Zuzak

Nooooo I only got a billion dollars last month

That's the point. He did basically what you said he should do. It's like you're saying, "I agree with his decisions, I just don't agree with the outcomes they led too." I don't have any information on when precisely Stalin decided he wanted Trotsky dead, but you can't just assume that he can write his name in a death note and have him drop immediately, and if one guy surviving ten years in a foreign country can destroy an entire revolutionary project just by writing then tbh it seems like the whole thing was doomed from the start. You can't predict every such case, it's not a valid criticism.

Stalin did have Trotsky killed though, eventually. I just feel like you're looking back with the benefit of hindsight and seeing things, not necessarily with Trotsky specifically, but generally being like, "The problem is they let bad people come to power instead of good people," and that's not a valid criticism if it's something that you can only see in hindsight. Did Stalin let people he thought were reactionary/revisionist hang around? If so, why, if not, then was Stalin's method of determining who was bad flawed, and in what way? You can't just say "these people shouldn't have come to power" you have to look at why they came to power and how they could have been identified and prevented.

I meant for Mao, but for Stalin is also relevant. I still don't see criticism or suggestions, just "these people were concerning."

But what's the specific criticism, about what should've been done differently?

Liberals rallying around China bad vs Maoists rallying around China bad

If Mao was so great, why did he create the conditions for "bourgeois elements to emerge and seize power," and what should he have done differently? Cultural Revolution, but harder? There's never any serious analysis of that question, at least that I've seen. The material conditions of the people of China improved with both Mao and Deng and the others.

Can't believe ISIS would do something like that 😔

The trouble is consciously rejecting an idea you were raised with doesn't immediately rid you of the various biases that idea instilled in you. And nobody is more susceptible to bias than people who don't think they have any, which describes a lot of people in that sphere. This is where the absurd phrase "culturally Christian" comes from, because they realize the beliefs they were raised with are bullshit, but then they notice that that belief system has all the prejudices that they have (because they were raised with it), so rather than confronting those biases and doing self-crit (emotional self-awareness and humility ew ew gross) they instead just come up with some bizarre twisted rationalization (using FACTS and LOGIC) and accept that. The brain is very good at rationalizations like that and can invent all sorts of convoluted lines of logic if it means fitting in with one's tribe.

Lol.

Canadian parliament accidentally honours Nazi - with Zelensky and Trudeau applauding - The Independent

The Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre said Mr Rota's remarks ignore “the horrific fact that Hunka served in the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS, a Nazi military unit whose crimes against humanity during the Holocaust are well-documented”.

Since his invasion in February 2022, Russian president Vladimir Putin has repeatedly made unsubstantiated claims that Ukraine “harbours neo-Nazis”.

Those are the last two lines.

Tbf I guess in this case it's technically not a neo-Nazi

I've been watching Voyager for the first time and just got to the episode. I think I agree with the decision (as a lever-puller) but it does raise some interesting questions. As Janeway mentions, if they'd been able to do it immediately, she'd have done it without question, but after two weeks of Tuvix integrating with the crew it's a more difficult question. If Tuvix had been around for say 5 years I think I'd disagree with separating him. I think the way I look at it is that the social bonds possessed by Tuvok and Neelix are more important than the mere two week old bonds of Tuvix, but if Tuvok and Neelix were long dead and their loved ones had already mourned them, while Tuvix had had more time to become a fixture in people's lives, then the circumstances would be different. Tbh I disagree with the idea that Tuvok and Neelix get the biggest say - I think that the input of Kes and the rest of the crew is valuable, and Kes pleads to get Neelix back while none of the crew back Tuvix.

Does that mean the worth of lives is based on popularity? Not generally, but I do think that social connections are a relevant thing to consider. Part of what makes murder bad is not just the loss of the individual's life, but also what it means for everyone else. If you could press a button to create a life then press another to end it, would you have made the world a worse place by doing so? I don't think so. But if you press a button to create a life then go out and murder someone who already existed, then I think you have.

I'd also say that the captain's responsibilities in her role as captain are relevant and also support the decision.

Food has a cultural component tied to its manufacture and identification. And IPAs are food that probably shouldn't exist and which only does as a byproduct of market capitalism. They're the Lacanian 'object a' - an empty, manufactured falseness. We don't desire the thing itself, but the thing whose absence it symbolizes. What you're really consuming when you drink an IPA is its innate mechanical predictability.

(Thanks to the thread last week arguing about pumpkin spice lattes for giving me a new copypasta to use about anything I personally dislike.)