- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
you think redneck homophobes in florida should have universal healthcare?
yeah. doy.
human rights are inherent, not earned.
If some hostile army started shelling say, rural neighborhoods of single-wide manufactured homes across the American southwest, the primary victims would be conservatives and I would be protesting the violence against them. I would be equally vocal and upset. Innocent people have the right to exist and lives their lives even if I don’t agree with them.
I am curious though the ratio of that calculation being reversed.
I was literally about to write the same comment.
I want right wingers to have the same access to healthcare as everyone even if a lot of them want me dead because of it…
(paraphrasing a similar comment i saw)
i guess i’m a socialist because i want neonazis to have free healthcare, and i guess i’m antifa because i want them to need it.
“Legally killed child” is still the most disgusting thing I’ve read since a long time.
Pro-tip for all you youngin’s. If you wanna be against war crimes, don’t get a Soviet tattoo.
Fuck… little late for that. I had “United Societies Solve Rabies” tattooed on my junk, but unless I’m erect it just looks like another USSR tatttoo.
Yeah… I didn’t really get that either.
It’s because the political compass meme character has it and they’ve reused the character here.
Pre Stalin USSR was accepting of sexuality.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_history_in_the_Soviet_Union
If someone had a Stalinist tattoo that would be another matter but the hammer and sickle or the raised fist are both for the working class.
Let’s not forget that this was the time of chemical castration, murder and repression in the “civilised” countries
They decriminalized it during Lenin in Russia and Ukrain only but acceptance didn’t really arrive, attitudes were mixed at best. At around 1925, if I remember correctly, it was labelled a mental disorder and after Stalin took power it was criminalised again with a minimum of 5 years of forced labour sentence. Any organising by gay people was labeled a fascist or anti revolutionary movement and punishments for that were much harsher.
So for a brief period of about 8 years attitudes were better than a lot of the world but it was by no means a good place to be gay. And for the rest of the USSR existence it was a lot worse.
If you mean that everyone was subject to murder and repression equally in the Soviet Union (not just gay or trans people), then you’re right.
I watched a documentary on the Soviet Union that discussed Gorbachev at one point. He was from farm country. His paternal grandfather disliked the collectivization of the farms and was sent to the gulag. His maternal grandfather supported the collectivization of the farms and worked for the local farm collective. He was also send to the gulag…
No I mean exactly what I had said, and no I am speaking of pre Stalins USSR.
Russia was incredibly poor and exploited by the west as well as they’re own ruling class pre USSR, things got much better for the Russian working class and its truly astonishing that a country of that time and coming from such turmoil would legalise homosexuality especially when contrasted with western countries.
I am speaking of pre Stalins USSR.
So you’re talking about the 2 year period after the USSR was ravaged by civil war?
Serving in the Russian Civil War before overseeing the Soviet Union’s establishment in 1922, he rose to leader of the country following Lenin’s death in 1924.
Dude, just read their link. The Russian Soviet Republic from 1917 - 1933 (which also sported the hammer and sickle) was (for its time) extremely friendly to homosexual people.
They simply erroneously spoke of the precursor to the USSR as the USSR.
Given the topic it’s not a big issue, especially since soviet republics as well as the hammer and sickle iconography predate the USSR by quite some time.
Steelmaning peoples arguments is cool, strawmaning them not.
Yeah it isn’t like Imperial Russia had a framework for LGBT acceptance. That there was any period at all of acceptance, legal or otherwise, was revolutionary.
Yeah I thought that was an odd addition. I’m open to hearing an explanation like how the schwashtika (sp?) is also a religious symbol but idk. Weird choice.
While the hammer and sickle may have roots in the USSR, I think it’s more likely inferred individuals and labor movements worldwide appropriate it for the symbolism around labor rather than anything ideological around a government. We aren’t taught shit about the USSR in the US beyond “communist government bad,” so I had to Google the origins of it just now myself. I associated it with communism as a whole, which is often conflated with the USSR, but I wouldn’t personally assume someone with it tattooed is giving explicit signal toward support of the old regime in the way a swastika signals a nazi (maybe they are, but I’d ask first, whereas with the swastika I will absolutely assume). Especially given how many variations there are these days. The religious swastika is also has distinct differences - flipped to a mirror image with dots around it. I’m partial myself to the romcom style where the sickle is shaped more like a heart, personally, though I’m not out here looking to get it tattooed. I only know enough to say communism is an economic system opposed to capitalism in the same way a democratic government is opposed (or should be) to authoritarianism. Workers of the world unite, something something, we have nothing to lose but our chains 🛠️❤️
Even the swastika depends a little on context. In Europe or the US, 95% of the time, it’s a nazi, and that goes to 99.99% if the person is white.
Seeing it on the wall of an Indian’s house next to an aum and a lotus flower? That’s likely just a Hindu blessing of well-being.
Dude thank you so much for taking the time out of your evening to type this up and look it up. I’ve always been a supporter of giving people a chance to explain themselves and now I have a solid explanation for the use of the hammer and sickle! Also +1 on losing chains. Hoping to see more movement like we have over the last couple years. Power to the people!
If you want to learn more about Communism, I suggest reading Critique of the Gotha Programme, where Marx critiques a weak Socialist program and actually makes organizational suggestions. If terminology is something you don’t yet know much of, The Principles of Communism is a great, shorter work.
If you want to learn more about why Capitalism is structurally doomed, Wage Labor and Capital is much easier to get through than Capital. If you want to learn about the philosophy of Marxism, Dialectical and Historical Materialism, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific is a great overview from Engels.
Good luck, comrade!
The hammer and sickle are sometimes used by more than just MLs and Sov apologists. But there’s definitely… discourse around it.
It turns out Principled people don’t simply just follow the “what’s in it for me” logic.
What! A! Shocker!!!
⢀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣤⣶⣶ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⣀⣀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⠉⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠛⠉⠁⠀⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠿⠿⠿⠻⠿⠿⠟⠿⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⠀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠀⠀⢰⣹⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣭⣷⠀⠀⠀⠸⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠀⠀⠈⠉⠀⠀⠤⠄⠀⠀⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢾⣿⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⡠⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠠⣿⣿⣷⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢄⠀⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠁⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿I’m not surprised if there is Hasbara psyops on this to diminish any support for Palestine. They seem to be on overtime accusing anyone of anti-Semitism.
It needs not even be Hasbara: it’s a pretty standard technique of Liberals who support some immoral position (generally it’s about things like cutting the support for the poorest which is social security or having healthcare privatised) to try and leverage identity politics by unreasonably stretching some vague association with a liberal identity group to excuse it or deflect criticism of it (a quite common one is for politicians that happen to be female to bat away criticism of their immoral positions by claiming the criticism is because they are women), so I wouldn’t at all be surprised if the source of this specific framing is actually the Biden Administration/Democrat Party trying to make their support for Zionism and their Genocide seem less immoral.
Not saying it’s for sure the Democrats rather than the Zionists because with these two is hard to tell as they both would do it:
- Whilst justifying certain (mainly pro-Money) choices using an unrelated or barelly related identity group that has a history of being victims of descrimination has been a traditional Liberal technique, whilst the Fascists would do the same using national identities (i.e. framing stuff as “For the Nation”), the very special case of the Zionists, who are Fascists within an identitarian group in a nation that has specifically bound that identity with nationality, means they have long used the Liberal’s technique (of binding things to an identity group which has a history of being victims) because in their case the “For the Nation” overlaps pretty well with the identity groups (and when it doesn’t, they just make believe it does).
Either way, the whole “argument” stinks of hypocrisy and machiavelism.
I mean, I oppose genocide (among other things) on the basis that I wouldn’t like being murdered and I prefer to live in a society that doesn’t accept genocide. That’s kind of self-serving in a way.
Well, in Phylosophy there is the idea of Psychological Egoism, which is basically that we are all always selfish because even when doing good deeds we do it because at the very least it makes us feel good.
So you could always and for all acts assemble a rational argument that the act was done for selfish reasons.
My problem with this line of thinking is that it doesn’t seem to be falsifiable. Why did you help the old grandma across the road? Because you got a little mental reward. Why do you vote for a candidate who promises to reduce the cost of housing when you own a house and would stand to benefit from higher costs? Because you got a little mental reward.
Which is why it’s in the domain of Philosophy, same as the whole idea of “I think therefore I am” (which is as far as answers got to the question of, roughly, “How do you know that anythink you know is real, including yourself, if your sense can be decieve?”).
Philosophy is the mother of Science, but it ain’t Science.
Falsifiability is also derived from philosophy. Science and philosophy are intertwined.
deleted by creator
There’s a good chance that not only some, but most Palestinians would have a problem with someone being trans.
Even so, yes.
not that it makes things necessarily better but for accuracy’s sake, and speaking very generally, muslim populations are less likely to have a problem with trans people than with gay people.
from my experience no, but maybe you met different people
I don’t know if it’s a Sunni-Shia split thing, but Pakistan and Iran are weirdly trans-friendly (relatively speaking) compared to how homophobic they are.
nah doesn’t have much to do with the split. the general view is mostly based on an assumption of gender binary. so being gay is like going against your gender, while being trans (with operation, and being straight) isn’t, because essentially you’re fixing something that’s not right with your body… not that different from having an operation on your eye to fix your vision or whatever.
Hmm. I know someone who moved to the uk from iran less tham 12 months ago and they hate both.
The Pakistanis i know are generally anti-both too.
well that’s self-selecting; they don’t allow you into the UK if you don’t hate trans people. it’s their national pastime.
Maybe… Its sad and i want to leave but where to? I’ll try and escape after my degree.
I’m sorry. you’d think after the disastrous brexit people would come to their senses a bit and try to swing left a bit but you seem to keep going with right wing leaders insistently, even though you churned through three conservatives in three years (which sounds generous considering truss) and they keep resigning in disgrace…
when will the people realize maybe the party of absolute clowns isn’t all that good? it’s disheartening that labour is not that different from tories but hopefully they’d take some better stances on social issues, idk.
seems like a good time to push some propaganda and tell people it was clearly wrong to hate immigrants so much when their own blond leaders were the ones screwing them so hard. maybe it was wrong to hate trans people too.
The gay and trans Palestinians in Gaza must be overjoyed with the support they are experiencing from the west to advance their rights.
I have it on good authority that if we blow up 5 more hospitals Gaza will support the LGBT movement.
I can not want to be anywhere near them because of their own potential discriminatory views while still not thinking it’s ok to carpet bomb them all to death.
Also, plenty of younger palestinians are at least open to defying holyisms for the sake of personal freedom, one possible reason Hamas chose that concert venue to attack was because of how often Palestinian musicians had been using it to get away with performing music that Hamas morality police would be able to drag them off stage for in Gaza proper.
The concert was planned to end a day earlier Israel extended its duration. According to Hamas plans it couldn’t even be on the map.
The reason Hamas stumbled upon that concert venue is because it’s near an israeli military base which sole function is to lock the Palestinians in a concentration camp. The concert also had surprise surprise a lot of armed IDF soldiers attending
one possible reason Hamas chose that concert venue
Oh, give me a fucking break. The “Hamas beheaded/raped/sacrificed thousands of babies!” bullcrap didn’t pan out for you, so this is what you’re going with now?
You hasbara are getting really desperate now.
'anna falasTeeni enton moghafil.
Removed by mod
I don’t want them to be bombed either
Well, I’m a utilitarian, not always. I just can’t think of any realistic scenario. /j
Edit: Added a tone indicator to clarify that I’m not actually trying to start a philosophical debate about the ethicality of genocide.
utilitarians try not to debate-bro the fuck out of an incredibly sensitive topic challenge (impossible)
I am as boring looking as they come and I still do not support genocide. Weird, I know.
Good old gays and bombs times.
Some?
Haha good one
You could change it to ‘most’ or even ‘all’ and it still doesn’t change a goddamn thing. Believe it or not, some people are just genuinely against genocide. Shocking, I know.
Sure, I still can laugh about the “some” haha
Didn’t pro-palestine Protestors block a Gay Parade recently?
Some loons, it would look like.
With some donning keffiyehs, the anti-Israel mob shouted, “PPP, KKK, IOF they are all the same,” another video showed. The slogan apparently likened the Philly Pride Parade to the Ku Klux Klan and the Israel Occupation Forces.
I am Arab . Islam doesn’t justify hatred towards a group or individual because they sin,( as long as no one is getting harmed) . Arabs generally don’t believe that either, except if they happen to be twisted individuals. Not being welcomed doesn’t equal hate.
You’re conflating two different things here. Arabs are an ethnic group, Islam is a religion. In any religion, what it actually says doesn’t matter (or Christians would still be looking up the going rate of a slave in the bible), what people believe matters.
24% of the world is Muslim, and they are incredibly diverse. Ranging from people who want the heads of heathens on spikes, to wonderful open-minded people, and everything inbetween. To reiterate, Islam is bigger than just Arabs.
Generally speaking, Arab countries tend to not have the best track record for inclusiveness, to put it lightly.
If you read my comment carefully, you would notice i used the word “ either” implying that ; I DO KNOW ARABS AND ISLAM ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
Don’t forget that a major portion of the United States equates being American with being Christian. Biases run deep and tend to spillover into adjacent portions of the population.
We don’t hate you, we just think you’re an abomination and will kill you if you enter our country! Two totally different things!
As i said… A muslim community/ society naturally would not accept an LGBTQ person inside their community and its (obviously) for their sake (better than the punishment , which actually really only applies to true Muslims who take their religion seriously) … Then they can find another community to belong to… Problem Solved. What you said about killing and such does not reflect Islam.
We don’t hate you we just don’t want to ever see you or have you involved in anything related to us, and if you do we’ll “punish” you. Do you really think there aren’t LGBTQ Muslims?
I know there is a small percentage of LGBTQ Muslims in the arab world… Most probably keep it a secret except for their partner (if they have any)… And they are wise to keep it a secret if they live in a muslim country… But its nothing personal really, its basically just to avoid stress on the community and potential disasters… I explained the concept to another user under this post too…
Yeah you keep explaining that you’re a bigot over and over
But we are totally okay with you doing that to others as long as it advances our ideology’s cause!
Ah geez that makes me feel much better now that I know that Arab societies don’t hate me, I’m simply not welcome /s
(and if I was born in countries like Qatar, I’d still be thrown into torture prisons)
No pleease… Arab governments are just as wicked and evil as other governments around the world… Also arab people hate their governments, the recent example is for not actually supporting and defending Palestine.
Yeah, it kinda does though. It’s just “being nice about it”.
so, first I appreciate that you don’t want to torture me to death.
If you belive being lgbt is a sin, that’s your thing. But you can see, why people could have a problem with your views, right? I have my biases as well, mostly against religios people (especially muslims), but I still think they are welcome to my country (as long as no harm is caused), because they’re still human beings, because I think it’s wrong to not welcome an inocent human being no matter what group they belong to.
No, actually I have no idea why people would have a problem with this view… please enlighten me…
because it’s in most peoples moral compass, that every human being should be welcome
Trust me there are no threats in the foreseeable future… If half the world is Muslim people territory, you could just go to the other half…
or you could just go to to another planet without breathable atmosphere, the problem here is, that I want to welcome every human being into my country, but that’s not possible if that makes me not welcome in my country anymore. I just belive everyone should be welcome everywhere
Humans are very different from one another … What one community (who just have barely enough in common to become a community theirselves) , (chances are), will not be compatible with other outside communities…
So as a practical scenario, introducing a person who doesn’t meet the minimum requirements (standards) will introduce too much stress in a community in the long run, taking into consideration that any community is already stressed because of disputes happening among their selves…
As an important side note , countries today don’t actually live as a community, but rather, under a secular regime… and even if this regime claims it applies religious laws, it doesn’t… Because it is only through the twisted eyes of the elite… The laws of religion can only be applied in a real community ecosystem where the people can only survive by serving one another in a decentralized manner…
I got a -6 for that comment… I suppose Lemmy’s community is just as sick as Reddit’s….
deleted by creator
