• 0 Posts
  • 142 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle

  • But Spartan women weren’t that bad off, compared to other places in antiquity

    We also white wash Spartan history pretty dramatically. Yes, Spartan women who were citizens were better off than their Athenian counterparts. However, that’s not saying much when you consider spartan citizens were a fraction of the population of Sparta.

    The vast majority of women in Sparta were helots, and were subject to chattel slavery. I don’t think you can claim that Spartans cared about gender equality when they had an entire social class made up of the bastards produced by raping their slaves.


  • Depends on the plastic, you can safely heat most polypropylene and polyethylene based plastics. If it’s putting off noxious fumes then it probably has urethane, styrene, or vinyl in it.

    The worst plastic to overheat that I’ve worked with is kydex. Even though it’s most common application is as a thermoplastic, if you over heat it the stuff off gasses hydrogen chloride.



  • I too have thousands of reasons why I shouldn’t be in charge of a country, however I do have one good pitch.

    My appointment to dictatorship would be guided solely by autism. I guarantee my powers will only be focused upon my two fixations that deal with the general public, trains and healthcare.

    If made supreme leader I will not only make the trains run on time, there will be more trains, more hospitals, we would even have trains that can take you to your job at the hospital. I would shape the perfect world for me, and vicariously a more efficient and safer world for you.

    Demand Me for dictator 2024



  • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.eetoMeanwhileOnGrad@sh.itjust.worksNATO apologism
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    According to the Regan administration perhaps, but not according to intelligence agencies from several European countries.

    Again, a reductionist interpretation. There’s been a lot of conspiracies over the years due to so many groups initially claiming responsibility. However the trial held in the UK and a recent one in 2020 both point to the same culprit.

    I think you may be talking about the bombing in Germany.

    Either way, the point is that Gaddafi has sponsored over 15 violent paramilitary groups in other people’s countries. Not exactly going to be winning a lot of friends on the global stage by doing that.

    This is not what stable leadership looks like …


  • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.eetoMeanwhileOnGrad@sh.itjust.worksNATO apologism
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    that 1) NATO did, in fact, make a move on Gaddafi

    Not something I ever disputed? Would be kinda hard for a rebel force to get a cruise missile.

    1. the West supported him when it was beneficial but turned on a dime the minute he stopped cooperating.

    This I don’t really agree with as it’s a bit of a reductionist mischaracterization. Gaddafi literally funded terrorist attacks on the US in the 80s, which led to about 15-20 years of political disruptions between the two countries. They normalized relations again in the early 00s, with the US eventually going as far as to delist them from the state sponsored terror list in 08.

    It would be hard to describe that as “turned on a dime the minute he stopped cooperating”. There’s a reason why no one in the UN, including Russia and China UN vetoed the resolution.


  • That also overlooks all the times western powers were friendly with Gaddafi. They didn’t mind him following his ascent to power, nor in the post 9-11 period when the U.S. and European countries restored diplomatic ties with Libya, and Western oil companies re-entered the Libyan oil sector.

    That was my point about him swapping out friends sporadically. Gaddafi had massive swings in political alignment throughout his time as leader of Libya. The reason nato/un could actually make a move on his government without greater political ramifications is because he’s burned every bridge across the political spectrum.

    Was Gaddafi a supervillain then too, or did he only become one when his interests were no longer aligned with the Western powers?

    Literally yes… Is it that surprising the west would work with a crazy despot that has a bunch of oil?


  • He certainly played up to the role, presumably for egotistical reasons, but most of it was sabre rattling bravado.

    My dude, this ignores like 40 years of him being the most unhinged leader in North Africa. He’s always been a wild card on the global political stage, swinging wildly from befriending revolutionary leftist, and then immediately dumping them for right winged dictators.

    The man literally tried to sell surface-to-air missiles to a street gang in Chicago… No one had to make him seem crazy, he was crazy.

    Now that doesn’t mean I think the US should have intervened, but I don’t think anyone had to really do any work to make him seem like an insane supervillain.


  • Yeah… This is a bit sketchy. Pharmaceuticals aren’t just something that an amateur can make by following step by step instructions. Even something as simple as baking a cake requires some basic experience to know when things are going right or wrong.

    Even maintaining the calibration on a CLR requires some background experience, let alone building and programming one all on your own. With your actual reactor being as small as a mason jar, it means the margin for error is going to be small as well.

    This is neat for people with a background in chemistry, but I don’t really see it as anything but dangerous for the general public. They also are fudging their math a bit to make things seem a lot cheaper. Reagents can be really cheap at bulk prices, but you have to spend the time looking for them, and they aren’t equating the cost of a trained chemist making these medications.


  • You are using the people claiming there is a genocide as the source for the claim.

    That’s typically how investigations work… There’s an accusation, and then an investigation to find evidence that supports the claim. They aren’t using people as a source for the claim, they’re using the evidence the people gathered.

    You on the other hand seem to be focused on who gathered the information instead of what they gathered.

    Welcomes** the outcomes of the visit conducted by the General Secretariat’s delegation upon invitation from the People’s Republic of China; commends the efforts of the People’s Republic of China in providing care to its Muslim citizens; and looks forward to further cooperation between the OIC and the People’s Republic of China.

    This is anecdotal evidence from a political organization that has a well established history of ignoring the plight of specific Islamic ethnic minorities, including the Kurds in Syria and Turkey, the Ahwaz in Iran, the Hazaras in Afghanistan, the ‘Al-Akhdam’ in Yemen, and the Berbers in Algeria.

    Over 50+ UN member states (mostly Muslim-majority nations)

    Again, anecdotal evidence which does not detail the accusations, nor how their experience contradicts that accusation.

    The World Bank sent a team to investigate in 2019 and found that, “The review did not substantiate the allegations.”

    Using this as “evidence” is just academically dishonest. The “team” was a single bank manager, and the “investigation’s” scope was solely to insure that a 50m dollar loan for 3 different schools were not being used to commit crimes against humanity.

    The bank claimed that the specific schools they investigated did not substantiate the allegations, however they found enough to decide they wanted to minimize the project.

    “In light of the risks associated with the partner schools, which are widely dispersed and difficult to monitor, the scope and footprint of the project is being reduced. Specifically, the project component that involves the partner schools in Xinjiang is being closed.”

    China’s mass imprisonment and forced labor of ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang amounts to crimes against humanity—but there was insufficient evidence to prove genocide

    I think you are forgetting the accusations of the population control of an ethnic minority. “The 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which lists birth prevention targeting an ethnic group as one act that could qualify as genocide.”

    Comparative Analysis: The War on Terror

    Again, a logical fallacy. Just because America has participated in genocide does not mean that China cannot also participate in genocide or crimes against humanity.

    Who is driving the Uyghur genocide narrative

    Another logical fallacy… You are attacking the man, not the evidence or argument.

    He relies heavily on limited and questionable data sources, particularly from anonymous and unverified Uyghur sources, coming up with estimates based on assumptions which are not supported by concrete evidence.

    The vast majority of the evidence he’s gathered for his peer reviewed study are gathered directly from public data released by the Chinese government. There have also been some data from a leaked cable, which have been validated by multiple investigative bodies of journalists across the world.

    As materialists, we should always look first to the economic base for insight into issues occurring in the superstructure. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a massive Chinese infrastructure development project that aims to build economic corridors, ports, highways, railways, and other infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Xinjiang is a key region for this project.

    This is a biased interpretation of materialism. A similarly biased claim based on materialism would be that the Belt and Roads initiative motivated china to ethnically cleanse a region vital to the initiative.

    On a personal note, I don’t think the lable of genocide is really important. What is important is that an ethnic minority is being abused by a State. And while there is a lot of misinformation and politicing surrounding the topic, there’s still an alarming amount of data that suggest China is forcibly assimilating an ethnic minority group.


  • white supremacists who came up with the verbiage you don’t like in the room right now?

    Nah, just their legacy…

    no real reason to split hairs

    Not ignoring one of the largest crimes against humanity = splitting hairs… Interesting.

    don’t want to be associated with white people, I guess. I would call that racism honestly. Would you call that Asian supremacy?

    You do realize you are the only person separating people based on skin color? My wife is German, I don’t hold her country’s past against her. But, if she was a Holocaust denier, or attempted to become a Nazi apologist, things would be different.

    “OUR SLAVERY ISN’T AS BAD, AS THOSE YUCKY WHITES!”

    The internalized guilt is strong with you…

    I don’t know that Muslims are white tho… So that’s not very careful about language.

    Islam is a religion you idiot, it’s not a race, or an ethnicity…Also, you are the only person legitimately utilizing skin color to categorize people. I don’t care what your pigmentation is, that’s not the thing that makes you a racist moron.


  • don’t generally split hairs on enslaving people to make a racist argument that my people are better in some way

    We’re not talking about modern people, nor are we blaming modern people for their ancestors behaviour. We are examining the crimes historic people did to other historic people, which do vary in different degrees in scale and violence.

    The racism you are accused of isn’t because of your people’s past, it’s because you are still utilizing the same racist classification system and justifications that led to their crimes in the first place.

    would I prefer being an Asian woman being group raped by Asian men until death, would I rather be castrated and worked to death in persia, would I rather he worked to death an whipped on a plantation, would I rather be a house slave for the Ting (which by the way they said they were very nice to their slaves and I bet they was never a bad experience!), would I rather be a Chinese space to the Khan?

    Lol, a lot of writing to admit you just don’t care about the suffering caused by chattel slavery in America. I didn’t claim that there weren’t horrific versions of slavery in east Asia, though you are exaggerating certain aspects. What I claimed is that there is a difference in scope and cruelty, compared between the two, which is just a fact.

    none of them sound like a race is better than the other,

    Lol, still about race for you huh.

    you are making a racial argument based on the nuances of slavery and it’s kinda silly!

    Lol, ethnicity does not = race you fucking idiot.

    The whole point of this is that race is construct that can’t be used to actually examine the ethnic prejudices that happened in a specific area at a specific time.

    Racist

    Says the person defending an argument developed by white supremacists…


  • Do I put a value difference between the Atlantic slave trade/chattel slavery and the sexual slavery of the Vietnamese women, or Korean women? No I guess I don’t! Every version of slavery is both abhorrent and devalues human life, and a well kept slave is functionally still a slave.

    Lol, so the amount of people, the amount of violence, the amount of time it’s practiced, and for what reasons are all meaningless to you?

    So if you had a choice of being from Africa and taken from their homeland and forced into perpetual slavery in the US, where your children could be whipped to death in front of you, or sold down the river for no reason. Or you could be in indebted servitude to a rich family in the tang dynasty who used you as a doorman, but you still got to go home to your family who weren’t enslaved at the end of the day.

    Both choices would be equal for you? That’s just a false equivocation that is willfully ignorant to the actual human suffering that’s occurred.

    This is just as bad as people claiming that the Irish had it just as bad in America as people in chattel slavery in the South because they were both technically “enslaved”.

    you desperately want Western slavery to somehow be worse than Eastern slavery.

    Because it’s not even close… The chattel slavery that occurred in the Americas is widely regarded by historians as some of the worst forms of slavery in recorded history. By what ever criteria you are ranking it, whether it be by volume, lack of rights, deaths, or in human suffering.

    This is not a controversial or even drastic claim. The technology and social hierarchy that allowed them to transport and organize that many people into chattel slavery was even possible prior to the transatlantic slave trade.

    feel like you just ignored any examples that do meet your criteria

    I’ve responded with a clear explanation to all of your ridiculously racist claims this whole time. Even providing sources that explain exactly how you came up with your assumptions. You on the other hand have ignored every question and have failed to explain how your claims are pertinent to the conversation.

    Honestly just sounds like exceptionalism to me. Again, sounds like you are a racist.

    Ahh yes, a rebuttal that disproves a highly inaccurate claim… Exceptionalism.

    Again, how do I seem racist? I already said east asians can be racist, I’ve already said they’ve had slaves. The only thing I am denying is your inaccurate use of the word racism under specific context, and denying your clearly inaccurate claims African slave trade happening in East Asia during a specific dynasty.

    You on the other hand have made generalized claims about race this whole time, in an effort to conflate all slavery as being equally bad.

    You don’t seem like a racist, based on your claims you are a racist. Go kick rocks.


  • So you think the idea of humans as personal property was a Western invention that specifically the East Asians didn’t engage in?

    Slavery has occurred in nearly every society throughout human history, the abnormality which is unique to chattel slavery is the legal system that evolved to protect the owners right in totality. Even in ancient examples that most closely resemble the chattel slavery practiced in the Americas, there were still social contracts that prevented the enslaved from the levels of dire abuse African slaves experienced in the Americas.

    Are you arguing that Asian slavery is better because slaves occasionally had rights?

    Are you claiming that all slavery is equally bad? That being an indentured servant is the same as chattel slavery? Seems like a pretty convenient attitude for someone who is trying to distance themselves from the largest example of chattel slavery in recorded history.

    think the slaves of the Khmer might disagree with you most recently.

    Lol, once again equating two totally separate societies and cultures as the same because racist from hundreds of years ago labeled anyone east of turkey as Asian. Cambodia is in South East Asia…

    It’s crazy how you don’t see that trying to justify your position with race science is in fact racist. What exactly do you believe validates your examples of Arab slave trade and the Khmer being pertinent to a conversation about East Asia?

    well known the Tang dynasty in China kept Western slaves.

    Lol, no it really isn’t. You are utilizing your preconceptions about skin color and projecting it to a misinterpretation of a mystical story from the 9th century.

    When someone from the tang dynasty is speaking about “westerns” they aren’t talking about Europeans, the Arab world, or Africa. They are usually referring to places immediately west of China or West China. In the case of the Kunlun, they are more than likely talking about modern day Malaysia and Cambodia.

    Here is a good breakdown of the Kunlun in China, with sources.

    Again, you are applying your preconceptions of racial science to a people that predated it, and have a vastly different understanding of things like skin color. The Kunlun weren’t all slaves, and the type of slavery that did happen was no where close to chattel slavery.

    This is a great example of racism in action. You are generalizing an entire continent, the one with a majority of the world’s population, and conflating them to be the same peoples based on criteria that was developed by racial science. The reason this debate has gotten so misconstrued is because the system you utilize to categorize ethnic groups isn’t based on any legitimate or logical basis.

    Racism is prejudice applied through the lens of racial science. There’s a similar prejudice that occurs in ethnic prejudice, that can lead to similarly devastating results as racism, but usually on a much smaller scale.

    Racial prejudice isn’t based on any real criteria that can be consistently measured or predicted. Which can lead to people classifying an entire Continent of people as the same and lesser than. Instead of a conflict between two rival ethnic groups, it can lead to things like the Scramble for Africa.

    I don’t know how you can’t see that as being relevant, and I honestly don’t know why you have a problem with me utilizing a more correct terminology. Utilizing ethnic prejudice is correct when race isnt a factor. Is this the first time you’ve heard of the terminology, or do you think it’s never appropriate? Why do you think both terms are used in academia if you don’t think there’s a delineation between the two?


  • (a period lasting from the 16th to the 19th century you silly man)

    The time I used was for chattel slavery, not for the transatlantic slave trade.

    African slave trade has been active through the Arab Muslim world since antiquity

    And you think the Arab Muslim world is relevant to a conversation about East Asia because your race science categorizes them all as Asians? Despite that most European countries have more culturally shared history than any East Asian country…

    Where do you think the Chinese were getting these magical Kunlun slaves.

    Lol, that’s from a mythical tale from the fucking tang dynasty… . If there actually were real Kunlun slaves, most historians agree that they were most likely from South East Asia.

    the definition of chattel slavery isn’t the transatlantic slave trade, it’s using humans as a commodity, which again is and was worldwide.

    Never claimed it was? Chattel slavery isn’t just that they were treated as commodities, it that they were treated as personal property. Even in places where slaves were historically traded as a commodity they usually still had some rights. Whether that be you couldn’t break apart their family, enslave their children, or even enslave them in perpetuity.

    Chattel slavery requires a system of laws protecting the rights of the owner, ensuring that he could treat slaves any way they see fit.


  • Asians engaged in the chattel slavery you mention in the 18th century, they also engaged in just plain old slavery.

    First of all, the 18th century would be the 1700s not the 1800s as I originally stated. Secondly, the slavery that was akin to chattel slavery was introduced to India by the British when they invaded in the latter half of the 18th century.

    Lastly, it’s kinda hilarious the only way you could state “Asians engaged in chattel slavery” is by utilizing terminology originating from racial science. We were talking about east Asia, not the Indian subcontinent.

    Chattel slavery was not a Western only concept, you may ask yourselves why the Asian continent is not filled with the children of black slaves.

    I mean that’s incorrect in so many ways… Chattel slavery was a Western concept, and African slaves never made their way to anywhere close to East Asia.

    That’s because slaves that were imported to Asia were generally castrated. Used them up, let them die, get new ones, no breeding programs.

    Lol, source?

    Whenever someone spends this much time trying to convince me that their feelings about other ethnic groups are not racist, because racism was invented by the West, I figure they are just trying to desperately hide their racism.

    Lol, whatever you have to tell yourself to make believe Europe didn’t create one of the largest crimes against humanity ever with the transatlantic slave trade.


  • Do you not think Asians engaged in chattle slavery?

    Well, there’s the whole problem with specifying race again. What do you mean when you say Asian? Are we talking about east Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or even south east Asia?

    There was something akin to chattel slavery in India in the 1800s, but nothing as widespread or cruel as chattel slavery in the Americas. As far as east Asia, no there’s not a documented history of chattel slavery.

    Chattel slavery is a very specific type of slavery that wasn’t prevalent until the 18th century.

    Prejudice isn’t separate from racism, it fits in like a puzzle piece

    Lol, I didn’t say it was separate. All racist are prejudice, but not all prejudice is based on racism.

    you just don’t like the word.

    The word is fine, it’s your understanding of the word that is flawed.

    Bro I think you might be racist.

    Lol, against whom?

    I think you might be trying to enact a revisionist view of history that lessens the actual meaning of racism. I think you are trying to equate all ethnic conflict to the systemic chattel slavery that race science enabled in the first place, making it seem less harmful than what it was.


  • you have a super secret definition of racism that doesn’t include people of similar ethnic groups not liking eachother because of past circumstances. Right?

    Nope, just the scientifically correct version. Redefining the colloquial understanding of racism to exclude the history of racial discrimination and it’s foundation in slavery is immoral and incorrect.

    It equivocates ethnic conflict such as your example of Japanese and Koreans as the same as the European racial science theory that vindicated chattle slavery based on skin tone.

    A Korean or Chinese person who dislikes a Japanese person partially because of a cultural memory of occupation is still a racist.

    So any conflict between two ethnic groups is automatically the same as the European slave trade…? That totally makes sense

    You are conflating ethnic conflict, which can happen for a multitude of reasons with racism, which is a prejudice specific to race.

    you don’t want to define yourself as racist so you created a new category that doesn’t include you.

    Lol, or…you are actively preserving racial science and projecting your cultures dark history unto people whom never partook in chattel slavery because not something as idiotic as melanin content.

    There are specific terminologies for everything we talked about, you just refuse to part ways with race science because it’s so inherent to your upbringing.

    If you have a cultural dislike of a neighboring country, or different ethnic group, that’s still racism.

    The word you’re looking for is called prejudice. Prejudice is part of racism, but so is the belief in race itself. Ethnic prejudice can be just as violent, or as damaging to social cohesion, but it’s inherently different than racism.