The bullshit that gets upvoted/downvoted here, does not get that on reddit. It’s really weird to see some of the cultural differences between the two platforms in terms of user base.

We drug animals for flights all the time, it’s practically a requirement. Until the age of at least 5, kids are essentially animals with just as little self-control

Not only do I think it’s ok to give them something that would help them sleep through it, I think it should be mandatory.

I don’t think this level of bullshit would fly in the reddit equivalent of r/worldnews

You see on Lemmy, it’s okay to say children are “essentially animals”, unless it’s in the context of Israel referring to infants in Gaza as essentially animals. The fucking crazy shit that gets upvoted in Lemmy vs reddit is weird. It’s like a giant reading group of edgy undergrads in here most of the time.

At literally every point of modern history, a reduction in the amount of humans was beneficial for the vast amount of humans in the long run.

Like, even the Black Death led to reduced wealth inequality and the beginnings of workers rights.

I don’t see how someone can claim that the mass death of people is simultaneously beneficial to that people.

There’s a difference in reduction of humans by events that cause death at large scale vs decline in rates of reproduction. Clearly catostrophic death is being used as an example of “a reduction in the amount of humans.”

Did you read the comment I responded to saying that the black death was good because a lot people died and as a result created a better labor market? That’s saying death is a good thing to cull surplus labor.

Can’t believe we have someone getting so many up votes for saying that the black plague was a good thing? Would you say that about all the deaths during COVID? This upvoted edgelord callousness is nuts.

Wtf. So instead of the rich eating the poor the poor should just eat the poor to improve the labor market in their favor?

My first thought was “I havent seen that in. A sporting context since WCW NWO Wolf Pack was a thing.” But fuck this guy.

What do you mean by “the point”? Anything that doesnt fit the preferred narrative is just not the point or arbitrary?

The star wars analogy is what I responded to. What was the point of that.

I’m not making a both sides argument about history. I’m making a both sides observations about personal experience and belief. Individuals on both side have experienced things that compel them to feel justified in war at a personal psychological and biographical level. Collectively, at a sociological level too. Explanation/description and justification are not the same thing, and I am merely trying to explain that no side thinks they are the bad guys, and both sides think they have justification. If you want to explain “why” israel goes to war it’s not useful to describe them as a maniacal bond villain or one dimensional like a Marvel Villain.

I think the conflation of justification vs understanding, description, explanation, is preventing us from having meaningul discourse. When Hannah Arendt wrote “The Origins of Totalitarianism” it wasn’t a justification for the the holocaust. It was a description of the rationality that lead to the holocaust. Just because you can attempt to understand evil doesn’t mean you are promoting or justifying it. Today, merely suggesting that Israeli’s suffered and had had experienced a sense of duty to rescue hostages is somehow interpreted as an argument for genocide and will somehow cause someone to be accused of being a zionist or some other inflammatory rhetorical pejorative.

Both sides think they’re the good guys with something to avenge. And both sides probably do have that.

Ironically doesn’t this star wars analogy work the other way. Israel citizens are attacked. A small relatively small amount of civilians die. Then Israel goes commits genocide.

I bought my Seiko snk803 on Amazon for like 66 bucks 10 years ago. Why is this watch now showing up as a 200 dollar watch? Why did the prices go up so much?

How do you think pension plans make money? They are managed by fiduciaries responsible for investing. Guess where they invest. 20% of the stock market is owned by pension funds :https://retiregenz.com/what-percentage-of-the-stock-market-is-owned-by-pension-funds/

So my employer did this thing where new hires automatically got enrolled in a 401k. If you did absolutely nothing to your 401k, each year it would automatically up your percentage to a max of Y. Is that common or uncommon? And in this world of 401k over pension, should that be more of a norm to help protect people that don’t know better build retirement savings. It doesn’t solve the problem of folks not having enough money and needing to use 401k for emergency funds…