When people say “Eh, it’s a living” are they referring to simply being alive? I think people sometimes look too much into some idioms.

In the natural world, you don’t actually deserve to be alive and need to compete for it. In societies I would argue it’s what the society can put up with. You don’t deserve to be alive, you simply are or are not … or the many thousands of states in between. By default, you are going to need to adapt regardless to keep alive. I can see “living” referring to that adaptation, but then again, I can understand polysemy.

People are generally good and will even freely donate their time for things that contribute to society. That creates an excess of labor available for those jobs.

You are a bot, you are a bot, everyone is a bot! If the Internet could be treated like a society, it would be the lowest trust society in existence.

But having said that, if the US doesn’t want to be told to fight against its tyrants who repeatedly violate their constitution, it shouldn’t have made its entire patriotic identity about fighting tyrants and honoring its constitution. If the US didn’t want people from outside the US to tell them to “fight amongst themselves” then they shouldn’t act like a multiple personality bipolar with one personality fighting with itself and the other bending the knee to make sure to always offer a degree of submissive complacency to the abusive personality.

Hostile nations are pushing these narratives, but let’s not act like they don’t have any ground.

Bail out the victims of bad investments, not the drivers of the bad investments.

Who knew that reducing different political ideologies to one of two ends of a line was stupid? About the only thing that ends up working out that way are the parties willing to work within the intent and purpose of the ruling system and those just interested in gaming it and subverting it. The Trump election was a perfect example, plenty of people “on the left” ended up behaving in a way that led to a Trump win because they were more interested in subverting “a corrupt system” than working within it.

That’s just it, they were not up for reelection so it won’t matter. None of them were.

This was bought off. Not sure why it would have to go through Schumer when each one of them could be bought off individually, specially given their history and the fact that they will not be up for reelection. This was orchestrated, but at best you are looking at a pawn and not those responsible for orchestrating it. The democratic party may be corrupt, but it’s not organized follow and do whatever the leader says corrupt, each of those could have easily been approached independently by lobbyists to vote like they did, and there’s signalling to that effect that the Republicans had to bypass Schumer’s attempts.

By all means, swap out Schumer, but don’t be gullible enough to think that’s going to fix the problem.

Cool, Fuck Israel and Fuck Hamas, and all their Hasbara and Panarab apologists.

So we are in agreement. Fuck Israel and Fuck Hamas. Oh wait, that’s right, for all your gaslighting, you still have a problem with the second part of that comment, you just won’t admit it.

What’s there to break down? Hasbara and Panarab Hamas apologists just gaslight in a very similar manner. Just go to r/worldnews on reddit and try to argue with one of the Hasbara brigade accounts that hog jpost propaganda pieces. You get your feet wet, you begin to notice the similarities.

Oh look, it’s Mr. Down again. How’s the propaganda run going? Accusing Hamas as well as Israel is not using Hamas to justify Israel. You are just trying gaslight. Anyway, back off to the block list you go, although your comment is surprising on par with those of Israeli disinformation troll brigades.

So by your metaphor, black people are terrorists?

About the only possible association is that the label was a dogwhistle by people who are racists, but within your example you equate a terrorist group, Hamas, to people who have been victims of prejudice due to their skin color, essentially whitewashing terrorists as victims.

You people (Hamas apologists) give yourselves away when you want people to denounce Israel but denouncing Israel while also denouncing Hamas is too much for you. Palestinians are not Hamas, but you people and Israel have a shared interest in making them be one and the same.

Why not both? Didn’t know we had choose between a greater evil and the lesser evil that was pushed forth by the greater evil to tank any possibility of a diplomatic approach with the alternative.