Well, my comment was a classic “yo momma” joke. You asking for “what about hamas?” Is a very common fascist deflection. So if you talk like a fascist, don’t be mad to be treated as such.

Next, armed struggle against an oppressive colonizing regime is protected under international law. And hamas is THE GOVERNMENT there that means even a government employed janitor as treated as a “terrorist”. In fact IOF uses this exact same rhetoric to kill civilian in gaza.

As a popular mainstream icon, radiohead has power that we everyday individuals don’t. And when you talk like “oh hamas and IDF same same” that makes you either complicit at best or genocide apologist at worst.

Yes.

Removed by mod

You know there was a mad king who tried to do the same?

Babies just end up dying if not talked to. He also wanted to figure out the language of gods

First part everyone would agree. Second part, no way in hell.

Hamas is also the government, which means they are government employees who have never taken a gun or done anything. But you go beyond and call every supporter of them “in favor of literal terrorism”

It’s like blaming all jews and supporters of judaism for the action of zionists

A friend of mine said something reaaaaaalllllly controversial. IDF claims everyone in GAZA is a terrorist. But look at Israel, everyone has mandatory military service. Everyone has either been in IDF, is currently in IDF, or will be in IDF.

If anything the opposite of “everyone in GAZA is a terrorist” holds more ground honestly.

Mosquito

Love the brainstorm energy and solution oriented mindset. Few suggestions:

Lets make the game mandatory and nonviolent, except the loser becomes the new kevin and the winner gets blown up with giant lasers.

The kevin system will push people not to be the last one and the laser will discourage people from being at the top.

It would create much more homogenous, and equal society with no class wars because everyone would want to be the part of the “middle class”

Replying to your post, if there were less workers there would be less consumers and then less consumers means less demand for workers.

This is gonna sound communisty but a better way to increase wages would be to avoid extraordinary wealth accumulation. There are finite resources, finite workers and thus finite surplus in this world, so if one person gets too much, that means the rest will have much less.

I remember reading a graph that showed, the number of young children in the world plateaued which means that the world population will also be plateaued in about 70-80 years.

Which actually fit the predictions that were made from simulations that world population will hit a max in around 2100

Bro what illegal network are you creating?

What reading ToS gonna do? For many people, if they want to find a job they have no option but to network via LinkedIn. You get blocked from many many services just because you use private browsing or a VPN. These services are so well integrated with modern society that you are basically at a huge disadvantage if you don’t use them.