Not_mikey

There's a study showing about 1 in 6 people have it to some degree, so relatively common. It's just that the images that trigger it are specific and rare, for me the clustering and the type of holes have to be just right, but if it is, ick

The way I learned about it was someone posted a picture specifically meant to trigger it on 4chan to troll people, and it haunted me enough to look into it.

It seems to be a bit of both. The article does cite a lot of comments agreeing with what the older relatives said and getting a bunch of likes. So some people are laughing at how horrible and racist it is, but some are laughing at the unapologetically saying what we're all thinking aspect.

A lot of racist jokes are just people saying their biases out loud and unapologetically, and then the racists laugh because they agree, and they get to affirm those beliefs. You might get some people on the other side laughing at the absurdity, but for the people of the race being made fun of, it just feels like the attack it is. Especially when the subject is serious and you can't distance yourself from it, and nothing is more serious than genocide.

Like if you showed these to a Palestinian child they'd probably become depressed and scared by it. If you showed these to a boomer israeli they would probably laugh at it and say they're right.

That's trypophobia . Don't Google it though, might come up with a lot of triggering pictures.

Did you read my reply?

fuck russia for starting this war

How am I blaming ukraine?

I'm pointing out a contradiction in your support for refugee rights and mandatory conscription. Instead of addressing that contradiction you seem to want to focus on russia and pretend I'm an fsb plant.

I'm not defending russia here, putin is horrible and without him none of this would happen. Now that we agree on that explain to me how your in favor of mandatory conscription and refugee rights.

The khmer rouge wouldnt have happened without u.s. meddling and bombing in Cambodia, that doesnt mean we cant criticize the horrible things they did in retaliation. Just because there's a greater cause of something doesn't mean we can't debate the decisions made by those effected.

If zelensky comes out tomorrow and says this is a great move by trump because ukraine needs the manpower are you going to change your position?

I wonder what the Ukrainian people want.

Well some want to leave, but the government isn't allowing them to.

Why is it evil for the u.s. to send people back to a war zone but not for ukraine to keep people in a war zone?

And before you go for the whataboutism I know russia is doing it too and that's fucked up. Fuck russia for starting this war but that doesn't resolve the contradiction of supporting refugee rights and mandatory conscription.

And 0.7m people working. Ukraine is suffering a labor shortage because of the war. Unless these are old or infirm people, people tend to produce more with there labor then they take out in government services. This is one of the reasons immigration is a good thing and why this is a bad move for the u.s.

Going to steel man this since theres obviously no one on here answering this question seriously. Not a republican and don't agree with all this, just imagining what my republican dad would say about this:

For ukraine and Europe, we have no interest in protecting them besides sentimental attachments. Ukraine is not our problem, it's Europe's and if they want to dump money into a lost cause by all means go ahead, but leave the u.s. out of it unless your going to compensate us for it. The u.s. isn't threatened by Russia, we have an ocean, the world's largest navy and nukes to protect us. The larger threat is China and we should be focusing on them, not russia which can barely invade it's neighbor, much less march across Europe and the atlantic. Europe can handle its own problems.

For Canada and Mexico and tarriffs in general. We need to bring manufacturing back to America and revitalize the rust belt. We can't do that if companies find it more profitable to go over seas and pay people pennies when they'd have to pay Americans much more. The only way to get them to come back is to make it too expensive to import things.

This is all about putting America first. For decades America has been spending billions to protect Europe and has been sending billions of dollars over seas to build factories owhile factory after factory closes here in the u.s. We need to stop all of that and spend our money in America for Americans.

Feel free to use this comment as a punching bag, I don't care, just trying to give OP an actual answer if this was a legitimate question and not some rhetorical question seeking affirmation on how dumb the Republicans are. They are, don't get me wrong, but just say so and don't dress it up in questions like this.

As a resident of the city that won the lawsuit, and thus doesn't have to pay for a $10 billion sewer renovation, I feel this is not in my favor

Oh no... please don't, that will erode the property claims of the vast hoards the ruling class possess, that would be terrible...

You can't just take billionaires money because there supporting a horrible cause, next thing you know every morally bankrupt oligarch will be financially bankrupt, we can't have that.

Ctr +f "cybertruck": 0 results

Good job everybody!

I agree, displaced person's should get a vote. Ideally people in the occupied territories would too, but thats just not feasible. Just like how in 1864 the blacks in the south shouldve gotten to vote since they were all now freed under the emancipation proclamation, and they had the most at stake in the conflict, but the confederacy was never going to allow that. That doesn't mean the north shouldn't have had an election because not everyone could participate.

The people in the occupied territories may not be as pro-ukrainian as you might think though, a lot of them probably just want the war to be over and for the bombs to stop falling on them. Hell putin might allow an election if he knows they'll vote for peace.

Why, the U.S. has had many elections during wars, many of which become a referendum on whether to stay in the war. The 1864 election had candidates openly advocating for ending the civil war. The 1968 election had multiple nominees on the democratic side advocating to end the Vietnam War, and the winner Nixon was campaigning on ending the war "with honor.

The people should have a say in whether there country continues a war, to say otherwise is undemocratic and patronizing.