What sort of nuance and objectivity would you like to see from the huge portion of liberals you mentioned?
crapwittyname
joined 1 year ago
"The left" blames Hamas for the kidnapping and murder of these innocent Israeli hostages, because they're the ones who did it.
"The left" blames the Israeli government for the murder of 186,000 innocent Palestinian civilians, because they're the ones who did it.
Do you get it now?
I came here, furious, to say all this. What the hell am I supposed to do with all this energy now?
Paces angrily
Physical pain? I've had a spinal tap, countless perforated eardrums, dental nerve pain, broken bones and dislocated joints. You might consider me quite unfortunate and each of these is a story in itself. (The burst eardrum is definitely the worst of these, in severity and relentlessness) So anyway, I'm no stranger to physical pain.
BUT, I'm even more unlucky in that I suffered from a pretty rare condition called recurrent corneal erosion syndrome for three years after somebody poked me in the eye accidentally whilst he was trying to do the Saturday Night Fever move.
It's hard to describe the pain, but I'm told it's a contender for the most painful condition known to medical science. A woman once popped her own eye out with a spoon rather than continue to live with the condition.
The cornea (layer of transparent tissue covering the pupil/iris) is pretty bad at repairing itself. Like the other tissues in your body, it attempts to bond with nearby tissue when it's ruptured. (Think on how a cut on your hand heals). Except with RCE, the cornea preferentially adheres to the eyelid instead of itself. So, when you sleep, the front of your eye "heals" onto the eyelid, and then it tears open when you next open your eyes. Each time you sleep, the wound gets worse, until you can no longer open or close your eyes without agonising pain. So you are utterly sleep deprived, unable to blink for fear of the worst pain you've ever experienced every single time you do, and it hurts a good amount constantly anyway. It's as good an example of your own body torturing you as you could ask for. And it goes on and on and on. There's only one treatment which works, which is a type of laser eye therapy, for which the expense is very high. So I had to wait 3 years. The only way I managed to continue functioning was when I was allowed anaesthetic eye drops, which became like the air in my lungs. I would have to beg for them regularly, and I never had enough. Every night and morning I had to remember to squirt gel into my eye before closing/opening it, which would stop the healing effect IF I was lucky. Had the laser therapy not worked I don't know what I would've done. It's been eight years now, but it's "recurrent", so there's no guarantee it's gone for good. I wear glasses that I don't strictly need now, to make sure my eye is at least partially protected at all times. Sometimes, especially if I've drunk alcohol and I'm dehydrated, I get a little reminder that it's there. I live in fear.
Choose the first suggested word. Repeat until the sentence is complete. Like this: women are a good girl to me.
More than that, people need to learn to read men. "Yeah I'm fine, don't worry" is often a very quiet cry for help from a gender which is traditionally taught to show only strength and permanence and to never show outward signs of "weakness".
It's nothing short of traumatic, the upbringing where you don't get to cry.
TL:DR Fuck the patriarchy
Has nobody mentioned Barotrauma? Had a few hundred hours of fun with this, my buddy and I. Especially if you don't mind shit being not very shiny. It is unique, and it keeps on giving.
I fundamentally disagree that this distinction exists, and even if it did this is not a situation where it would apply.
But it does exist; preaching is persuading or guiding others to follow your own beliefs. If no distinction existed then we would be mechanically bound to preach what we believe, and we're not, so it's a choice.
Everyone is a hypocrite to some degree. There are levels of hypocrisy that are breathtaking, and levels that are just meh.
'Thou shalt not kill' is a biblical commandment, not a principle. It comes from the fundamental principle of harm minimisation, and the two examples you gave are different (extreme) applications of that principle, see: the trolley problem etc. It's morality for babies; looking at extreme black and white cases to be able to get a clear, consensus issue. Life is rarely that simple. Morality is never that simple.
They straight up went "when I break my own moral principles it doesn't feel as bad as when others break them against me"
I'm not sure, that seems like another extreme interpretation of something more nuanced.
This behaviour is morally no better than that of megachurch pastors who preach the immorality of gay sex and get caught paying men to fuck them in the ass.
OP didn't say they preached their morals though. Holding morals and preaching them are different things. I'd put this more in the category of people who pray secretly to a different god than the state-enforced religion, since OP is living in a capitalist society whilst not holding capitalist values.
I think there's got to be room for some grey areas in morality. I abhor late-stage capitalism, but I would not rather die than shop at a chain supermarket.
I bet you say that about all broad categorisations.
I actually inadvertently laughed out loud
It is exactly this. You attack "the left" and "liberals" as though they are the same thing (they very much are not) without mentioning anything specific, so it's hard for me (the left; not a liberal) to defend any position. I suspected a bunch of implied strawman fallacies was hidden behind this hand-waving and frankly I think this is a cowardly way to argue your point. So let's do the bullet points.
"From the river to the sea" is not a blatant anything. Yes, it has been used by Hamas, but it has also been used by Likud, for basically the opposite meaning. Therefore context must be absolutely appropriate in the understanding of the intent of the words. If a person or group who are in favour of Palestinian sovereignty and/or a single-state solution use the phrase, you can quite fairly assume that they are talking about this issue, rather than calling for the extermination of an ethnic group. It's dishonest in the extreme to label anyone who calls for Palestinians to be free an antisemite. As for the other phrase you mentioned, it seems like you are saying anyone who mentions an intifada is antisemitic. That seems ridiculous, and possibly you need to give more context.
Israel is an apartheid regime. It is a settler colonial project. It meets these definitions, and either you're for settler colonialism or you're against Israel in its current manifestation.
The reason you've not heard about other states doing other things is because we are talking about Israel, and the ways in which Arabic people are opressed there. The mistreatment of Jewish people in other places at other times does not pardon or imply permission for the mistreatment of Arabs anywhere.
It's not about being "progressive coded". It's context, again. If a group's aim is to restore human rights for people, and/or oversee equality then any accusation of racism should be considered with this context. Conversely, an organisation which has historically made horrific racist/homophobic statements should be considered differently in the same scenario. Again, it's hard to pinpoint exactly which groups and which incidents you are talking about, as you give no examples.