I’m arguing AGAINST violence. I’m a pacifist. And I’m tired of being called right wing or fascist everytime I argue for pacificism, when I couldn’t be any further from the right wing. It’s insanity. Have you said anything to the violence supporters in this thread?

https://deadline.com/2023/08/andy-ngo-journalist-author-wins-300k-in-alleged-assault-1235526808/

So he won 300k for being violently attacked but I’m wrong that he was violently attacked. Ok.

And you’re a fucking idiot.

I left reddit because all of the brain dead right wing trumper zombies that toe the line, only to find the left wing equivalents here. Fuck politics as a team sport. Literally no difference between either side other than the team color

It’s clear from their comment that they are referring to the well known physically violent attack against Ngo, and that they are claiming that Ngo is not the victim here. It’s not theoretical astrophysics, read the comment again. What’s with the abject denialism here?

Regarding your other comments, I know what that means, I was just preemptively calling out potential BS responses, because they were used multiple times before on this very Lemmy instance by others defending the violence against Ngo.

Bullshit, by this definition every journalist is under attack. Ngo was famously attacked in public with a concrete “milkshake” for supposedly being a nazi. There are people on Lemmy in other forums defending this. There is no confusion here, so don’t sow it.

Anger and violence are two different things bud.

You said you argued with your friend about Ngo being attacked but not being the victim. Come on, it’s not like your comment was 100 pages long.

No one is living 100% to ideological perfection. It’s a spectrum. Some are a lot closer than others. I’ve definitely met some ascetic non-judgemental types.

Removed by mod

Because it’s additive?

Removed by mod

Sucks on Android tho

So even back in the early 90s when I dabbled in Libertarianism, people had a more nuanced take here, in that shared resources like water and air that crossed land boundaries would be protected by law. For instance you could do a class action lawsuit against the person damaging your air and water. But no one is that nuanced now.

Most “libertarians” are this dumb, but the old school ones at least attribute the problems to uneven regulation rigged in favor of the ruling class, which does jive with my understanding of what is wrong with the financial system. That being said, libertarianism wouldn’t work even if they did get shit straight.

Mattress: something firm like a tatami mat with a thin futon on top. Your lower back and hips will be happy.

Pillow: buckwheat husk filled with a dust cover. Your neck, shoulders, and sinuses will be happy.

I would have to agree 100%. Would be better if you weren’t on here though lol.

Lemmy is run by left wingers

Your definition of atheism is not my experience with pretty much every atheist I’ve ever met. It’s not absense of belief, but belief that God doesn’t exist. There was never anything nuanced about the definition.

Now we can say absense of belief for the sake of discussion, but then it becomes an issue of semantics, as there is overlap with agnosticism. But it doesn’t match my experience at all. Most atheists will call you names for suggesting anything but the idea that the laws of physics are a complete description of reality. Teenage edgelords mainly.