Look at the differences between how they treat Stalin and Christopher Columbus in terms of Genocide.
Stalin: "Stalin was a accused of genocide, but it's hard to pin a number in him because he didn't kill them directly."
Columbus: "Yeah, he's been accused of genocide, but there are also many historians who disagree with this assessment."
Ok, where is Saddam?
2025 prediction: "Stalin was a revisionist."
These people have no understanding of the history of Haiti at all, the most they'll tell you (if they remember anything) is that Christopher Columbus did bad things there like slavery and killing people. They usually can't tell any details beyond this.
The only history they know and care about (if any at all) is 1776, Founding ~~Fathers~~ Fuckheads, the existence of Columbus and Cortez, and the watered-down story of the English pilgrims that completely erases the history of the indigenous people of the Americas. They have been raised without this knowledge and learning the reality of the history of the US is not just an inconvenient truth, but an existential threat to the morality, freedom, and righteousness they think the US stands for and which they have built their personal identity upon.
I don't blame the individuals for how they were raised, but this widespread ignorance is unforgivable. Nearly everyone in the US is in desperate need of reeducation because the first round purposely left out, revised, or treated immense suffering with the cold detachment of only teaching the number who died.
We're stupid, but at least we're honest about it. They're stupid, but at least they have the decency to not act like it out in broad daylight.
Wrong comparison. People from the US are stupid and proud of it. There's nothing honest coming from the US except bombs.
You forgot the anti-vaccine campaign they ran in countries near China saying their vaccine contained pig parts. Not the US state dept's first anti-vax campaign btw.
US vaccines were made available first and foremost to Western citizens, and only then were made available to purchase. China released their vaccine worldwide, so countries without a vaccine program had access earlier and cheaper than they could acquire vaccines from the US. Their anti-vax campaign was meant to prevent other countries from accepting China's offer, thus preventing goodwill towards China, protecting the profits of US companies, and leading to the deaths of millions who could have been saved in "US Allied" countries such as the Philippines.
If you were going to buy into one of these two conspiracy theories, first you should have some actual evidence, and then you should look at the behavior of these countries and ask yourself: which behavior is more consistent with releasing a virus that could act as an economic weapon meant to shut-down a country, but not kill everyone?
This thread brought to you by Western Imperialism™.
Seeing this allowed on mander.xyz is deeply disappointing.
The US is the only country that has ever used nuclear weapons on civillians, so them using biological weapons on civillians would not be a big moral barrier for them or a big stretch to think about.
That's such a small stretch that it's actually a confirmed fact that the US has repeatedly used chemical and biological warfare. Korea and Vietnam are merely two easy examples.
And for even juicier chicken, directly inject cranberry juice using a needle and syringe. You can use other juices, but IMO, cranberry goes best with chicken.
For outrageously juicy chicken, sous vide to 155-160F directly in cranberry juice (no vacuum bag). This may bring the chicken beyond many people's juicy limits, so I suggest trying the other two recipes first to gauge your personally acceptable limit of juiciness.
Citations needed or all citations point to unreliable sources (Adrian Zenz).
Stop giving a shit about those limitations. Stop posing the question and expecting others to fix it for you. Leaded fuel is a much bigger problem than the cost of replacing or retrofitting those planes and if people don't have an incentive to change, they won't.
At the government level:
Subsidize the cost of retrofitting, set a hard deadline for no more leaded fuel, tax that fuel ridiculously starting yesterday...seriously, just invest in actual solutions instead of shrugging your fucking shoulders and saying, "but it'll cost too much."
Money ain't shit compared to public health. Give the problem a reason and the means to be solved. It really isn't that hard unless your government only cares about profits, not about improving the lives of its citizens.
Community level:
If this is your case, it'll be harder, but you need to create circumstances where either the government's or those continuing to use and produce leaded gas are punished for doing so. This is only possible through mass organizing. One of the simplest versions of this is through forming consumer unions. An even simpler method is to burn all of those little fucking planes down and burn every new one that pops up. Make it too expensive for people to buy and insurers to cover.
I think you can see where I reached the limits of my patience in writing this comment. I joke, but it is an effective means and should probably be The last resort. The point is nothing will change unless you take direct action which will involve organizing people who are affected by this problem to invoke positive change. Alone you are weak, together you are powerful. Power is what allows you to change the world.
Despite calling Bernie out for at least some of his shit, I do think he has generally been one of the better Democrat senators in terms of progressive domestic policies. I wonder now if anyone actually can climb to that political level without being corrupted or rejected and black-listed by the system.
I used to support the Democrats and him in particular. It was demoralizing to see how he supported the DNC after his 2016 and 2020 campaigns, but I think there are lessons we can learn from his career. For me, he represents a good example of how operating in good faith within the existing US political system as a path to major reform is not a viable strategy (Jill Stein as well), but that you need to build organizations outside of this structure to seize political power and force the change that the system resists. Unions and other community organizations. The attempt at a general strike led by the UAW in 2028 for example.
I don't believe this will fundamentally change any systems within the US, nothing short of revolution would achieve this, but I think it is an opportunity to improve lives. It's a chance to show people not only that they have power, but how to build the power to fight for themselves.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm tired of putting my faith in these people when, you're right, it feels like they've given up all pretense and dropped the bar on the floor. All they've ever done is disappoint me. Working and learning from socialist and labor organizations has given me hope again that there is a path to change.