Because they are manufacturing consent for closing the platform, calling installing apps from other stores "sideloading" and hiding the options behind "SUPERDUPERDANGEROUS" warnings, making you wait 24h for literally just installing software on your own phone. They know 99% of people won't even bother. It's obvious what they want to do, this is a step back because of the outrage, have no doubts that they're gonna keep pushing it

Wrestlers oil one another prior to matches as a demonstration of balance and mutual respect.

If a man defeats an older opponent, he kisses the latter's hand (a sign of respect for elders in Turkey).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_wrestling

That's because IRL the context of "but" s doesn't usually go like this when there's a legitimate argument. The point of the comic is not blindly following trans people.

"I support trans people, but X" tends to have transphobic sentiment, even if X could be valid. In your example, many medicines are animal-derived or tested on animals. Focusing on addressing trans prople on this topic is usually a choice.

If you have these views, the context you would usually express them is not addressing trans people, but your message would probably be "I oppose people taking animal-derived medicines even if it improves their health".

Another simplified example. Let's say there's a grifter, scammer, scummy trans person, Alice. If you want to denounce Alice, you'd say "Alice is a scammer, xyz, don't use her as positive trans representation" in a forum, discussion, post, etc. You'd probably not start with "I support trans people, but some of them are scammers like Alice". Imagine how weird that would sound with other minority or opressed groups (women, black, gay, etc).

By the way: I don't know if you're vegan, but most vegans don't share your views on animal-derived or tested medicine (even the Vegan Society definition accepts these medicines). I'd suggest you find another term so you don't misrepresent veganism, like "ethical" or "[strict] animal rights" beliefs. I don't want to invalidate or debate your beliefs but calling it veganism is just not accurate.

Depends on the definition. In Lenin's Imperialism, the highest form of capitalism, he defines five criteria:

And so, without forgetting the conditional and relative value of all definitions in general, which can never embrace all the concatenations of a phenomenon in its complete development, we must give a definition of imperialism that will include the following five of its basic features:

1. the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life;

2. the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation, on the basis of this “finance capital,” of a financial oligarchy;

3. the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance;

4. the formation of international monopolist capitalist combines which share the world among themselves, and

5. the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed.

1 and 2 apply with some caveats, 3 and 4 are a yes (WTO, UN, BRICS, etc), and 5 should be seen through a soft-power neo colonialist lens with China's influence in Africa for example.

This is not meant to be anti-China or whatever, anything China has done pales in comparison with US imperialism, just that I don't think it's a completely baseless accusation.

I was so scared this was a meta meme about something bad with my guy Cillian cause he has immaculate vibes

Proprietary

Very visible hand of the market

Indoor/outdoor argument is universal and for good reason.

There's fucking ammo at wallmart. You can't even comprehend how mindboggling that is in most countries

It's way more sustainable and ethical (and possibly healthier too) to take b12 supplements (even if they're not sustainably produced) than any amount of animal flesh (other than roadkill I guess).

• b12 deficiency is widespread even among meat eaters
• b12 is generally supplemented in animal feed or the animals themselves are supplemented. Skipping the middle man is clearly more sustainable.
• If the animals are not supplemented, you can't know if you're avoiding deficiency. Furthermore a tiny amount of a vitamin (milligram or microgram order of magnitude) takes way fewer resources to produce than 500g of meat/fish.
• no matter how "humanely" they treat the animals they still get killed, unlike with the supplement. For dairy and eggs the slaughter is more indirect but it is still a fact that animals in the industry end up getting killed.
• In terms of sustainability, it doesn't matter that much if a product is local, the most impactful thing is the mode of production or the product itself (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/food-emissions-supply-chain)

I agree with your overall point that from a population perspective it's way more practical and impactful to change as many diets as possible instead of focusing on changing diets to 100% plant-based. And I think we should focus on that, broader society interventions instead of advocating for individuals to change their diets.

But if someone who reads this is facing the choice of taking a supplement versus some animal flesh, there is no ethical or sustainability grounds for choosing the flesh. Also probably no health grounds unless there are compounding issues (eg deficiency + allergies, interacting conditions, etc). I focused on B12 but this applies to many nutrients.

It's just not true that a tiny amount of animal flesh will spare you deficiency. It's also not true that deficiencies are "tough to avoid" on a plant-based diet, especially protein deficiency.

When vegans promote a whole food, plant based diet: "I will only switch when there are drop-in meat and dairy replacements"

Ok then I guess we'll develop drop-in meat replacements: "why emulate meat? So processed!"

It's amazing if you're into WFPB, it's one of the healthier diets out there. You're just not the target consumer of these meat replacements. But they're useful for some people to have a better choice. They're usually not unhealthier than the animal-based product they aim to replace (see meta analysis ).

They're German so no

I appreciate the effort and I will check it out. However imo the original works (ie Marx, Engels, Lenin) are too dense for a begginer, I feel there has to be a softer learning curve, with more digested content. For example I'm reading the Vietnamese textbook and I think it does a very good job at explaining excerpts of the originals in accessible language. Denser doesn't mean more accurate or better in all cases, just generally harder to read.

The voice is not AI, the video is quite good imo minus the slop pics.

You guys have downvotes? Every time I try to downvote a post I got a server error

Not open source

I think he probably considered this - part of commodity fetishism?

Based

It's also severly punished

1 who cares 2 avg male height in mongolia is 5' 6" which is pretty normal worldwide