Hazor

Indeed. 🤨

As a Tennessean, I'd be shocked and dismayed.

But I'd still say throw her in the slammer.

Also consider a healthcare career. As a teenager, I wanted to do computer science/engineering, and sometimes I do wish I had stayed on that track. But now, as a nurse, I could get a job in any state in the US by tomorrow. I dare you to try to find a hospital that doesn't have open nursing positions. Even when the economy goes down, people still get sick. Even if society collapses, the knowledge/skills will be useful.

And if you don't want to change diapers or deal with blood, there are still options; I'm in psychiatry and rarely have to deal with either.

I used to do most of my grocery shopping at Trader Joe's. When they came out calling the NLRB unconstitutional, I never went back. Fuck Traitor Joe's.

I really don't understand why I constantly see this sentiment on every post pertaining to protests. Rome wasn't built in a day. How do you expect the masses to go directly to violent revolution when many of them don't even recognize there's a problem, and most of them have spent their whole lives in a system which hasn't required any political participation at all? Drawing attention to the problems is how you get more people active.

Obviously, protests won't do anything to directly influence the corrupt leaders in any meaningful or beneficial way. I don't know anyone who actually hopes for that. But a handful of individuals resorting to political violence will be easily quashed by the fascists' enforcers and then demonized or ignored by the fascist-friendly media, so the logical thing is to make the movement too big to fail or ignore. Drawing attention to the problems is how you get more people active.

As a vegan:

A. wtf, why would this warrant banning? At most it should have been a warning to use a less hostile tone? B. Why is it absurd? Should I be okay with a burglary in my neighborhood when there are wars going on somewhere else? Your equivocating meat consumption with wasteful transport suggests to me a fundamental misunderstanding of the motivations of veganism. No sentient, feeling creature has to suffer and die for someone to take a jet ride, but they do for me to eat a hamburger. I think the private jetters should feel guilty too, but for different reasons. In any case, how do you feel about dog meat?

Regarding availability and cost efficiency: shipping soybeans from Kansas fields to a cattle ranch in Nebraska and then the beef to a grocer in Idaho is less efficient than shipping soybeans from Kansas to the grocer (obviously, this is an oversimplification). Not to mention that animals aren't perfect energy converters, reducing efficiency further. I'm not arguing that it'd be easy for the whole world to convert to veganism, but in most developed countries it'd actually be more efficient and cost effective (at the society level; not necessarily for all individuals) for most people not to eat meat. Especially if subsidies for animal agriculture were redirected to plant agriculture.

In any case, who's actually "ramming" ideology? As a casual lemmy user, I do see a surpising number of discussions on the matter of veganism, but most of what I've seen has been pretty civil. I do recall a lot of self-defeating thoughtless toxicity from vegans in the vegan subreddits, but I haven't witnessed it myself on lemmy.

Something something only the best people?

I don't quite follow your argument. Are you suggesting it requires more cropland to make vegan food than meat? If everyone ate crop-derived foods in place of livestock-derived foods, we'd need less cropland, because livestock animals are not perfect energy converters. I.e., it takes more than a pound of feed to get a pound of beef.

Or are you saying it's hypocritical of a vegan/vegetarian to eat products of agriculture because of the damage to the natural environment and animals which reside in it? The only non-hypocritical thing for me to do in that case would be to kill myself. Forgive me if I don't. Perfect is the enemy of good, and so I'll choose to minimize harm where I can.

We can't eliminate all suffering and harm, so we shouldn't even try reducing it? Perfect is the enemy of good. For many if not most vegans, it's about minimizing harm. Many are motivated by ecological concern as well.

Some insects die on my car's grill when I'm driving. I still go to work every day while calling myself vegan. Literally the only non-hypocritical action would be to kill myself. Forgive me if I don't.

My understanding was that it was a "no modern weapons" thing. That is, pre-1900 weapons were "acceptable", hence why the pirates and wild west sets could have guns, but the police sets do not. To my (absolutely non-expert) knowledge, Indiana Jones sets only had revolvers, a pre-1900 technology. As I recall, there was a bit of controversy when they released the Sopwith Camel (a WWI-era fighter plane, i.e. post-1900) set with machine guns on it.

The Star Wars sets have fantasy weapons, not real modern weapons. Why that or a revolver should be seen as meaningfully different from a modern gun is, evidently, left as an exercise for the consumer. In any case, clearly the stricture has been relaxed over the years.

In some states, testing and then notifying CPS of positives is required by law. The healthcare staff hate it as much as the patients, because it does more harm than good.

If they don't have to work to live, they're no longer working class (Musk still works at Tesla, but clearly doesn't need to). But I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that those who derive their wealth from the labor of workers but who can't afford a yacht should be treated differently than billionaires? I'm not arguing that we shouldn't have progressive tax rates, I'm only saying that an arbitrarily defined 'middle class' exists solely so that you and I are distracted by exactly these discussions, and provides no benefit to determining what is justifiable economic policy.