IQ only means something within a small subset of the establishment. It’s a made up thing that is highly biased towards white European men. Yes, the system will hold you back if they determine you to have a low IQ, but for thousands of years people of all intelligences successfully lived in societies with others.

You have to give up the belief that the system is the sum total of reality. It’s the reason you wonder if your life is over at 23 - because the system is narrow and myopic and only has a little space in it and everyone else is pushed out. But the system isn’t even half of real life, and when you find the rest of life by giving up on the system you’ll find your life is just beginning.

Carl Jung even said that life doesn’t start until 40 - everything before that is just research.

That’s a white puritan definition of perfection, and perfection itself is a white supremacist Christian concept. You may think you’re an atheist but you have a lot of Christendom to shed.

Emotions are super potent. You will not be whole until you feel all of them and work with them on a regular basis. Eliminating anger from your life is a totalitarian strategy based on a Christian ideology that is fundamentally anti-human. Anger is amazing.

Yes, the standards you are holding for yourself are absolutely toxic and you will suffer from them long-term.

2.6ms by the end of the century. They claim that people might be feeling like the days are getting longer. 2.6ms is not noticeable

This is the work we have to do as individuals, to struggle with our understandings against the real world we live in and challenge our own positions and understanding to more thoroughly champion those values we hold dear. Keep going, you’re on the right path. Keep struggling, it only gets harder for a while. If it starts getting easier, you’re going the wrong way.

Keep going! I think you still need more precision. Your racialized students are all victims of racism at nearly all times. What you’re talking about is when racialized students are victims of harm (which comes in many forms) where that harm is the intimate form of structural racism.

So when someone uses a racial slur, racialized people experience harm if they are exposed to it. A) what is that harm if the slur was used at them versus if that slur was used near them but not at them? B) is there harm if no racialized people are exposed to that event?

Being able to articulate these sorts of nuances in a way that is internally consistent will be the result of struggling with these concepts and coming to deeper understandings and the path forward will be clearer.

To put a finer point on it, if a white child, in a room of 5 white children and a white teacher, uses a racial slur, how would you describe that, how would you understand the consequences of that, how would you make the decision on whether and how to intervene, and how would you communicate your decision in context?

I will challenge for the sake of you refining your argument: bigotry is equivalent with rude behavior and aggressive confrontation. Bigotry is not limited to the structures of racism. You can be a bigot against people without hair, bigot against people based on height, a bigot against people based on body fat, a bigot against people based on body shape and proportions, etc.

Racism, on the other hand, is a structure that exists even without bigotry. Bigotry is a symptom or an outgrowth of structural racism. The earliest racists didn’t spend their time being rude and getting into fights with people, they spent their timing writing academic essays, giving lectures, and generally being perfectly calm, reasonable high society people who just believed things like race is inherent in the person and values are inherent in the race.

I challenge you to get more precise about why you think bigotry is different than other forms of conflict, connect it to the structural so that you’re not only dealing with the individual, and proceed from there with a refined analysis and set of proposals.

It’s a social democratic country run by an early stage neofascist party. Social democracy is the form of a state adjacent to fascism - fascism emerges from social democracy and fascism returns to social democracy.

So Italy is in an early stage of fascist potential.

Advertising in my private space on my private hardware in my private software in my private time is an invasion of my privacy. Anyone forcing ads into my domicile is invading my privacy. It’s MY space, not yours.

plenty of escaping Nazi officers fled…

This is a misattribution. Nazi officers were protected, transported, and given new lives by the US military and the Vatican working together.

I think this could have gone a lot harder

You literally just described a settler state, complete with using reproduction as an occupying tactic.

Israel, the state, is illegitimate and needs to be dissolved. The Israeli people can integrate and co-createba society with the Palestinians or they can GTFO. Any that stay to explicitly disrupt this and form reactionary movements can get rekt.

However, as you say, this reality won’t stop the genocide. So a two-state solution is the most likely interim step.

Jesus

No Fly Zone means active warfare. You cannot just declare a No Fly Zone like “stay out”. A No Fly Zone is literally a commitment to shoot down any enemy aircraft in the airspace. If Oman actually does this, they are in the war.

As for the point about Yemen already being bombed back to the stone age, the OP wasn’t talking about the minor strikes that the US and UK just launched, they are referring to the last near-decades-long assault Yemen has endured from both Saudi Arabia and the US.

Whataboutism, liberal

I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3625683/us-department-of-defense-statement-on-japans-decision-to-transfer-patriot-missi/

Russia has suffered more severe shortfalls

Citation needed

although since their government and military aren’t subject to Western-democracy-style oversight, I doubt they’ve “announced” anything

https://www.newsweek.com/russia-increases-weapons-production-2023-despite-sanctions-armed-forces-1856938

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-ramps-up-output-some-military-hardware-by-more-than-tenfold-state-company-2023-09-19/

https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-increased-stock-long-range-missiles-faster-than-expected-isw-2023-11?op=1

Because Russia is not subject to the anarchy of production for profit that the West is, weapons manufacturing is nationalized and directed by strategic plans and oversight to ensure more efficient and more effective production.

This is another one-sided approach, where one (accurate) aspect of the problem gets magnified as if it existed in isolation without putting it in context or examining counterbalancing factors on “the other side.”

You haven’t done this (putting it context / counterbalancing). You made no attempt at sourcing anything. You only demand to hear things that make you feel better and when you only hear things that make you feel worse you automatically assume ill intent from the message.

Want me to make an effort to compare and contrast supply levels on the Russian vs Western side?

I would actually.

Germany has deindustrialized

What on EARTH are you talking about?

2022 https://www.economist.com/business/2022/09/11/germany-faces-a-looming-threat-of-deindustrialisation

2023 https://www.politico.eu/article/rust-belt-on-the-rhine-the-deindustrialization-of-germany/

Late 2023 https://www.ft.com/content/7095e5d7-7a72-483f-9464-52d36bac03f7

What on EARTH have you been reading?

Honestly, I’m comfortable with calling it a day with the viewpoint I’ve laid out so far

That’s because you don’t have a viewpoint based in reality but instead prefer to live in the world of comfortable narratives masquerading as fact.

If you don’t want to agree, and feel like Russia is dominating in this war, that’s your right to think that, and I won’t stop you.

And here’s my evidence. You leap to strawman. No one ever said Russia is dominating, least of all me. I said Russia is achieving its strategic objectives (no country can join NATO while engaged in an active border dispute), Russia is not running out of munitions, the West is running out of munitions, the West is suffering economically, the West failed to open multiple fronts against Russia et. al, and multiple fronts have successfully been opened up against the West. None of this stuff is in dispute and none of it says Russia is dominating. If that’s what you think it says, that’s on you. What it says to me is the West is failing to meet its strategic objectives, militarily and economically. If you can’t handle that and require all journalism to also write some narrative about how those resisting the West are inevitably losing and suffering just as badly or worse and also they’re stinkydoodoo heads, well, then I think you’re making the right choice by ending the conversation here.

Considering the US is clawing back munitions from allies, UK has announced multiple shortfalls of ammo and personnel, Germany has deindustrialized, and multiple fronts have opened up against the West (Niger, Palestine, etc) and Russian production is in full swing, it sounds like a winning strategy to me. Every war the West has lost they lost against an entrenched enemy.

You mean holding the ethnically Russian territory and then settling in for a long conflict to drain your opponent of materiel? When your primary advantages are size, production, population, and patience? Yes. I would say that the particular position of the Russian army is achieving it’s strategic objectives quite well.

There is a nuclear nonproliferation treaty to stop nuclear countries from transferring the technology

One sided commentary about how the war is going? What kind of fantasy world do you live in where reality and unreality have equal journalistic weight.

As for your understanding of how war works, it’s about as bad as your understanding of journalism and propaganda. The fact that Russia pushes past the areas that it now occupies is how it came to occupy those areas. You don’t march your forces to a line and just stop. You clear far ahead of what’s defensible, set up your defenses, and hold. That’s what you’re seeing in that map and the idea the Russia is losing because of that is, quite literally, lying Western propaganda.

All civilian trade ships are fired up on when they attempt to violate a blockade. Europe does it, Israel does it, the US does it. It’s how blockades work.

Will it effect international trade? Yes. So maybe the USA should have considered that before ruining relationships by attempting to maintain white dominance on the region. Oh right. They did consider it. And then realized they could just bomb everyone to get their way. And now, the West is experiencing the consequences of their violence - shipping delays.