ondoyant

thinking that farmers should do work with nothing in return as a method of ending food insecurity is ignorant to the work being done to address food insecurity. nobody is proposing farmers should work for free. food stamps, subsidized farming, community owned farmland, urban gardening, universal basic income, food banks, all of these things and more are how we eradicate starvation, and how many other developed nations have successfully reduced food insecurity.

systems which allow people to starve are indefensible in a world where we can make enough food for people, and we absolutely can do that.

people should not starve. we have the resources to ensure nobody starves. it isn't a naive statement, its a moral imperative.

your public school promoted body dysmorphia?? that's wild. did the school have a policy about telling kids they were fat or something? i really am having a hard time envisioning an ideological position that's explicitly in favor of inducing eating disorders in schoolchildren. i'm also just kinda confused at to how veganism plays into this. how does a school tell somebody to be vegan? diet is a pretty personal choice, and tends to involve a lot of effortful change. was there like a program for encouraging vegan diets specifically?

what ideological position is this school using? because... i don't really know what kind of ideology leads to anorexia. anorexia is a complex mental health issue caused by interactions between cultural notions of beauty and health and the psychology of individual humans. the closest ideological cause i can think of is like... sexism, or fatphobia, or patriarchal standards of beauty as imposed by the advertising industry.

it was exactly like they were having an actual drag show. maybe not the modern cultural understanding of one, but they were dressing up as women to play feminine roles in the context of a performance, which fits under the definition of a drag show. it was a common practice in both the British and US militaries.

what is too far? what places? i hear this point alot, but do you have examples? real schools that are really going "too far" in some specific sense? where are they? what are they teaching?

such a slippery slope! supporting free speech means allowing people to talk about how much they want queer people dead, too. tell the people calling for violence against queer people to fuck off, and maybe one day your very own calls for violence might get told to fuck off!

everybody deserves a platform to call for the extermination of people groups, but they have to earn their audience 😏. i think we should do absolutely nothing to stop them, because doing anything just makes them stronger anyways. /s

the lizard thing is unfortunately just antisemitism, and older than zucc himself. the whole alien lizard people running the world bit comes from David Icke, who is very much a fascist, and was inspired directly by old school Nazi conspiracy theory texts like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

sure. i'll bite. how about you tell me exactly what opinions have gotten you branded in this way? please. tell me what exactly are the kinds of things you say that get other people to call you a nazi.

thats weird. i never get called a fascist, and nobody i know gets called fascists, and i've never had to worry about other people calling me a fascist when i disagree with them. huh...

i built a rigid heddle loom and wove myself a scarf! it sucks and is super wonky looking but i love it, and its been neat learning about how weaving works and the history of textiles and all that junk. did you know that weaving is one of the oldest crafts in the world? we were doing it back in the paleolithic, like 27,000 years ago! its very neat. it took me like a month to build the loom, and a few days to weave the scarf, and its the first time i've felt this much consistent focus on a hobby in a long time. it also coincides with me getting new brain pills (and estrogen) that are working really well at restoring my passion for life.

i mean i get the impulse, but if we were to blindly trust any sort of knowledge system, science is the one to trust, right? like, any downsides of trusting scientific consensus are necessarily larger when trusting information sources that aren't scientific, and if you follow through with trusting science blindly, you might ignorantly begin to believe that empirical testing and intellectual honesty is necessary for determining the truth of your beliefs!

we aren't talking about millionaires? at least i'm not. this whole thread is about billionaires why would you think we were talking about random celebrities? like maybe this argument would be relevant somewhere else but i'm genuinely confused, we're talking about Bezos and Musk here, not actors?