It absolutely is a violent act. In the same way that locking a person in a cage is a violent act, depriving people of the things they need to live is a violent act.
The fact is, simply asking these people to stop hoarding and polluting is not going to work (duh).
Is there a non-violent solution?
Killing other humans is often justified. For instance, it would be completely justified to kill someone who was in the process of shooting up a school.
In the same way, billionaires are guilty of causing the deaths of millions of people through their hoarding of necessities. Killing the billionaires would allow this wealth to be redistributed, saving potentially millions of lives.
I feel the same way about Americans.
deleted by creator
The United states holocaust museum has a pretty good ‘plain text’ definition of genocide, which perfectly captures what the Israelis are trying to do to the Palestinians as genocide.
The article also has some useful ‘plain text’ descriptions of ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, mass atrocities, mass killing and war crimes.
https://www.ushmm.org/genocide-prevention/learn-about-genocide-and-other-mass-atrocities/definitions
The astute reader will notice that the Israelis are actually guilty of all of these mass atrocities as part of their attempts to genocide the Palestinians.
Genocide is defined as any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.
The acts are:
Except for perhaps the last point, there’s no person that could argue that Israel has not perpetrated these acts against the Palestinians.
All that leaves then is the intent aspect of genocide.
The Israelis are very open about their desire to destroy Palestine. Law4palestine has a collection for quotes from current and former legislators which capture their genocidal intent:
If you don’t feel like reading through that, here’s an excellent summary of other evidence of Israel’s genocidal intent from Jewish Currents:
https://jewishcurrents.org/a-textbook-case-of-genocide
*Edit: added the link to the legislators list. Left the decision makers list as it just serves to hammer the point home
What creature is a Zionist in the morning, anti-genocide in the afternoon and uses Arch btw in the evening?
You’ve actually got it backwards. The ranking algorithm (rankdex) developed by one of the engineers that founded Baidu was published in 1996, two years before pagerank. Some of Google’s early patents actually cite the rankdex algo.
Not like it matters here
Cope
You’re putting a lot of faith in whoever packages the ‘distro’.
Obviously you have the same problem with trusting FOSS software distributions, but it’s mitigated by things like Linus’ Law and reproducible builds.
That being said, I personally use tiny11 VMs for certain non-critical things at home and work. I’d never use it for anything security related, or as my main OS, as there is a non-negligible chance that it’s compromised (and there’s basically no way of knowing).
We get on edge about the constant military/economic threat of China
Not everyone in Australia watches Sky News
I live in a country with a nominally ‘labor’ government that has stood in the way of unions protesting the genocide in Gaza and is actively working to suppress union led protests.
We in the west are in for a very rude shock in the coming years. Today it’s clamping down on protests for Palestine, tomorrow its teargas and truncheons for strikers.
A lot of people don’t understand that if we don’t stand up for the Palestinians, we won’t have a snowballs chance when it comes to seriously protesting our own governments and the corporations that control them.
Fuck zionists
Why do bots! Love exclamation marks! So much!
Executing children in the street, for the crime of being Palestinian.
This is what genocide looks like.
Where else does this happen regularly?
No, it isn’t. You can fully believe in people’s ability to rehabilitate and change, while also being aware that not everyone rehabilitates and changes.
The needs of the perpetrator of a crime need to be balanced against the needs of society at large. This is why you get your license taken away from you when you drink and drive, or why you end up on a sex offenders register.
In this case, there’s a valid argument to be made that this person represents a danger to society, and the need to protect/inform people from him outweighs his desire to not have past crimes revealed.
Hard to make the poor people richer when the rich are taking an increasingly large share of the pie.
Do you work for arpeture science or something?
That’s a bad comparison. The Wikipedia decision was made specifically because the experts – i.e actual scholars of genocide and war crimes – have a very widely held consensus that a genocide is occurring.
Do you disagree with the experts?