Yeah it took me way too long to look at the source of this!
Yep, and we could stop making it worse, but we won't :(
Context is anti semitic
It's sarcasm the way I'm reading it, i.e. he is saying the the UN chief is providing context and that is being deemed as antisemitic, which it's not.
The Israeli ambassador is conflating the state with the entire set of Jewish people, which as you said is itself antisemitic
I think you're both on the same page
No, equating all Jewish people with the oppressive apartheid state Israel
Where did he say (or equate) all Jewish people?
They're quids in (unless they've based their finances on the capital gains from owning property in a ridiculously expensive city while shunting the costs onto lower paid workers who are forced to commute long hours at their own expense).
Well they have to have their side hustle too, gig economy and all!
I think this is very interesting, and you should go pester ones like Stephen Fry on mastadon to come have a play with lemmy
Just as a homage to Stephen Fry in particular, here's a fantastic audiobook version of hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy on archive.org
https://archive.org/details/hhgttg-ab
Mythos is also awesome
Alpha private school leaders believe
they will make lots of money
Clearly a bit too vanilla for the clergy admins liking
There are no metics to support any drop in productivity. There are lots of metrics to support making people go back to the office is bad for the environment. The traffic were I live is pretty much back to what it was before. It's gross just watching the haze of fumes knowing it is there so these dickheads can maintain their property portfolio.
Sorry, I'm very jaded by people being intentionally stupid, I on the other hand am just stupid...
Wow be on the lookout for people talking to people they didn't talk to before, or people being upset, this is thought police, this is actually, literally, fucking 1984!
Are you stupid
Edit:
Sorry I'm stupid, I meant to post this
Genocide
Aaaaaa you're so wise! I bet everyone in your life just adores hearing you put the world to rights. And they don't think you're a self centered moron only concerned with sniffing their own farts.
I don't think anyone is mad at her, people are looking at this and seeing naked corrupt authoritarianism.
So to explain my confusion, not wanting things to progress is something I don't understand, so when you said progressive I then thought you were saying Greta is doing good.
Fundementally, being against progression means you are regressive. I think being static isn't something well defined, because it doesn't seem feasible, it would required being entirely insular, i.e. solipsistic, which is mad.
If you don't mind me asking, why do you want things to regress? In recent times ( bar the rise of the far right ideologies causing a fair bit of war and death), it's statistically been one of the most peaceful periods in history, bar some notable regions, really Europe's stopped brutally annihilating each other. Arguably, this has been due to global cooperation on an economic and cultural level, it could be nuclear weapons as well, but cooperation is good, so I would personally roll with it.
Would you prefer to go back to a time when countries where more insular and thus more likely to end up in war with each other? Or what other benefits do you see in being regressive?
They yearn for the guillotine