I’d be willing to bet most Lemmy users are passive gentrifiers at best - though they’d be deeply personally offended if people (accurately) called their housing choices gentrification. Still cool image tho 😂

Thank goodness.

Becoming?

Becoming?

Bacteria, sure. Maybe. But fecal parasites? Incompletely composting your own feces is a great way to help your intestinal parasites complete their life cycle by consuming their eggs 😆

deleted by creator

If you think that’s bad try posting on the vegan community 😆

The point is, all the different brands you see are owned by the same handful of megacorporations So you’re not getting actual choice, just the illusion of choice. You’re like a dog who gets excited when your owner feeds you dog food from his hand instead of the bowl, because you think it’s a treat.

I thought the meme was clear about that, but the average American reads at a third grade level, so I understand reading comprehension can be difficult for you.

Anarchist types prefer consensus-based decision making processes to democracy. We want the entire community to agree on a course of action, not just let 51% order 49% around.

The American welfare system is byzantine, unfair, corrupt, and ineffective. People need this workaround on cooked food because there are irrational, pointless restrictions on what kinds of food people can buy with EBT. That’s the dystopia part.

It’s awesome that good people do good things to fix the problems caused by a dystopian system. But if the system wasn’t broken, they wouldn’t have to.

Yep. And back in the days of the USSR, the Kremlin would rant about how racist Jim Crow was. The North Vietnamese dropped leaflets on US bases encouraging black soldiers to defect because the US government was using them as cannon fodder.

This was propaganda and it was also true.

If China and Russia are spreading propaganda about police brutality in the US, the solution isn’t to silence criticism of the police. The solution is to reform the goddamn police.

How do you know someone isn’t vegan?

Don’t worry, they’ll tell you.

I was struck by how the farmer featured here sells male sheep for meat - even though he supposedly doesn’t have enough sheep to meet demands for grazing around solar project. As if, what, male sheep don’t graze just as well as female sheep?

Just shows how even the most innocuous forms of animal agriculture rely on murder and exploitation.

This solar ain’t vegan.

It’s really not, though. Terms like “restorative justice” are not generic positive adjective pablum - they are specific terms with specific meanings. If you don’t know the meanings and don’t care to research them, that’s on you.

For whatever reason, Lenin disregarded this when the Bolsheviks took power

Come on. You know why.

The nonprofit industrial complex is a leech. At least government agencies have some level of accountability, because if they fail to solve a problem, the voters blame the politicians, and the politicians shit downhill on the agencies. Nonprofits don’t even have that minimal level of accountability. They just spend all the government money they get, write grants saying “we spent all the money you gave us doing stuff, please give us more”, and get more money.

But this is what you get when both the left and right have bought into libertarian free market ideology and agree that privatizing government services is more efficient than letting the government do its goddamn job.

And I’m the left, and I think the center left are capitalist cryptofascists, hypocrites who virtue signal about social justice to hide their opposition to economic justice, while ultimately achieving neither.

And I think the “far left” are generally good people who seek both social and economic justice. Some of their ideas for attaining justice are both moral and practical, while other ideas are impractical or would do more harm than good.

And I suspect, if I was a right-wing conservative, I would feel the same way about the center right and the far right.

All depends on where you stand, huh?

Preach. I rant about the same thing all the time.

Capitalism is decentralized tyranny. If a dictator said “if you refuse to work where I send you I will starve you to death on the streets” most Americans would recoil. But capitalism says “if you do not provide enough value for the upper class, they will not give you enough tokens to exchange for food and housing, and you will starve to death on the streets”. And we just shrug and say it’s the workers’ fault for not working hard enough - because “no one is forcing you” - there’s no specific individual we can blame for starving the unwanted population to death, it’s the insensate grinding of the gears of a machine, and don’t be silly, we can’t turn off the machine, what are you, traitor?

And even with the open dictator model, many Americans would say “that just makes sense, if you don’t work you don’t eat” and cheer the dictator for putting lazy useless people to work. Just look how many people support slave labor in private, for profit prisons, and how many people want unhoused people to be enslaved in those exact same prisons. Hell, at the height of the Qanon craze something like 20% of Americans believed that Donald Trump would enact martial law and put millions of liberals in concentration camps and wanted it to happen. We’re addicted to the taste of boot.

I agree, everyone who loves liberty should oppose this law.

Unfortunately, if you are conservative and you oppose this law, in my experience you are damn near a unicorn. I’m in California and these kind of brutal crackdowns are wildly popular among conservatives - and moderates, and even wealthy white liberals. Like the article says, blaming the victims of homelessness for the homeless crisis has been incredibly effective. And most people don’t understand how corrupt the homeless industrial complex is, how little government funding actually gets to the homeless to help them, and how incompetent, abusive, and poorly run those aid programs actually are, so it’s easy to look at all the money and programs that exist on paper and blame homeless people for “refusing help”.

Unhoused people refuse help because past “help” failed them or people they know, or “help” comes with conditions that are unacceptable to them, or “help” will not solve the actual problems they have. The solution is not to force people into institutions that abuse them, neglect them, and then kick them out for failing to follow arbitrary rules.

I mean, if you have a dog, and the shelters don’t allow dogs, what do you do? What sane person would risk their dog being put down at the pound in exchange for a few weeks of housing - housing, moreover, that is demonstratively less safe than living on the street?

The solution is to improve the services available without conditions so that unhoused people feel safe in asking for those services.

There are a small number of people who genuinely cannot make decisions because they cannot comprehend reality. And those people need help, possibly involuntary help. But even then, that doesn’t mean taking them away from the people and places they know and locking them up. People blame Reagan’s deinstitutionalization of mentally ill people in the '80s for the current homeless crisis - people forget Reagan’s deinstitutionalization policy was popular because insane asylums were horrifically incompetent and abusive.

And if you see a homeless person experiencing a mental health crisis or acting irrational in public, please remember, they have no private place to go - how would you come off to the public if your worst moments had to be displayed in public? - and then ask yourself whether their actions are making you feel unsafe, or merely uncomfortable.