• Treevan 🇦🇺@aussie.zoneEnglish
          262·
          1 year ago

          The boomers also own the farms that over-planted Avocado to profit off of the ‘Avocado Toast’ craze and now the market, within the next few years as most trees mature, will become over-saturated with fruit driving the price down. They won’t be worth picking.

          I have a feeling we will see Avocados going through woodchippers to keep the price high.

          Damn millennials, they ruined avocado toast.

    • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
      214·
      1 year ago

      The only thing I’m proud of when looking at gen Z is that they are completely unwilling to go to war for the military complex and giving their life fighting a battle where they have nothing to gain but everything to lose. That’s way smarter than my generation or the baby boomers ever were.

      • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
        3·
        1 year ago

        are completely unwilling to go to war for the military complex

        Are they though?

        "Post-millennials (also known as Generation Z or Gen Z), born from 1996 to the present, now constitute nearly 90% of the Army’s active duty junior enlisted and nearly 35% of all junior officers (Defense Manpower Data Center, 2018, p. 29). "

  • PugJesus@kbin.social
    7719·
    1 year ago

    Just a little casual genocide, nothing major, some dead LGBT folk here, some dead minorities there… normal stuff. Just wanna grill.

    • Aceticon@lemmy.world
      205·
      1 year ago

      As long as they’re our alliest, gotta let Fascists be Fascist once in a while to release some steam.

      A few dead children and blown up hospitals is just collateral damage. There’s nothing we could do about it1

      1that wouldn’t upset our Fascist allies.

      • PugJesus@kbin.social
        5·
        1 year ago

        They’re not even good allies. They’re busy shooting American citizens and selling US military technology to hostile powers. But I guess the end times needs Israel to begin so 50% of our politicians will mindlessly bootlick Israel and 40% of the rest are spineless cretins who think bipartisanship means ‘compromise, always’.

    • Land_Strider@lemmy.world
      57·
      1 year ago

      I love the smell of minority&meek soap in the morning. Then I remember I’m a right wing catholic white man with privileges and I use them by shooting some jets of fire with my pocket flamethrower from the fully open window of my monster truck while on the way to the usual grill with the boys, as my god intended ;)

      Edit: Obviously satire

  • geissi@feddit.de
    55·
    1 year ago

    Interesting how everyone seems to think this tweet from 2018 seems to refer to th situation in Gaza in 2023.

  • yui@lemmy.world
    6523·
    1 year ago

    I can’t believe someone with an anime profile picture isn’t spouting bigoted nonsense.

      • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        5·
        1 year ago

        Is it though? Is the narrative from the center and the right not overwhelmingly in favor of the ethnic cleansing occurring in Gaza?

        • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
          27·
          1 year ago

          It’s nonsense because the far left’s position is cheering on Hamas, the complete destruction of the state of Israel, and chanting “from the river to the sea”.

          The centrist position is “ceasefire, just stay the fuck away from each other.”

          Your overton window is fucked if you think this is what actual centrists think.

          • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
            51·
            1 year ago

            the far left’s position is cheering on Hamas, the complete destruction of the state of Israel, and chanting “from the river to the sea”.

            Your overton window is fucked if you think this is what actual leftists think.

  • computerscientistI@lemm.ee
    403·
    1 year ago

    Are you 'murican? I don’t think the rest of the world agrees on any of the US’s “definitions” of left, right and liberal. From a European POV, the US democrats are really, really far to the right. Sanders might be leaning toward the center. The republicans are a strange mixture of libertarian regarding economical matters and very very right-wing/intrusive on personal matters. Whenever someone even mentions/comments other people’s sexual orientation and identity I automitcally assume they are creep that wants to sniff other people’s bedsheets. How can you be partly libertarian and also creepily nazi-intrusive? US-republican invention I can’t wrap my head around, that is.

    • daw_germany@feddit.de
      3614·
      1 year ago

      Bro/Sis this is what is happening in the debate about refugees in Germany right now so no, actually you are wrong

      • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
        172·
        1 year ago

        Well, back when Steinmeier was our foreign minister and toured poor countries to advertise Germany as the land of opportunity and wealth because corporations wanted slaves they don’t have to pay properly, I was called a Nazi by many for saying that they won’t find any opportunity or wealth in Germany. Our government never had the well-being of immigrants in mind, they just stuffed them into dilapidated “refugee camps”, told them their education is insufficient and left them to rot. I am not surprised.

      • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
        103·
        1 year ago

        Any relevant links? I tried to google it, but it seems to me that the debate is about funding them - not about killing them.

        • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
          5·
          1 year ago

          I can’t speak to Germany, but in the UK the government had to be forced to use the lifeguard to save drowning people because they wanted to let refugees die, and had to be forced to stop sending people to Rwanda (even if they’re not from Rwanda) just to get rid of them.

          Both stories are easily googlable.

          • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
            41·
            1 year ago

            That’s not a genocide. There is a big difference between refusing to expend resources to save peoples life and actively expending resources to destroy lives.

              • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
                42·
                1 year ago

                And the Nobel Peace Prize you get for that will be mailed to you. Until it arrives, let’s do discuss about definitions, nuances, and all these other annoying details that set a principled debate apart from blind virtue signalling.

                I, for one, really care about the distinction between initiating something evil and merely not doing enough™ to stop it. The UK did not made them refugees. Sure, the old British empire caused trouble all around the globe, but modern refugees are mostly escaping from regional wars and totalitarian governments. One could say that it’s still their fault because that’s the aftermath of them leaving, but that would imply that the UK should have kept occupying these countries, so you probably don’t want to go there.

                So they did not cause them to be refugees. Both the refusal to save them from drowning and the deportation are an expression not of a deliberate attempt to kill them, but of a refusal to help them. The UK government does not want these refugees to be in the UK.

                If we take this issue and place in the OP template, it’d look something like this:

                Right: Let’s not let refugees in.
                Left: Let’s let all the refugees in.
                Center: Guys, you’re gonna have to compromise, let’s just let /some/ of the refugees in.
                …

                One should notice that:

                1. Unlike the original post, this is not a strawman. You don’t have to go very far to the right to find plenty of people who want to let no refugee in, and you don’t have to go very far to the left to find plenty of people who want to let them all in.
                2. Once the strawman is removed - the centrist position does not seem that absurd anymore.
                3. If you keep insisting that “not accepting refugees” equals “genocide” - people will stop taking your claims about genocide so seriously. Because you don’t care about definitions, so it could mean anything.
    • irmoz@reddthat.com
      114·
      1 year ago

      It’s fucking satire

      Did you think this was supposed to be a direct quote?