• 0 Posts
  • 40 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 2nd, 2023

help-circle

  • Ok let’s be pedantic then

    The judges had stressed they did not need to say for now whether a genocide had occurred but concluded that some of the acts South Africa complained about, if they were proven, could fall under the United Nations’ Convention on Genocide.

    Israel isn’t convicted of committing genocide, yet as there’s only “a plausible risk of genocide” - and I’m sure the “defense” minister calling for the starvation of all people in Gaza and referring to them as “human animals” will do wonders for Israel’s case…

    The current ruling is that “Israel must take all measures to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza” - which is an interesting statement to make if the ICJ thought no genocidal acts were happening.

    But hey innocent until proven guilty right - I just hope if it does get proven you’ll be the first one to start shouting how Israel is committing genocide - the same way you’re currently doing the opposite - as that would show your true lack of bias…




  • Here’s some math on that “revolutionary” idea to put things into perspective, as it turns out, it’s pretty underwhelming:

    • If we used ALL the aluminum produced globally in a year (about 65 million tons), we’d get around 7.30 million tons of hydrogen.
    • While that might sound like a lot, it really isn’t… That hydrogen would contain about 8.30 x 10^14 BTUs of energy.
    • Meanwhile, our annual global methane production is sitting pretty at 1.14 x 10^17 BTU.
    • Doing the math, and our “amazing” aluminum-to-hydrogen process gives us a whopping 0.73% of the energy we get from methane…

    And remember, this is assuming we use EVERY SINGLE BIT of aluminum we produce globally!

    Obv hydrogen is “cleaner” than gas, but the point is the scale - this method is a drop in the ocean compared to current energy usage.

    TL;DR: Using ALL the world’s annual aluminum production to make hydrogen would only give us 0.73% of the energy we get from natural gas…

    .

    .

    .

    .

    For the math nerds, here’s more detail on the chemistry and energy calc:

    • The reaction: 2 Al + 6 H2O → 2 Al(OH)3 + 3 H2
    • Global aluminum production: ~65 million metric tons/year
    • Molar mass of Al = 26.98 g/mol
    • Moles of Al = 65,000,000,000 kg / 0.02698 kg/mol = 2.41 x 10^12 moles
    • H2 produced = (2.41 x 10^12 moles Al * 3) / 2 = 3.62 x 10^12 moles H2
    • Mass of H2 = 3.62 x 10^12 moles * 2.016 g/mol = 7.30 x 10^12 g = 7.30 million metric tons

    BTU Calculation:

    • Energy content of H2 = 113,738 BTU/kg
    • Total energy from H2 = 7.30 x 10^9 kg * 113,738 BTU/kg = 8.30 x 10^14 BTU

    Methane Comparison:

    • Annual natural gas production ≈ 4,000 billion cubic meters
    • Assuming 80% methane content: 3,200 billion cubic meters of methane
    • Energy content of methane ≈ 35,663 BTU/m^3
    • Total energy from methane = 3,200 x 10^9 m^3 * 35,663 BTU/m^3 = 1.14 x 10^17 BTU
    • Ratio: (8.30 x 10^14) /(1.14 x 10^17) = 0.0073 or 0.73%


  • While I appreciate your enthusiasm for the police force in Ireland (an emotion I’m sure isn’t shared by everyone) I feel that it glosses over the intense distrust of other forces, like the PSNI (incorporating the RUC) in Northern Ireland, and the negative effects of state beneficial clique formations. (eg. union constables against anti-union communities)

    So while you might see the Garda Síochána as a step in the right direction for a liberated Ireland - I think it’s important to never forget the main purpose of the polis - to maintain monopoly on violence.

    So while the Gardaí may appear to work for you right now - I just hope you never have to be on the “wrong” side of the state and have to feel the force of “legitimate” violence used against you, especially when standing with your community against capitalist sponsored state oppression (eg Shell to Sea)




  • Still let’s not forget the right-wing policies from their manifesto:

    • Increasing military spending by 13 billion

    • Increase police funding

    • More border security force to “stop the boats”

    • Build more prisons

    • Pour money into polluting industries (car gigafactories, steel production, “carbon capture”)

    • Keep oil and gas production in the North Sea for decades, with the only focus on jobs and none on environmental issues.

    So yeah I guess it’s better to have an authoritarian social-ish democratic state than an outright fascist one but that’s not a very high bar and will only work until the climate crisis boils us all alive :)



  • I really shouldn’t have to keep justifying myself to you but I do own personal property to have a place to live…

    Here we’re not talking about kicking your grandma out of her single bed flat and onto the street - the main argument is that individuals that already have disproportionately more than others - should distribute it instead of hoarding more and more (especially to ones impacted by historic land grabs) - as in do you genuinely think it’s fair for one individual to own 250,000 times more land than the average person?

    Land should be shared as much as possible not being an “investment” to hoard. That’s why I’m also against inheritance and have been looking into how to give away the land I’m supposed to inherit (as nobody should ever really own more than one property)


  • If someone asked you to give back the land you own for free, you’d fight tooth and nail to prevent it.

    As these are words you are trying to put in my mouth - I can only assume it’s your stance on the issue, in which case if you claim to not be hypocritical then you have to admit to also supporting Palestine’s right to land sovereignty, right? And one could argue their claim is more valid as they weren’t the ones that explicitly took the decision to appropriate somebody else’s land by force.

    Also I’m not even from the US but because like most countries, mine has had a history of both being occupied and occupying other people’s land - I am a supporter of a no borders policy, inheritance abolishment and wealth redistribution, starting from the ones that have extracted the most and giving to the ones that have been exploited the most (and I’m more than willing to distribute my fair share)

    Which is why I am actively doing everything in my power to “fix a wrong” both domestically (supporting immigrants and locals and fighting for land reform policies) and internationally (pressuring governments to stop engaging in colonial practices)

    So “If you won’t deal with it, they shouldn’t have to either.” doesn’t even apply here but I’d still warn against that kind of thinking as a certain “nationalist” used very similar rhetoric to claim that if the US were allowed to put native Americans in internment camps, so was he…


  • Nah - i want both the west and Israel to pay reparations and return as much of the land as possible (not just some nature reserves as pittance) while also apologizing and commemorating the ones that have been displaced.

    I wasn’t around when the native American genocide was happening to “disallow” the outcome - but i sure can do something about the one going on right now instead of throwing my hands up and going “well same thing happened with slavery, so I guess we should just sit around and do nothing” while crying “hypocrisy!” - just because bad things occurred in the past isn’t an excuse to keep doing bad things in the future…


  • Yes.

    That’s the main issue with colonial-settler states - they colonize the land (via terror and extermination) and then settle either in borders they’ve drawn up (or even outside if there’s not enough resistance)

    Using past native American genocide to justify the current native Levant genocide isn’t the trump card you think it is…

    And we can go on a whole debate around “oh but other states got to establish their borders this way in the past - why doesn’t Israel get to do the same?” - because we’re supposed to be more civilized by now and understand that killing people to take their land is an extremely inhumane and reductionist point of view.

    The whole phrasing around “a land without people for people without a land” is the same native population erasing shit the European settlers used to colonize the Americas.

    If Israel wants to be a brutal colonial state - it gets to decide that - but at least be honest and don’t pretend it has some sort of divine right to do so while expecting to not be met with resistance.

    If Israel really wanted a land for its people (while not infringing on the rights of Arabs already living there) they could have assimilated into the already existing population where they are just one of the people living on that territory and not gone for the nuclear option of total dominion over everyone else.

    Which is why Israel is so afraid of Hamas and the general resistance - because it understands the world from a dominator-dominee perspective - they cannot envision a world where somebody doesn’t try and take over Israel in return for them doing the same. Since if “every country exists because of terrorism” then the Arabs have as much right to terror and conquest as anyone else - but I doubt you would you defend their rights to do as fervently as Israel’s…

    So instead a much less bloody way forward would be to work on dismantling borders for the benefit of everyone instead of stockpiling more and more guns while waiting for the inevitable boom…


  • nobody is cheering for the “good guys” - but when one side is actively displacing the other and your response is to just let it happen because of both sides being bad it loses the nuance of the conflict and the people just living there. especially when we’re on a thread about one side asking about a military ceasefire in exchange for the only leverage it has - while the other refuses and actively chooses to continue it’s current onslaught.

    if you actually care about lives you wouldn’t argue pedantic points about which side commits war crimes but instead influence policy towards there being less war crimes in general. (maybe starting from the ones causing the most damage…)



  • Also by saying the only option in case of systematic collapse is the emergence of right wing authoritarianism what you’re implying is that you’d much rather wait for that to happen than to create a left wing environment now that can establish itself in the power vacuum - to me this shows that you have so little faith in yourself that you would much rather do nothing and just let the right wingers trample you over and over - no wonder things keep sliding right when even so called leftists think they’re such massive losers.



  • That’s why you should start building an alternative system that isn’t right-wing instead of just voting for Hitler^lite - by choosing the lesser of two evils election after election you will always be actively choosing evil - that may be fine for you but it sure isn’t fine by me - and saying that any alternative is too idealistic means that you’ve already given up.

    Trump is truly awful but let’s not pretend that police haven’t arrested students at pro-Palestine encampments without solid grounds under Biden either - sure vote for Biden now to mitigate the biggest calamity that is Trump - but it just signals to the dems that so long as they’re a smidge left of neo-Hitler they’ll get voted for.

    And if you really think Joe will listen to protestors about the genocide after he’s in office, that’s what I call naïve idealistic thinking…