Did Japan’s real estate bubble crash heavily during those times?

The US reined in their vassals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaza_Accord

I appreciate that comment. I may have been too reactive and harsh in my response, and apologize for that. It is admittedly one of my “peeves” when someone I’d otherwise consider a comrade seems to advocate specifically for killing innocents and children as a means to punish the people who do deserve the pit and worse.

I absolutely share your anger, even rage for the demon shitstains supplying WP to aid a genocide. And to be clear, it’s not that they don’t deserve to see their own family killed in the same way they are facilitating the unimaginably painful murder of other families, I just personally think it’s important for us as leftists to draw a line against targeting innocent people especially for the sake of vindictiveness. In other words, if we could somehow make the guilty fascists think that was happening to their own family without actually doing that to the innocent members of their family, I’d have zero problem with that, in fact I’d be all for it. Since we were discussing hypotheticals, I actually rather like that one.

Well wishes to you, I should probably log off for a bit too.

You:

Eh, fuck em. It’s killing somebody’s families either way, might as well be theirs.

Also you:

Save your indignation for those who deserve it.

lol.

If we’re just talking hypotheticals here, why is it so hard for you to say that it would be bad, hypothetically, to kill a 3 year old with white phosphorus?

What you’re apparently trying to say is that your comments advocating for killing entire families based on the crimes of one of their members is that you’re posing this hypothetical situation to people here on lemmy who are in a position to target/profit from/earn a living from white phosphorus. And that doing so will perhaps get them to imagine the horrors and change their ways. Really? K. Keep fighting that good fight then. As a final note, believe me, those who deserve my indignation aren’t getting any less of it just because I took a moment to call out a chuddy comment.

Disgusting. The problem is the torture and murder of people who don’t deserve it. If “their family” only consists of WP provider’s cousins who condone the business then fine, good riddence. But you’re saying their 3 year old niece who knows nothing about any of this should be killed by slowly burning to death from chemical weapons? Nah, fuck off with the “children are valid targets” bait.

You were asking about the shifting nature of the meaning of the term whiteness. Go up and read your own comment to see how you related that to authoritarianism. If you can’t follow your own train of thought, then I can’t help you because it makes it apparent you’re not asking in good faith.

You’re saying “authoritarianism = non-whiteness = opposition to the NATO bloc”

What I’m trying to explain to you is that “we” are not saying that. The people who use whiteness to justify their actions and otherize their enemies are saying that. This isn’t difficult.

Why not skip the middle step?

Go ask the NATO bloc and their supporters. The obvious and surface answer is that it has to do with making for an easy “us-vs-them” identifier. “Of course they’re bad, they aren’t white like us good wholesome folk are, who are inherently good and wholesome because we’re white, and being good and wholesome makes us right and correct in what we do and you can tell because we’re white. The ones who are bad clearly aren’t like us. They’re not white!” Yes, it is circular reasoning and garbage logic. But I don’t know why you’re getting pissy at us for that instead of the dipshits white people who keep moving the goalposts on the meaning of whiteness, as they always have done to suit their agenda. Take it up with them.

As I already said, you have no understanding of what settler-colonialism is, and your disgusting (and actually racist) insistence that the Palestinians (who we agree are being genocided right now) will simply genocide everyone living on their stolen land is testament to your ignorance. You know how space_comrade pointing out you were telling on yourself by spouting a Zionist delusional fear, and that it is pure projection? Well it really is both those things: delusional and projection.

Most of what you said I already addressed, and you seemed to have missed it, so it doesn’t make me very keen to respond to it again. But this part:

you should be looking for a solution that doesn’t involve destroying a nation and its people.

is very revealing. Destroying a STATE is not the same thing as destroying a people and it’s very sneaky to pretend that it’s the same thing.

The site I already linked has a FAQ, and here is one entry from it:

Does Israel have a right to exist?

People have a right to self-determination, but no state in the world has a right to exist. This ‘right’ simply has no foundation, and Israel is not special in this regard. More here

Since I don’t expect people to always read when something is linked, even when they absolutely should do so if they have even a passing interest in actually understanding the situation they are talking about (let alone talking as if they have the solution, lol) I am going to paste another piece from the write-up that I linked and suggested you read in my last comment. It puts the lie to your insistence that a Palestinian state (which is the only way forward that is congruent with both justice and long-term peace) would also necessitate another genocide.

Everything below is from: https://decolonizepalestine.com/myth/the-two-state-solution-is-the-only-way-forward/

These anxieties are not unique to Jewish Israelis, settlers in many different colonies throughout history have echoed these same sentiments. If we were to take a look at the narrative surrounding anti-Apartheid South Africa activism and boycotts, we would find eerily similar projections and arguments.

For example, In an article for the Globe and Mail under the title “The good side of white South Africa” Kenneth Walker argued that ending the Apartheid system and giving everyone an equal vote would be a “a recipe for slaughter in South Africa”. Others, such as Shingler, echoed similar claims, saying that anti-racist activists were actually not interested in ending Apartheid as a policy, but in South Africa as a society. Others came out to claim these activists were actually motivated by “anti-white racism”, fueled by “Black imperialism”. Political comics displayed a giant soviet bear, bearing down on South Africa declaring “We shall drive South Africa into the Sea!”

Sound familiar?

Yet even when it is rarely acknowledged that Palestinian refugees were wronged, and deserve to return home, the refrain is that while it is tragic, it is the only way to keep the Jewish people safe. Once again, this pretense is hardly unique to Jewish Israelis, as a matter of fact, similar arguments were used against the abolition of slavery in the United States. For example, Thomas Jefferson likened slavery to a wolf:

“we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.”

How utterly ridiculous this all sounds now.

While the first approach is crude and vile propaganda, designed to instigate fear and panic, it is par for the course for settler societies. Perhaps the second approach stands out a little bit more for its brazen attempt at manipulation. In a final endeavor to center their experiences and erase their victims, settlers frame themselves as the stars of their own tragedy, in the end they were the tragic victims of fate, forced to wield injustice for the sake of self-preservation.

Underlying the logic of both of these approaches are racist assumptions that the colonized are barbaric, bloodthirsty and ruthless. It is a deeply dehumanizing logic, steeped in every colonial and Orientalist trope. The idea that a decolonized, free Palestine would inevitably lead to genocide comes from this same logic. As a matter of fact, for all the claims of the Palestinians wanting to push Israelis into the sea, only the opposite has occurred in reality.

Regardless of your ideological leanings, the reality is that we are already living under a de facto one-state reality. Israeli politicians proudly boast about never allowing a Palestinian state to materialize. Israeli school books already erase the green line. Israel already rules the lives of everyone there. Palestinians calling for the dissolution of this naked colonialism is legitimate and just. The fact that Palestinians are even asked to guarantee the well-being and welfare of their oppressors as they are killed, imprisoned and brutally repressed daily is a testament to their utter dehumanization.

Removing the Israeli state “from the river to the sea” as you say, would mean another genocide.

No it fucking wouldn’t. Completely dismantling the STATE of Israel, a terroristic settler-colonizer project, would not necessitate a genocide in any way and by pretending it does, you’re doing the propaganda work for the actual genocidaires.

I guess at the end of the day, it’s always ok to commit a genocide, but only if it’s your side committing it, eh?

Stfu with your false equivalency bullshit. Let’s use the stolen house analogy that was used elsewhere in this thread because it is apt. If a group of armed assholes comes into your house and starts killing off your family, claiming your house as their own, your doing everything within your power to get them back out of your house is not committing a crime at all, let alone one that is equivalent to the crime they are currently perpetrating against you.

The real solution is to create two states, one for the Jews, one for the Palestinians, create a well-defined border

Consider again the analogy above and ask yourself if the real solution is letting those who came in your house and killed your family have their own kitchenette, bathrooms, and bedrooms in your house, just with new walls. When they’ve been saying the whole time (as they were killing your family) that that’s all they actually wanted to do.

The following is from: https://decolonizepalestine.com/myth/the-two-state-solution-is-the-only-way-forward/ which you should read in full.

Is the two-state solution the only viable solution?

Viable for whom and for what?

The two-state solution is inadequate to right historical wrongs, as it focuses on the pre-1967 borders as a starting point, which are in themselves a product of the colonization of Palestine, and not the root cause of it. It is thus preoccupied with finding solutions to symptoms, rather than dare address the root cause, which is Zionist settler colonialism and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

This automatically means that Palestinians must relinquish any rights or hopes for their millions of refugees, and it also means that Palestinians must relinquish their rights to live in over 80% of the land they were ethnically cleansed from. Consequently, resource distribution, from water to fertile land, will be heavily stacked in Israel’s favor.

Shortly put, the two-state solution is more interested in maintaining Israel’s colonial gains and artificial demographic aspirations, and lending them legitimacy, rather than seeking justice for the Palestinians in any form.

You should really go ahead and read the other myths discussed there too.

stop it with the holy wars, stop it with the persecutions, stop it with the genocides, stop it with the forced resettlement, stop it with terror attacks, stop it with the bombings

Only one “side” is doing all that and is the only one that has the power to immediately stop doing all of that. Instead, it keeps doing all of that. I wonder why it hasn’t stopped.

and stop it with religions altogether.

Seriously? You are a clown. And I say that as an atheist myself.

Everyone has the right to live, so just live and let live

Oh, just give peace a chance, right? My god liberals are so fucking vapid. This is not a situation with two sides of equivalent means and committing equivalent atrocities with an equivalent power to stop the violence. It is extremely asymmetric in every sense, including the fact that one side is currently conducting an open genocide against the other which is disproportionately made up of children. I would guarantee that most of the Palestinian people would do just about anything to be able to live and let live but Israel will not have that - they never have and they never will, which is the nature of all settler-colonial projects which you clearly don’t understand.

They can take that long, even longer, but there is no law of empires that states collapse can’t happen extremely quickly either. The material circumstances on the global scale that we find ourselves in are different in significant ways from the way things were historically during the collapse of the other large hegemonic empires. One of these important differences is the speed of information. And the increasing rate that climate change is drastically altering the world helps ensure that geopolitical change will also unavoidably be seeing rapid changes as a result. Don’t forget what Lenin said about decades and weeks.

ok, thanks for the info. I don’t know a lot about how this kind of thing works (clearly), I just try to use and support FOSS and “piracy” whenever possible.

Oh really? This ban won’t effect people who use (for example) F-Droid to get the app?? That’s great to hear tbh. Hopefully this stupid ass decision will have the effect of turning more people on to FOSS stuff more than it will actually prevent people from using TikTok.

Someone asks you what your problem is since you’re hopping mad and insulting them because they dared to (100% correctly) criticize a game/genre you like? And your response is that they are antagonizing you? Rather than assume that everyone who thinks there are real and easily demonstrated problematic issues with your favorite media is actually just out to “antagonize” you, you might serve yourself better if instead you stop and reflect on why it makes you so upset and why you so quickly jump to taking videogame criticism so personally.

Or you can completely forgo any self crit and block me for antagonizing you or something, and if that’s the case, I will enjoy it because it will be funny.

If you think there will be a meaningful difference in the extent to which minorities are targeted depending on which flavor of fash is in the white house, you are an idiot. Sorry.

Either one could be ok, depending on what the person you’re talking about prefers (their preferred pronouns). But since you’re asking, it sounds like no one participating in the conversation knows what this person’s preferred pronouns are. So again, either one should probably be ok, so long as it’s made clear you all have respect for this person’s identity, even though they’re not around to specify their pronouns. They/them is probably more universal and generally accepted rather than using their assigned gender pronouns, so if they’re not there to verify, it’s likely the default to go with.

Latin America has been westernized by continuous economical, cultural, and imperialist influence by the United States (and other global north countries), it doesn’t make sense to think of our countries as some non-Western society, it’s inaccurate and a bad framework to try to change our life.

I’m going to paste what I said in another comment replying to another user just because it mostly applies here too.

Look, neither you or I get to define what “the West” means. It is a racist concept, but that’s the unfortunate reality of the situation. “The West” is not defined by who thinks they should belong to it, it’s defined by the material reality of exploitation. It’s nearly synonymous with “Imperial Core.” If you’re in the periphery, you are not part of “The West” no matter how much your society mirrors so-called western culture. Just as a regular worker is not part of the bourgeoisie no matter how much they want to be. There are the exploiters and the exploited. Latam, on the global stage, is exploited by the imperial core and there is no escaping that fact. The exploiters will never see it as part of their club because they’re exploiting it! It’s not like we (hexbears or leftists in general) see this as a good thing or want to perpetuate it. We want to tear it the fuck down. But we can’t deny material reality, and it seems like that’s what you’re trying to do by insisting that Latam is western and getting mad at us for the fact that it’s largely racism that determines who belongs to the in-group “Western” and who doesn’t.

We may not be part of the west in a historical sense, but we are westernized countries living in the world that the West has created for us with violence.

Absolutely. So you do see it is “The West” that unfortunately gets to define who belongs in the club, and it does so via violence. The West has violently created the world you live in, but that does not make the world you live in part of it, no matter how many people around you mistakenly think it does.

Look, neither you or I get to define what “the West” means. It is a racist concept, but that’s the unfortunate reality of the situation. “The West” is not defined by who thinks they should belong to it, it’s defined by the material reality of exploitation. It’s nearly synonymous with “Imperial Core.” If you’re in the periphery, you are not part of “The West” no matter how much your society mirrors so-called western culture. Just as a regular worker is not part of the bourgeoisie no matter how much they want to be. There are the exploiters and the exploited. Latam, on the global stage, is exploited by the imperial core and there is no escaping that fact. The exploiters will never see it as part of their club because they’re exploiting it! It’s not like we (hexbears or leftists in general) see this as a good thing or want to perpetuate it. We want to tear it the fuck down. But we can’t deny material reality, and it seems like that’s what you’re trying to do by insisting that Latam is western and getting mad at us for the fact that it’s largely racism that determines who belongs to the in-group “Western” and who doesn’t.

Call me conspiracy-brained but I legit think that not only are the most ridiculous “conspiracy theories” pushed and spread by the alphabet soup agencies as well as discredited so that any “conspiracy theory” can be written off as batshit no matter how plausible it may actually be, but that that sub is also ran and moderated by those same agencies, which is exactly why you get that kind of gatekeeping.

yw. I hope you feel nice and educated now. lol Even added a bit more with an edit. I actually wish I didn’t know some of this shit, but I’m high and can’t sleep, so why not go on a diatribe about the lineage and dogma of misogynistic shitstains?

@BeamBrain@hexbear.net is right:

MGTOW is older, I believe mostly GenX and to some extent Boomer, and was “a thing” earlier on where they tried to pass themselves off as a legitimate movement. “Self help for men” type shit. Even trying to influence law to get the courts to grant more rights to fathers in custody cases (which I admit is not 100% always a bad thing). Most of that is a pretense though, and it becomes immediately obvious when you talk to them that they are of course nothing more than flaming misogynists with a persecution complex. Again, they tend to be older so a good percentage of them have been married and divorced, often with grotesque sob stories about how their wives stole everything from them, and now they’re struggling triumphantly to reclaim their masculinity or some shit. But it’s just usual run of the mill misogyny and anti-feminism.

Incel on the other hand grew entirely out of internet culture, and so never had that earlier GenX-like air of legitimacy. They tend not to have ever had wives or even girlfriends, as one of their defining grievances is that they are virgins, and will remain so for the foreseeable future if not indefinitely. Hence “involuntary celibacy.” It’s not really a cohesive movement as much as a nebulous, twisted internet subculture with varying degrees of incels tying to make it a movement or coherent ideology. Like most subcultures they have their own terminolgy and sickeningly sexist language but are united really by their extreme hatred of women and a sense of shattered privilege because they suffered the social but very personal crime against them of not by default getting the hot /insert misogynistic slur/ to fuck that society always promised them.

That’s how it’s been as far as what I’ve come across anyway.

Edit: But lol, Incels are not stoic. They tend to be extremely whiny and entitled. They have no inner calmness, but a constantly simmering rage against women, and, as this thread and their violent rhetoric and actions makes evident that rage simmers for People of Color too. And often even a more general rage for society itself, but for misogynistic and patriarchal reasons, anything they can twist into being the cause of them being denied their god given right to women’s bodies. They are the complete opposite of stoic. The NoFap movement which has some crossover with Incels tries to be stoic in some ways for obvious reasons. And there was crossover because NoFap offered a “cure” of sorts for some portion of Incels. To be clear, NoFap as a movement is also filled with misogyny and has some very weird beliefs bordering on esoteric about super powers and shit like that. But they also come with the generally good and obvious advice that if you are addicted to something, breaking that addiction can be beneficial. Specifically giving up an extreme porn addiction is undoubtedly a positive step for many of these men. But it’s only one step among many needed to have any hope of breaking them of their pathologically patriarchal ideology.

I suspect you got the stoic part either from the joke we make of it here about being VolCels, (and fuck yeah we VolCels incorporate Stoicism in keeping our vital fluids to ourselves) or because of the Incel-NoFap venn diagram wedge.

all of America will be a graveyard

I kid, I kid.