There’s not a lot of genocides that are entirely ignored historically speaking. Loads of nations who deny them, and use propaganda machines to spread disinformation about them, but global scale denial is not really possible.

Genocidal acts are not dependent on the scale of those actions. What matters is the acts themselves and the intent behind them. The context of the situation in which those actions occur is also a consideration. But we recognize thousands of genocides throughout modern history. The Armenian Genocide is the progenitor of modern conceptions of Genocide, but the term is retroactively applied to lots of historical cases of ethnic cleansing.

The actions Israel is taking are and have been genocidal. This situation is not new. Israel has massacred Palestinians en mass for nearly 80 years. They are taking systematic actions to kill Palestinians, to disrupt their way of life, to destroy their culture, to grass their history, to steal their land and their homes, to mass incarcerate them, to mass sterilize them, to forcefully relocate them, and to cause mass scale healthcare emergencies by way of starvation and dehydration under prolonged siege and blockade. These are all very common actions under imperialist colonial regimes.

This is a genocide. The only reason there is pushback on that is because the nation in question is Israel. If this happened elsewhere in the middle east there would be 0 hesitation to label it as genocide. The existence of a terrorist organization does not provide justification for genocide and ethnic cleansing.

Second Navidrome. I use it with the android app Symfonium and have thoroughly enjoyed it.

It’s basically like. Someone drawing a picture. Then watching the buttons you’re pressing on a controller. And then drawing a new picture. And based on the game that they think you’re playing in their head trying to guess what the next picture ought to look like. With no error correction and no conceptualization other than what the next picture should look like.

The… many limitations of this is the inability of image generators to rationalize 3 dimensional space. It can only approximate it based on what it thinks should appear on the screen. It lacks any ability to keep track of variable information. It really is more like a Doom-style hallucination than anything else. Some of the videos on that article are truly bizarre looking. I’d imagine after a few minutes every single one of them would devolve into an endless loop of being trapped in non-sensical geometry or killing the same enemy over and over again as the AI has no way of remembering the enemy existed to begin with, let alone that you killed it.

I’ll be honest I don’t think there is much use in this at all. It suffers from the same limits as any other model AI. Believability at a glance is not believability under scrutiny and if it’s only believable at a glance then there’s not much practical use in it. The advance in computational power and model sophistication required to stand up under scrutiny is massive.

The Nazi’s created rocketry as we know it today and made many innovations in medicine and manufacturing.

Are we going to argue the pros and cons of the Nazi party?

This conversation wasn’t even about the Mongol empire it was about Genghis Khan

“…not at all clear other kings would have done any different…”

Is that the standard now? Comparison? He is still unbelievably evil even by comparison to other evil people.

Him and the dynasty he created were one of the most destructive forces in human history and resulted in the horrific deaths of millions of people. By many metrics, they practiced genocide and ethnic cleansing on conquered populations. They destroyed the books of captured people’s and places of worship. They’re also well known for having destroyed farmland and aqueducts to starve out massive numbers of people. They were butchers. Mass murderers on a skill the world had never seen at that time. He erased entire civilizations from history, ones that we still barely know anything about.

Idk what makes you believe that. These images are and have always been available online. Similar albeit less graphic images appear frequently on news sites all around the world. People don’t support genocide because they aren’t aware of how brutal it is, they support it because they do not view the victims of genocide as human.

That’s a fair and valid criticism of the way western media is censoring the ongoing genocide. I do think there is some merit in reminding people of the brutality that is being enacted on men women and children. I don’t agree that showcasing these kinds of images in this way is the way to go about it. Images of graphic violence can be exploitative, they can be voyeuristic and serve actually to dehumanize victims rather than humanize them. I think photos of survivors with wounds, people being taken to hospital, and the ruins of the area left behind are important and should be spread far and wide.

I do not think that photos of mangled bodies are worthwhile though. I do not feel that images of horrifically torn apart and disfigured remains serve any function beyond satiating a curiosity some have. I feel the same way about photos and videos taken after mass shootings or other large-scale acts of horrific violence. It’s important that people understand what took place, but it doesn’t have to be conveyed in this manner.

Maybe I’m being pointlessly moralistic about this, and should feel that so long as it brings attention to what is happening that it is a good thing that I should support. But I don’t agree with that at all. I do think it’s relevant how we spread information about ongoing genocides and their victims.

I’ve watched videos of it in the past that were posted online. I just disagree that showcasing horrific gore and violence in this manner is necessary. It is necessary for people to understand what’s happening, if they don’t. But in the aftermath of mass shootings and other forms of large scale graphic violence I don’t think it’s necessary to showcase images of dead and mangled bodies. It’s a kind of voyeurism I personally find distasteful and disrespectful to those that died. Pictures of survivors with wounds, hospitals full of patients. Rubble and ruins. Those things are worthwhile in my mind. But not mangled corpses.

I do not think this photo is necessary to be viewed. We know what the aftermath of these attacks look like. The victims and their families deserve peace, not to be made a spectacle.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I don’t see how UBI would materially worsen the lives of the chronically ill and those who cannot sell their labor. It’s essentially universal welfare that allows anyone to survive whether they sell their labor or not. That gives you the ability to leave a job that is exploiting you. Without UBI losing your job means potentially becoming homeless.

I’d say that it isn’t far enough, sure. I’d also say that food and shelter should be considered universal human rights that everyone has to by law have access to regardless of their circumstances. Which would itself provide many of the same benefits as UBI.

As an anarchist and a socialist I’d change almost everything about the way the current world functions. But as a direct thing that would improve the lives of almost everyone, I am very much in favor of UBI.

You might know someone who has, I sure don’t. I’ve been in rehab, I’ve been in women’s shelters. I’ve been in homeless shelters. I’ve met a lot of people who have been victims of violence. Loads who have gone to the police for help too. I cannot name a single person for whom the police did literally anything beneficial whatsoever. There are a lucky few. Mostly white mostly middle class people.

But that’s all besides the point. And you’re choosing to continue to ignore that this is not the purpose of the police. A side action that they are occasionally asked to perform, and which they very rarely do anything beneficial towards. More often than not police are themselves perpetrators of physical and sexual abuse (their daily job is literally commiting acts of violence and using the threat of violence, it’s not surprising). The primary purpose of their job has nothing to do with violent crime or with violent crime prevention.

My point being getting rid of them isn’t going to change all that much if they don’t actually do all that much anyway. Women get raped every day. Sexual violence is essentially a given for the majority of women in our society. The number of victims is staggering, especially when you poll people indirectly. Police do nothing about this. It’s literally not their job. I know a girl who was sexually assaulted at 15 by a man in his mid 20s. Not only did the police fail to do anything, but the justice system actually supported the man and absolved him of all wrong doing just because. She was harassed by members of law enforcement who were friends with the man and local members of her community to the point that her family literally fled out of the country out of fear for her safety. Hers is just one story in a mile high pile.

There are millions of women who have been victimized again when trying to report crimes that happened against them. Being a woman or a minority immediately dispels any fucking notion that the police are there to protect you. That’s not the point of their job. It literally isn’t that is literally not why police were conceived of nor is it what they spend their time doing. I don’t have to come up with a system that ends all violence. No such system presently exists.

If I’m being asked to replace the police then I’m sorry your question doesn’t actually make sense. I’m an abolitionist, I don’t believe that the police should exist at all. I’m also an egalitarian who believes every hierarchy is coercive and we should dismantle all of them. I think that dismantling patriarchy as a concept and giving women and non-binary people equal power and respect within every realm of society would do many times more to prevent sexual violence than any amount of coked up gun toting militaristic assholes with shiny badges will. When it comes down to individual instances of violence, I believe how it is handled should be decided by those in the community in question, those directly impacted. I believe that violent crime warrants some kind of response but it shouldn’t be up to some uninvolved unempathetic judicial system to decide how.

How do we deal with them now? Is dealing with serial killers the day to day of the police? Is that their primary function? Do they even really do anything about it without constant prompting from victims and the community?

I’ve been a victim of physical and sexual violence. Nearly every woman I know has been at some point. None of us have ever had any positive experience with the police. At most they hand wave us away, at worst we are accused of being liars and of wasting their time. Police don’t prevent anything. They don’t solve anything. They don’t address anything. They are only occasionally turned towards a specific person who has done something wrong and used a means of state violence against that person. That is an exceptionally rare occurrence. They are the perpetrators of violence many times more than they are the defenders of victims.

Essentially, what is being currently done about the john Wayne Gaceys of the world? What is currently being done about the Bill Cosby’s, about rapists and pedophiles? What are the police currently doing that actually prevents those things from happening? Nothing. They only do anything after something has already happened. And they don’t do anything to prevent those things happening again. Their daily job has literally nothing to do with the John Wayne Gaceys of the world. It is in the things I listed in another comment. In rent enforcement and eviction, in enforcing private property and means of production, in collecting menial tax from the impoverished, in defending the interests of the rich and of the state, and in harassing minorities while enforcing hierarchies of gender race and class.

No, I’m an anarchist and a police abolitionist.

I mean, it’s not a slur, but an insult? Sure. Liberals are not allies to leftists, and actively support the same systems we seek to dismantle.

ACAB as an acronym began in the early 20th century by workers who were striking in the UK. It is a term with a long, complex history behind it. Cops are the institution, so I’m not sure what you mean by individuals. Every member of the police force, from the top down, is a bastard. Every single one. There’s no exceptions to this. The very nature of law enforcement is being a bastard. It is a term that is meant literally. Law enforcement functions as a means to break strikes, to enforce private property and ownership of the means of production, to enforce rent and evictions, to terrorize the impoverished and the marginalized, to collect menial tax from the impoverished who cannot fight back against them, and above all else to act as the legal arm of state violence against working class people.

Individual cops may have done good actions. I’m sure there’s a cop out there who’s volunteered at a soup kitchen, sure. But that has nothing to do with him being a cop. That has nothing to do with the actual role he fulfills in day to day life, with the violence he enacts, with the system he supports.

The idea that police are holding back some tidal wave of horrifying crime is and has always been propaganda. Nearly every single woman I know has been a victim of sexual harassment or violence at some time in their lives, including myself. A lot of them have gone to police before. I don’t know a single person for whom that did literally anything good for them. I know 1 woman who was harassed literally across the country by people including police officers who said she was lying. The police don’t prevent murder. They don’t prevent violence of any kind that’s literally not their job. More often than not they are the ones committing acts of violence for which there are no repercussions.

I love how every acab post inevitably brings out a bunch of uninformed libs in the comments talking about how pigs are only bad in America (as though the term ACAB was invented in America…) or how a society without them is completely inconceivable. As though badges grow on trees, like police are just a natural thing that sprung out of the ground.

The primary function of the police is to protect private property and enforce eviction. They’re state agents who are allowed to use violence against working class people, and do so to prevent us from overthrowing the ruling class and redistributing wealth and the means of production. They protect class hierarchy. They attack protestors. They use state violence against the disenfranchised and the marginalized. The “just doing their job” of the police is to protect and preserve the unequal distribution of power in society. They do so by using violence against the working class. The rest of anything else they do is a small fraction of their job and entirely secondary to their primary functions.

You’re awfully lucky then. That’s a form of socialism, assuming that your government is intervening and ensuring affordable rent even for homeless and those on assistance. And what are the quality of those rentals? Have you lived in one personally?

My rent is 50% of my income I will never get back.

No, renting is literally incomparably more stressful than owning a home would be where I could sell it at any time and get a portion of my invested income back.

If I could opt out of my landlord calling the plumber when I need one, I sure as fuck would if it meant I could keep my money. No, my rent goes straight into his pocket every month and a fraction of a fraction ever comes out to cover upkeep. I’d happily opt out and pay it myself.

You sound like you’re probably decently middle class. Which is fine and I’m not saying that you have no experience being a lower class renter. But you probably are not familiar with the same financial pressures we live under today.

Landlords should not exist. Nothing would be lost if we converted every apartment building into a co-op. We would all have much more disposable income and much more control over where we lived.