I only knew this one from him, prior to Lemmy(, even if i still haven’t seriously read any of his essays), worth a look[1] : https://dessalines.github.io/essays/us_atrocities.html

edit( post-@Blursty@lemmygrad.ml’s answer) :
[1] : What sucks is that i’m certain we could live in peace, help each other, etc.
Is it simply that capitalists fear to disappear if they allow communism to survive ? Then they should strictly restrict communist ideologies if they don’t entertain the thought of fusing both ideologies to keep the best in each(, e.g., by only allowing capital’s revenues for enterprises in order to keep this organic distribution, which is obviously not the solution, just an idea, theses need antitheses to evolve).
So, if we agree to stop spreading capitalist ideals(, and even more our covert operations[2]), and other countries agree to never spread communist idea(l)s, as well as (c)overt operations ; and we’re adding that, e.g., citizens who want to change the ideology of their country will have to leave, they’re not allowed to be in politics ; then we’ll have found/searched ways to enforce a long-lasting diversity.
But even if we’ve found these rules we’d also need for them to be strictly followed, supra-national institutions would have to be able to protect (from )(non-)westerners, with national armies gradually evolving towards a world army(, e.g., for natural disasters), and a support for countries to help them prove that foreign powers are interfering, and obviously a thousand more things, with as many “stress tests” before being adopted, etc.
We’re not even trying to walk this path, yet cooperation/assistance is the path, we’re in it together.

It’s also important to note that the current world would need to have much more diversity than currently, we would indeed preserve and be proud of our diversity/uniqueness while not trying to convert the others, but we’d need at least 5-6 different ideologies, and even thousands if we’re hoping for local variations.
At most, we’ve currently got 3 of them(, free-market capitalism, communism, and theocracy/islamism), i suppose that royalism, republics, and direct democracy could be three more, and the kind of south-american indigenous movement that tries to revive its past a seventh one, but we’re still too homogeneous/‘close to hegemony’ on Earth, Africa has to carve its own path, and South America is too similar to the western world, Europe is also too similar to the u.s.a., and Australia&New-Zealand as well. And there’s obviously many more ideologies that have to exist, and also on other planes than socio-economy//‘political representation’//‘importance given to God/religion’.
In comparison to westerners, Russia is more different from China, itself different from India, but it could/should still go further, and i’m not going to cite every country you got the point.
If we reach a state where every “zone” has the same standard of living because we couldn’t fear anymore to help a future enemy, if we jealously preserve our own particularity, and once again can’t possibly fear to be attacked by anyone, then we would focus on something else than military expenses, (war )propaganda, … It’s not perfect but it gets closer, we simply need to get rid of every possibility of fearing something, from ideas to missiles. We’d first have to accept the possibility of definitely protecting ourselves&others, and then actively research how to do that.
Kinda out of topic with @dessalines(, but not with u.s. atrocities)

God(&gods)( in the material world, but also) in the world of Idea(l)s(, and probably other worlds inaccessible to humans as well) :

SABC News as well(, not western channels though) : https://youtube.com/@sabcdigitalnews?si=NJVpLshupTA-SkI-

Yeah, a buzzword with legal implications, Myanmar’s rebels are terrorists, good for them.

Videos of his arrival, and official venezuelan statement.

Arrested in Cap Verde the 12th June 2020, he was held in Miami since 2021 under the pretense of money laundering, Interpol notifications or arrest warrants were issued retroactively and, of course, diplomatic immunity wasn’t respected. Here :

And usual accusations of mistreatments.

In order to obtain his liberation, they had to : release 10 americans, extradite fugitive Leonard Glenn Francis, and release around 20 political prisoners from jail. (source), it’s as asymmetric as usual.

What’s less known is that apparently Qatar played once again a role of mediation :

The wiki page lacks a lot of the above information, but this extract is ~interesting, they’re seriously claiming that hungry people are easier to control and less prone to revolts, so they’re sanctioning the c.l.a.p. which was feeding the poorest of them :

I still think that evilness is a myth formulated by people refusing to understand/explain, and i’ll continue to think so even if we(sterners) exist.
As an example, the murderous Israel would indeed be safer by destroying Palestine once and for all, at least as long as their estimation of a lack of retaliation from their neighbours proves to be correct.

Massive defundings and privatizations in sight…

And :

And b.t.w., contrary to what is often said, the huge i.m.f. debt(, with an 8.07% interest rate, more than others,) is the responsability of the right, as usual :


more here

The title isn’t exact :

Moreover, their relations were only re-instaured after the western-supported coup by J.Añez :

(Here’s Colombia’s president 6 hours ago b.t.w., among other examples)

(no need to point out that it would be safer for them not to take position for//against any side. The article also spoke of Argentina, here’s an interesting 2mn-long point of view)

Unless the creatures, overall, would prefer to have never existed in the first place, then the Creator isn’t evil and should be praised(, that’s only one reason, for example an other one would be our search for Absolute/Greatness/Good/…)

And they’ve long gone past the retaliation of “an eye for an eye”

The worst is that we’re still not offering a solution for this decades-old conflict, there must be a way to please both sides ! That’s what our medias should talk about instead of always act as a powerless spectator or judge, where is the list of solutions, why don’t we all know about the different possibilities ? Our actions only aim for the prolongation of the best outcome for us and the worst outcome for them, that’s not fair and they have every right to hate us for this injustice. Once again, how to resolve permanently&virtuously this conflict should be the main topic ‘on our televisions’/‘in our newspapers’, so that our leaders make the right/just/correct decision.

And an other word that they would refuse to attribute to fighters from our side, but would hate you if you refuse to use it for the fighters of the other side :

And weird.

People are saying that referendums represent the will of the people, as if it was unmoving. How many people would have changed their minds after the u.s.s.r. dissolution of 1991 for example ?

Also, i’ve looked at the opinion surveys for presidential elections of the last decades and it always moved a lot in the last weeks, a proof that they’re consciously manipulative/lying i.m.h.o.

From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Australian_Indigenous_Voice_referendum#Advertising_and_media :
Mass media in Australia are highly concentrated, with Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp Australia dominating the landscape, owning over two-thirds of leading newspapers along with most online news websites ; three News Corp outlets occupy the top three positions in the nation, based on popularity and viewership.
The majority of News Corp’s content was commentary, not reporting, so when the various articles and videos were examined together, around 70% of the coverage favoured “No” arguments.

Yeah, it’s just a resolution, the list of countries was what interested me, always the same opponents(, since we’re also the main countries behind such measures).

I take it as a natural reaction to overload of stress/emotion/pain. Being able to cry is physiologically beneficial (you get rid of cortisol) and psychologically it can help you process the things you’re going through more quickly. Trying to appear though by not crying seems counterproductive to me, but I understand in some cultures it is not socially acceptable to cry, especially for men.

To me, if you’re crying you’re admitting that something is stronger than you, that you’re powerless, and i still find it useless, i guess that i just have a bad image of it(, it can be beautiful though, like tears of joy, or of an emotion which isn’t defeat). But i clearly(, and subconsciously,) don’t treat men, women, or children, in the same point of view in regard to crying, i’d never think of saying “man up” to a woman hurt to the point of tears, yet i find it admirable when a man swallow his pain, and straighten his profile in order to act after whatever happened, that’s the common thinking, i’m not the weird one here(, even if my descriptions are very imperfect), but since modernity changed so many things they may end up suppressing the differences between men and women, or not, w/e.

If I suppressed my emotions, I would still be influenced by them, but I would have no conscious control over them, which would again result in limiting my rationality

On the contrary, suppressing your emotions helps to act rationally without being overwhelmed by them, and i.m.o. there’s no real difference between emotions and reason, since our feelings can be explained rationally, we’re often saying that “reason ignore the heart’s own reasons”, but that’s not true, we are indeed influenced by subconscious feelings that we would be unable to analyse, but that’s a minor side and i don’t make a distinction between the cold reasoning and the hot emotions, i’m deciding with both a’d i think almost everyone does the same.

I find the terms inner strength and beauty to be also very vague.

100%, i realized it when i was writing the examples, and the example you gave me is another very good one, you can indeed find effeminate/weak persons who are “tough motherf*ckers”, i didn’t give enough thought behind what “internally strong” may mean, and it also depends on the situation, it’s not because you’re weak or ugly internally at one time of the time that you can’t act beautifully or strongly at another time.

I agree with you that it’s reductive to stop on two adjectives.

Well, it doesn’t come from me and i have a story and some good memories from it. But in a few words, i asked someone special(, ~9 years ago,) if he had a motto, and he told me that the masonic triangle is “Strength · Beauty · Wisdom”, i still haven’t checked if it’s true(, but discovered a few years later that it’s in the Kabbalah). It stayed in my mind and i naturally decided to apply it to men and women and divide it in internally//externally. Just to say that somewhere.
While reductive, i think it has a lot of truth in it.

I don’t see any reason to propagate just one way for men and one way for women.

Men have testosterone, have sexual fantasy when they touch women, and read comics when they imagine themselves fighting.
Women have estrogens, in their fantasy they imagine themselves being touched, and read romantic novels when they’re preparing themselves for the unavoidable desire they’ll attract.

Yeah, i’ll need to edit this message, if you’re reading this line give me 30-40mn i want to do something first.

Not that i care but i’m sure that your comment made sense in your mind, would you mind sharing it with me ?

Do you interpret relieving your emotions by crying as being weak ?

Yeah, obviously, would you say that it’s a sign of strength ?

Or perhaps feeling emotions as being weak ?

“Emotion” is a vague term. Some emotions like bravery(, often a borderline foolishness,) are assimilated with strength. Some emotions like the feeling of defeat, self-pity, the lack of resilience, the fear of authority/punishment that makes you betray others/ideals, that’s weak. Always interesting to see how Chelsea Manning is stronger than a lot of men in this regard. Men love to fight, so kinda appreciate to be hurt in a way, and are proud of their scars.
Some emotions are beautiful, such as the one expressed in poetry, others are ugly and you don’t need examples to get what i mean.

It’s easier to exclude men from external beauty and women from external strength than it is to exclude them from internal beauty and strength, respectively.

And do you find women more flawed, because they’re physically weaker than men ?

We have our qualities and flaws, some women are stronger than some men and some men are more beautiful( inside&outside) than women, and it’s reductive to stop at these two adjectives, as well as obviously erroneous to draw conclusion on an individual from generalities.
Here’s what i answered to a previous comment if you’re interested :
Admittedly, beauty is more useful in times of peace than strength, if i count the benefits(, women can give birth and that’s the most important thing in Nature), women have more of them than men, but if we can keep some of our qualities i won’t say no.

Why would it be better if there were no distinction between men and women ? Or between countries, or citizens ?
What’s the use of showing your vulnerability, is that something that others like to see ? And it’s not difficult, what’s difficult is to take upon yourself and desire the struggle.
We’re men, alike rocks, people/life hit us and we don’t move, this has advantages and inconvenients, we generally appreciate women’s sensibility, and i suppose that most of them appreciate to be able to rely on men when they’re needed.
Admittedly, beauty is more useful in times of peace than strength, if i count the benefits(, women can give birth and that’s the most important thing in Nature), women have more of them than men, but if we can keep some of our qualities i won’t say ‘no’.

That’s how things are in general.
Diversity is good, but cry if you want to, i won’t support weakness on my part, and i will keep being annoyed if i encounter a weak man(, just as women may be annoyed by “ugly” women, i.d.k.).

Lol no, you can be both, and both can be wise/smart, etc.
But in general, women are more beautiful than men and men are stronger than women, perhaps that people nowadays see egality as uniformity, i.d.k.
But weakness(, inside and outside,) is a flaw/defect, as is (internal&external )ugliness, and other flaws.

As a general “rule” : women are beautiful(inside&outside), while men are strong(inside&outside).
Promoting weak men is a mistake in my opinion.