Not really important, but a capitalist is someone who has a significant amount of capital.

Someone who ideologically supports capitalism is called a liberal.

I don't like those losers. I like the generals who knew where to put the suitcase.

That one specific group experiences oppression due to being trans in America they don't experience in Iran.

It’s a simple flowchart: are they even slightly pro-Israel? F tier. Are they right-wing? F tier.

Well yes, obviously in a tier chart about understanding arab culture, people who support their genocide are going to be F tier.

If black people did a tier list ranging from "invited to the cookout" to "puts raisins in mac and cheese", would you expect open racists to be in anything but F tier?

It’s what these fake progressive losers like to call a “dog whistle”.

What's more likely, that a bunch of people who ban antisemites from their communities and one of whom is jewish, are all secret antisemites trying to signal their antisemitism to other antisemites, or they were referring to the garbage hummus nobody who understands arab culture be caught dead eating?

Yes, the point is a binary trans Iranian who wants surgery is less oppressed in Iran on the axis of being trans than in America, but they're quite obviously worse for someone in nearly any other position.

This kinda thing can't be reduced to a single number, how do you compare the US, where trans people often can't afford HRT in the best states, and are literally unable to get it in Florida, to Iran, where it's free, but surgery is mandatory and being gay is punishable by death?

A place where hatecrimes aren't uncommon, but there is some level of legal protection, to a place with far fewer hatecrimes/discrimination, but no special legal protections?

Sabra is the garbage hummus at the grocery store. If they meant Jewish, they wouldn't have put an arab and an open antisemite in that category.

Literally anyone who is in an opposition party and won an election.

made electric vehicles something that people would want to buy

*people who were considering whether they wanted a Porsche or a Landrover. Selling Teslas to people who had $80,000 dollars to blow in 2015 is orthogonal wide adoption of EVs.

the other automakers were ‘technically’ making EVs

It's worse than that. California passed a law requiring the big automakers offer a non-fossil fuel vehicle. Most companies stuck electric or hydrogen motors in existing cars to make cheap garbage that technically met the requirements. GM spent half a billion developing the EV1. They released for lease-only in 1996 with a 160 mile range. They estimated a starting MSRP of $34,000 by 1999.

The customers loved them. Then California got rid of the law. And GM canceled the program. Thousands of customers sent checks trying to buy the cars. GM proceeded to revoke all leases, crush the cars, and sell the battery technology to Chevron.

Reminder that Navalny was a Russian ultra-nationalist who referred to Chechens as cockroaches.

You don't need to eulogize a nazi, even if another nazi didn't like them very much.

There's even opponents to Putin who've had more electoral success than getting 27% in a mayoral election.

Without Judaism there would be no Zionism.

There would be be an equivalent, to quote Joe Biden "If Israel didn't exist, we would have to invent it". Settler colonialism does not require religion to create all the systems we see in Israel, as we saw most of them during the colonization of the rest of Africa, and many when Japan was colonizing SEA.

If I look at the Old Testament and see it as a genocidal and elitist mythology, what chance to believers have when they adopt it as an ideology?

It's not a random chance, it's determined by what they're using it for. When my jewish friend interprets his books, his agenda is justifying why zionism is incompatible with Judaism. Sadly that interpretation isn't useful for America's foreign policy so it's not amplified like Joel Olsteen's interpretation of his books.

Idealism is not a useful way to analyze societal effects of an ideology, they only exist in the context of society.

What Adam Smith has to do with iPhones and Ancient Egypt is a mystery to me

The point is that ideology doesn't determine society. If it did, then all the ancient Egyptians needed was for Adam Smith to invent capitalism, and then they'd all embrace capitalism and start making iPhones, in the same way you suggest that reading the torah turns people into zionists.

But we could argue here indefinitely and get nowhere

Yes, if you keep coming back to claiming religion determines behavior after we've established religion is molded to fit what the ruling class is using it for.

You're still approaching this from a non-materialist perspective; do you think that if Adam Smith wrote Wealth of Nations in ancient Egypt, they'd have stopped making pyramids and started making iphones? Why was this new belief system suitable to Britain at a time when the power of the bourgeoisie was surpassing that of the aristocracy and not ancient Egypt?

If the percentage is high, then you can safely assume that there’s a fundamental flaw in the belief system.

No, because it's not their belief system that's causes zionism, it's zionism being useful to the ruling class that causes that interpretation to be amplified. Zionist jews get articles republished in NYT and spots on cable news. Antizionist jews get silenced (or in Israel and Germany, literally arrested).

Yes, but the US's analysts know they can't win this type of war with Iran; a generic number required of troops thrown around for an occupation is 2%, though it's often much higher.

The US can bomb civilians all they want, but any strategic objective like stopping Iran from sending masses of balsa wood drones to overwhelm Isreal's defenses can't be done with airstrikes.

Iran has 92 million people, that's almost 2 million troops needed for occupation. Drafting a million Americans to enable an occupation would be political suicide.

Here's a whitepaper written by some brookings institute ghouls in 2009.

Note that when it was written, Iraq's counterinsurgency was considered a success, drones weren't a thing, and it assumed Iran wouldn't close down the strait of Hormuz.

without subsidies they’re is no profit incentive for developers to build the necessary housing stock

So cap rent. If a developer wants to build, they need to build what people actually need. You don't need to hand them boatloads of money to make affordable housing more profitable than non-affordable housing, just ban the unaffordable housing nobody needs.

People interpret it the way that suits their agenda

Then you understand it's not the belief system causing these people's behavior, their agenda determines the belief system.

America doesn't support Israel because the bible says so, even though some people might come up with some wacky interpretation, we support it because it helps facilitate imperialism throughout the middle east.

There's plenty of jews who don't interpret their religion that way, but their interpretations aren't convenient for the ruling class so they're not promoted. You can observe the same with philosophy, I'd hardly call philosophy bad just because those in power are able to amplify ideologies that serve their material interests.

You're putting the cart before the horse, when a belief system is incompatible with what the ruling class requires, they change it the way its expressed accordingly.

You understand Israel's actions have nothing to do with Judaism, right?

Religion is a justification used after the fact, in the same way the US used Christianity to justify genociding the native americans. There's nothing in the bible that says "Destroy the native American's food sources and take their land", the Americans were going to do that anyway.

Any 2 state solution was dead on arrival for the last 30 years, as such a Palestine would be effectively dependent on, and always at the mercy of Israel by virtue of Israel having already stolen the best arable land, water sources, and strategic locations.

If Yassir Arafat had gone back to the Palestinian people with "We're gonna live forever at their mercy, and none of you will ever return to the homes Israel stole", the Palestinians would have assassinated him.

If Ehud Barak had gone back to the Israeli people with "You have to give them back their houses and stop encircling/blockading their settlements", he'd have been assassinated by the Israelis.

I don't like how the news is trying to lay this entirely at Netanyahu's feet. This is like trying to blame South Africa's apartheid on the last president during apartheid, instead of the actual system.

Israel is a settler colonial project, its national project requires apartheid and ethnic cleansing.

Any alternative to Netanyahu would be doing the same thing, and if they failed to do so, they would be replaced by someone who would be more competent at it.

The protests in Israel aren't against the genocide, they're at the failure to rescue the hostages. Non-arab Israelis overwhelmingly support the amount of firepower used by the IDF in Gaza and the use of starvation as a weapon.

This is why there are Israeli "civilians", sometimes wearing IDF uniforms, who burn aid trucks, and why there was a successful riot to protect Israeli prison guards from being prosecuted for the rape of prisoners.

Because Crysis looked good, Chris Roberts mandated that Star Citizen would use Cryengine 3.

To make astronomically large spaces fit in the game engine from 2009, they made everything infinitesimally small.

So now due to the inaccuracy inherent in floating point calculations, instead of invisibly nudging things a few millimeters in the wrong direction, teleports people hundreds of feet out of their ships into space if they bump into a physics object, ladder, elevator, etc.

This is what happens when an ideas guy with no technical knowledge is making technical decisions.