NXTR

Have you ever thought about why black people are often criminalized or why so many kids grow up without dads? It’s due to centuries of systemic injustices.

Redlining is probably the biggest example. Redlining practices pushed black communities into areas given barely any resources. These places today have rough living conditions and rarely see revitalization efforts that actually uplift the people living there. This continued the years of generational poverty that came after slavery and the repeated destruction of any attempts for black people to get any crumb of prosperity. With little support from the government, combined with poverty, forces some into crime just to put food on the table. Now, with these areas being over-policed, you’ve got a recipe for high arrest rates.

1: Black men are more often caught in this web. It’s not just about being targeted by the police. It’s about the dire living conditions, the lack of support, and then the heavy policing. All this means more black men end up behind bars, leaving families without fathers. The kids from these broken homes? They’re set up for a hard life from the start and some fall into the same cycle.

2: Pulling your kids from public schools and opting for homeschooling restricts their exposure to diverse viewpoints and backgrounds. This is why many who’ve spent time in cities or universities tend to have less conservative views. It’s not about them being molded by others; it’s genuine exposure to diverse experiences and stories. This broadens understanding and breaks down barriers while leading less people to view different races negatively. I’m sharing this not to change your mind, but hoping you’ll see a different perspective, even if you don’t fully agree. Just as you believe in spreading your viewpoint, I believe in the value of diverse exposure. It’s how we learn and grow.

The BLM movement‘s purpose is to highlight the racial injustices black people face everyday in the United States especially in policing. Black neighborhoods are over-policed, their citizens are harassed and in the worst cases murdered in unprovoked situations by police officers. The fact that many people witness these injustices and either remain indifferent or choose to ignore them suggests that black lives do not matter in this country.

Supporting the movement doesn’t mean you automatically think all white people are racist. All it means is that you recognize the racial injustices in society and support people, legislation and the steps it takes to eliminate as many of these as possible. This is why when someone doesn’t support black lives matter, the implication can be viewed as racist. It implies that they wish to keep these injustices ingrained in society. Highlighting the division that still exists in society is the only way to solve these problems. How can you heal the wound if you “won’t even admit the knife is there”?

Ahhh yes the BLM movement, famously known for lynching thousands of people just like the KKK!

Also, the KKK were only fighting to uphold their racist ideals. This is exactly the same as the BLM movement trying to fight against racism.

No false equivalence here!

I’m guessing it’s to train AI models for Microsoft 365 Copilot.

A lot of consumer’s buying habits for products with inelastic demand is driven by cost. If companies weren’t driven by ever increasing profits then there might be more of an incentive to offer a wider variety of crops to consumers. Certain crops are already subsidized by the government to make it profitable for farmers. If other crops were subsidized then perhaps farmers would be more encouraged to grow them and if people see these at normal prices they might also be more interested in buying them. Of course, this would rely on multiple parts of farming being overhauled. For example, there’s a lot of cost sinks, one I can think of is the locked down maintenance of farming equipment (once again driven by the need for increasing profits via fiduciary duty). Eliminating these and other overheads would not only lead to more cost efficient farming, but also cheaper crops and increased variety offered to consumers.

On the flip side I’m worried about manufacturers realizing that the continuous revenue stream from autonomous vehicles is more profitable than selling vehicles outright thereby increasing the cost of buying a vehicle to the point where ownership becomes functionally obsolete except to the ultra-wealthy. This also makes it much easier to restrict the movement of people. Self driving car companies could easily disable the ability to travel to entire areas either because they say they’re too dangerous or not profitable enough to operate in. I can imagine entire cities and rural areas becoming ghost towns. While personally I think autonomous vehicles, in a vacuum, have the potential to save countless lives, the reality is that in time we will be giving the companies making these vehicles the ability to dictate where we can and cannot go.

What’s interesting about homophobia in Iraq and West Asia in general is that it was originally imported by the British during their colonial rule. Prior to this these countries were much less strict about homosexuality. It was still frowned upon at certain points in time, but not violently persecuted. After these countries gained independence they stuck with the British stance regarding homosexuality. Ironically, western nations becoming more open about same sex relationships made fundamentalists in these former colonies even more homophonic and violent because it had the appearance of going against western hegemony (despite homophobia still being firmly engrained into western society).

Fortunately…or unfortunately depending on how you look at it, the United States would use Japan as a base of operations to attack China and the Philippines is basically considered a giant aircraft carrier by the military. So they would want to keep them around while Taiwan gets sacrificed…though the Philippines would be next. Sad state of affairs all around.

Of course not, but they wouldn’t intervene for the good of the Taiwanese people. It would be because of all the US assets (chip investment) wrapped up in Taiwan. Not to mention war is good for business. So both the US and Chinese populations will be at the whims of their government sending them into a meat grinder all for financial interests.

This is true. The six assurances reaffirms that the United States doesn’t view Taiwan as a sovereign nation under either Taiwanese or Chinese rule. The main points it states is that the US will continue to supply Taiwan with weapons, it will not be involved with negotiations between the PRC and Taiwan, Taiwan is not a sovereign state and China is not recognized as having sovereignty over Taiwan.

So the US doesn’t think China has sovereignty over Taiwan while also saying they do not support Taiwan independence.

Basically it’s another way for the US to feed the military industrial complex while keeping the possibility of war in our back pocket without disrupting relations with our #1 trade partner.

Not according to the US state department:

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