If you have adequate competition in the market the companies thst dont enshittify should see more business. But that requires government to be effective at enforcing antitrust. Thinking the market is going to regulate itself is what leads to enshittification.

This is a terrible example by OP. Why can’t those individuals simply move to the public sector after health insurance companies are eradicated?

The Railway Men: The Untold Story of Bhopal is an excellent fictionalization on this for those that enjoy South Asian media. Madhavan and Kay Kay Menon deliver solid performances.

https://nitter.net/andrewcuomo/status/1984416921937232084

Spoiler: Its not any better.

Yeah I gave her the benefit of the doubt initially too but watch her intro of Vance prior to this. Didn’t strike me as a person mourning. Especially for her to directly bring up similarities between him and Vance.

That’s what’s neat about human rights. Even people who are bad at this particular point in time have them.

The US is small on a global scale (in terms of population) but adequately equipped to destroy the world.

The US certainly punches above its weight economically and militaristically. But its population is still a fraction of the global population. While it has wealth and massively destructive weapons, the rest of the world absolutely does have a say in how important we let it be.

If there was a global initiative to not respect American intellectual property and people were universally turned off by its politics / lack of morality, it could become a backwater pond in no time. I believe in human ingenuity to accomplish that.

Now of course the US would respond with violence but in a circumstance where it truly was the globe versus the US I actually dont like the US’ chances very much.

The US was already mildly disliked for that general civilian arrogance but most Canadians overlooked it say 15 to 20 years ago. Now when American arrogance is recognized, its seen as unequivocally contentious, compared to being harmlessly obnoxious in the past.

I’ve met several Americans that seemed to think the financial might of Wall St or the sacred reverence with which they hold their constitution somehow made their existence more meaningful, fulfilling or even valid. They had the genuine belief that everyone wanted to be in their position even though their specific material circumstances were often worse and their priorities warped by ideals of hyperproduction and hyperconsumption.

From a Canadian perspective I might have put my hand on their shoulder and said “Cool” fifteen years ago. Now I’d put my hand on their shoulder and say “You’re stupid” which in many ways is more grace than some deserve.

It will take the US decades to rebuild trust. Its more likely the country decays some sort of hypercapitalist modern flavored feudalism with water slaves dying in the streets before other countries put long term trust in the US again.

Its not just the Western world.

America got to define the new world order after world war 2.

They accrued 75% of the worlds golds reserves selling weapons to allies.

This allowed them to peg the dollar to gold under the Breton Woods system, making their currency the global reserve currency.

Never mind that scientists and innovators had fled from Eurasia to the US for safety, causing a massive braindrain

This is why they say they won WW2. They were one of few countries that had circumstances tip heavily in their favour due the war.

This is at the state, not individual, level. The coal miners certainly thought they were better off than people living in the Global South (and more worthy of individual rights). They also enjoyed infrastructure developments paid for by their state’s exploitation.

So yes, they did have a form of privilege, on a global scale.

Not formally criminalized but socially stigmatized Im sure.

But I’m also sure theres a Hrithik Roshan jerk off channel somewhere on there too, dont worry.

What if she starts praying to Jesus as an avatar of Vishnu? Would that meet the threshold?

Kenya is an excellent example of this. 90% of its electricity is from renewable sources and its aiming for 100% by 2030.

Just because its small doesn’t mean it doesn’t have an impact. I want to be able to tell the next generations I tried in ways thst made my life less convenient.

On my street alone (in thr US), half the houses have massive lighting setups and inflatables for Halloween and they’re about to switch them over for Christmas. Three months of absolutely unecessary electric usage. Sure one can argue that if they shut them off it wouldn’t have a world changing impact but it’s hard not to look at that and go wtf?

Europe got its wealth from the Global South. Colonial exploitation bankrolled the industrial revolution and Enlightenment era. A certain threshold of wealth and urbanization is needed for that progress to occur and “poor” countries paid for it with their bodies and blood.

That wealth (75% of global gold reserves) was transferred to the US during WW2 as they were in a geographic position to not face any significant infrastructure loss while raking in money selling arms to their allies.

If you’re asking for introspection from either faction mentioned here, dont hold your breath. Its hard enough to find here, let alone in a direct discussion with ordinary people out in the street. People struggle with the idea of being born in the West amounting to being born on third base (and I say this as someone born there) so we’re a long way from any kind of deeper understanding, humility or gratitude.

That often means they take part in rituals without having any other beliefs. This is different from that since, in a Western framework, spirituality is often defined by a devotion to a specific God. It can be tough to understand spirituality in the absence of God though that conceptualization has existed for millennia in other cultures.

Did you read the article you linked?

Therefore, Samkhya maintained not only that the various cosmological, ontological and teleological arguments could not prove god, but that god as normally understood—an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent creator who is free from suffering—cannot exist.

In some ways people had got used to the idea that India was spiritual and religion-oriented. That gave a leg up to the religious interpretation of India, despite the fact that Sanskrit had a larger atheistic literature than what exists in any other classical language. Madhava Acharya, the remarkable 14th century philosopher, wrote this rather great book called Sarvadarshansamgraha, which discussed all the religious schools of thought within the Indian structure. The first chapter is Atheism – a very strong presentation of the argument in favor of atheism and materialism

Sounds pretty atheist to me.

You’re welcome to hold onto whatever belief system you choose. Hindu atheists have referred to themselves as such for a very long time and if you want to gatekeep the term in whatever corner of the world you happen to be in, you’re free to do so. Just dont falsely hold onto to the idea that your belief system is universal.

Using phrasing like “primitive” (which is western colonial-settler terminology intended for dehumanization) warrants being called out I’m afraid. I deleted the comment as I felt yours did not warrant a thoughtful response.