The commission said 29 people have so far filed to run for the presidency. But after today’s decision, Mr Putin remains the only candidate to be able to register as a candidate.
Not just this anti-war candidate. It appears all candidates are banned from challenging Putin.
They ran a shitty corrupt government, tried to conquer eastern Europe, failed, renamed themselves to “Russian Federation”, and are now trying to recapture lost states while feeding people into a never ending meat grinder.
But that was never the subject of the discussion. The USSR, and the Russian Empire before it, did successfully conquer Eastern Europe. That’s a historical fact. Whether you agree that this conquest made that land rightfully theirs is another topic, in which I have no interest.
By this logic the Roman empire should just be called the Roman republic. The systems of governance might be similar and both be abhorrent, but the USSR isn’t the same as the Russian federation
Did people really think a dictator would let a silly thing like an election get in the way of his ambition for power? It’s hilarious that people thought Putin would give up his power without violence. The only way Putin will ever leave power is through violence. Look at those gigantic tables he sits at. Putin knows how “popular” he is, even in his own country.
Everyone assumed as much. But there is now confirmation that the next election won’t be free. It’s important to be able to point to specific actions and behavior when saying Russia isn’t a free country.
David Morales, a former Special Forces soldier in the Spanish military who owned a Spanish surveillance firm that was contracted to provide security for the Ecuadorian Embassy in London
To be clear: when they say Morales, they’re talking about the Spanish for-profit surveillance guy, not to be confused with the president of Bolivia Evo Morales.
For a second I thought this was a back stab by Latin America, whew. Nope, just the US doing its illicit shenanigans.
I am not a fan of the Guardian, but according to the subject of the article (they call him Li), he is a dissident and was under active investigation. I don’t think they would have just let him leave
thats fair, but from an outside perspective (from either country) it looks exactly like how the US treats its dissidents. i doubt someone like julian assange would get better treatment.
also, i dont know how they defined “dissident” in this case but its vague enough that i wont judge too hastily.
Just because one state is also shitty to dissenters does not mean another state isn’t. They don’t cancel each other out.
Dissident is pretty vague, probably on purpose. As much as I dislike the US government, I can say the government here is shit and not get hauled to jail for the most part. The same is not necessarily true in China
how is the us treating communists, smaller trade unionists, palestine supporters, blm people and such over there? those people have sharp criticism and are the true dissenters to varying degrees.
ask one of those what could happen to them if they get singled out as a leader or something. i judge by actions not words.
I did imply the US is better, and I probably should not have. And even in that I did not mean the government doesn’t do horrific things. Probably should not have made the comparison TBH. That doesn’t mean China doesn’t also do horrific shit, even if the way they do it is different
While I personally don’t think Julian Assange did anything ethically or morally wrong, and the US government’s dogged pursuit of him was unjust, he did leak military intel which is much more serious and legally significant than what people often get jailed and harassed for in China. Like, I would not expect to leak info about the military in any country and just walk away as if nothing happened.
People have literally been jailed for making Tweets in China, people have been punished as retaliation against someone in their family being a dissident, we really shouldn’t be comparing the two countries as if they’re the same, regardless of the numerous major issues the US has. And even if they were the same, it doesn’t make anything China does even slightly more justifiable.
The US tortures its dissidents. Just look at how they treated War on Terror whistleblower Chelsea Manning. Even the UN special rapporteur on torture spoke up about her treatment. She was driven to attempt suicide in prison multiple times. Including when she refused to cooperate with the secret Grand Jury investigating WikiLeaks and Julian Assange.
Julian Assange is about to be buried in a US prison and get a taste of that same medicine. Where are the Guardian outrage-articles on that? Oh, wait, that’s right. They threw him under the bus as soon as he’d given them access to the best scoops of the century (US diplomatic cables). The Guardian journos divulged the pass phrase to the unredacted cables in their book giving anyone who could locate the files online access. Cryptome published the unredacted cables before WL did while Assange called the State Department trying to warn them of the bad news. The Guardian then tried to make out like WL had acted irresponsibly in publishing the unredacted cables, when in reality the cat was already out of the bag and WL was doing harm-minimization. The Guardian’s blame-shifting makes my blood boil.
The ‘Guardian’ has no ethics and can’t be trusted on anything political imo.
China is pretty egregious about taking away passports/not letting its own nationals leave its borders. Sometimes because they are political dissidents, sometimes because they are being retaliated against in some way, etc.
There is ample evidence that China is suppressing its own people, including prohibiting emigration. One good source among many is the Safeguard Defenders, an NGO focusing on China.
You’ll find many good sources, including here on Lemmy. The situation has even been getting worse in recent years.
<a href="">@Bartsbigbugbag </a>What’s a good source on that issue in your opinion? I know a lot more, but would like to learn new ones if possible. Would be great if you posted a link.
Extreme wealth absolutely is correlated with psychopaths. Nobody becomes ultrawealthy while keeping a conscience; to get that rich you have to step on other people. Unfortunately this phenomenon is not unique at all to the Saudi regime and I don’t think their cruelty or violence are either; the ruling capitalists all across the world make decisions daily with the same outcomes.
Golf sucks. Personally I think it should die out. What a waste, all across the world, of good land and water.
What a coincidence, here in the US we banned all our anti-war candidates from the presidential election too! (Yes, I know dnc primary candidates aren’t literally and legally banned).
I see you only read one out of the two sentences I wrote above. I addressed this in the second sentence which was in parentheses because I predicted that my comment might be confusing to some. To be fair, my comment did assume some knowledge regarding the 2024 DNC primary which has been structured in such a way that no candidate but Biden, a pro-war candidate, could possibly win. Hope this helps.
But it’s only transmissible via consumption like mad cow disease, is that correct? If so, at the very least it shouldn’t become an epidemic, just very bad for the environment and deer jerky enthusiasts.
Edit: Nope, nvmd, I’m dumb. They said it’s really contagious and these prions can persist a long fucking time on surfaces. I’m gonna just never go outside again, thanks, I ain’t fucking with no prion disease.
It’s tricky. So I was listening to a BSE radio doc recently which had an episode about the deer. They actually don’t know if BSE was transmitted through eating the beef, in fact there’s cases of vegetarians getting it. It’s still being studied. They’re very worried about people eating infected deer, which is quite likely being as they’re easy to kill, but also having anything to do with them because they just don’t know how it moves from animal to animal, deers rarely eat each other so it’s not super likely that’s the only way.
sorry ma’am, your child was one of thirty five killed when we reintroduced wolves to kindercare because they were native here in the 1300s, but their comeback is something to behold, and the survivors have quite a story!
I kid, but also, reintroduce them to areas where they’re least likely to bump up against population, all the areas they natively lived in the past are, unfortunately, overrun by humans. I live in Washington state, where we’re seeing grey wolves slowly come back. I’m all for it. And here in Seattle, we’ve always had Coyotes living around the town, on the large greenways. Keep your cats inside if you love them!
And then some people wonder, why we don’t want Muslims in Europe. It’s not because we hate them for their religion (for the saner part of Europeans it’s the same bullshit as Christianity), we just don’t want their bullshit and raping and executions and misogyny and all the other nice things here.
See, the thing about religion, that no religious person wants to come to terms with, is that no religion is a monolith. What does that mean?
Even if you claim to be a fully practicing Christian, Muslim, Hindi, etc, there will always be descrepencies. Furthermore, no one believes exactly the same thing as someone else. The nature and limitations of the human mind does not permit it, so thinking that if you identify with a religion that suddenly your behaviour is dictated by dogma is nonsensical.
This also means that Christians today are not responsible for the crusades or the persecution as well as eradication of European pagans, and that Islam is not to blame for what’s going on in Iran, largely because they were irrelevant to the actual goals, which was for certain people to gain more power and wealth.
The Iranian government doesn’t give a shit about the 5 columns of Islam. Not even close. But they absolutely love having morals police, executions and an authoritarian system that seeks to subjugate and suppress any kind of democratic movement.
The Iranian regime knows the Iranian people, and if they could they would turn liberal democracy in a heartbeat, and they are still mostly Muslim. That’s why the boot has to stomp and fists have to bang on doors, like all the time.
I think people easily forget how fucked you can be if the state has so much power they can effectively curb any dissent. At that point the religion used just becomes a nice decorative mask to put on, both to keep power, but also to keep using fear via “us vs them”. This is also signified by the secular Muslim empires.
Just a little bit of history is enough to dispell all fears about religion and to squarely focus on corruption and authoritarianism instead, which is where our focus should be - and that’s coming from an atheist.
I’m sure she was Muslim till the very last cause I’d sure as hell find religion when I’m facing the end. I’d like to think I’d remain rational but it’s daunting AF. But she’s not one of the bad ones is she?
If she still considered herself a Muslim, then what happened to her was perfectly in line with her claimed worldview. She can only ever see herself as a victim by rejecting her religion. She probably wasn't conscious of it but at this point I'd say she was already an ex-muslim, it's a matter of a therapist making her aware of it (assuming she'd be rescued in time!).
I would propose that perhaps linking religion with the religious leadership is linking Christianity with “the church”. And using that logic all Christians condone pedaphilia which isn’t the case. Islam the religion isn’t about cruelty anymore than Christianity is about white supremacy.
Yes, linking the religious leadership of the inherently strongly hierarchical belief systems with these belief systems sounds very reasonable to me.
I have an impression we agree on the reasoning, just not on the details and the conclusions from these details. At this point we're arguing the semantics of whether the religious people rejecting their religious leadership still belong to the same religion or rather they invented their own religion distinct from the original one. In other words, whether the leadership is an inherent part of their religion.
Do I have that right that apart from the above we're pretty much on the same page?
I think the trouble with the conclusion you’re drawing is that it enables one to make sweeping statements about Muslims on the whole while maintaining plausible deniability in claiming that they’re only referring to “the bad ones.” In other words, sort of an inverse “No True Scotsman” fallacy.
Furthermore, I would wager that most people you’re referring to as “ex-Muslim” would still very much consider themselves to be Muslim, and even though you’re explicitly not addressing them in your claims, it’s not a huge leap that someone acting in worse faith would use your rationale as an excuse to generalize the entire demographic (including the so-called “ex-Muslims”).
Also by that logic and if as you say you feel Islam is as whacked as Christianity you should just ban religious people. While being more exclusive I could get on board with that doctrine.
No, it’s not the same thing. When most Christians, or governments in countries with majority Christian population, hear about priests raping kids, they are disgusted by it and are 100% ok with punishing the offender.
When Muslim countries hear about the above, they think justice has been done. Obviously the girl should have just been a good little child sex slave and went along with whatever her husband wanted. The see shit like this as A-OK.
It’s a false equivalence to say these two views are the same.
No, it’s not the same thing. When most Christians, or governments in countries with majority Christian population, hear about priests raping kids, they are disgusted by it and are 100% ok with punishing the offender.
ignoring that this is severely debatable, “which religion is more fine with sexual abuse” is an embarrassing pissing contest to have and one that we’re not interested in having on this website.
I don’t understand… she has the right in islamic law to ask for divorce which she would have been granted by a judge seeing the abuse.
I think it is not possible in Christian law for a woman to ask for divorce except in the case of adultry, but Islamic law is clear about cases where the husband is abusive or doesn’t take his responsibilities. I just don’t get how people still consider Iran as a country that upholds Islamic law, unless they don’t know said law.
It’s not because we hate them for their religion (for the saner part of Europeans it’s the same bullshit as Christianity)
Yes, I am firmly convinced that religion (and ideology) is used as a pretext for suppresssing people. One of Iran’s major partner countries is China, for example, but Iran says nothing about Beijing’s oppression of the Muslim Uyghur minority in China. They don’t care.
It’s all about power, and we see similar things all around the globe across all cultures and ages, including here in Europe.
It has been reported that more than one million ethnic minorities have been killed, arrested and forced into detention camps/prisons, what is referred to in Beijing as “re-education camps”, like the one witnessed during the Cultural Revolution. In reality, minority people are subjected to humiliation, torture and political indoctrination in these so-called camps to make them “de-radicalised”. China claims this to be an effective way of “tacking extremism”, whereby, once de-radicalised, these people would acquire skills to be employable and contribute to the economy. The mass internment system has affected not only those subjected to the state crackdown but also the family members of those incarcerated, especially children.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.