Technically I was raised in a completely non-religious household so I was never myself properly religious but I always found the reasons why that was a thing really interesting.
My grandfather on my Dad’s side did a stint in WWII protecting the Vatican as part of the Canadian forces. He never spoke about what actually happened there (because he wasn’t allowed to) but it shook his Catholic foundations to the marrow and was never able to reconcile what happened with his faith. When he returned home he had a massive row with the priest at his church that he left. Half the family disowned him for leaving the church. My father never particularly went to church though his mother remained an Anglican.
On my Mother’s side my grandparents made an enemy of the local diocese when they and a bunch of their friends conspired to run a priest out of town for being a complete asshole to children publicly and a child molester privately. My grandmother basically swapped to playing organ at another smaller church but the rest of the family became very agnostic and really didn’t want to expose their kids to the faith.
So I basically wasn’t raised with faith because three generations back everybody in my family had a religious crisis… And I am SO glad you have no idea.
The answer to your question is a resounding “yes”.
In fact, among the 4 members of war cabinet, at least one other has children in active combat units, and ALL cabinet members served in a combat unit as well as had at least one child in active combat duty.
Most children of Israeli politicians are absolutely conscripted to the army, and the public would look very badly on a “fortunate son” type situation.
Furthermore, there’s an unwritten rule the ultra-orthodox parties do not involve themselves or even voice an opinion on military matters because, and this something often said in Israel, “they don’t risk their children’s life in the army” (the ultra-orthodox are essentially exempt from conscription).
The Israeli Jewish public doesn’t see the Israeli combatants as poor or uneducated “others”, but as their children, brothers and fathers.
I think that’s a more ethical way of looking at it. However, this also helps explain the seeming lack of consideration for Palestinian life. Take a random person and ask him to choose between risking the life of his kid, who is in active service, in a military operation or throwing bombs and risking harming other civilians. Most people will choose to risk others. And among those who’ll choose to risk their kid, most would either be lying or didn’t really think about the question.
Furthermore, there’s an unwritten rule the ultra-orthodox parties do not involve themselves or even voice an opinion on military matters
Only this isn't true Deri (of Shas and convicted felon) is in the war cabinet for crying out loud.
You are really naive if you think they don't get a say in everything that goes on, and deliberately ignoring reality if you can't admit that there diversion of funds for their own causes and communities has deprived the rest of the country not only of the security it needed on 7.10, but of health and social and community funding for everyone else, for decades.
The amount of power the ultra orthodox hold is obscene.
Also, he’s barred from being a minister as per Israeli’s supreme court ruling (exactly because he’s been convicted with fraud multiple times), so I highly doubt he could be appointed to the war cabinet even in theory.
One could argue that the ultra orthodox parties are active behind the scenes, but there’s no indication of that anywhere. Israel has free press, so this type of thing would probably come out as rumors at the very least (By contrast, there were reports he was the de-facto minister of social services after the supreme court ruling).
Not to diminish the political power they hold, but in this specific case there isn’t any indication they exert said power.
Lemm.ee that you're on has 25,718 users but only 2232 are active, that's a really small number. Lemmy.world that you're posting into is number 9 with 11,500 active users, that's still super small tbf.
People say that a few large instances would be easy pickings for the profit motive, and monetizing.
There is a lot of handwringing over on mastodon about how people should not be directed to the large instances by default. And that people need to join the small instances to make sure mastodon (or fedi-verse) is not taken over by a few who want to profit off it. They mock those on large instances. They tell people they should join small instances.
But I have seen many small instances close and leave people in the lurch. I have seen a few people have to move several times.
I have seen users be abandoned and left with a broken instance that doesn’t work, and the admin nowhere to be seen.
I agree. But maybe the medium ones aren’t too bad.
1: Even big instances start out small.
2: Also having other instances besides the big ones helps prevent a monopoly over the fediverse.
3: Bigger isn't always better. Nothing wrong with a small Cozy community.
There is no monopoly if you have a dozen big instances. But if you have 1000 instances? What is the point. Can’t start a community there without it going poof the next week.
That is always a risk for small instances.
It is the same for small businesses or libraries/museums funded by donations.
Imo just because there is a risk does not mean they shouldn't do it.
The core issue here is instances disappearing, and That goes into the discussion of the structure of the fediverse right now vs. the fediverse in the future
A dozen big instances feel better now, and I personally wouldn’t make a community on a smaller instance unless I know it is likely to stay up. If it was run by an existing organization for example.
Long term though, I trust existing organizations to set up stable instances that won’t be shut down easily. If a government, school, game company etc. makes an instance it’s not likely to go down. Having lots of instances will look more normal then.
Ultimately we don’t need to do anything differently, I recommend new people join a big instance and then make a new account once they know what instance they like.
note to everyone: please don’t downvote good faith questions
OP asked a pretty reasonable open ended question. There are other people who may be thinking the same, and reading the discussions here might change their minds. Save downvoting for rule breaking / content that’s bad for the community
Would be nice to be able to backup your magazine/community, so if for example random.lemmy goes down, you can still migrate your /mini4wd elsewhere. Don't know how it could be implemented though, I'm still in the "i get it but not really" phase with the Fediverse.
A lotta folks host their own instance simply to have a bit more control over what they personally see since until 0.19, only instance admins can block an entire instance. It also allows you to see metrics you can’t otherwise; such as the actual users who voted up and down on a specific post.
asklemmy
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.