I guess I’m just skeptical this false impression will work on locals… I’d presume they aren’t hearing from this group from lemmy mainly and likely already have feelings established, no? It just seems to me this wouldn’t be a good forum on which to spread misinformation… strikes me as a lot more likely that a forum known for being pretty left leaning is just latching onto a story that is related to their interest.
Because (at least on lemmy) they spam articles about this, and treat it like some “gotcha” moment that would make the company no longer able to fulfill their purpose.
Because more militant left leaning views are pretty common here. Seems to be the Occam’s Razor answer.
Yes of course, it is to me just clear that it is not about Mullvad. The post are about ÖP.
To what end? Surely locals would have a better idea of exactly where their politics stand… what’s the point in giving a false impression to people from random countries on the Internet?
I still wouldn’t support it and would probably pull my money from someone who is actively promoting it. Often this kind of sentiment is a soft pedaled version of more ugly policies, and I just don’t agree with it in the first place. I think nationalism is generally an ignorant position and the lesson of the 20th century should be that trying to maintain homogeneous states nearly always leads to genocide in the worst cases and apartheid states in the best of times. So this doesn’t assuage me much.
That said, extra context is always welcome.
This is way worse than what Yen did. This guy donated a lot of money to a party that explicitly pushes demigration policies, and if there was any doubt that this was a motivating factor for the donation, he later said he felt those policies were necessary. That’s understandable to not want to give your money to someone who you know is going to go bankroll demigration politics with some of your money.
Yen praised the Republicans at large over an anti trust pick.
I think the other criticisms of Proton’s policy changes are valid, and everyone has different standards for what is enough to divest from a company I guess, but I’ve heard people calling Yen a fascist sympathizer for that statement, and that’s just divorced from reality imo.
On the bright side, if the AMOC shuts down, which early indications seem to say it might be, you’ll also have way colder winters in Europe to balance things out. I guess that should also get the eastern seaboard of the US hotter as well? So fun for everyone!
Spoken like an upper middle class person.
In fairness, it’s often false thrift to move to an area you need a car with the hopes of saving money on rent… that all ends up going into the car. I hear you as someone born into poverty in a car centric place that this often isn’t a choice, that’s fair, but all else being equal my experience that needing to maintain a car was a constant albatross around our neck as a family. Once I moved to an area with good transit and didn’t bother with a car, I could save way, way more money even considering higher rent…
Relax, amigo.
Look, I’m not sure if there’s a language barrier here, so I’ll try to rephrase this simply: if trains have fencing on either side, there are almost always man gates every so often so that a) the tracks can be accessed for maintenance and b) in case of an emergency ( like we’re discussing, ahem ) there is an exit to get people out and off of the tracks.
Is your expectation for emergency egress that sidewalks are required along the entire route in order to have emergency exits from a fenced area???
What you suggest is like letting people leave a plane and walk along the tarmac.
Buddy, this is exactly what sometimes happens. What do you think they do? Sometimes a plane just isn’t able to be fixed on the spot and you have to disembark on the spot. Shit happens.
What I want is to get from point A to point B safely.
Then why are you driving? That’s statistically way, way, way more likely to end in a fatality for you and it isn’t even very close.
Southern Europe cosplaying as western Europe for the purposes of feeling superior to eastern Europe is legitimately funny though, especially since I’m from a place where both would be considered barely functioning countries lol.
That being said, you seem to really be getting up in your feelings with this since we’re devolving to both unearned and mistargeted national pride, so I think now is probably a good time to block and move on :) . Been fun, amigo, but maybe get one of your countrymen to pass a J and loosen up a bit, eh?
Drive safe!
Walking through the woods is not what I would call “a better [train] experience”.
What are you actually wanting here? “They won’t let us off the train, we’re cooking in here” and then “Oh they let you off the train, what an awful experience”? Pick a lane here, guy. Being let off the train sounds a lot better to me than heat stroke… I’m still not sure what you really want in this scenario.
I’d still like to know when this actually happened? A breakdown, sure. But trying to keep people to stay on a clearly dangerous train? Hard to believe.
Do you not have mandatory gates every x km in Spain? We have plenty of sound barrier fencing, and all of them have gates a short distance apart exactly for safety reasons.
Glad to hear you had a good experience overall!
They will not open the door you dufus.
No need to be prickly :).
They will indeed do exactly this in my experience. We even had a sort of viral video of this happening here in Hungary… train broke down, they opened the doors and walked people through the nearby woods to the nearest village.
If Hungary is managing a better train experience than Spain… I would understand your frustration, the situation must be pretty damn dire there.
But again, I doubt this has happened at all… even aside from physical, can you cite a situation where conductors would not “let people off the train” when it was getting dangerously hot during a breakdown? It’s hard to believe that Hungary would handle this better…
You can get a fine for using emergency exit.
In a non emergency, of course.
they will not let you leave the train
?
Man, I’m surprised to hear that. International travel is infamously shit, that’s part of why so many Europeans fly. The trains themselves are fine, but there’s a mishmash of standards, electrical systems, booking systems, etc, and every country just wants to engage in protectionism and refuses to harmonize with others. Trying to book travel through multiple countries is usually seen as a bigger headache than it’s worth, not to mention more costly, than flying which is just backwards in terms of incentives.
Maybe if you’re getting one of the tourist Eurrail pass thingies it isn’t so bad, but for regular international use (aside from just going to one country over, so just one journey) Europe really needs to standardize its rail travel much, much more.
the AC stops working, the windows don’t open and it gets real hot real fast unless it’s some extreme situation they will not let you leave the train
That sounds to me like an extreme situation.
All trains have emergency releases on the door to allow manual opening. Practically, if it is actually getting hot to the point of danger, no conductor is going to physically stop you from leaving the train. More likely they’d be the ones to let people off.
I’d need to see a news story of this happening where they were trying to force people to stay on a dangerously hot train. This sounds like a made up scenario.
“Dang.” adds two new email aliases.
I have not said Israel shouldn’t exist. I’ve said it shouldn’t be an ethnostate. That’s all. While you’re trying to tar anyone against the idea of an ethnostate as an antisemite, I might point out that the most vociferous advocates for ethnostates in America are white nationalists such as the KKK. So maybe we should keep this converation between you and I rather than slandering each other based on who is standing on our side, because you’ll find you have your own pretty unsavory types standing with you. Including, ironically, ardent antisemites.
You can call yourself pragmatic, but supporting the genocide or apartheid of a people because the people doing the genociding were themselves once genocided seems pretty ideological rather than pragmatic. I don’t think this puts you in a very good position to finger wag others for their views on racism, cowboy.
I think the lesson of the 20th century is very, very clearly that ethnostates only lead to genocide and war. They almost have to by definition… the story of the Balkans and central Africa for the past century has been one of attempting to establish borders based on race and then humanitarian disasters followed as people who didn’t fit into those borders were either forcibly expelled or killed. This can’t really be denied, can it? And aren’t we seeing this exact thing play out in Israel?
Can you explain to me how it is possible to have an ethnostate without engaging in either genocide or apartheid? Because I can’t see how that’s possible.
I think we also need to acknowledge there’s a pretty big difference in a people currently or within a few generations culturally connected to a land, and people who have been displaced for literal centuries. Do we give Britain back to the Gaelic peoples that were displaced by Saxons? They can both claim a cultural connection and have been present the entire time, as with Jews in the area around Israel. How far back do we go?
In any case, no, even in the case of indigenous peoples, I absolutely do not support ethnostates because of the above… they invariably and always lead to genocide and apartheid, which I feel should be avoided at all costs. Do you not?
Well yes, but that’s my point, this trend has been global since the 80’s with Reagan and Thatcher. Continental Europe held out longer, but even here it pretty much rules the day. A lot of Americans have a very, very misinformed view of what politics here look like thinking it much more to the left, and that just hasn’t been the case for arguably a few decades. There’s a few issues we’re even to the right of Americans on. Sure, there are some holdouts, but not many that have impacted politics much in recent history.
So I’d repeat my follow up question: aren’t there quite a few peoples who could claim ongoing discrimination as a justification for founding an ethnostate? Should the Roma in Europe be given an ethnostate? Why do you only extend this to Israel? The Roma face far more open discrimination in Europe today, measurably. Should Europe hand them land that doesn’t belong to Europe in India because that’s their ancient ancestral homeland?
Heck, look at the anti-Islamic rhetoric and attacks that have happened post 9/11… doesn’t this, using your reasoning, justify the existence of an Islamic State?
I don’t think you can fight racism with more racism, and ethnostates by definition require some degree of racism. All you do is encourage more racism, and I think quite clearly this pans out as the rise in antisemitic views has directly coincided with the actions of Israel. Or you’ll have to walk me through how they don’t… if ethnicity is an institutional dividing line within a state, you necessarily have to engage in racism to uphold it.
(Also not sure what you’re referencing in the Night of Long Knives… I really hope this isn’t an oblique National Socialists are socialists reference, because that would be pretty ridiculous. Even the Strassers, while you can certainly argue had some socialist ideas informing them, were not really traditional socialists. National Socialism was a distinct movement from socialism, and the latter never really aligned themselves with fascists, they were actively bleeding fighting them).
Ehhh, this isn’t half as true as it used to be (lived on both sides of the Atlantic extensively, am currently in central Europe). The majority of Europe is as firmly neoliberal as America is ideologically. We have a more robust welfare state, and some of us have some better labor laws, but the core ideals of neoliberalism rule nearly the entire subcontinent with real, old school socialist parties (that are actually still holding socialist views) don’t really have any more power than they do in the US. They get a bit more just by virtue of parliamentary systems, but their actual size and influence is almost non existent in most countries here.
So would you support the idea of ethno-states in general? Do you think being against ethno-states as a principle means one is against any given ethnicity that is attempting to found one? If you don’t support ethnostates in general, what is the basis for granting exceptions such as to Israel? Having suffered a great injustice earlier in history? Couldn’t, say, Ukrainians claim this because of the Holodomor? Would you find it ethical for them to, say, have separate rights for ethnic Ukrainians vs ethnic Hungarians, Russians, and others that are Ukrainian nationals?
I’m really asking here, because I just can’t see how you can square this circle without just being plain arbitrary. You either are okay with the idea of ethnostates, or you aren’t. And if you’re in favor of them, you almost definitionally need to engage in either genocide (in the wider sense of any form of removal of a people) or apartheid (having separate classes based on ethnic lines). No? How else could you realize this without one of the two?
Perhaps, but one could argue it happens so often that the hammer lends itself to hammering this particular nail, and so often devolves into that. The Balkans are this experiment played out, attempting to carve out ethno states, and we’ve seen how that’s gone. Once you start saying things like “this country should only be (or primarily be) for X people”, you almost necessarily have to engage in some degree of genocide (in the wider sense of removing a people and culture that doesn’t fit the paradigm), or apartheid, otherwise the statement ends up a bit vacuous, no?
Israel is, in my view, a very clear example of this; once you’ve decided “this is a Jewish state”, anyone not Jewish by definition become second class citizens.
If we’re just talking general assimilation, that’s more nuanced… I don’t oppose calls for more assimilation, but I think governments have done a very poor job in using more stick than carrot. They tend to not put any effort in helping people integrate, which is, from experience, very difficult. One could argue it isn’t their responsibility, but I think such framings for state action is silly… either the state has an interest in a thing being done or it doesn’t, and in this case I think they very much do. Most immigrants that form insular communities do so not out of any inherent pull to, but because they’re already being somewhat ostracized. In the US, Chinatowns arose as a direct result of ostracization and discrimination.
I do think there is a danger of assimilation programs overzealously wiping out culture… the Sami have faced multiple attempts in the past at trying to stamp out their culture, the US and Australia religiously forced the elimination of many native cultures in the name of assimilation. It is also a fine line to walk. But there is undoubtedly a state interest (and immigrant interest!) in assimilating into society.
I’d argue the binding culture that should be assimilated shouldn’t be things as fuzzy as ethnicity… the culture that binds should be the values of that nation. Which doesn’t really have anything to do with ethnicity.