Many people fail to grasp this, fascism is the mutual merger of state and corporate power.

Both work to enhance the control the other exerts in specific areas, such as corporate capture of regulatory bodies, and state capture of media.

Fearful idiots are easily duped by the state and media into ‘othering’ a group of people.

Claims that the ‘other’ group are weaklings eroding the country but powerful enough to be running some kind of shadow government are common in fascism.

This gives more ‘reason’ for the fearful idiots to push their ‘saviour’ figure into the role of dictator.

So a live feed?

Early dementia refers to the progression of the disease, he’s unlikely to die from it during this term.

As opposed to early onset dementia which is when a younger person than usual is diagnosed.

Sleepy Don! That’s what everyone calls him folks. He’s low energy and old. So old. I remember when my dog was old like that. Kristi Noem said to me “just shoot him, take him out back and shoot him” and I did. Just like that! Bang! No more sleepy useless old dog. And lots of people said it was a good thing, including my good friend Jeff.

I’m not moving any goalposts, my responses are keeping in mind the original arguments of antinatalism, that sufferring is inevtiable and that all sufferring should be avoided.

The oldest writing on this (that I am aware of) is Sophocles’s Oedipus at Colonus, written shortly before Sophocles’s death in 406 BC:

Not to be born is, beyond all estimation, best; but when a man has seen the light of day, this is next best by far, that with utmost speed he should go back from where he came. For when he has seen youth go by, with its easy merry-making, what hard affliction is foreign to him, what suffering does he not know? Envy, factions, strife, battles, and murders. Last of all falls to his lot old age, blamed, weak, unsociable, friendless, wherein dwells every misery among miseries

Look at the examples given, something as simple as envy being defined as sufferring. Loneliness in old age? This doesn’t seem to match how you are defining sufferring, and so our approaches differ.

suffering is something you cannot escape and that you do not choose, not something that’s difficult or temporarily painful

Torture is temporarily painful and we all agree that’s sufferring and not something you would choose.

Relationship breakups, especially one you didn’t choose to end, can be difficult but many people would agree that they sufferred during and after a breakup.

The premise is that sufferring is an inevitablility which you seem to agree with but sufferring as you’re defining it doesn’t seem to be a guaranteed experience.

You could conceivably live your entire life and never experience something that you cannot escape and that you do not choose, not something that’s difficult or temporarily painful. You could even choose a peaceful death to wrap up your sufferring free life with the way you’ve defined sufferring, even if it’s still unlikely it is a possibility, which goes against the original antinatalist claim that sufferring is inevitable.

Obviously sufferring comes in degrees of severity. I would never agree that not being born would be better than going through a breakup, or that its a moral imperative not to create new life because they might experience relationship difficulties.

However I would agree never being born would be preferrable to the death suffered by Hisaschi Ouchi, who was kept alive for as long as possible against his wishes so that doctors could study how extreme radiation poisoning would progress.

Personally I don’t want children for a number of reasons

I respect that and have zero interest in your reasons, it is your choice.

boiling it down to a moral reason is reductive, unhelpful, and can be dangerous.

It can certainly be dangerous, and I volunteered to moderate a space for discussion on the topic to try and mitigate some of that danger. To, potentially, reduce sufferring ;)

But the premise is that the suffering is a certainty, which the suffering we’re seeing in Gaza is absolutely not a certainty for everyone who is born.

The risk of suffering something unbearable is lower now than at any time in history and will hopefully only get lower.

It is possible to hold the view that having children can be a good thing and that people should be free to choose for themselves. They aren’t conflicting beliefs.

There are no stupid questions but there are vapid questions seeking validation over unimportant, meaningless and biased interpersonal relationships.

These people aren’t here to learn something they’re here to get a pat on the back. It is disgusting and shallow.

Not suffering is always preferable to suffering.

Is it? I prefer suffering the aches and pains of exercise knowing that caring for my body will reward me in the long term.

The definition of suffering we’re working with here is very broad. Not all suffering is pointless, unbearable or even involuntary.

People so afraid of suffering they would rather not ever have existed lack resilience.

that’s a bizarre logic that feels an awful lot like some fundamentalist Christian quiverfull shit.

To me it’s a sort of thought exercise and conversation starter, not my complete philosophical approach to the topic. I’m not religious in the slightest and probably best described as anti-theist.

Disagreeing with a philosophical stance doesn’t mean that I need to be biased in moderation.

I find antinatalism to be an interesting philosophical exercise and welcome discussion about that and people’s personal choices based on the philosophy.

To think that our times are special enough to warrant a movement like antinatalism

Antinatalism is a question first asked by ancient Greek philosophers. The modern antinatalism movement is… not so philosophical.

I’m now the mod of antinatalism on lemmy.world because the previous mod bombed a fertility clinic and I don’t want crazies like him running the sub or posting extremist content.

I believe that discussing antinatalism as an answer rather than a thought exercise is a mistake.

I reject antinatalism because I believe that suffering is not always a negative.

Could an artist not suffer for their work that brings great joy to themselves and others? Is that suffering not then worthy and good?

If something is worthy and good then denying others the opportunity to exist and be worthy and good is itself immoral.

I don’t see how anyone can trust Israeli agreement to anything with how consistently they have violated ceasefire agreements.

Anything short of an agreement that all Palestinians will die seems unlikely to be honoured by Israel.

What kind of vapid shit is this? Its like bots are posting bullshit relationship drama bait.

Ahh yes, Russia the oligarchy which ‘refuses to be owned’.

That Russia, that is owned by private capital concentrated into the hands of the few?

Where 500 people own more than the rest of the country combined?

A broken clock… ignoring reality because its messy won’t make it go away.

Your posts read like an LLM that has been instructed to shit post like a Vulcan.

Or a teenager that discovered a dictionary and believes being as obtusely verbose as possible somehow implies intelligence.

Compared to a nation of 32 million people? Fairly strong.

Compared to the EU? Weaker than a communist economy

The missionaries should be jailed for the rest of their miserable lives.

That saying started with the recruitment process, that it also applies to the criminals is just a natural consequence.

Those are rookie numbers, gotta pump those numbers up!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet–Afghan_War

Civilian casualties (Afghan):

1. 1,000,000 dead[28]
2. 1,500,000 dead[29]
3. 2,000,000 dead[30]

If I need to explain to you that two completely unrelated acts can be judged differently you might want to head back to pre-school, which is where most humans generally learn these sort of lessons.