If you have data that shows negative effects of immigration I will genuinely look into it. But yeah, I find it important to debunk right wing talking points of immigration, they are based on hysteria not fact. I don’t know what exactly you’re talking about when you say mass migration. I’m advocating to completely legalize migration and give everyone an avenue for citizenship.

Globalist? Ok, that’s some conspiracy theory nonsense.

Do you mean internationalism? Because that’s completely different

Supporters of internationalism are known as internationalists and generally believe that humans should unite across national, political, cultural, racial, or class boundaries to advance their common interests, or that governments should cooperate because their mutual long-term interests are of greater importance than their short-term disputes.

The pathogens created by hundreds of years of isolation between the new and old world, due to the disproportionate access to animal husbandry, is both completely unrelated to modern immigration, and does not at all change the fact that Dehumanization and Settler Colonialism nearly eradicated native American people and erased their culture. So why bring it up? How can you consider genocide and settler Colonialism a ‘sprinkle’

• Erasing Indigenous History, Then and Now

• The Native American Boarding School System

What part of treating everyone as equals, including people immigrating, is ‘infantilizing’ to you? Immigrants, across the board, are responsible for less crime per capita. That is a fact.

If you’re worried about jihadist terrorism in Europe, you should look at the EUs findings. The cause is from online radicalization, not immigration.

• How to stop terrorism: EU measures explained

The causes and prevention of radicalization is important to consider, such as material conditions and marginalization. But attributing the actions of those individuals who do jihadist terrorism to all Muslims or Immigrants or their culture makes no sense. They are the vast minority and in no way represent Muslims or Immigrants as a whole. Limiting or restricting immigration would not prevent that kind of radicalization. Education, preventing marginalization, and promoting awareness are the ways to address that root cause of radicalization.

• Radicalisation in the EU: what is it? How can it be prevented?

The economic benefits of immigration also applies to European countries, despite the racist sentiments many Europeans have towards immigrants. Additionally, the West’s destabilization of the Global South, from war and climate change, has caused the increase in people seeking asylum and immigration.

The crackdowns on migrants and the deliberate two-tier immigration system is certainly a problem, and is deliberate in order to coerce illegal immigrants into very low paying jobs with no workers rights under the threat of deportation.

Immigration was not the cause of the genocide of the Native Americans, that was due to Settler Colonialism and Dehumanization. That is not like today. Immigrants are not settler colonialist like the early Americans. Additionally, it is the US citizens who are dehumanizing Immigrants, not the other way around. Immigrants are a positive, the only negative is the reactionary violence by racist far-right domestic terrorists.

From an economical standpoint, immigrants bring in more taxes and labor, which can go towards infrastructure and social infrastructure like education and housing

America is a nation of immigrants so I don’t really understand this argument. Cultures don’t really integrate that way, plus assimilation is a generational thing.

A 2018 study in the American Sociological Review found that within racial groups, most immigrants to the United States had fully assimilated within a span of 20 years. Immigrants arriving in the United States after 1994 assimilate more rapidly than immigrants who arrived in previous periods.

Measuring assimilation can be difficult due to “ethnic attrition”, which refers to when descendants of migrants cease to self-identify with the nationality or ethnicity of their ancestors. This means that successful cases of assimilation will be underestimated. Research shows that ethnic attrition is sizable in Hispanic and Asian immigrant groups in the United States.

By taking ethnic attrition into account, the assimilation rate of Hispanics in the United States improves significantly. A 2016 paper challenges the view that cultural differences are necessarily an obstacle to long-run economic performance of migrants. It finds that “first generation migrants seem to be less likely to success the more culturally distant they are, but this effect vanishes as time spent in the US increases”. A 2020 study found that recent immigrants to the United States assimilated at a similar pace as historical immigrants.

• Wiki

The healthcare resources is good, but the sending of troopers is a fascist and racist anti-immigrant response based on a lie

Try out a Moka pot first if you want to save on money. The espresso is quite good for the price $5 vs $500

I agree with the views of Israeli Historians Ilan Pappe, Avi Schlaim that a One-State solution is the only permanent solution. I still support a Two-State solution in the meantime, as a foundation for Palestinian emancipation, but the on-the-ground reality of the settlements dividing the West Bank into hundreds of enclaves eats away at the viability of a permanent Two-State solution. Religion is not the primary element of the conflict, despite the religious ferver of many settlers and rhetoric of Israeli officials. The primary element is still the expulsion and domination of the native Palestinians through the use of Settlements and Apartheid. There cannot be a ‘democratic’ Jewish State (an ethnostate), without a Jewish majority, which presents what is called the ‘demographic problem.’ in the words of Ben-Gurion:

There can be no stable and strong Jewish State so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60 percent. - Ben-Gurion in an address to the central committee of the Histadrut on 30 December 1947

I don’t believe the Israeli Government would ever agree to a One or Two State Solution, not unless there is enough internal secular and external international pressure.

• How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution

• ‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe

• One State Solution, Foreign Affairs

Claiming ancestral history does not justify ethnic cleansing, Settler Colonialism, or the existence of an ethnostate. ‘Transfer’ has always been fundamental to Zionism. Zionism is not Judaism, despite, as Israeli Adi Callai puts it, its weaponization of antisemitism. Jewish people have lived in historic Palestine for generations, despite the mass ethnic cleansing of Jewish people by the Romans during the Jewish-Roman Wars. Which is exactly why a Secular State, based on religious tolerance and equal rights, is the right way to end this conflict.

• Palestine A Four Thousand Year History - Nur Masalha

• The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948

• 10 myths of Israel by Ilan Pappe, summerized and full book

Oh my bad, I thought “I see an argument in favor of the settlements that I’m actually agreeing with” meant you agreed with the settlements.

My view on Zionism is that it is fundamentally a settler colonial ideology, one founded and currently engaged in ethnic cleansing. And that the Apartheid Regime needs to change into a Secular One-State with equal rights and right of return for everyone

Can I ask which part of the settlements you agree with?

I don’t know what constitutes leftist in Israel right now, but I do respect Ofer Cassif, Ilan Pappe, Norman Finkelstein, Avi Schlaim, and any anti-zionist Israelis who are fighting for the equal rights of Palestinians.

I won’t ascribe these views as yours, but I will argue against them from a pro-palestinian standpoint.

Settlements and Security:

Israel does justify the settlements and military bases in the West Bank in the name of Security. However, the reality of the settlements on-the-ground has been the cause of violent resistance and a significant obstacle to peace, as it has been for decades.

This type of settlement, where the native population gets ‘Transferred’ to make room for the settlers, is a long standing practice. See: The Concept of Transfer 1882-1948, the Transfer Committee, and the JNF which led to Forced Displacement of 100,000 Palestinians throughout the mandate, before the mass ethnic cleansing campaign of 1948: Plan Dalet, Declassified Massacres of 1948, and Details of Plan C (May 1946) and Plan D (March 1948) . Further, declassified Israeli documents show that the Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip were deliberately planned before being executed in 1967: Haaretz, Forward; while the peace process was exploited to continue de-facto annexation of the West Bank via Settlements (Oslo Accord Sources: MEE, NYT, Haaretz, AJ). The settlements are maintained through a violent apartheid that routinely employs violence towards Palestinians and denies human rights like water access, civil rights, etc. This kind of control gives rise to violent resistance to the Apartheid occupation, jeopardizing the safety of Israeli civilians.

The settlements represent land-grabbing, and land-grabbing and peace-making don’t go together, it is one or the other. By its actions, if not always in its rhetoric, Israel has opted for land-grabbing and as we speak Israel is expanding settlements. So, Israel has been systematically destroying the basis for a viable Palestinian state and this is the declared objective of the Likud and Netanyahu who used to pretend to accept a two-state solution. In the lead up to the last election, he said there will be no Palestinian state on his watch. The expansion of settlements and the wall mean that there cannot be a viable Palestinian state with territorial contiguity. The most that the Palestinians can hope for is Bantustans, a series of enclaves surrounded by Israeli settlements and Israeli military bases.

• Avi Shlaim

How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution

‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe

State violence – official and otherwise – is part and parcel of Israel’s apartheid regime, which aims to create a Jewish-only space between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The regime treats land as a resource designed to serve the Jewish public, and accordingly uses it almost exclusively to develop and expand existing Jewish residential communities and to build new ones. At the same time, the regime fragments Palestinian space, dispossesses Palestinians of their land and relegates them to living in small, over-populated enclaves.

The apartheid regime is based on organized, systemic violence against Palestinians, which is carried out by numerous agents: the government, the military, the Civil Administration, the Supreme Court, the Israel Police, the Israel Security Agency, the Israel Prison Service, the Israel Nature and Parks Authority, and others. Settlers are another item on this list, and the state incorporates their violence into its own official acts of violence. Settler violence sometimes precedes instances of official violence by Israeli authorities, and at other times is incorporated into them. Like state violence, settler violence is organized, institutionalized, well-equipped and implemented in order to achieve a defined strategic goal.

• https://m.btselem.org/settler_violence

Civilian Deaths and Human Shields:

Israel does deliberately targets civilian areas. From in general with the Dahiya Doctrine to multiple systems deployed in Gaza to do so: ‘A mass assassination factory’: Inside Israel’s calculated bombing of Gaza, Lavender, and Where’s Daddy. When it comes to Israeli Soldiers and Civilians, there is also the use of the Hannibal Directive, which was also used on Oct 7th.

Hundreds of Genocide Scholars have described this ethnic cleansing campaign as genocide because of the deliberate targeting of children/civilians and expressed intent by Israeli officials: “A Textbook Case of Genocide”: Israeli Holocaust Scholar Raz Segal Decries Israel’s Assault on Gaza, 800+ Legal Scholars Say Israel May Be Perpetrating ‘Crime of Genocide’ in Gaza , Law for Palestine Releases Database with 500+ Instances of Israeli Incitement to Genocide – Continuously Updated.

On the subject of Human Shields, there are some independent reports for past conflicts of Hamas jeopardizing the safety of civilians via Rocket fire in dense urban areas, two instances during Oct 7th, but no independent verification since then so far. None of which absolve Israel of the crime of targeting civilians under international law:

• HRW on Laws-of-War Violations 2009

• Agency Demands Full Respect for the Sanctity of Its Premises in Gaza - July 2014

• HRW - Palestinian Armed Groups’ October 7 Assault on Israel

Intentionally utilizing the presence of civilians or other protected persons to render certain areas immune from military attack is prohibited under international law. Amnesty International was not able to establish whether or not the fighters’ presence in the camps was intended to shield themselves from military attacks. However, under international humanitarian law, even if one party uses “human shields”, or is otherwise unlawfully endangering civilians, this does not absolve the opposing party from complying with its obligations to distinguish between military objectives and civilians or civilian objects, to refrain from carrying out indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks, and to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians and civilian objects.

• Israel/OPT: Israeli attacks targeting Hamas and other armed group fighters that killed scores of displaced civilians in Rafah should be investigated as war crimes

• HRW - Gaza: Unlawful Israeli Hospital Strikes Worsen Health Crisis

Additionally, there is extensive independent verification of Israel using Palestinians as Human Shields: IDF uses Human Shields, including Children (2013 Report), and in the latest war Israel “Systematically” Uses Gaza Children as Human Shields, Rights Group Finds

I consider all ambitions to form an ethnostate a flavor of Fascism

Since at latest 2004, a significant goal of the group has been the foundation of a Sunni Islamic state.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State

Depends on the root cause. If the terrorism comes from a place of desperation for liberation or emancipation, addressing the underlying material conditions would prevent that kind of terrorism. A great example of that is Apartheid South Africa and Ireland. On the other hand, if the terrorism comes from a place of Fascism, like ISIS or the KKK, I think funding progressive and democratic opposition and also education would have the most positive effect. Holding the terrorists responsible for their actions and jailing them accordingly is really important, but to solve the underlying cause is critical to end it entirely. Otherwise, if the root cause isn’t addressed, there is no reason to believe the terrorism will stop.

A Moka pot is a cheap and easy way to make espresso. I got mine for less than $5. Of course a fancy espresso machine is going to make higher quality espresso, but for the price you can’t go wrong with a Moka pot

Here’s another article that has more sources

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/what-do-we-know-about-microplastics-in-food#The-dangers-of-microplastics

It’s important to keep in mind that nothing is really ‘static,’ the molecules consisting of the plastic and food are still vibrating and decaying into its local environment due to entropy, everything is to some extent. While strong and resilient, plastic molecules will still ‘leech’ out. The concern is more to what extent. High temperatures and liquids would be the highest risk factor, while low temperatures and solids would be much lower.

I think storing solids in plastic at room or cold temperatures are fine. But I avoid microwaving or storing hot items in plastic and opt for glass or ceramic instead. Our entire bodies are already compromised with micro plastics so for me it’s just about minimizing exposure when I can

The heat releases BPA from the plastic which will leech into the food

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2024/02/427161/how-to-limit-microplastics-dangers

Considering the reality of the Apartheid and Occupation, I’d say some kind of violent retaliation was bound to happen. I don’t think the date itself is of any significance, more about the circumstances and opportunity. Although, you could also look into the how the security failure came to be to better understand why it happened then.

• https://theconversation.com/why-israels-intelligence-chiefs-failed-to-listen-to-october-7-warnings-and-the-lessons-to-be-learned-219346

The only way I see this conflict ending, after reading the works of Ilan Pappe and other Historians, is a Secular One-State solution where both Israelis and Palestinians have equal rights and Right of Return in the whole of Historical Palestine. That’s what I advocate for, at least

In terms of the reasons why they chose to attack, these are the three main reasons. Which you can find more about in the three different analysis articles below. In terms of the exact date, I’d say it was due to the shift in IDF forces in the region at that time.

First, the policies of the far-right Israeli government enabling settler violence in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem led to a sense of desperation among Palestinians and growing demands for a reaction. At the same time, the rising tensions in the West Bank caused by these policies necessitated the shift of Israeli forces away from the south and into the north to guard the settlements. This gave Hamas both a justification and an opportunity to attack.

Second, the Hamas leadership felt compelled to act due to the acceleration of Arab-Israeli normalisation. In recent years, this process further diminished the significance of the Palestinian issue for Arab leaders who became less keen on pressuring Israel on this matter.

Third, Hamas was emboldened after it managed to repair its ties with Iran. In recent years, the movement had to reconsider the political position it assumed in the wake of the Arab Spring in 2011, in opposition to Iran and its ally, the Syrian regime.

• https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/11/analysis-why-did-hamas-attack-now-and-what-is-next

Before October 7, the group not only limited its own rocket attacks on Israel but also publicly punished those who instigated attacks within Gaza to break the fragile ceasefires. Hamas has let the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) fight Israel alone, not joining the fray between Israel and the PIJ in August 2022 or in May 2023.

At the same time, there was incendiary far-right political rhetoric and rising levels of violence against Palestinians. Both 2021 and 2022 set records as the deadliest years for Palestinians, as the Netanyahu government green-lit the expansion of settlements in the West Bank and settlers themselves conducted pogroms against Palestinians.

• https://www.csis.org/analysis/why-hamas-attacked-when-it-did

Israel’s focus on the West Bank may also have created an operational opportunity for Hamas. According to Uzi Ben Yitzhak, a retired Israeli general, the Israeli government has deployed most of the regular IDF forces to the West Bank to manage the situation there, leaving only a skeleton force at the Gaza border. The effort to secure permanent Israeli control over the West Bank, in this assessment, created conditions where a Hamas surprise attack could actually succeed.

• https://www.vox.com/2023/10/7/23907323/israel-war-hamas-attack-explained-southern-israel-gaza

Yeah, I don’t watch them too much but I do support that channel.

Also GDF when it comes to imperialist/colonialist conflicts, Leeja Miller on any US issues from a legal lense, and Hasan Piker on political commentary

When I gave the books Manufacturing Consent and Consequences of Capitalism a fair chance, and learned about the brutal reality of our foreign policy that goes completely ignored in our history books

Also finding the channel Knowing Better on YouTube and learning much more about the history of Slavery and Native Americans