Sometimes I have rare nights when I feel good about myself and the future, so my maladaptive brain has a failsafe to make sure I’m never happy. “Everything is gone forever once you die. Your life has functionally already ended, yet it never began. Every second is of infinite and infinitesimal importance.”

Thanks, brain. Can’t even argue with that one. And you know it’s not helpful either. You’ve just had it beaten into you that it’s dangerous to hope. You’re just doing your job, but I wish you’d find a different one.

Hi, Majora’s Mask.

That’s really cool. Right on. I assume you wouldn’t go around calling people fake leftists for not being vegan. I wouldn’t, despite animal agriculture being one of the most entrenched establishments in modern society and completely antithetical to leftist principles. That’s not rooted in strategy either; that’s just acknowledging that “leftism” isn’t a monolith and that everybody has their own journeys. I don’t see them as “not leftists” despite unquestioningly participating in a system that spits in the face of every leftist ideal I know and causes unimaginable suffering and damage because of it.

Some of the shit in this image is obviously non-leftist like anti-antifa and Joe Biden, but it’s mixed in with center-left politicians and ideas – like you’re not a “real leftist” if you support sensible gun control, voting, a couple politicians who’ve probably inspired a leftist awakening in millions of people, and uh… Corporate appropriation of gay culture? This image has to be old as dirt, because I don’t know anyone these days who applauds that while self-describing as “a leftist”.

Some of these are obvious; some of them just seem like obnoxious purity tests that drive people away from leftism. The way they’re mixed in together seems disingenuous.

Hey Deceptichum, what do you eat? Because if purity tests for “actual leftism” are on the menu, boy do I have a fuck of an unnecessary hierarchical power structure perpetuated for profit and justified by “the natural order” which results in the exploitation, torture, and murder of billions of an oppressed underclass that you just have to give your opinion about.

… Or is “actual leftism” just “give or take whatever my views are”?

In case you want a good recipe for sauce:

• One can puréed tomatoes
• One can diced tomatoes
• Spices. This is whatever your taste is, like garlic, onion powder, the seven components of Italian seasoning, white pepper, hot pepper flakes, etc.; I recognize this is kind of “restofthefuckingowl”, but I just have a big Mediterranean mix I keep in a jar.
• Kale leaves, torn
• Crushed sliced almonds (bag of sliced almonds and crushed by hand)
• Sour cream (I used Tofutti vegan sour cream; can’t attest to dairy-based)
• Olive oil
• Diced, sautéed oyster mushrooms

I went about this in a dumb way and only sautéed the oyster mushrooms, but for better flavor, you could sautée with olive oil, crushed garlic, spices, almonds, kale, and oyster mushrooms, then pour the tomatoes and sour cream on top of that once you feel they’re cooked well enough.

I know that’s high-effort compared to jarred, but the flavor is really something. Take out everything but the tomatoes, olive oil, and spices, and you can still have a really good but almost-no-effort sauce.

Your cock does all your thinking for you?

So all strikes happen because demands weren’t met. Cool. And the fact that this is ostensibly true of literally every strike bolsters your case that this information should be in the headline… how, exactly?

“Person McPersonson, who is a human being on or orbiting Earth and breathes oxygen, does a thing” should be in every article written about a person going forward just to make sure the people are informed.

I’m not even going to bother arguing the obvious point that “forced” or calling the working conditions “unacceptable” in the publication’s voice is hilariously biased, because a) you’re clearly not intellectually honest enough to understand that and b) you’ve already dismantled your own shitty alternate headline by making everything you added to it superfluous – again, assuming the intent is to include pertinent information and not to make a propaganda piece.

“How can you do this? You make me sick.”

What you’re describing is comically biased and nothing any serious news organization would print outside of an editorial. I have serious problems with The Independent, but this article is fine. You’re clearly aching for propaganda and/or editorialization, and there are plenty of places to find it.

Would you like me to find you an editorial about this strike?

You mock, but it’s my golden ticket to getting my virginity back.

How about we focus on the potential positives, instead of the short term pain?

The purpose of a strike is to inflict enough pain that the organization you’re striking against accedes to your demands. Any news article worth its salt covering a strike will discuss the pain it inflicts both because it affects people outside the organization and because that’s the leverage the strikers have.

The article’s job isn’t to “focus on the potential positives” because its job isn’t to be propaganda for or against the strike; it’s to cover who’s striking, what they’re striking for, and the leverage they have – to inform the reader of current events, to be news.

People asking you for sources isn’t what sealioning is; get a grip. You gave specific data points with no source, no timeframe (well okay, now you have a timeframe according to some random Redditor), and no methodology. That’s not sealioning; that’s asking after the fact for the basic common decency you owe readers when you post things like this but are plainly too embarrassed to admit you can’t provide.

As for the CSIS source, what are you even talking about at this point? Even assuming it has the data shown in the graph (it doesn’t), the chain for this evidence would be to prompt you for a Reddit comment which links to a Guardian article which links to some document which allegedly helps me find the CSIS article (it doesn’t; it doesn’t link to, let alone mention the CSIS article by name, a single time). Is this an actual joke? That you’re being snarky with “the PDF you so happily disregarded” like that’s a totally normal sequence for someone to follow?

You still haven’t shown anyone the source for literally a single data point in the graph, so I not only think I’m being perfectly reasonable but that you’re desecrating the corpse of the burden of proof.

it only serves to belittle others

Yeah, that’s the point of using insults. It’s 2025, and I’m completely sick and tired of watching society crumble around me because fine, sophisticated people can’t or won’t bother to take five seconds to evaluate the ragebait slop being presented to them. You’re talking about a term whose clinical relevance was dead over 40 years ago, so unless I’m a psychologist telling you this over ARPANET, it isn’t ableist.

As for the sources, why is that in scare quotes? No the fuck it does not sate any reasonable person’s “need for ‘sources’”, because it doesn’t link to the source. By the Reddit comment’s literal own admission, it does not link to a source for any of this. It just states there was some unnamed 2023 conference where this was presented then links to an article from The Guardian which has nothing to do with this particular graph’s data and just has a link to this document which doesn’t even classify groups according to the graph you posted. It also links to an ADL article, which equally lacks this data.

Removed by mod

More like “source for this image is clumsily half-explained and never properly pointed to in a Reddit comment and the data vis is still garbage.” This isn’t 1935; that word isn’t ableist, but I’ve removed it anyway so there’s at least a comment pushing back on this nonsense.

• No source for the data.
• No indication of when this was made because “since 2010” is relative. (I guess we assume 2020 due to “A DECADE OF VIOLENCE”?)
• No indication for how death by neo-Nazi, jihadist, or antifa is defined or tracked.
• Comparing police with three wildly uncomparable groups.

I love junk food data vis and the (EDIT: fine, sophisticated people) who (EDIT: ignorantly) upvote it.

That’s not what this double negation cancels to, though. The cancellation of “I can’t believe it’s not butter” is “I must/I’m compelled to believe it is butter”. This is because you’re saying you lack the power to believe that it is ~B, where B is the set of butter. Thus, because you’re addressing that it exists (i.e. you have to believe it’s something), you not only believe it is in set B but are powerless to do otherwise. ∎

See also: /r/isitbutter

No, no, you can clearly see “PETA” inscribed on his pants, and he’s here to tell Elmo about the animal abuse in his glass and his bread.

“Opinion articles may be removed.” What do you think an editorial – “an article or any other written document […] that expresses the publication’s opinion about a particular topic or issue” – is exactly? The Le Monde article even says “OPINION ● IRAN” at the top in case you were confused somehow.

Rule 3, OP. Editorials aren’t allowed.