But that’s not what you wrote. You claimed that it doesn’t show new information because you can see the favicon and title. It does show new information.

When I shop online, I have many tabs from the same site open. The tab title is the store name + the item name, so the item name never fits. A bunch of identical ebay icons is way worse than this.

It’s not objectively better or worse. Some people will prefer it and some people won’t.

These countries have similarities, but this seems more like simplistic stereotypes and generalizations.

South Korea’s suicide rate is almost double that of Japan’s. Japan has a lower suicide rate than the US, and similar to European countries like Sweden.

South Koreans work some of the longest hours of any rich country. They’re closer to India and Mexico than Europe. The Japanese work fewer hours than the US. Yes, Japanese people work too much, but I think Americans don’t realize that they work too much too.

I agree with the first part, but I’m confused by “Individualism is great”. Not sure what individualism has to do with it.

Is this supposed to contrast with the US, a country where people work some of the longest hours in the developed world? I think the whole “the West is free and individualistic and Asians are conformist robots” thing is a myth.

South Korea also has one of the biggest anti-feminism movements in the world. They just eliminated the gender ministry and rolled back protections for women. Not coincidentally, South Korea is Jordan Peterson’s biggest audience outside the US.

That theory doesn’t make much sense to me. The military conflicts have been political losers for Biden. Polling consistently shows that Americans believe (for some insane reason) that the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts wouldn’t have happened under Trump. Gaza in particular has split Biden’s base. The best thing that could happen for Biden is if all the conflicts end before the election.

There are legitimate worries concerning the commodification of people’s bodies. We already do not allow people to sell oneself into slavery, and many countries do not allow the selling of one’s own body parts (which is why organs must be donated in many countries).

I’m the only one here who knows anyone who’s used surrogacy, and it was for a legit health reason.

I’m not sure why you think it matters, but my sibling recently had a child through surrogacy. No one is disagreeing about the health case. But more exploitative cases can exist. Not everything should be made into a product.

Are you two substantially disagreeing?

When surrogacy is merely a luxury to spare the rich mother the discomforts of bearing a child, it can be bad, and for other reasons such as health and infertility it’s totally fine?

The critic rating is better than the audience rating. I’ve never seen a film with a high critic rating that didn’t have something worthwhile about it. But I’ve seen a lot of audience hits that were garbage.

Having lived there for a few years, I don’t think this describes Japanese child raising culture at all. I’m not sure how you can infer so much about the culture based on a single visit to Japan without any ability to speak the language. You may have just had culture shock.

Nowhere in your first comment do you make anything like the argument in your second comment. You say that my summary is reductive and that I built an “over complicated argument” by talking about broken promises. But then you essentially argue that this will be a broken promise!

Your second argument is more reasonable, and not at all over complicated, which is why I anticipated it. The problem with your fatalist take is that “mere talk” precedes, not only broken promises, but also fulfilled promises. Honestly, if your cynical take is right, then there’s no reason to expect anything from any party ever. Cynicism is depressingly fashionable on the left.

Well said. This feels like an existential election for Taiwan.

Is it “mere talk” when Biden says US support for Israel is unconditional? No, we can and should criticize him for that because those words encourage Israel to act without restraint. But, conversely, when the US signals that they will not support actions like forced relocation, we should also see that as a corrective, not “mere talk”.

To your point, in IR theory, there also exists phenomena such as the paradox of empty promises, where making unfulfilled promises can worsen human rights. But that claim is more nuanced: the problem occurs when promises are empty. That doesn’t mean all promises are empty or promising doesn’t matter. Public declarations are a necessary step (but insufficient on their own) to justify further action.

This might be the first time I’ve heard a demand imposed on Israel from the US during this recent escalation. Hopefully, the first of many.

Yeah my first thought too given how much that’s been in the news.

Might be like how it is here in Canada. Pro-immigrant, but much more contemptuous of the indigenous population.

Agreed “win” is too simplistic. Still good shot at forming government though. I’m not familiar with the Dutch system, but, even in systems with proportional representation, the plurality winner usually gets first shot at forming government, and by convention usually does form government. They need 76 seats to govern and are more than halfway there with 37.

I believe that’s again the opposite of what that person is saying.

That’s not what I’m seeing. Most world leaders are expending political capital supporting Israel, and losing young, progressive, and middle eastern voters in the process. I think this scorched earth strategy is stupid even from the perspective of Israel’s self interest.

I think 9/11 is a great analogy. The lesson I draw from that period, however, is that we cannot let bloodlust win. Hundreds of thousands dead, $8 trillion spent, for nothing.

The editor of the Jewish Current makes the same analogy in his article Have We Learned Nothing?

That America overreacted to 9/11 and compounded the scale of the tragedy is now a standard position among progressives, and even some conservatives; these days it takes little courage to denounce “the forever wars” and to condemn the shortsightedness of liberal intellectuals who aligned themselves with George W. Bush and his neoconservative advisers to champion the invasion of Iraq. But at the time, it was far more common for conscientious progressives to equivocate and prevaricate. To foreground the suffering of the Americans in the Twin Towers was obligatory; to acknowledge the past, present, or future victims of American violence abroad was at best awkward; to imply these things might be related was something almost no one wanted to hear when it might have made any difference.

Now is not the time to abandon nuance, but neither is it the time to be too “understanding” of Israel’s bloodlust, because their overwhelming advantage in power and resources over Palestinians means an alarming potential for abuse.