This is becoming a problem in latin america as well and you see people importing culture wars issues that are not really relevant to their local politics and further muddying the waters and distracting from the actual issues facing them
Colombian here - that phenomenon has been present since I can remember. Lots of upstart people here wanting or feeling like they're part of the culture of the USA just because. Go to r/Colombia and see how many of those Dunning-Kruger commenting balls of ignorance profess a stupid and weird hatred for communism and socialism, and they don't even know what those words mean, let alone tell them apart.
Another part of it is that the "international" section of our media is just about regurgitating whatever they say at CNN, FOX or whatever they have there, so the information almost always is arriving already biased (for example, they made here a big deal about the mishap of Biden's mental block at that debate, but they have never mentioned all the links between Trump and Epstein). Though I'd concede the phenomenon has aggravated due to social media, our hiperconnected reality and the increased amount of people moving there, legally or not.
Communist and socialist (by name) regimes in South America have caused more trouble for their own citizens than any leftist (by name) regime has caused for the world of capital. I don't think those posters necessarily absorbed that opinion from the US, in fact I think the US absorbed a lot of its own anticommunism from refugees. Historically it has been the business community advocating for détente and trade.
Absolutely. What troubles me in this discourse about "socialism" is that when it's brought up it's USSR and Cuba as opposed to Scandinavia. Northern Europe countries, despite the weather and high taxation rates, consistently occupy the better part of all kinds of lists trying to assess the level of happiness and social cohesion. Of course there are other reasons for it, such as a largely mono-ethnic population, but I doubt their vast social net hurts.
Because currently most socialist, or kind of socialist, countries globally have a higher quality of life than countries like the US.
Of course, what we need to acknowledge is that this shit is complicated and there's nobody that's one thing. There're no purely free market Capitalist nations because that would lead to crimes against humanity beyond our comprehension. There're also no fully communist nations anymore - when there were, they lead to crimes against humanity beyond our comprehension.
Everyone, everywhere, has a mixed system. Whereby the public sector exists, operates, and owns some stuff. Some public sectors own more than others. Those that own, say, education and healthcare SEEM to be doing better than those that don't. Their citizens are healthier, more educated, and seem to be doing better overall.
Not necessarily, for a small but very elucidativo example see the 'amigx' 'amigues' 'latinx' thing.
At least Brazil has had a significant amount of levantine immigration and a few refugees recently, so it's not out of place to sympathize with the Palestines wrt the incursion
The UK also has a problem with the right wing trying to import American "culture wars" issues for their own benefit, and it has nothing to do with Gaza — specifically, they bring in the US talking points about trans issues, using "woke" as the next step on the euphemism escalator now that "politically correct" has worn off, blaming millennials for everything, and a conspiracy theory about 15 minute cities (despite almost all of the UK being within 15 minutes of all the important things already, including the car-focused bits like Milton Keynes and small Welsh hamlets like Abermad).
Still, at least it means the Tory party completely forgot about wanting to bring back the hunting of foxes on horseback.
These all seem like really bad examples, panic over trans people has some very real, very British sources and 15 minute cities (and related concepts like LTNs and the ULEZ) is not something regularly discussed in the US.
Much better examples are US Southwest/Californian concerns around water scarcity being imported to places where water is not scarce, or similar concerns around emissions from electricity generation being imported to places that use high amounts of renewables/nuclear energy. Another example is civilian disarmament fear mongering switching from being about cheap handguns to "assault weapons" after DC v Heller.
The reaction to George Floyd in UK was quite strange, with "don't shoot" protests and "defund the police", when the UK police is not even armed and gets paid like half of their American counterparts.
Although the pushback against trans activist policy has come mostly from the right in the US (with some notable exceptions - Kara Dansky of Women's Declaration International, for example), it's a different story in the UK.
Around the mid-2010s, two events occurred in close succession: the Conservative government of the time proposed a policy of gender self-identification, and trans-identifying male prisoner Karen White was charged with sexually assaulting female prisoners while he was incarcerated in a women's prison. He was later convicted and it was uncovered that he'd been sent to the women's prison due to his "female" identity, despite having previous convictions of sexually assaulting and raping women.
The reaction from women was immense, organised on Mumsnet and other forums, mostly by left-wing feminists. After a lot of protest and publicity, the Tories dropped this policy. It was only later on they changed tack with policy proposals that shifted the balance away from trans activism, mostly to draw a line between them and Labour.
Cis women who rape women and cis men who rape men have always gone to prisons aligned with their gender identity. The issue with the normalization of rape in prison is unrelated, and should be solved without throwing trans people under the bus
This ideological argument was attempted back then too, but it's rejected by most people, who see the reality of the situation: men being locked up in women's prisons.
It should be no surprise to anyone that such a policy is very unpopular. Prisons are separated by sex for good reason.
Trying to pretend that some of these male criminals are women just because they said they are is not a particularly convincing argument.
Pretty interesting how being anti-prison rape is considered an ideological argument. But hats off to the real winners of this situation: the bisexual rapists who get to rape no matter what ideology their captors have, I guess.
Sociology of the society as a whole perhaps, but the first three letters of LGBT are not magically immune and the fourth letter is not magically capable.
And physiologically, someone whose outie was surgically modified into an innie is going to have just as many difficulties topping as a natural born woman.
I remember hearing about some boy who was sent to a prison for a minor offence, was raped, got HIV.
Regardless of your intent, which I cannot know because I am not a mind-reader, what you write here therefore still comes across as if it was ~"it's only bad when pre-op trans women do it".
Please refrain from deliberately misreading my comments.
Sexual assault and rape is terrible, no matter who the perpetrator or victim is. On this, I assume we agree.
The issue here is policy changes that remove one of the most important safeguarding measures to prevent this in the prison system: segregation by sex, so that all male inmates have no physical access to any female inmates.
The UK prisons are a total clownshow atm, recently there was a string of female prison guards that were jailed for having sex with (male) prisoners, filming it, and of course smuggling drugs, etc. Also Prisons have run out of space so many offenders were let out early.
Jesus, sounds like it's just the UK prisons trying to project their awful "justice" system on their own victims. I give the American justice system a lot of shit based on my personal experience with it, but it sounds like police in general are struggling with maintaining their representation of justice in the modern era, especially with how publicized it can get when they fail to deliver.
All government funded systems in the UK have spent the last 14 years struggling, because the UK government of that era tried to get over the recession caused by the global financial crisis in the late 00s by cutting absolutely everything they could possibly cut.
Israel is clearly the moral side of this conflict. This conflict began only because Hamas attacked and captured hostages. And it only continues because Hamas refuses to let them go.
I think people in other countries have trouble believing this motivation because they don't see how a country care this much about a regular citizen. But today, IDF recovered Farhan al-Qadi, and the whole country celebrates it. Can you imagine random people in US celebrating that Evan Gershkovich got release in the recent exchange with Russia? I doubt most american citizens even heard this name.
This whole thing will be over when hostages are back. Whoever captured and holds them is the devil who made all of this happen.
It seems like Hamas knew they could trigger an overwhelming response from Israel, and so they sacrificed innocent Palestinians to do it. They were correct, yeah? They wanted to make Israel look bad in the eyes of the world. And now we get pictures of dead Palestinian children. Israel may equate Palestinians with Hamas, but I don't think that is a universally held opinion in the rest of the world.
Does it? Israel provides them with food, water, electricity. Treats them in hospitals. Warns them about incoming strikes. I don't know any other country in the world which treats a hostile population like that in time of war. I also don't know a single other war with such a low civilian-to-combatant killed ratio. Usually it's somewhere around 9; in this war, the estimates are around 1-2.
This whole thing will be over when hostages are back. Whoever captured and holds them is the devil who made all of this happen.
There's the devil who made the hostage situation happen. And the other devil (and his allies) who made the calculated decision to allow Hamas to flourish for so long, and who apparently (now 11 months into this disaster) has never been particularly interested in resolving the hostage situation in the first place.
Both are ultimately responsible, and deeply immoral.
