You ignored most of what I said, cherry-picked things, and even then had to leave out context and use vague language to make your argument seem anything less than insane.

The rise of the Nazis before WW2 was definitely partly caused by the imposition of the allies after WW1.

You mean economic sanctions? Around the same time that Germany was suffering from those economic sanctions and Hitler was rising to power, the world was going through The Great Depression, and by the time Hitler rose to power Germany’s economy was already improving. And even you are aware enough to use the word “partially” in that sentence. More on this towards the end (*).

They write the history books after all.

That’s an argument made by people who don’t know history and have nothing to back their claims. I really would not be shocked if you tried to claim the Holocaust wasn’t real, next.

They still killed about 8% of the total German population during WW2.

I’m not gonna bother to check that number because 8% of the population of a country being killed during a war is not a genocide, and not even an inherent attempt at one. What the Nazis did to the Jews, and what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians, that is genocide. Push them away from where they live, close them off in ghetto’s or walled compounds, and slowly kill them off. That’s how the Holocaust started too, before they moved to concentration camps and gas chambers.

Almost 50% of German casualties during WW2 were civilians…

Firstly: According to this, about 2.25M civilians were killed during expulsions, and 500K Germans were killed by strategic bombing, but it does not specify how many are civilian. Even if we assume 100% of those are civilian and say the number of civilians casualties is 2.75M, that still only makes up 39% of the German death toll. That “almost” is certainly doing a lot of work there, for someone complaining about reality.

Secondly: How many civilians do you think make up the Palestinian death toll when they indiscriminately (and sometimes purposefully) bomb civilian areas? Israel has purposefully bombed civilian targets; 4 in 10 killed in Gaza are children; just in 2023 22K Palestinians were killed.

Finally: That still doesn’t cover the important part you ignored, which is that no one is defending the bombing of German civilians during WW2, (*) and most people acknowledge the sanctions on Germany after WW1 were too harsh. Meanwhile, you are actively defending the ongoing killing of innocent civilians, and the genocide that has been ongoing for decades. Even if (and this is a giant fucking if) you were right in your comparison, you are merely arguing against yourself, because most people are not okay with any of those things.

You are somehow both (1): trying to equate Nazi Germany to Palestine, when Israel is the one doing to Palestinians what Nazi Germany was doing to the Jews, and (2): at the same time, purposefully or not, trying to victimize and justify the fucking Nazis.

I’m pretty sure we’re not far from this conversation straying into Holocaust denial, either by you or someone else coming in here, so I’m leaving this convo permanently. I hope neither you nor your loved one ever get bombed because of people living in your general area; peace.

Firstly, the first and only rule of the instance you are commenting on is “be nice”, but you couldn’t even do that for one comment. Why are you even here? It’s like going to a place whose sole purpose is having somewhere where there isn’t rubbish on the floor, and throwing something on the ground as soon as you set foot in the area.

Secondly,

This situation and WW2 are not remotely the same thing. And no historian would call what the allies did to the Germans “genocide”, because it wasn’t. What Israel is doing has been. And it will be remembered as such. Just some differences:

• They don’t hold even remotely the same kind of power and influence over the people in their region. The Nazis were given power through legal elections, Hamas was not. And Hamas is only in control in Gaza, not in the West Bank, where Palestinians still suffer at the hands of Israel.

• The existence of Hamas is a direct consequence of what Israel has been doing for several decades; this conflict did not just start last year. There was not an ongoing genocide of Germans before WW2, and it’s not how the Nazis came about.

• WW2 was a war being fought between mainly armed soldiers, and people do not defend or support the bombing and killing of civilian targets, nor were they the primary targets. Israel has bombed and killed Palestinians indiscriminately, and that is what you are defending.

All those are fine suggestions, but a “free with ads” option isn’t that bad either; the real problem isn’t the ads themselves. The real problem is how intrusive the ads are, how many of them there are, as well as much information they (and YouTube) collect on you. Plus, in this case, the company in question isn’t exactly a small company who is financially struggling. It’s the classic capitalist problem of “infinite growth”, where your profits have to be constantly increasing.

But there’s nothing inherently wrong about the idea of having ads, just like there’s nothing inherently wrong about youtubers having sponsors.

I do agree I am matching with the wrong kind of women, I just don’t know what to change haha.

My swiping criteria are basically the same as yours; however, instead of seeing a lot of copy paste jokes, I see a lot of profiles that are just an Instagram handle. I’d say easily over 3/4 of profiles I see are empty, and a lot of the others only have an Instagram handle.

I’ve had good matches and conversations before, and the women I meet outside dating apps are a lot better to talk to, so I know it’s just bad luck; but knowing that doesn’t stop it being frustrating after several matches in a row where I have to carry the conversation, and that’s after swiping through hundreds of empty or bad profiles between each.

So after a while of all that, I decided to take a break. Maybe when/if I return, I’ll have a new look at my profile, see if anything can be improved or if there’s something that’s giving a wrong idea.

Maybe it’s just my experience, but this just does not work. Maybe it’s because I’m asking “get to know you questions” and perhaps those should be reserved for dates; but the one time I decided to start by arranging a date, I got the answer “I would prefer if we got to know each other better here first” - which I agree with, by the way. So I do end up asking “get to know you questions”, but the women I’ve matched with don’t even try to put effort into the conversation.

To demonstrate what I mean by that, here’s a fictional representation of an actual conversation I’ve had (the content is fictional, but the structure and tone is real):

in her profile, she says she likes movies, so maybe I’ll ask about that

Me: Hey! So, what was the last movie you watched?

Her: Oppenheimer

Me: Cool, I went to see it last week! What did you think of it?

Her: It’s good

ffs, it’s always like this. fuck it, instead of asking another question, I’ll just answer my own question and make force her to come up with something to say

Me: [Give some of my thoughts on the movie]

Her: Ok

I never replied to her “Ok”, and she never said anything else. Most conversations follow along the same lines: me asking questions and getting the shortest answer back with no question turned my way.

This might make me sound horrible, but I had to stop using dating apps because it was beginning to give me a horrible view of women.

There have been examples of anarchy working. Unfortunately, most of the ones I know of were around during World War 2 and got crushed between 2 larger opponents, or backstabbed by one of them.

• Anarchists - and other socialists in Catalonia - during the Spanish Civil War, were stuck between the fascists and the republicans (Soviets), sided with the Soviets and ended up being betrayed. Homage to Catalonia by Orwell is a good book about the civil war and the anarchists.

• Korean People’s Association in Manchuria were destroyed by Japan a few years before WW2 during a war between China and Japan IIRC, and apparently some of its leaders were also killed by “Korean communists” (the same ones that ended up forming North Korea).

• The Black Army of Ukraine fought the Red and White armies at separate times; one time they joined the Red Army against the White Army, and were betrayed.

You might have noticed a pattern there, which is also why a lot of anarchists are not found of Marxist-Leninists or Stalinists.

A “Democrat” is a member of the “Democratic Party” of the USA, it is not a political ideology in itself. Democrats are usually economic Liberals and don’t care that much about workers or the environment, but some are Social Democrats (Bernie Sanders). They are also usually socially progressive.

The Republican Party is also composed mainly of economic liberals; however, they are typically socially conservative.

There is such a thing as a “Libertarian Socialist”, which seems to be what you are looking for. A lot of Libertarian Socialists also just call themselves “anarchists”; and “anarchism” essentially just means something like “anti-authority” or “anti-hierarchy”.

If you want to maybe explore it a bit:

• Homage to Catalonia is a book written by George Orwell where he tells of his time in Spain fighting alongside the anarchists and socialists in Spain (against the fascists supported by Hitler and Mussolini, and against the republicans backed by Stalin).

• The Dispossessed written by Ursula K. Le Guin; it’s a sci-fi story about a society living on a moon, who are anti-capitalists and supposedly anarchists (whether they are anarchists or not is one of the focus points of the story).

If you just want to read theory instead, you can also search for Pyotr Kropotkin, and Emma Goldberg.

I honestly don’t understand why this is so controversial in (what I perceive to be) a left of Liberal space. I’ve always seen Affirmative Action as the embodiment of the old “Conservative vs Liberal” meme:

Conservative: Fuck workers and poor people!

Liberals: Fuck workers and poor people! #BLM 🏳‍🌈

A though experiment:

A company/university is choosing one from two candidates, named A and B, who are from two different races.

With Affirmative Action: Person A gets the spot.

Without Affirmative Action: Person B gets the spot.

What changed?

Just the demographics. In both cases, one person is still denied a job/education. Instead of fixing the problems with unemployment and lack of education, we just evenly distributed those problems across different races.

In essence, Affirmative Action just tries to hide the problem instead of fixing it; like trying to put a band-aid on cancer.

On a semi related note: race is not even a scientific concept; it is merely a social construct. One which we would do well to get rid of. But among many things, Affirmative Action is one that helps to reinforce it.