Let’s leave the role of the US alone for now. I was just sharing my perspective in context or recent developments.

I can see how the term degeneracy could be seen as loaded in the US context.

But then my question would be, how would you describe Rogan’s behaviour and the fact that this particular act had zero impact on Rogan’s popularity? One could say that at the very least his following (and he is one of the largest media personalities in his home country) is tolerant of such acts.

I would even go as far as saying that in other cultures even conservatives would share my views about the regressive nature of Rogan’s behaviour and the tolerance of his following for such antics.

I started reading the article and I was curious what the context was and who was involved.

I was shocked to hear that it was Douglas Murray who got into a conflict with Rogan. Murray out of all people (I am aware of his chauvinism due to some other stuff).

What really struck me about this article was this:

Nine days and five shows later, Rogan hosted Tim Dillon, another anti-woke comic, and together they impersonated Murray’s voice like middle schoolers at a sleepover. (“You haven’t beeeeen?”)

I am not American, but I have lived there and travelled extensively. I have close friends who live there (both locals and immigrants from a very young age).

I would always defend the US as a force for good in the democratic world (albeit a very flawed one) and highlight that compared to other major powers (russia, china), the US has been involved in a very good outcomes (post WW2 Germany/Japan, Poland and the Baltic nations after the breakup of the USSR).

With the reelection of Trump, I am starting to wonder if this well ever be possible again (from my perspective Trump is a symptom, not a cause).

But Rogan’s behaviour is an example of degeneracy. True degeneracy. Not degenerate as a random insult or say the term “degenerate gambler”, but the actual term like in the dictionary. A regressive, undesirable behaviour that is an affront to the development of human society. And this is perhaps the largest media personality in the US.

It’s going to be very difficult for sane Americans to root out such degeneracy. And there are unfortunately (in my opinion) certain negative elements of American culture that are going to reinforce such behaviour. It will require novel approaches that I don’t believe Americans have the capability to explore (I hope I am wrong).

Agreed, but do you really need knowledge of political philosophy to do that?

The impression I got from living in the US is that it’s not so much a problem with identification, but more like a desire to avoid rather uncomfortable topics.

I don’t know, maybe I just don’t get it. I will admit that I could be wrong, I am just thinking out loud based on my experiences. 😀

See, I don’t you need know anything about political philosophy to understand how oligarchs function and to well, identify oligarchs.

It’s almost like she is insulting her fellow citizens.

The implication that I see (based on her statement) is that other people in her country lack the capability to comprehend the notion of oligarchy or they are too corrupt themselves to support anti-corruption reform.

Willingness to keep protesting and commitment does seem to be critical as per successful global examples.

I wonder what our Revolution of Dignity would fall under.

At the peak, I believe Kyiv alone had 500K protesters (with many regional centres also being major protest hotspots). But we also had armed rebellion closer to the presidential office in Feb 2014.

In Chenoweth’s data set, it was only once the nonviolent protests had achieved that 3.5% threshold of active engagement that success seemed to be guaranteed – and raising even that level of support is no mean feat. In the UK it would amount to 2.3 million people actively engaging in a movement (roughly twice the size of Birmingham, the UK’s second largest city); in the US, it would involve 11 million citizens – more than the total population of New York City.

A quick search suggests US has twice achieved the 3.5% threshold, the record being in 2020 with the George Floyd protests (15M to 25M) and Earth Day in 1970 with 20M protesters (assuming this was the biggest US protest in recent history on a population adjusted level).

Perhaps the difference relative to other countries was that Americans didn’t explicitly protest for removal of the existing regime.

I strongly disagree (btw I am not downvoting you). Let me try and explain; I am going to go on a bit of a tangent, but it’s all relevant to our discussion.

I am from Ukraine. I have exposure to the local LGBT community and generally I try to stay informed on social and governmental attitudes to LGBT rights in Ukraine.

I interact with queer Ukrainians (not trans Ukrainians though) who don’t speak English and aren’t exposed to the arguments and polemics inherent to English-language debates on the topic at hand (they have their own interests and priorities that reflect local realities).

My argument is that the discussion around the nature of sex is irrelevant to promoting transphobia. The far right (English-language or otherwise) will find something else to latch on to. I would even go as far as saying that the polemics of transphobia, in say the US, are largely defined by the propaganda strategies used by local oligarchs to maintain their economic power and enable corruption. On a certain level, the only reason why the American far right is even involved in transphobia, is because they are exposed to transphobic propaganda polemics pushed by local criminal/oligarch groupings. This is not unique to the US.

I would also argue that many in the Ukrainian LGBT community are more likely to agree with my interpretation than what you are arguing for (keep in mind that discussions around the extent to which sex is binary is not something that Ukrainian homophobes/transphobes engage in). Economic issues, the role of corruption, russian imperialism are far more important for the local LGBT community in shaping their worldview.

Now while I have exposure to the Ukrainian LGBT community, I don’t have any trans friends, so I am less confident about making statements regarding the attitudes of the Ukrainian trans community.

That being said, how do you know that Ukrainian trans folks (e.g. people who don’t speak English) completely agree with your interpretation on the interplay of “sex discussions” and transphobia?

Forget Ukraine, what about say Pakistan or India or Uzbekistan?

You claim that I want “purity of ideas” and an easy and neat framework. I could argue the same for you!

You are welcome to disagree with me and say I am wrong in my understanding of the binary nature of sex. It is what is. I am just trying to show you that my worldview has a level of nuance and it’s not a mere matter of wanting “neat solutions” while ignoring the weaponization of this discussion by the English-speaking far right.

Let me take a step back for a second.

We are not discussing the strategies used by the far right to demonize trans folk (or anyone else). We are discussing something completely different that has no bearing on the strategies used by the far right. What will me moving away from what you call “my ideal” change in this world?

Let’s say we have some deus ex machina method to close the discussion around the nature of sex and make everyone believe that sex is a spectrum.

Do you really think this will magically get rid of transphobia? I would even go as far as saying a lot of the people who claim to be concerned about “trans issues” don’t actually care about them and they are simply being led by oligarch propaganda. And oligarch propaganda will leverage anything that they think will have an impact.

So how will me rejecting my understanding of genetic bio-chemical reproduction (as is proven by hundreds of millions of years of life on earth and the a reproductive framework that span millions of species) change anything?

Do you see what I am getting at?

I strongly disagree. I am only happy for people to be the best version of themselves and to feel comfortable in their skin.

Changes in legal or morphological sex is not relevant. This is not what we are discussing.

I already mentioned that there are edge cases. Edge cases do not discredit foundational frameworks that define reality.

The bio-chemistry of terrestrial life is built upon a binary sex framework. This has been true for hundreds of millions of years. There is no such things as a triple helix or quadruple helix in terms of reproduction. Even trees and plants have a binary sex.

You claim that this is something I want to be true. I would argue the same (on a vice versa basis) for you and that you’re framing the discussion using irrelevant examples (how is a morphological change in sex even relevant to what we are discussing).

It’s far closer to a binary distribution than a bi-modal distribution. You can be pedantic, but that’s not a real arguement. I admitted there are edge cases.

This is not tied to pure outcomes and is derived from actual earth bio-chemistry.

There is no triple helix or quadruple helix as a foundational system of genetic bio-chemical reproduction.

When you flip a coin, there is a chance that it will land on the side, yet we still use a coin flip for a 50:50 probability scenario because it is close enough.

With all due respect, sex is not a spectrum.

It’s a clearly a binary. Yes, there are many exceptions and edge cases, but they are all based around a universal binary biological structure.

You don’t have say three distinct sexes required for reproduction outside of sci-fi. It is a binary with some edge cases and variations in how exactly the two parts of the binary interact.

Point 1 and 2 really need to be addressed.

It would be so much better if lemmy wasn’t developed by genocide white-washing tankies.

In the interview, Merkel stated that Vladimir Putin, at the beginning of his presidency, had no intention of attacking Ukraine, and his plan gradually took shape over the years, partly due to the behaviour of the West.

Did he also have no intention of continuing to occupy Georgia and Moldova and the West forced him to continue the occupation and then invade Georgia in 2008?

This is not an act of war and no one sees it this way.

An act of war is ballistic missiles falling on your cities and tanks rolling in. It’s honestly pathetic of you to trivialize this.

You probably recognize this on same level, but you see too self-absorbed to be willing to publicly admit this.

You should stick to ruminations about how “Poles and Ukrainian are unfit” and “they are like the russians, anyway!” I think we will both agree that this is a good reflection of your character.

I am done here.

Because you were saying that “Poland and Ukraine are not ready for EU”, yet you don’t take the same maximalist, hyper critical attitude to the Germany leadership.

Did I not say bombing NS was a mistake?

I am just pointing out you have no right to pretend to be noble when you’re own leadership de defacto supported and enabled russian imperialism.

What exactly do you want me to say?

No I don’t support torturing russian POWs. I agree with you that bombing NS was a bad idea. I disagree with you that it was “EU infrastructure”, it was owned by the russians I believe and Germany explicitly told other EU members to “bugger off” with their concerns.

What bothers me is your moralizing attitude. The last two German leader were some of the biggest enablers of russian genocidal imperialism in the last ~30 years. There is nothing to discuss with Schroeder. Merkel as a bit sneaky. Nominally she said she opposed it, but all her actions de facto always supported russian imperialism.

And then you come along saying “Poland and Ukraine” shouldn’t be in the EU because they don’t uphold moral standards. You don’t see how this could be seen as hypocritical!?

So you would be OK with Ukraine and Poland building a Russian pipeline if didn’t go directly to the newly annexed Putlergrad oblast? If the pipeline went to Austria or Czechia following the annexation of Putlergrad oblast, would this fundamentally change how you would view Ukraine/Poland’s involvement in the construction of the said pipeline?

I am not necessarily arguing you’re wrong or trying to convince you of anything. I am just trying to show you how it looks from the other side.

I see where you are coming from, but I think this is not comparable.

Imagine if russia invaded Germany. Took over Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (renaming it to Putlergrad oblast), banned German and forced everyone to speak russian and get russian citizenship. In the mean-time Ukraine and Poland would build a pipeline to the newly annexed Putlergrad oblast. How would you feel then?