While continuing to tap new oil fields and failing to make sufficient progress. Also, this one isn't about climate, but healthy and sustainable food. Connected issues, but still.
All that aside, to come back to the somewhat dodged question, what would make things go faster?
This is not the way to go about that
What is your way to go about that?
If you aren't doing anything, what way(s) would you deem acceptable? If you know acceptable ways, why aren't you following through? Honest if-questions, not meant as assumptions.
Healthy and sustainable food seems to be a decent goal. People should be able to get behind this. So if all the disagreement is about the right approach, where are the people with the right approach, and where are all the people voicing their concern about art supporting them?
Please help me out. It feels as if people are more concerned about pieces of art which they may never see, than about healthy food, the climate, or other major issues which affect everyone.
I get why it puts people off, these points exist. I just wonder what the "right" alternative to these "wrong" approaches is, and wether the critics walk the talk.
Not sure what country you had in mind. Some do have a "no negotiation" stance: https://www.chathamhouse.org/2022/01/we-do-not-negotiate-terrorists-why. I also had the impression it was a widely accepted idea by the general population.
Arguments can be made either way which decision is at their people's expense.
So I understand your area/bubble never favored "no negotiation", but then I'm not talking about your area/bubble. My question was about the change in attitude.
Has the general consensus changed about how to deal with hostage takers? I think it was "don't negotiate with terrorists" not long ago. Very tough for the relatives, but meant to prevent more harm in the future, by spoiling the plans of the terrorists.
When reading reports and comments about the Israeli hostages in Gaza, I get a different impression. Why is that, what is different?
Are there no concerns for encouraging more hostage taking this time?
More than 100k across Germany?
AFAIK it was 160k in Hamburg alone.
An attempt to reconcile both views by comparing it to a structural collapse of, let's say, a bridge.
In the end, it collapses. Before that, the cracks begin to show. Before that, invisible micro-cracks form. Before that, pressure exceeds limits.
Now, at which point in this story does "collapse happen"? Some use this to refer to the actual collapse, after the cracks began to show.
But since collapse is inevitable after too many micro-cracks have formed (or maybe even earlier, since those are already symptoms of an underlying cause), some refer to this long, unspectacular build-up phase as "collapse happens".
I'm neither an economist nor a civil engineer. Bridges are complex, economies even more so. I still think these two views explain how the same term can refer to different things, or different phases of the same thing.
As phrased in a recent anti-union campaign by Amazon: Watch out, your co-workers might be "vulnerable to organizing".
Distinguishing that from just an algorithm
How do you distinguish intelligence from just an algorithm, for example our own?
I assume this was nothing more but a ~~wild assumption on thin ice~~ personal belief.
Edit: Next downvotee please enlighten mee. How do you distinguish the two?
Hamas never had a chance against IDF in a military clash. They try to erode international support for Israel instead, by dragging the giant into a long and dirty fight.
They also need to take care about their domestic support. In both cases, it is good for Hamas when IDF does cruel things.
So the strategic goal of continued fighting is to show everyone, abroad and at home, how evil Israel is, to stay in power.
Thanks for your nuanced contrapoints in this thread. I cannot judge wether it's true, but I appreciate a different perspective.
Nice! The market and climate need clear signals like that.