Victor Villas

mostly inactive, lemmy.ca is now too tainted with trolls from big instances we’re not willing to defederate

  • 0 Posts
  • 370 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 9th, 2023

help-circle



  • I think you might be jumping to conclusions on what I think and understand about what’s happening. I don’t think the term “zionist Palestine” is acceptable. I think it’s unacceptable for slightly different reasons than you do.

    I’m just saying that defending a jewish state is not necessarily at odds with Canadian secularism if the state in question is not Canada. The point is that defending secularism is totally orthogonal to the whole discussion. And yes, obviously if the Prime Minister is indifferent to a Jewish Israel, they should be indifferent to an Islamic Palestine. Just like they are already indifferent to Islamic Saudi Arabia - we don’t see the PM giving interviews saying that Saudi Arabia should become a secular state.



  • When i heard a zionist palestine i understand that he advocate for an ethnostate which is completely against canadian secularism.

    Maybe? I think one thing is defending Canadian secularism because it’s what we believe it’s right for us. Another thing is a Canadian official claiming that a different nation should be secular. I don’t think he’s in a position to do that, even if, like me, he believes that secularism is the better and most humanitarian choice.



  • International Law is just a set of agreements between sovereign powers

    And? What’s circular about it? Nations arise from self organizing societies, and these nations come together to define international laws. And then they define the right of self affirmation, and if the main powers recognize a state it is assigned the right to exist. And if the core powers of this world decide that a country does not matter, they’ll look the other way as those rights are bombed. It’s an emergent property of international politics.

    It doesn’t spring from seafoam, fully formed.

    No rights do, so I don’t understand where you’re going with this.


  • I guess he means a state that’s ok with illegal settlements and apartheid treatment.

    Why would he mean that?

    I think it’s more likely that he’s idealizing a future where Israel and Palestine forget their history and trauma and suddenly become best buddies who root for each other’s success because no one is interested in inflicting any more pain on the other. This is a pointless exercise in imagination but it’s probably what he’s going for with this statement.





  • Ah ok, “they” meant cannabis magazines.

    experts were ignored

    The experts were on the side of legalization, so they weren’t really ignored. If by experts you mean people who study public health policy and narcotrafficking.

    Now that the consequences are being seen, what are we going to do about it?

    What are these experts saying nowadays? What I see is a consensus that legalization was a pretty good move. There’s probably more we should do, but it’s stuff that builds on top of legalization.