It looks like but I am not. You can verify my identity :D Genocide is a strong word. There's no intention of Indonesian government to eradicate any people today. The last time we did commit genocide was 1965 during the communist purge. Guess what? Australia, UK, and USA blessed the act.
I recently found out that my schizophrenic mom committed suicide. This was the end of a childhood that was filled with abandonment, neglect, and abuse.
I recently started meditating and read "The Power of Now". I think without those two things I would be completely lost. It's still hard but I can feel myself getting stronger in the face of all this.
It's just the Earth's immune system finally kicking in. We need to stop fighting against nature and start working along with it. We cannot sustain ourselves without this planet and we're not going to find a replacement anytime soon.
The intelligence that makes a seed grow into a flower is the same intelligence that will protect the Earth from these insane beings who live on its surface.
This planet won't explode because of climate change. Don't be a drama queen. We may not be able to sustain 7 billion people, but why do there need to be billions of humans anyway? There's no good argument other then they are alive and killing humans is bad.
The planet is only responding to a stimulus and experiencing a sort of fever which will cause major shifts in human consciousness by inducing increased suffering and eventually mass-ego destruction.
It is at this stage that we will be able to work with the underlying intelligence of the Universe and reach our next stage of evolution.
The 'end of the world' only means the end of the mind-identified state of consciousness and a return to pure consciousness and the end of all suffering.
However, JRE hosted Alex Jones (conspiracy theorist "mass shooting victoms are crisis actors"), Gavin McInnes (white supremacist), and Milo yiannopolous (conservative provocateur who among other things supports pedophilia in the gay community.
Joe himself I can't comment on. He chooses to promote controversial and actively extreme people though. Sometimes he disagrees with those people, sometimes he doesn't.
So why keep saying that, when you aren't claiming it's extremist? If I said "a person who plays with their socks every evening, pretending it's the royal family, might also make such an argument", that would also be technically correct, but I doubt I could get away with "just making an observation, not saying that's describing anyone here, just that it might".
One is about extremist content. Extremist content can be interesting. Calling content interesting does not excuse its extremist nature.
There is a parallel conversation specifically about whether JRE is "extremist". The show is certainly interesting. It may also be extremist, but it being interesting doesn't make it not extremist. Because, as I previously stated, calling content interesting does not excuse its extremist nature.
I am not making any conclusions about JRE. I'm only saying that his show being interesting doesn't make it "not extremist". If you're trying to prove that he's not, you've got to do something else.
I also provided some things he has had on his show that probably are extremist content.
The main problem I have with discovery weekly now is that I primarily use Spotify for the gym but during the day I like to listen to a work playlist that mostly consists of non-vocal electronica.
So because I spend so much time listening to the work playlist it's began to influence the music on my Discover Weekly which I used to use to curate new hip-hop/metal music for the gym. It would be nice if Spotify gave you finer control over the type of music that hits your Discover Weekly because it really would suggest good music for me occasionally.
What about hunting for meat as a method to responsibly manage deer populations for example? Austin, Texas is having a huge wild boar population explosion because the county instituted a no-kill policy. Also, hunting is a big part of some cultures. Why does one person outside that culture get to decide that's wrong?
We pull two deer a year if we're lucky on my farm, we don't grip and grin but we relish in the ability to eat something that shares the land around us.
re: managing deer populations. There will always be some harm. We can strive for outcomes with the least harm.
Hunting is as not much the issue as the billion-plus animals we kill everyday for food. If more people had to look an animal in the eye as some hunters do, perhaps more people would connect the animal flesh they eat with the sentient beings the flesh came from.
