Do you believe that Goy/Goyim is similarly divisive? Or Kafir? And I’m not sure what books you’re reading, Pagan vs Christian Rome is a common distinction if the context hasn’t already made it obvious (such as here).
You know what else isn’t a compelling argument? This arduous attempt to argue that Christianity, the largest religion in the world and the very one that was adopted by Rome, is somehow inconsequential to the framing of what came before it. There is no logical argument that can be made to separate the two, for experts in the field will continue to use the term Pagan to refer to Pagan Rome no matter how much it hurts your feelings. It is simply the most objective and efficient method of separating it from the other. Unless of course you know of a better method that the historians do not? I’m sure they’d love to hear it.
It’s not a meaningless distinction, as it cements it rather firmly in a broad era within a specific context of thought, unlike referring to it as a Goy library. If you refer to it as a Goy library, that both brings it within a Judeo-Christian context and completely loses all meaning. However referring to it as Pagan you now are more informed of the era and schools of thought employed at the time.
Why would you assume lgbt materials are synonymous with breaking the rules of this site? It’s obvious they don’t, and realistically the website has rather sparse rules, so what could both break the site and be considered integral to your movement?
Dang has no problem with lgbt representation, so that couldn’t be the problem. So what could be rampant in the children/teen sections that is banned from this site but is simultaneously synonymous in your mind to the lgb movement?
So it’s hardly a hypothetical. As for balancing benefits and costs, slave labor intrinsically weakens the value of labor to any country that imports, so ideally the US would tariff goods that are labor intensive from countries that practice slave labor. In general, taking China off of the UN Human Rights Council would be a good show (for what little the UN does), and countries that oppose slavery should tariff the countries that do it as well. I don’t want a blood diamond on my wife‘s finger, why would I want a blood apple in my mouth?
As for Trump, I believe he does so in part, not from an ethics perspective however. I imagine he views slave labor as undercutting US labor value, just as illegal immigration does, and that it plays some part in wrestling manufacturing away from China.
> taking China off of the UN Human Rights Council would be a good show
That's not how legislatures work. It's like saying, 'take Senator Jones off the HHS committee because they are anti-vaccine' - the people in Senator Jones' state are entitled to representation with complete disregard for whether others like their Senator. Legislatures work with power as it is, not as how we want it to be.
> for what little the UN does
People on the right repeat it, but repetition doesn't make it fact. What do you know, specifically, about what the UN does (about human rights, if that's what you mean). The foundations for international law, which is powerful and effective though imperfect - like domestic law, but lacking the same enforcement mechanisms.
> [China and Mexico]
If everyone stopped doing all business with anyone in a country that does bad things, there would be no business or trade. Trade enriches the US, and has lifted billions out of poverty - including in China and Mexico.
Putting them back into poverty is just reckless. You need to come up with a better solution to your leaky roof than burning down the house.
My passion is robotics and engineering, and manufacturing covers both of those readily. While I have been blessed to have been born in the midwest where manufacturing is plentiful, the majority of the US is not so accessible for this work outside of a military base or airport.
Some people do enjoy assembly line work, and in fact I would say a large amount of people want a reliable job with minimal mental overhead. There’s a lot more industry wants though: welders, safety personell, repair techs, engineers, chemists, programmers, electricians, hydraulic specialists, all just depends on the company. A car manufacturer for instance prioritizes robotics, but a steel plant would prefer welders and machinists. Tons of opportunity for people to do the jobs they love for good pay and benefits, if we could get more manufacturing into the US.
> My passion is robotics and engineering, and manufacturing covers both of those readily.
That's completely different than working on an assembly line.
> Some people do enjoy assembly line work
Who? How many? I don't think I've ever heard it (though I'm sure someone must). Do you like it? Why don't you work on assembly line.
> would say a large amount of people want a reliable job with minimal mental overhead
That's an ignorant, condescending description of assembly line work. You'll need some evidence of this great mass of people, "I would say" isn't evidence.
> Tons of opportunity for people to do the jobs they love for good pay and benefits, if we could get more manufacturing into the US.
That's not the case - American companies can't find enough people with those skills as it is; there is no need for more of those jobs.
> That's completely different than working on an assembly line.
Manufacturing isn't defined by the assembly line, of course. Good data is hard to find, so take from it what you will, but the internet loosely suggests that only around 30% of manufacturing jobs are on the assembly line or adjacent to an assembly line. Anecdotal observation aligns with that, so I expect it is in the right ballpark.
> I don't think I've ever heard it
It is not so much the hot topic it once was, but when manufacturing was really in its decline you would frequently see in the news interviews with former manufacturing labour expressing such things as they lamented no longer being able to work in the industry.
It may not be sipping margaritas on the beach enjoyment, but on the spectrum it is unsurprising that many find it to be more enjoyable than other types of jobs. For as bad as you can imagine the assembly line to be, there is undoubtedly someone doing a job that is far worse.
> That's an ignorant, condescending description of assembly line work.
If these kinds of feelings are flooding your head, you have not considered the statement logically. That is not in good faith. Rationally, where do you find error in the statement?
> American companies can't find enough people with those skills as it is; there is no need for more of those jobs.
There is definitely an information problem. Manufacturing by and large happens in small town/rural areas (70% of it, according to the BLS), while people by and large live in large urban areas. The urban dwellers exclaim "Where are the jobs???" and the rural dwellers exclaim "Where are the workers???" It is a fascinating disconnect – something we see outside of manufacturing too.
You are right that this isn't apt to fix that problem. However, it is important to remember that the people calling for this aren't running complex mathematical models to ensure that moving manufacturing to the USA will be better for the world or whatever you think should be driving. They are simply in the mindset of: "I think I want to work in manufacturing. Give me that!" It is not a solution with well-considered grounding. It is an attempt to appease emotions.
reply