When I Google search for bias in AP’s coverage of Israel-Palestine, all of the sites I encounter claim they have highlighted harm to the Palestinians more then threats to the Israelis. I feel like this isn’t what you’re talking about though? This level of bias (highlighting the concerns of one side over another) is still substantially less egregious than what you are accusing them of: just getting facts blatantly wrong/ opposite of the truth.

Look, without speaking Mandarin, traveling to Xinjiang, and having access to all the sites on question, I can’t really know what’s happening there. The best any of us can do is try to study through the sources available and pick out who we trust.

I trust the AP. As an organization, they trade in their reputation for quality and unbiased coverage. When I read pieces by them of extremely controversial events in the US, they give only facts. I am absolutely going to trust them more then am unsigned document, hosted by a site I don’t know, that largely engages in character assassination of names I don’t even recognize.

Listening to A People’s History of the United States has been a revelation.

I think planning and posturing for their attack on Taiwan can still be counted as military adventurism.

The AP is about as unbiased as you can get: https://apnews.com/article/269b3de1af34e17c1941a514f78d764C

And Lemmy is also full of propaganda. That commenter didn’t even cite a source.

Your entire response is just Whataboutism. You’re still simping for the man, just the Chinese man instead of the American one.

Not when their friends in The Philippines or Israel are doing it.

In truth I don’t know anything about the government in the Philippines right now; if they are running camps then there is a shameful lack of media coverage about it.

But vastly more people in the US are horrified by the plight of the Palestinians than that of the Uyghurs, primarily because they feel at least indirectly responsible for it. But the people calling out the mistreatment of the Uyghurs aren’t silent about the Palestinians.

As far as the Chinese posture towards Taiwan, we have intelligence and data documenting their military buildup for at least a decade. They are building amphibious assault ships (https://youtu.be/DtrGMsGsZiU) and verbally making public statements about reunification.

I don’t think we should expect China to do a bunch of random piddle-farting around with arbitrary bombing like US policy under Trump. Mainly because that is not at all what their consolidation of authority in Hong Kong looked like, but also because they’re not fucking dumbasses like Trump.

How are these two policies equivalent?

I’m arguing against the premise of making the argument based on equating the two countries. The circumstances/ policies don’t have to be different or the same to evaluate them.

Also, your assertion of what the Chinese government is doing in Xinjiang might well be true, but what people/ the West take issue with is the rounding up of dissidents, sending them to reeducation camps, and forcibly sterilizing some of them.

On what planet is policing your own sovereign >territory against domestic insurgency “military >adventurism”?

As far as the Chinese government goes, this part refers to taking Taiwan by force. Literally only the Chinese government would refer to Taiwan as their ‘sovereign territory’.

Your logic is shit.

Everyone is agreeing with your bashing of the US, which is fine, I agree with that part.

But just because the United States is creating/ allowing internment camps and death camps doesn’t mean it’s okay for the Chinese to do it to the Uygurs. Just because the US is stupidly throwing our military weight around doesn’t make it okay for China to do it, especially not to one of the highest rated democracies in the world.

Is your premise that suppression of minorities and military adventurism is par for the course so there’s no use criticizing it?

Keeping the area of grass you play in trimmed short and clear is usually enough to keep the ticks at bay without spraying.

Suburbs/ exhurbs in Maryland here. We still have them, but we don’t rake our leaves at all, and I’ve gotten fairly into native gardening. Maryland in general has also made a concerted effort to preserve 30% of it’s land from development though.

The US is lying through their teeth about Iran, but Iran is hardly a communist government. They’re a theocratic authoritarian regime. There is no diversification of power in their government. Roles and responsibilities may be delegated out, but ultimate authority rests with the Ayatollah.

If the men are also covering their hair (which is true of some middle eastern societies like the Berber people, traditional Qatari clothing, traditional Saudi clothing, etc, and Sikhs), then it’s not specifically ostracizing women in a society. But that is not true of traditional Muslim face coverings for women. And while I agree that there are plenty of sexist practices in Western society meant to hold women in their place, that hardly excuses the sexism practiced in much (not all) of modern Islam. Two things can be wrong.

Embrace of a belief system that teaches that women should have less rights and less agency is anti-feminist, even if that embrace is of a feminist’s choosing.

To be clear, I think the homes being made fun of in the original picture were supposed to be Western homes. They certainly look like many subdivisions in the US.

I haven’t actually seen propaganda about Soviet housing. The pictures you posted just look like the poorer areas of any western city. We stayed in La Mina (on accident) when we visited Barcelona. Your pictures look better than La Mina!

I don’t know about Tokyo or what the options really are for raising kids in Japan. But I think (I’ll join you here with spewing opinion/ conjecture everywhere) in the US a lot of people intentionally leave cities once they decide to have kids. When you are a young professional in your 20s, it’s still very popular to live in dense urban centers, but then as you get married and start having kids, the vast majority of people move out to the suburbs or more rural areas. Now, obviously this is a privileged class of people, and maybe there are different trends in socioeconomic classes above and below them. And perhaps they move out of the city for other reasons (the price of housing, the quality of schools, etc), but I think access to nature also plays a part. But I say this as a girl scout troop leader, so I’m definitely biased.

On the one hand, I guess it’s a more efficient packing of people into urban areas than having large green spaces. On the other hand, it’s fucking depressing, and I think kids miss something in childhood without psuedo wild spaces to go explore alone.

I graduated high school the year you were born. I agree with everything you said. I feel like this was written by an older millennial still self-deluding themselves about being in the olds now.

I tried to reference my husband’s penis as “our penis” to him, and he was all “Absolutely not.”

I was like, “We only have the one between us! We have to share!”

He was unmoved.