Footage from Israel shows dozens of Palestinians being tightly packed and transported into custody in a garbage collection vehicle.

Perhaps an unpopular opinion, but if I was Peter Magyar, I would think long and hard about what to get out of the EU for utilising his mandate to get EU policy priorities completed.

After all, he now has the mandate, but he also has to prove to the Hungarian people that his brand works better.

I don't care about any of the American political dramas. They can enjoy that stuff themselves.

But I really love the commitment to the bit by including biblically accurate F-22s.

Enöigt mig kan man inte säga att Iran vann. De är ju trots allt i ett mycket mer skört läge än de var innan konflikten och deras relation med omgivningen är ännu värre än tidigare. Däremot skulle jag säga att USA defintivt förlorade.

Haha. Yeah well there you go, I guess. The proof of concept will be if politicians like Mamdani can make it work. My opinion is that it will, but only time will tell.

2/2 necessarily "true".

What this means in terms of my original point is that you need to accept that people feel things rather than think things and have to appeal to feelings in a better way without explaining away those feelings with frankly (sometimes) insulting rationalisations.

I think of issues as separate from political thinking in the vast majority of an electorate. We feel something as a result of being shown or told something, and that is pretty much the honest reaction there. If you probe to justify that feeling, you start getting rationalisations that aren't 1/2

Regardless, it is a hard example to give any opinion on what to do better since Russia's information landscape is so heavily censored and directed it doesn't really matter much what the struggling liberals do regarding the topic of the day.

I think that paints one side of a picture - i.e. what non-liberals are doing with the information environment. That doesn't change what people "feel" about these things necessarily. It just activates that emotion.

I think we can talk about probable outcomes in terms of individual states and how they see their own security outlook as well as what they are likely to learn from this frankly stupid war they find themselves in. But the overall dynamic is kind of a moot point as there isn't even a state goal atm.

Most wars have goals. This one is unique in that you have the capabilities of a super power being used for no discernible purpose. What are we supposed to make of that really?

Emotion comes first (reacting to stimulus) and then needs to be remidied or answered in some way to gain satisfaction. That is, at least, how I see it.

I think my concept of collective human emotion is that it is mostly inate and stagnant. It is affected by stimulus but the underlying assumption that I make is that those "isms" are us trying to make concrete emotions and concepts that don't really follow a clear discernible logic.

In a way, I feel like I am seeing the dying body of liberalism protesting its unjust end, but avoiding entirely to find a way to survive.

Why protest if you aren't even willing to try to figure out what went wrong?

In a populist information environment, I still see the same kind of insulting rhetoric ignoring emotionally impressive arguments without even an attempt at figuring out why those feelings are so strong or how to appeal to them in a constructive way.

If you believe in a certain worldview, you need to accept that it might be framed very differently by a general public that you might not fit into - whether you believe that or not. Then you need to figure out how to respond to that in a way that will convince and not insult those you want on-side.

This website is heavily American, so I guess you might read this as a critique of U.S. political culture, but the story is similar worldwide.

If people are bothered by something like "too many immigrants" or "this drag queen is talking to my kids", you need to figure out a response to that.

Emotions matter, and people feel something when they see things that threaten their worldview. I have always believed that this needs to be recognised (withoit necessarily being accepted) far more than it is by people who supposedly are interested in the popular will.

Politicians of all stripes often get criticised for being too populist. That they don't have values of their own, but only mimic that of their perceived constituents.

I get why people dislike this, but seeing liberals especially ignore what "the people" want over and over again is more annoying imo

Imagine deciding to be a major non-NATO partner and realise that even NATO membership itself seems to matter nothing to the U.S. whom now only see their own interests in absolute terms.

The funniest thing for me is seeing all the non-NATO allies in the region be pumelled by the Iranian countermeasures and have basiclally no say in how much suffering they have to bear in a war they ultimately did not want. Not exactly a great outcome for partnership with the U.S.

Imagine the amount of money and blood spent by the U.S. over time to get this worldwide hegemony over several decades, and then having the least historically literate person ever just absolutely waste it all in the beginning of one term.

Me: enjoying a moderately accessible thing that people also have access to in China (and everywhere else).

"You found me during a very Chinese time of my life"

The more random shocks to the international system (Let's say, Trump really wants to invade Malaysia for vital Laksa supplies), the better and cheaper renewables will get.

In effect - the more unstable the world gets, the more non-central-grid renewables become attractive alternatives. Even if oil prices stabilise, the momentum is with this who want safety in an increasingly volatile energy market.

It has also meant that there is massive private competition for those home-centered technologies and they are rapidly getting better and cheaper. Not to mention this makes them far more reliable when it comes to shocks to globql energy supplies.

The good thing about most central governments shunning renewables' potential is that it has forced a small-print technology sector where you often buy in your own potential to generate power. You don't need the central grid as much and that makes things attractive for people in unstable states.

I have seen first-hand how energy instability and poor governance has led to a boom in renewable energy production in Iraq. Most people I know now have solar panels and are planning on installing windmills and whatever else available to not rely on the central grid.

I don't know about the younger people on here, but I still remember a conversation many years ago with a professor where he was confident that renewable energy availability would be hampered for the simple reason that fossil fuels are plentiful and cheap.

He was both right and wrong.

Niche post Nick. Appreciate it.