Sometimes, the majority is false because it only includes those with power. Sometimes the majority is not just wrong but actively selfish and maybe just a little evil.
Good point. I mean, look at the Australian referendum on giving Indigenous people a voice in that country.
If human rights were based on majority rule we'd still have slavery.
We bear witness. But CBC News does not itself designate specific groups as terrorists, or specific acts as terrorism, regardless of the region or the events, because these words are so loaded with meaning, politics and emotion that they can end up being impediments to our journalism.
Surely there are objective examples that require no attribution though. The terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center is a good example.
As well, I don't think there's any argument that the Hamas attack on Israel could be anything other than a terrorist attack (without attribution) because they targeted civilians with the specific intent to kidnap. It wasn't a country invading another country, or a case of a resistance force pushing out an occupier. Had Hamas attacked only military targets only the hard liners would call it a terrorist attack. But what Hamas committed was terrorist atrocities.
On the flip side, one could argue that Israel's retaliations are state-sanctioned reprisals that ostensibly act as a means of terror to the Palestinian population. However, since Israel as a nation is condoning the military action I don't think it could strictly be said it's terrorism.
I think the bizarre thing is that unions are negotiating 3% wage increases and it's like.... that's below inflation.
It's a shame the pole won't be in Scotland where it could serve as an education piece both about colonialism and Indigenous culture in British Columbia, but I do understand the desire from the Nisga'a to bring back something they feel belongs to their Nation.
High cost of living, unsustainable gas prices, runaway climate change, housing crisis, stagnant wages.
I'm sure the right wingers will be the perfect solution to these problems.
Milk used to come in glass bottles
I don't want more glass (deposit and all) unless they go back to milkmen delivering it and taking away the empties. And even then, that wouldn't work because of the delivery costs.
I have so much glass I have to take to the recycling depot and it's not worth your time and gasoline to do it.
I agree it's not the supermarkets' fault but it's an industry problem. Why is everything wrapped in plastic? Even bananas and cucumbers and things that don't need plastic?
One thing we could do is have refillable containers and just reuse them! Why are bulk aisles just a thing for nuts and grains? Why can't we come and fill up milk or shampoo or other things in our refillables?
Anyway, the bigger story is that there are too many humans. We don't have a plastics problem, we have a human overpopulation problem.
Colonel Nicholson: Yes, Clipton. I understand, truly. But don't you see it's a matter of principle? If we give in now, there will be no end to it. No!
Major Clipton: Sir, we're lost in the jungle, a thousand miles from anywhere. We're under the heel of a man who will stop at nothing to get his way. Principle? No one will know or care what happens to us! Give in, sir! Please!
I guess she thought she'd win like Nicholson.
Only the capitalists care
I'm not sure what a solution is but I do think that we should encourage people to not have children, stop handing out the baby bonus, and reduce immigration. I feel these moves can provide a (non-genocidal) way to relieving the pressures of human overpopulation. For example, Japan is doing great work in reducing their population, a trend that will reduce the strain of housing and services in that country.
We shouldn't but here we are.
What else can we do?
By the way, news companies are also run by maniacs.
Send death threats, get locked up. Seems to make sense.