Between them and Rolling Stone the last few years…
“Well guys, looks like the grey lady is doing a 1935 again, so Jackson, I’m gonna need you to pivot from writing relationship quizzes to the child labor beat. Ada, Frank, can you handle best makeup tutorials and genocide? Allison, I know you’re on concert reviews, how would you feel about also picking up the investigation on coal coke emissions?”
Fucking good on them, I’m sure that there have always been people doing good work at these publications, but it seems like they’ve had to really expand their purview recently to cover these giant gaps.
From what I can see I’d definitely rank Teen Vogue above Rolling Stone, although both are still editorial to some degree. Teen Vogue’s headlines aren’t as incendiary.
Says who? Regardless, at least someone trying to reduce one’s dependancy on this shit is doing something rather than simply disregarding any attempts like you are.
can you show a causal link between being vegan and a decrease in child labor? my guess is that there is a general trend of increased child labor globally that tracks closely the rise in veganism.
As if fruit and veg packing and processing plants are any better. As long as greedy humans are in charge people will be exploited as much as they possibly can regardless of what the industry is.
so, you’re assuming that because of their race and economic status (which you are also assuming, btw), that makes them forced labor. how is that not classist?
If you have a problem with basic socio-economic analysis, I suggest you go back to school. It is a fact that racialized people are more likely to be in lower socio-economic classes than their non-racialized counterparts, and therefore have to “”“choose”“” more grueling and exploitative labor to survive.
Some of the worst work out there involves exploiting and killing sentient beings and it tends to leave any person, adult or child, with permanent trauma as a result.
Actually, you seem to have a problem pivoting from calling people classist to, when called out for being wrong about that fact, complaining about people being on a “soap box” defending animal exploitation.
The underlying problem here is exploitation. The animal ag industry is known to be one of the most exploitative industries, and it is no surprise that they have a more significant problem with child exploitation, given what they are willing to do to animals. Child labor exploitation and animal exploitation are inextricably linked. My proposal would be to address both problems, instead of whatever band-aid solutions your cognitive dissonance may lead you to.
Actually, you seem to have a problem pivoting from calling people classist to, when called out for being wrong about that fact, complaining about people being on a “soap box” defending animal exploitation.
Akchually, i didn’t call anyone classist, nor did i defend “animal exploitation”. if you have to lie outright in order to make your point, it can’t be much of a point.
The underlying problem here is exploitation.
as i said from the start, i oppose child labor (in fact, any forced labor)-- and i find it pretty disgusting that some here are so blinded by their hatred of meat that they would overlook it in order to push their own agenda. and since you, too, would conflate the two - as if veganism would somehow magically eliminate child labor/exploitation - and are attacking me for pointing that out is preposterous.
this isn’t cognitive dissonance-- it’s me calling out your straw man argument for the fallacious and specious argument that it is.
so, you’re assuming that because of their race and economic status (which you are also assuming, btw), that makes them forced labor. how is that not classist?
You must have very short-term memory. Sorry if that’s the case. I’m sure it was a totally genuine, good-faith question.
as i said from the start, i oppose child labor (in fact, any forced labor)-- and i find it pretty disgusting that some here are so blinded by their hatred of meat that they would overlook it in order to push their own agenda. and since you, too, would conflate the two - as if veganism would somehow magically eliminate child labor/exploitation - and are attacking me for pointing that out is preposterous.
If you opposed child labor, you should want the animal ag industry abolished. Veganism has not once been brought up by me. However, since you invoked it: yeah, actually, taking a holistic approach to addressing exploitation, including animal exploitation, would, in fact, lead to a reduction in child exploitation. The underlying thinking that enables one to think of other sentient beings as resources to be exploited, for their labor, for their bodies, their lactations, etc., is all the same. The fact is that if you banned animal ag, you would significantly reduce total child labor violations.
Any yeah, whinging about people correctly pointing out the reality that animal exploitation begets more child exploitation is an implicit defense of animal exploitation. Sorry ¯_(ツ)_/¯
But seeing your other comments about how people in lower socio-economic strata choose some of the most grueling and exploitative labor conditions because they can just quit lul makes it pretty apparent that you aren’t really equipped to have any discussion about addressing exploitation in any form.
You must have very short-term memory. Sorry if that’s the case.
apparently you have reading comprehension issues-- you read me asking a question and interpreted that as a statement. or… you’re so bold as to lie while providing evidence that it’s a lie…
If you opposed child labor, you should want the animal ag industry abolished.
oh, so, you’re a psychic now? fascinating! what color shirt am i wearing?
Veganism has not once been brought up by me. However, since you invoked it: yeah, actually, taking a holistic approach to addressing exploitation, including animal exploitation, would, in fact, lead to a reduction in child exploitation.
see, this is what i meant by disingenuous. the mental gymnastics, the twisting of words and intentions… you’ve outdone yourself. well done. you’ve straw manned your straw man. you’ve assumed i agree with your position that eating meat = animal exploitation, that it’s an established fact, which it isn’t and i don’t. that’s just your opinion, and a far more complex issue than you present it as. then you make a massive association fallacy with your straw man by trying to equate it to the actual, very complex issue under discussion: child labor/exploitation.
and, again, for calling you out on this, you attack, lie, and mischaracterize everything i’ve said.
Maybe shouldn’t, but I’m replying in a separate comment because I want to make something clear: we agree on most things discussed here. From the start, I made clear that my ”problem” was that the issue of child labor/exploitation was being co-opted by those who wanted to make veganism the issue. You seem well-intentioned and your arguments well-articulated enough that I believe what you and were trying to say got caught in the fray, so I’d like to clarify my positions, even though, under normal circumstances, I don’t feel they would need to be defended or even explained.
as I’ve already explained, but I’d like to make clear: I find the concept of any form of human exploitation unacceptable. More than that: revolting and worthy of revolt. I don’t need to see some migrant child enslaved to revolt over it, but I will revolt over it all the same. I recognize and have long known that the industrial farming industry has long been one of the worst offenders in exploiting workers, especially workers of disadvantaged groups and classes, but that industry is hardly alone— yet in any discussion on lemmy about disadvantaged, exploited workers, vegans descent, en masse, to shift any discussion of exploited workers - even children - immediately to “boo hoo, what about the chickens? The cows? THE GOATS?!”
All care of the exploited humans, the children is always drowned out by the militant and irrational, religious belief that “Meat Is Murder” crowd with nary a thought for the vast exploited masses who slaughter and process that meat.
Look: you and I may disagree on the ethics of slaughter (I assure you, we do), but I’m trying to focus on the objectionable nature of exploitation of human labor under such horrific conditions, and I believe both you and I can have constructive, productive conversations about that.
Now, YES, a said some dumb-shit things when trying to one-up someone while parsing the meaning of the word “force”. I was WRONG AND DUMB, Forced labor or exploitative labor— whatever… the point is that it’s wrong and terrible, and nobody, anywhere, regardless of race, class, nationality, location, or whatever should ever have to endure it. However, I’m not convinced that meat has a causal link to that, as it exists in many other industries. Also, the slaughter and harvesting of meat exists in humane ways without exploiting either animals or humans.
And while we may disagree on some of the finer points, we can certainly proceed discussing the matter now that we understand each other on the broader points.
I hope the time I spent typing this wasn’t wasted.
Edit: I see now that you downvoted even this attempt at reasoning, that you care only to further the agenda of “meat is murder” and any reproach of human exploitation is merely a means to an end to further the dietary zealotry of veganism. no person can reason with another that places a well-being of farm animals over those of suffering humans. How disgusting.
So much for my attempt to reach out with a reason. I won’t make that mistake again.
As someone who has been to these places, yeah, it is usually a bunch of migrant workers or children of migrant workers who already work there. I don’t think I have ever seen a white kid, much less adult, fulfilling those roles. They really do give the worst jobs to the people nobody gives a shit about. So yeah, these people are definitely poor as shit.
Meat packing, farming & agriculture in North America is run entirely off the backs of immigrants, poor people and people of colour. People don’t choose these jobs, they take them out of necessity. This is just a fact, and a weird hill to die on.
If you want to rebut the argument that this is unique to meat, look no further than fruit picking in the US. It’s less risk of maiming and disgusting, but still dangerous and exploitative.
from the start, i said the problem was child labor. the weird hill to die on is ignoring that to whine about people eating meat. then, ignore what i said about being against child labor to try a “gotcha”. and then pretend to care only after being called out for being disingenuous.
The workers, most often immigrants and resettled refugees, slaughter and process hundreds of animals an hour, forced to work at high speeds in cold conditions, doing thousands of the same repetitions over and over, with few breaks.
ok, so you and the author of this article clearly have a problem understanding the word “forced”-- if they can choose to quit, they’re not being “forced”. yes, the job is terrible, and conditions should be improved, but it’s clear that you care more about people processing/eating meat that these people’s working conditions. and that’s why this isn’t the “gotcha” you think it is.
there are literal entire countries (including Canada off the top of my head) who have told other countries and their resettlement orgs 'we see you have a humanitarian crisis, but we're only accepting refugees if they work in our slaughterhouses'
I recognize you're completely entrenched in this baffling perspective and it's kinda hard to look at, honestly. you've got that "when sea levels rise, everyone living on the coasts should just sell their houses and move" kind of energy.
Since you have to mischaracterize my statements to such a degree just to make your point, you really don’t have that much of an argument, at least not with me. The amount of mental gymnastics you just performed in order to pull some kind of “gotcha“ on me is something you should’ve saved the Olympics a few weeks ago.
I suggest you direct your anger where it belongs, rather than random Internet strangers.
Geeze. You literally just refuse to acknowledge sources when they’re handed to you. That is just sad.
And if you think that anyone chose to be in some of the worst working conditions known to man just because they can choose between quitting and starving to death, then I’d say that’s downright ghoulish.
It’s not your sources I refuse to acknowledge, it’s your specious, fallacious argument that “the meat industry can be exploitative, therefore veganism.”
the first step would be to shut down animal agriculture, as a huge part of plant farming and it's inherent exploitation is in growing food to feed to the animals before they get to the slaughterhouse; we grow more than enough food to feed the planet as it is, but we waste so much of it trying to sustain animal ag, which is a failing enterprise and a massive driver of climate change
I never said I didn’t see child labor as a problem as well, but the industry shouldn’t exist in the first place.
you’re conflating two issues here to soapbox about meat with a strawman argument-- and you still haven’t said you disapprove of child labor. child labor won’t magically disappear if people stop eating meat.
I don’t think it’s mere coincidence that an industry devoid of compassion for animals is also devoid of compassion for humans. The issues are certainly distinct, but not entirely unrelated.
I used to work in a meat processing plant doing cleanup when I was about 16. It is a very dangerous job. You have to take machinery apart to clean it and if you are careless you can easily lose fingers/hands/arms/other appendages. My least favorite part of the job was cleaning the bandsaws. You have to take the the blade which is about 10 feet long out of the machine (it’s razor sharp so on a good day you don’t cut yourself very badly) and clean out what I can only call “meat sawdust” out of every nook and cranny of the machine. Then you have to feed the blade back into the saw. That was probably the least dangerous machine to clean. The meat grinders were also a pain in the ass because you have to remove a giant spiral cylinder with razor sharp edges, again very easy to lose at least a finger if you’re not careful
I wouldn’t ever want my child to be doing that job, or anyone else’s
Not trying to have any gotcha moment or be deceptive but I am genuinely interested what made you go there and possible come back even to work more? Nothing else available and you needed the money maybe? Its OK if this is too personal a question to answer.
They make cut resistant gloves specifically for working with things that are meant to cut through skin and bone. I’m wearing a pair as I type this. A3 cut protection has worked on all the band saw blades I’ve changed.
dont ever wear gloves when working with rotating or moving saws. the gloves will force your hand into the saw.
i am a regular guest on a clinic ward that specializes in hand surgery. people with severed fingers or half of a hand missing always tell me the same story: the glove forced my hand into the sawblade.
Hi, I’m, among other things, an industrial safety guy.
It’s understandable not to know this, but I’m industry there’s a standard practice of locking out equipment that’s being maintained. Either by physically placing a lock on the power box or by simply putting the plug to the device in your pocket for smaller equipment. And then ensuring that all the energy in the equipment has been exhausted and that the machine cannot be started.
This is the subject of one of many annual trainings for everyone in any given facility.
When changing blades or cleaning equipment, it would be standard that it’s locked out during this process. So wearing gloves and presumably arm guards to protect against laceration when working with blades would be not only acceptable but I imagine expected.
I’d argue that’s only to get more one-sided as military benefits get cut down further and further. GI bill and medical benefits are huge draws for people, it’s a way out of genuinely shit situations. Hack away too far and people stop signing up.
I only have responses that would be derogatory and biased against the military in general. And while I think one could apply your statement to most groups of people in any context, you do have a point.
No but there’s a few more tidbits in the article like Jimmy McCain voting for Harris and the “ever-so-relevant” Meghan McCain:
Despite her harsh criticisms of Trump, Meghan McCain indicated last week that she would still not endorse Harris. “I’m a lifelong, generational conservative,” she tweeted.
Correct, it isn’t just an executive order away. It’s his administration, an administration he appointed, that decides it. He nominated the leader of the DEA, Milgram. Apparently Biden didn’t bother picking an administrator who would prioritize re- or de-scheduling cannabis. That is something you can confidently hold Biden accountable for.
‘We want to be able to talk about things, but not the important things like price gouging and how we turn a blind eye to companies doing illegal things constantly. Please keep focusing on this carrot until after we’ve been selected to continue ruling over you’ - the government
Harris has been talking about price gouging in groceries and housing on the campaign trail, and is previewing some plans to fix it. The justice department is suing realpage, a rental price fixing collusion engine that is used by something like 80% of all rental companies that has exploded rents upwards. The FTC is suing to prevent the Kroger/Albertsons merger, which would drastically increase grocery prices. Biden has forgiven 169 billion dollars in student debt, more than every other admin in history combined, and is trying to forgive more. The biden/harris admin is also pushing for this cannabis rescheduling, something no other admin has done in 80 years.
The current admin is working on the exact things you’re saying they aren’t, and doing it very publically. They want to continue to work on them, and because of that you’re saying they aren’t working on them? Make it make sense, man.
“We terminated her employment in March 2023 after discovering evidence of misconduct, immediately reported her actions to law enforcement and have assisted law enforcement throughout this process,” Small said.
Good on them for finding evidence of wrong doing, and reporting it to experts in law enforcement to chase it down.
I’m not a “Support the Troops” person. I even have family in the military, I just really don’t care for that jingoism. So I’m not that offended by Trump’s antics disrespecting the military.
What really frustrates me is the fact orange man thought it was a good idea to THUMBS UP in a graveyard. Jesus Christ, no respect for the dead. And every single person around this idiot is cool with him doing that. Fucking ghouls.
I understand what you mean with the military overall, but I personally find the THUMBS UP to be more egregious when those buried there died in service to our country.
Also I want to add even if you believe that those soldiers were victims of propaganda, they believed they were serving the country. They believed they were serving their fellow man. That counts in my book.
I lay the blame for why they died at the feet of the men and women responsible for their deployments, not at the feet of those who died believing in something bigger than themselves.
He doesn't respect anyone, so this isn't a surprise. That some people wanted or still want him in a service position to the country when all he cares about is one person named DJT is beyond me. If the previous term didn't show them that, they won't ever get it.
It’s because he was “hurting the right people.” They have accepted that their lives will be miserable, and will do everything they can to make sure no person of color, or minority of any type, has it better than them. That’s the most important part to them.
It’s not even about whether or not the government can do good for all its people, that’s not even a possibility to them. So instead, they see it as a means of making other people more miserable than them, and pulling the ladder up behind them.
What sickens me is that they planned this. They strategised how to get in there with the cameras, and how to respond to the inevitable outcry that would follow.
Their statements in the immediate aftermath are vulgar. The comment about an employee who was suffering a mental health episode trying to stop them. I imagine that employee was upset at seeing the sacrilegious trampling of the dignity of the fallen soldiers in her care.
It’s also not lost on me that if anyone thought for a second that any political campaign would be so low as to try this, there would be security in place to prevent it. These scum are willing to stoop that low.
This announcement is a geopolitical weapon that arrived immediately. It forces russia to consider a future where all kinds of things they deem relatively save right now suddenly become much less so. Its also a message to russia that more weapon systems are on their way and the West can see a future delivering them. Just this announcement alone will alter russian war plans.
Does russia decided to throw their forces onto the front now to get larger gains before these weapons arrive?
Does russia decided to hold back forces and move strategic assets outside of the possible range of these new weapons at the cost of battlefield gains and needed response time to Ukrainian counterattacks?
Have the weapons already been delivered and the announcement is just for show to give the appearance of a gap of time?
In the future when/if the weapons arrive is the second geopolitical, and at that time, actual physical weapon.
yeah this also gives russians ample warning to move all of their actual intended targets just outside the range, like how they already did with aircraft
Armchair General here. When they moved their aircraft further back, Russia greatly reduced their range and ordnance options while increasing the time Ukraine had to prepare for the strikes. Similarly, Russia splitting up their stockpiles to reduce strike effectiveness will have a significant impact on Russia’s already-strained logistics network. That’s the same reason why a relatively low volume of ATACMS has had such a substantial impact on their ability to wage war.
right, so as far as i understand rn, russian air force does several things that suck balls for ukrainians:
a. starting two and half year ago, russian strategic bombers lobbed long range cruise missiles like kalibr, kh-22, repurposed anti-ship missiles and such at ukrainian powerplants and so on and so on. these things have really long range, and some were launched from places like caspian sea; these heavy and medium bombers sit at airbases far, far outside any of these missiles range, they stay well outside ukrainian air defense in air as well. i doubt this decision will change much in this regard
for some considerable time now, russian close air support stays well outside of ukrainian surface to air missiles range by using glide bombs to deliver bombs to the frontline. ukrainians can’t target these cas missions with their own air force because their missiles lack range, and any of these are also armed with their own. this is where not announcing these missiles delivery, but just shipping them and dropping without warning would have greatest effect, i believe. ukrainians lack means to get rid of this aircraft; they do have drones that go far enough, but drones are slow and very shiny on radar, providing plenty of warning, so aircraft can scramble in time. proper cruise missiles and especially ballistic missiles are much faster so they could catch some of these still on the ground. this is what happened when i think like 30? of ka-52, atgm-armed helicopters, were destroyed on ground without warning in two atacms strikes one day apart. these things were important in stopping ukrainian armored attacks in the south, until these were burning in luhansk and berdyansk.
now instead of destroying large part of russian su-25s, su-34s, su-35s, mig-29s, mig-31, and other such aircraft, on the ground, without warning, with exactly these cruise missiles, americans blared to the whole world that they will deliver these things months away from now, so that now… what exactly? su-25 will pick up a little bit more wear on every cas mission? daily scheduled pulverizing of donbas villages will be delayed by some extra half an hour? extra warning is meaningless because ukrainians don’t have means to strike these aircraft when in air. it’s just part of logistics for the bomb that lands somewhere in kharkiv that a bit longer part of it happens on a bomber. nothing stops russians from using well-connected airbases with rail links to launch these strikes. americans just gave up very important, very permanent and immediately impactful effect for nothing
or, if you will, these might be fears of eScAlAtIoN because some of these targets might have been, potentially, maybe, nominally russian strategic bombers, as in part of their nuclear triad. not like it’s actually a big or important part of it. if anyone took this seriously, kursk incursion should make clear that all russian lines are complete bluff. for now, the most potent russian air defense asset is american policy on long range weapons
III. russian jets flying air defense sorties will have to be stationed at further airbases. this changes little, because all the difference is that now these jets will just take a bit more wear on every mission
for some considerable time now, russian close air support stays well outside of ukrainian surface to air missiles range by using glide bombs to deliver bombs to the frontline.
The F-16s can solve this. The range of even the older AIM-120C AMRAAM exceeds that of the Russian glide bombs by 30 to 60 kilometers. The D variant, and I have seen Ukrainian F-16s with this loaded, has a range of 180 kilometers. That’s enough to knock a Russian aircraft out of the sky long before they can use a glide bomb.
III. russian jets flying air defense sorties will have to be stationed at further airbases.
The JASSM will push them back hundreds of miles and that’s no small matter. Aircraft like the SU-25 only have a range of 560 miles, roughly 900 kilometers. The JASSM could push them so far back that they become unusable as they can’t carry enough fuel! The MIG-25 might be able to make it, just barely, but there will be no range left for any combat. Even the SU-34 will have to fly lots of extra distance in order to keep far enough back and all that extra flight time comes at a serious cost to tempo and aircraft availability.
The JASSM is no small thing, don’t underestimate what will happen when it shows up.
would be much cooler if it showed up unannounced. AIM-120D has long range, but so is R-37 and R-33. (yes total range is larger than no-escape range, and probably western and eastern missiles measure it in different ways, but still). F-16s are delivered in symbolic numbers now and for the time being, their only job is plinking shaheds with sidewinders and won’t do that until more are delivered, from what i understand
i’m not saying this will do nothing, i’m saying effect of this delivery could have been much more permanent
this announcement is pure horseshit that only warned russians and did nothing else. surprise strike on some airfield would send even better message with immediate and permanent effect on the frontline, as russian aircraft production is wholly inadequate
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.