I found a site called Committee to Protect Journalists and I though of sharing some relevant info:

As of April 16:

• 175 journalists and media workers were confirmed killed: 167 Palestinian, two Israeli, and six Lebanese.
• 93 journalists were reported injured.
• 2 journalists were reported missing.
• 84 journalists were reported arrested.
• Multiple assaults, threats, cyberattacks, censorship, and killings of family members.

Capitalism works this way, unfortunately.

Here is one more article based on a 2025 report saying something similar.

Only 9.5% of plastic materials produced globally in 2022 were manufactured from recycled materials. The findings, reported in Communications Earth & Environment, are part of a comprehensive analysis of the global plastics sector, which also reveals a large increase in the amount of plastic being disposed of by incineration and substantial regional differences in plastic consumption.

Plastic production has increased from 2 million tons per year in 1950 to 400 million tons per year in 2022 and is projected to reach 800 million tons per year by 2050. As a result, plastic pollution is a pressing and growing global issue, posing major challenges for the environment, economy, and public health.

Totally. According to the IEA map, it is ideal because Taiwan is close to the borders of tectonic plates.

Ok so it looks like they try to shift to the sociocracy model.

Coincidentally, I have a friend who worked for some years in a company that was trying to shift from a typical hierarchical structure to a co-op with a horizontal decision-making processes, using sociocracy. For them, and to my understanding, it was not going great. They actually kinda kept replicating the typically centralised structure for too long but this time using the “circles” deriving from sociocracy. That said, maybe by now they have managed to move on from this transitional phase, but I don’t know since my friend doesn’t work there anymore. That said, from the conversations we had, I got the understanding that there has been successful approaches in other coops, in the sense that they had achieved consent-based decision-making processes.

This could be a promising project. If anyone knows what is the decision-making processes within this community, could you share a link?

Thanks for the recommendation and btw I just found a link to download it.

For me, many variation of direct democracy could be great.

As briefly as I can: instead of voting every few years for someone to represent the interests of your area in a national parliament, we would vote on a local level for our local maters, more often. When I say matters imagine the questions asked to be more like the ones at referendums.

I think it’s capitalism in crisis specifically, because during crisis common people may turn to leftist ideas, so in order to prevent that, capitalists promote nationalim and fascism as better alternatives to leftist ones. Of course, I could not pretend to be able to resume all parameters in one sentence.

Apart from that, and if I got you right, I am surprised you mention that for Germany it’s the lack of education. I was under the impression that since WW2 there was a lot of effort through education to avoid specifically the rise of fascism again. Did I get this wrong?

I wanted to have a conversation with you, this is why I asked your opinion specifically. I believe it’s important for people with different point of views to be able to talk about them. For me, it’s a pity that you don’t want to have one but at least I tried.

I understand that you see things differently, so I would like to ask you a couple of things to get your point of view.

For you why did fascism emerge in the first place and why did it re-emerge nowadays.

I just wrote a comment to a person that said we should kick out fascists. Copy-pasting it here:

I would like to add that we should also kick out capitalism and representative democracy out of the way because fascism is a byproduct of both of them.

Capitalism, when in crises uses fascists to restore its status quo and this is how they get elected in parliaments. We can now tell with certainty, that all the worldwide measures/reforms that took place after WW2 were not effective. If they had been, fascists would not be on the rise everywhere.

There are plenty of alternative systems of organising societies for the benefit of the people, they are just not promoted by the media, this is why we don’t hear about them as solution. I often use the example of kings to illustrate my point. During their era, everybody thought that this system could never change, but it did. So we can do this change as well. Actually we have to.

I would like to add that we should also kick out capitalism and representative democracy out of the way because fascism is a byproduct of both of them.

Capitalism, when in crises uses fascists to restore its status quo and this is how they get elected in parliaments. We can now tell with certainty, that all the worldwide measures/reforms that took place after WW2 were not effective. If they had been, fascists would not be on the rise everywhere.

There are plenty of alternative systems of organising societies for the benefit of the people, they are just not promoted by the media, this is why we don’t hear about them as solution. I often use the example of kings to illustrate my point. During their era, everybody thought that this system could never change, but it did. So we can do this change as well. Actually we have to.

Do you think that morality is relative to each person’s view point or do you think that moral facts do not exist at all?

I think that morality is relative to each person and in the same time it is shaped from social and cultural norms.

In relation to your answer to my question, I came to realise that I don’t think that I will get a satisfactory one, because of our different backgrounds. What I mean is that you talk with philosophical terms to a commoner. For example (and to my understanding) you talk about moral facts as a given term, and for me this notion doesn’t even exist. Don’t get me wrong, good for you!

Also, taking into consideration that our answers are getting longer and longer, maybe this could be a good exit point. So, I would like to thank you for the time you spent on this conversation, because I enjoy thinking and you gave me food for thought.

I was not satisfied by my previous answer, so I thought of deleting it and giving it another try.

So your suggestion is that we can keep our moral judgments out of practical considerations without espousing the objective truth of moral facts?

Not at all. I would be extremely hesitant to suggest something on this topic, for all people. In a way, this is the reason why I talked about how I see things on a personal level, specifically.

About the category error, once more I don’t know the terms you use, so I will answer from what I understand by the way you describe them.

My question was related to a notion (objective morality), and not a physical object (i.e. a rock). Notions exist - to my understanding - because we use language, so we should be able to define them. An object like a rock, is there even if language is not used. So I don’t see where the category error could be.

Finally, I will rephrase my 2-part question for clarity, because only half of it got kind of answered:

Since you claim that morality is objective I would assume that you would be capable of tracing where this objectivity comes from, how it emerged, and how it stays that way. I’m not too sure how to phrase this as a question, but it’s something along those lines.

Also, if it were objective for all people, I imagine we would all know its content. But, for example, the terms morally good & morally bad even tho they are commonly used in modern languages, they often have different content. So, it seems clear to me that the terms morally good and bad are not objective. So which morality is objective? Please, describe the content of this notion you claim to be objective.

You are totally right. This article is related to Europe, like all the others that are related somehow to China as well. Some were interesting, some borderline (?) conspiratorial but the point I wanted to make is that I lost count! This is why I asked the OP for mercy.

Please, have mercy.

This is a Europe community and almost all of your numerous posts today are somehow about China. And just to be clear, I don’t support China.

deleted by creator

I don’t know the term you mentioned so I’ll be talking about the points you made, not the term itself.

So, I don’t need morality to condemn the human suffering that slavery, female genital mutilation, or genocide creates. I don’t need a moral lens for this, just a practical one – out of solidarity, for freedom, equity, equality etc, for everyone on this planet. This is why it’s easy for me to justify any fight for social justice. These fights are by default systemic so against the status quo. I hope it is clear why I don’t need an objective moral truth.

I would like to ask you, when you say morality is objective who defines it and what is it?

The way I see things, there is nothing objective about morality because it is based on cultural principles, and these vary from place to place and through time as well.

Relevant report from the International Energy Agency (IEA):

Global Energy Review 2025

1.0 Key findings

2.0 Global trends

3.0 Oil

4.0 Natural gas

5.0 Coal

6.0 Electricity

7.0 CO2 Emissions