Statistically, chances are higher that it doesn’t

Pathetic. You’re crying up and down these comments about genocide and then when presented with it you aim for the lowest rung and defend it. Fuckin loser.

I don’t want a revolution. Revolutions look nice on paper and being decades or centuries away from them seem nice but revolutions cause extreme instability that open up space for corruption and allow the very people you’re often trying to help fall through the cracks.

We didn’t get the 40 hour work week because people fought and died for it, unfortunately. It might have brought the conversation forward but it likely delayed results as states prioritize control and stability and will increase their means of violence to do so. We got the 40 hour work week because the right people were elected.

Unfortunately the same with slavery but in an odd opposite way. The civil war ended slavery, but only because increasingly officials who were anti slavery were elected and that put pressure on southern states to engage in violence as they feared slavery would end. Which caused the government to increase their means of violence and force stability, ending slavery.

The solution is obvious, educated people make better decisions including electing better officials and they will steer society the right way. Currently the level of frustration has made people close off their opinions, disengage from electoral processes and regress back into factions prone to infighting. I fear a revolution, it will immediately land on the feet of the poor, destitute and desperate and harm them probably killing the very people a revolution is supposed to help.

I’m not preaching total non-violence here. There will be violence. But starting a full blown revolution is not the path forward in my opinion. Regardless of how people want to portray it stability is way closer than it seems, uniting together and education are the shortest paths to it.

And people who comment that harris and trump are the same are actively ruining those avenues to a solution because often they’re not interested in a solution they’re interested in being right and being heard and making people believe they are right.

That’s just my take though.

But you’re happy as a clam to defend the others. Okay

Well, in this case I am sorry, my country shouldn’t be invading any other countries. I will agree with this, death to American fascism. But don’t let the these maga scum fool you, you say it’s not their fault. While a small group were “useful” idiots and got scammed into this, a much larger group are just racist pos. It is absolutely insane the amount of brainwashed idiots walking around in this country.

I was serious, but then you started insulting me.

But it’s a democracy

That’s a nice benefit but we can’t use the Indian trade agreement as an example of European independence if it serves the US strategy.

defending multilateralism and the rules-based international order.

As opposed to the multipolar order. This is not opposing the US. France, and thus the EU, were not so long ago excluded from a nuclear submarine deal. I doubt that Australia switched to relying on the EU.

we should cleverly flood the Arabic peninsula with euroes through energy trade. To make Saudi Arabia assert its soft power in Africa and weaken the US in the process.

I don’t think Saudi Arabia can be bought like that. Saudi Arabia was made by the US. Also, how would the EU benefit? Saudi Arabia most likely has their own goals.

There’s no way we can break a US blockade on Cuba,

True, but we could try to deliver and more prominently rub it in that the US are violating international law.

Cuba is too insignificant to cause a greater international reaction

That’s when international law matters. If we don’t defend it or at least try, we signal that it is only there to suppress the ambitions of small countries.