I think defining discussion here is the critical point. If someone take the assignment literally, they don't need to provide arguments to describe how they feel about the topic in the article.
Since this part can be interpreted differently, the students should get some points. Or ask the resubmit their papers with "scientifically supported evidence"
This. Basically if you say Colonization is wrong, that mean you admit all European colonized country are wrong, this includes Canada, and Australia for example. These people have a hard time admitting their crimes.
So it seems like she is trying to secure as much money as she can because she knows her political career is gone in time of: Maga, America First, and Progressive Democrat. So she is going to be a mouth piece for Israel and get a salary.
Iran is a primitive society based on superstition and where 1500 year old barbaric laws
Let me choose the most modern laws where you get death sentence by a white cop because you are black. Or the laws that looks at a genocide and then decide to send more weapon to the one who is committing the genocide killing at least 70k people mostly women and children that you pretend to care about.
You can disagree with laws, but claiming they are "primitive" and "barbaric laws" is a stupid, racist, and ignorant statement.
If someone decides to move there, find out about how they are not supposed to be there, ignore it and continues to live there even though they can migrate to anywhere they want in the world, then they are part of the problem. This "not everyone is bad" didn't stop Germany and Japan, because they don't understand any language other than force.
it is funny how low they are willing to go, not even journalistic integrity is stopping them anymore. should have the name of the writer out there and his twitter account so they can be shamed on public. If this is an actual person and not fake name or AI.
it is funny because the editor of the article think this title is negative, while the one who voted for him are most likely looking at the title and saying "that is who I voted for"
The legacy media already gone far. I do hope other journalists with integrity do come up with their own platform as having scattered news makes it harder to track.
My first impression after reading the title is to say:
Amazing how journalists will twist words instead of saying the truth. This is called dictatorship.
And then I got carious what is the difference between being a Mafia style government and being a dictatorship. Looking online it seems such topics has been discussed by acidemia and I found this article:
I then skimmed over the Atlantic article, and it seems to lack depth, as it only look into one aspect of comparison between the two, which is offering protection and getting bribe. However, it fail to address any other aspect. Including, this US government is representing Billionaires class, Republican Party, White Supremacy, Evangelical Christian, and Zionist. Trump cannot do what he want, he just representing these groups and finding balance between them.
I am not sure if this is facism or dictatorship but regardless it is not Mafia government.
I would suggest Send memes or funny images if you can. Sending messages might feel more stressful, they might think they need to answer. Images have no expectations of respond.
Even books or podcast things like " I know you like this topic, and when I saw this book I thought you might enjoy it "
they are literally destroying people home, killing their sheep, rape them in prison, and stealing their body parts, and soon death penalty to anyone resists. Along with continuous killing.
I think defining discussion here is the critical point. If someone take the assignment literally, they don't need to provide arguments to describe how they feel about the topic in the article.
Since this part can be interpreted differently, the students should get some points. Or ask the resubmit their papers with "scientifically supported evidence"