

This source supports me as far as I can tell.
This source supports me as far as I can tell.
Hydro destroys environments, uses enormous amounts of concrete and the related disasters have killed orders of magnitude more people than nuclear.
The entire population of North and South America at the start of that project did not exceed a hundred million, and the vast majority of it was in central and southern America. There were not hundreds of millions of people in the US to kill.
Very possibly, every native American living within the modern borders of the US from 1400 to today might have totalled a hundred million, but the colonial project didn’t kill literally every one of them.
The law covers that also. All visible religious garments are forbidden.
And to Germany’s communist party, fascists were also distasteful, bigots, and extremists, and they would lead to the collapse of capitalism.
This would be a good mirroring response if it had any amount of truth to it. To the Communists in Germany, the fascists were their mortal enemy. The two parties were fighting in the streets. The Communists saw the fascists as a capitalist system, they certainly were not under the impression that fascism would bring about the end of capitalism.
A declaration by the Communists that the Fascists would collapse under their own contradictions is not evidence to the contrary, or evidence that the German communists tolerated the fascists.
Liberal and libertarian are not the same thing and cannot be conflated, and authoritarianism isn’t anything with a state.
I swear, the political compass has rotted people’s brains.
Firstly, liberals are not left of centre, they are the original capitalists, the ideology that socialism was built in opposition to.
Secondly, Liberals will always side with fascists when push comes to shove. To liberals, Fascists are distasteful, bigots and extremists, however, fascism does not threaten the liberal system. It does not threaten the liberal ruling class, at least inherently, whereas socialism is an existential threat to that class. To a liberal economy, to a liberal nation.
Not hugely. Actual nuclear waste, not just mildly radioactive uniforms and similar material, is extremely small and compact for the amount of energy generated.
The source you linked talks about uranium reserves. Mineral reserves, known and unknown deposits, refer explicitly to the known amount of economically minable supplies of that mineral.
Discussion around them can be misleading, especially for a growing industry, because as a resource becomes more scarce, it becomes more economically viable to mine difficult deposits, this growing the reserve. On top of that, the effort and technology tend to yield new methods of both mining and refining that increase yields.
Jets and ships can be nuclear powered. It’s just not a very good idea for jets at least.
Nationalise energy production.
We’d run of our uranium that’s economical to extract using current technology and at current prices. All known mineral reserves could power the world on exclusively nuclear energy for several thousand years at least.
The biggest enemy of the left is the right, it’s just that everyone on the left can agree that they’re terrible so it doesn’t come up in discourse too much, whereas the people who are on your side but want to do things a different way will take up much more of your attention.
The Palestinians have the stated goal of murdering the Israeli people as well as ending the Israeli state
Which excuses attempted genocide?
It’s always funny seeing people post that image without the context that Palestine declared war on Israel alongside all its neighbours and attempted to push the Israeli population into the sea.
You:
Your source places the highest estimates for a north American population at seven million. Most likely it was half that. “Hundreds of millions of people in the US alone” is what I am contesting.