Piquing a demigods’s curiosity, returning to your home city and finding it’s been turned to metal and everyone is fused into the walls/floors.

It’s not that deep, we don’t need a rigorous philosophically consistent way to measure allyship.

No, indirect action is a form of action, stopping a transphobe from being transphobic is a form of allyship, because presumably, you’ve saved a trans person from feeling unsafe around that person.

The real answer is measured in how your actions have affected the lives of the people you claim to be an ally of.

No, this isn’t always practical to measure, but if someone is saying “I’m an ally because I identify as an ally”, I’m certain they have done absolutely nothing to protect/advance the rights of LGBT+ people.

OK, that person is on their way to becoming an ally.

There is still no physical difference in the world brought on by thoughts that exist only in their head. Theory without practice.

Posting is not praxis. You have affected nobody’s lives or material conditions through posting.

I should have been more clear, I meant it’s irrelevant to whether one is an ally or not, because that is determined by practice.

Or they can just be boring and do “Huh, we have an array of telescopes, it’s very large.” OK, what do we call the small one?

We’ve increase the frequency for radio, lets call it High Frequency. We’ve increased it further, what do we call it? Even further. Surely it can’t get faster than this. God dammit. Fuck it, just use numbers.

It’s kinda crazy how supporting war isn’t seen as a betrayal of veterans.

Russian influence is on the rise and surprisingly effective.

…Do you think Russia is communist?

Going full fascist to enforce austerity.

Declaring martial law at 19% popularity and accusing anyone right of Mussolini of being communists, just classical South Korean things.

This is how carbon credits work.

If you’re not actually doing any allyship, in what sense are you an ally?

Theoretical allyship is irrelevant.

That article isn’t great in the way that it considers GaAs wafers separately, as if Chinese export controls won’t touch GaAs wafers, whereas the Chinese announcement specifies anything that might be used by the US military industrial complex containing Ga may be targeted.

The government determines what illegal immigration is.

If you want to increase the pool of illegals to deport simply lower quotas or throw some extra road blocks in there (my buddy has paid over 20K in non-lawyer fees in the last decade to maintain his legal status, and even then has had lapses and had to leave the country once due to horse-shit that our immigration system is).

Remember, all the immigrants in Springfield, OH Trump said he would deport were legally in the country.

Antimony? That thing I gotta pay the ex-wife?

They also skipped how production of these metals occurs, for Gallium for example, it’s a byproduct of aluminum production. China became the main gallium (and later, LED) producer because they mandated (and sourced relevant equipment) for bauxite refining operations to harvest it, despite being non-economical to do so at the time, as part of a project that was consuming ~5% of their national budget in the late 80s.

America produces 1/36th of the aluminum China produces so even if Trump took the same step (I’m sure he could use the Defense Production Act or something), the numbers don’t add up.

Others require the blighting of huge swaths of land and a lot of future work to prevent contamination of ground water (see West Virginia).

I don’t believe America has the capacity to build local production with its current political system.

That is correct, hence why it’s dumb to accept the rightwing framing of “Oh, we only want to deport criminals” or “We like legal immigration”.

The US should be looking into what? How to deal with getting sanctioned by the US?