You have to shoot big if you want to get anything close to what you want - it's a basic principle of negotiation

It's still something you can argue should be done even if it's not currently politically feasible. Things don't always stay politically unfeasible, but they usually don't get pushed in that direction by people not making that argument in public.

My utopian take would be that Israel should become fundamentally secular, remove references to being a 'Jewish state', grant all Palestineans citizenship and full rights, and perhaps change the name - a lot of people would say that should just be called Palestine, but frankly I think a compromise of Israel-Palestine or some other completely new name would be fine too. End the colonialism & apartheid, everyone who's there lives in peace, people who had to flee during previous wars get to come back.

I don't know that we'll ever see that, but it probably is much more unlikely if we don't try to convince people that it's a good idea.

And ironically screwing it up by still supporting European settler colonialism?

I actually did stop engaging as much after eliminating Reddit. Lemmy is nice sometimes, but I'm nowhere near as active. I probably post a few more YouTube comments, that's about it.

That's the result of poor planning, and not true everywhere. Places with good planning for non-automotive transport have much smaller shops, smaller streets, and more of everything because of it. The radius you can reach within 15 minutes might be smaller, but the actual number of places you can get to can be much larger.

That doesn't even make sense - you are in a neighborhood that only has one grocery store nearby due to car dependent planning, therefore walkability isn't practical?

I live in a neighborhood that was definitely originally designed for cars and has been gradually getting better and I've already got at least two grocery stores I can easily walk to, plus two convenience stores and a pharmacy that's kind of also a convenience store. Then I've got another three or four that I can easily bike to. And these aren't small grocery stores, they're all like massive supermarkets designed originally around car traffic.

If you spend time in places that have actual walkable neighborhoods, you find lots of much smaller grocery stores and you can easily shop around and compare prices on foot.

Yeah I don't think this is completely true. I'm not in Gen Z but close enough and I do see that they're a lot more accepting of a broad spectrum of attitudes toward sex, and that includes asexuality, but I think they're also quite accepting of people being quite the opposite of that. I think where they get more weirded out and are willing to say so is when people - and because of patriarchy, it's almost always men, but not always toward women - make sexual comments about real people who aren't explicitly inviting that. That's something that has been declining in acceptability over time anyway and Gen Z just more commonly takes it a bit farther, and has a better understanding of consent. But I've really never seen this "women aren't capable of consenting" thing outside of a strawman for people who want to pretend it exists by misinterpreting real criticism.

Sounds more like the Rules of Acquisition to me.

People can enjoy a drink responsibly, but you shouldn't drive even if you've only had a couple of drinks. Even a small amount of impairment is unacceptable when you're controlling a machine that could easily kill other people by mistake.

Punishing drunk drivers is well-deserved, but as long as car-dependent infrastructure encourages drunk driving, it is considerably more difficult to actually decrease the rate of it. Taking a taxi is expensive and being a DD is no fun, so people take stupid risks. If you know you can take public transit home, there's no reason to take such a risk at all.

It kind of screams co-opting by the fossil fuel industry, doesn't it. Just like all of the efforts to make Alberta tar sands oil sound environmentally friendly, by pointing to the strong regulatory environment. Rather than focus on what will actually improve things the most, they want something that keeps them in business

Voting is still good, but it's the bare minimum. Not everyone has the time, but if you do, you should try to advocate publicly, and preferably in a group. Just like with unions, collective action is more effective. If I give feedback to my city individually, I'm a data point. But as part of an advocacy group, they reach out to us.