Can you define "non exploitation"?

My understanding is that leather is a waste byproduct of the meat industry, so much in the same way that gas is from dinosaurs that are already dead, the cows that provide leather are "already dead" due to their use as meat.

So in that sense, it seems like leather is the more ecological choice, though not knowing your definition of exploitation, it may or may not be exploitative. I certainly wouldn't consider it vegan though.

There once was a final solution
With suffering and mass execution
They said "Never again"
What they actually meant
Was "Palestine's just an illusion"

But if we also include all the times that he didn't kill Hitler, then he actually killed two thirds of a Hitler

For some added context, this has been going on for years from all parties. Maybe this year was not the most amicable environment to do this in, and maybe these particular slogans were in bad taste, but I don't think this is as egregious as everyone is saying.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/political-party-convention-gimmicks-1.2530848

I'm not inherently against this, but what benefit does this bring users of either instance (or Fedecan)? It seems like teaming up in this way (sort of) goes against the whole decentralized nature of the fediverse.

As a extreme example that hopefully never happens, a decade or so from now, every federated Lemmy instance could be under the umbrella of Fedecan, and it could leverage its power and not federate with new instances at all, making it no better or different than Reddit, and making it difficult for any new Lemmy server to gain traction.

Small group of extremists? One third of Americans voted for this, and another third didn't hate the idea of this enough to vote against it.

This may not be you specifically, but more than two-thirds of Americans directly or indirectly chose this clown as your president.

The fight you want to join? It's already started. The people best positioned to stop this are being fired. The checks and balances are being removed or taken over.

Is that a concession? I don't think he actually wants to be president anymore.

Don't get me wrong, it's the correct "deal" to make - it's the most overt declaration he can make to those who claim he wants to be dictator for life - I just think it's probably a win/win for him.

Spotify gave Joe Rogan a platform, which likely contributed to the current situation in the US.

How many specific bands are you trying to support? It might be better for everyone if you just send them $5 directly and pirate their stuff.

It can be hard to separate art from artist, but just keep in mind that you've already paid for those books. He isn't getting more money from you just rereading them, and nothing changes if you continue to enjoy the books.

Most people don't "back" Trudeau. We tolerate him because the likely alternative is so much worse.

That's the thing though. The people flying the duck Trudeau flags don't understand that we don't have unwavering loyalty to the party. They don't understand nuance. And it's going to destroy Canada during the next election.

aside from ensuring the fundamentals are in place of affordable accessible homes, is there really any realistic way of nullifying that advantage and is it even right to do so?

I don't think that's an aside, I think that's the key to solving a lot of problems with our current society. Give everyone a roof and enough nutritious food, and most people can figure out how to live their lives from there. The problem is that the lack of housing and food options forces people into low paying jobs with no upward mobility, and continues the cycle of poverty.