12·
1 month agoc/askchapo , depending on the question
GarbageShoot [he/him]
- 0 Posts
- 168 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: August 18th, 2022
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
None of its supposed assets make up for the corporate overlords who run it and promote or permit all sorts of terrible things
Adam Johnson and Nima Shirazi
Citations Needed, excellent reporting on the way corporate news distorts various issues to shape public opinion, occasionally with historical examples going back to the antebellum period.
Reddit is notorious for astroturfing. The lemmy hivemind(s) is the lemmitor hivemind from people socialized on Reddit who came to lemmy and brought that shit with them. Same with other instances like .world, but worse because they have fewer legacy users.
What do you mean fiat doesn’t work on a finite planet? Current economic models certainly don’t work on a finite planet, but fiat was here before them and will be here after they are long gone.
what is a good way for the working class (90%+ of all humans) to save and succeed in this current environment?
There isn’t one. A big chunk of that class can do just fine and you probably already have good normative answers in that respect, but the current economic model is one that demands poverty. Even with all of the ridiculous developments in production we have, the available infrastructure even with the qualms we might have with it, and all the other things going for us that you might want to list, the closest that the current economic model has achieved to escaping its age-old need for having a sizeable portion of the able-bodied population unemployed is by slightly expanding that same portion and then having them sell themselves by the hour and minute in the Gig Economy. If you want that whole 90% of the population to all be able to do well, you need to change the system they are operating within.
tl;dr I don’t have an answer for your problem, but I have some thoughts on it that hopefully might contribute to you finding an answer.
I think it’s probably bad to think of the homeless, etc. as being drug-addled and especially as being dangerous. Usually, if they do have a drug problem (especially alcoholism) it came after becoming homeless and not before, and functions as a way to self-medicate to ease the pain of their terrible conditions. There is, of course, a strong correlation with mental illness that they are often also self-medicating, but “mentally ill” does not mean the same thing as “dangerous”. You probably don’t want to have them as a baby sitter, but that’s much more because of mental illness impairing their ability to care for others (and often themselves) rather than there being a realistic chance they would actually hurt the child directly.
People, religions, politicians, corporations and so on speak of charity as a great thing, and it’s certainly not a bad thing, but there being a need for charity for people to survive is a symptom of a system that doesn’t care for a substantial portion of the population that lives in it, and typically brutally exploiting those people. Charity is like a bandage, it can help to tend to a wound that has been inflicted, but we must ask “Why is there a wound in the first place? What inflicted it? How can it be prevented?” Your society, like mine, is organized in part to hurt these people in order to exploit them. No amount of charity can change that fact, only a change in social organization can change it.
It might be helpful to the survey to include a y/n so they don’t need to guess whether you are a dom or a sub in that situation
The only thing it’s useful for is an approximate answer to the question “Who does the Economist Group want to lionize?”
but works alot more like the type of socialism that’s common in Europe.
i.e. not the socialism of Marx
but I still think the Nordic countries are what most people would refere to as at least a little bit socialist.
If you ignore that country with 1.4 billion people and a few others, i.e. the majority of country calling their countries socialist.
Maybe the proper term is social democratic?
Yes, that is the proper term
Only one of those four is white, and it’s a classic reactionary tactic to downplay him compared to the Georgian and the older Han Chinese example
Because authority carried out under the pretenses of private property is whitewashed in liberal states, who are the ones in your question doing the “considering”.
Always neat to see another fan of CSB/Woolie around. I haven’t seen your instance name before, at least that I can remember.
Main one worth sharing is Blowback. The rest are comedy slop.
Bear witness to the sickest shot while suckers get romantic
They ain’t gonna send us campin’ like they did my man Fred Hampton
Still we lampin’, still clockin’ dirt for our sweat
A ballot’s dead, so a bullet’s what I get
A thousand years they had the tools, we should be takin’ 'em
Fuck the G-ride, I want the machines that are makin’ 'em
Security through obscurity is a notoriously sophomoric strategy that won’t keep out a dedicated attacker
That and some major proprietary software has had built-in backdoors for decades at this point, I’m pretty sure (I think this is more of a Windows than an Apple thing, but Apple has its own issues)
The DPRK is in an unusual and tenuous position, and there is very little that can be usefully gained from speculation that doesn’t involve considering that. At the same time as trying to develop a [dictatorship of the proletariat/highly unusual set of political economic arrangements], they bear constant acts of sabotage from the South and the US that are at times extraordinarily depraved, have endured sanctions for decades, and suffered from regional poverty since long before the WPK took over, all the more so after the US bombed them back into the stone age.
Given this context, and probably also the Otto Warmbier incident, we can begin to understand why they would be vigilant – some would say hypervigilant – towards various security issues, and don’t want some jackass tourist going rogue and causing an international incident. Since they never made a ton of money from tourism – especially discounting Chinese tourism – sacrificing some level of profitability to their tourism industry to keep tourists on a short leash and prevent incidents isn’t so inexplicable.
Complete aside, what nationality is your tourist friend? I assume not American because – due to US passport law – it is very difficult for a US citizen to gain access to the DPRK since the Warmbier incident.
Of course the DPRK is strange, even its most ardent supporters would tell you so, but the fact of the matter is that what westerners think about the DPRK isn’t “The DPRK is weird”, it’s “This is a completely backwards place with absurd laws and propaganda which considers human life worthless,” right? “State propaganda says the Kims don’t shit and Kim Il-Sung invented the hamburger. Kim Jong-Un had his uncle eaten alive by dogs for being rude to him. The rats eat the kids and the kids eat the rats.” etc. My biggest point of emphasis is that every one of those stories, which have agglomerated together to create the hazy cultural consensus that I mentioned, is unambiguously false and you have very little left that you’ve ever actually seen about the DPRK if you subtract all of that.
Here are some things to look at if you like. Obviously I would not tell you to take anything uncritically and I have my own issues with things here and there. I’d be happy to discuss any of them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V4Hnl7J9H4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BO83Ig-E8E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBqeC8ihsO8
And of course, you can actually look at statements that they put out:
http://kcna.kp/en/article/q/5a9ffe6e4d6704ac1838b14785365295.kcmsf
Or the fact that the Korea-watching industry is just completely shameless about putting out the most harebrained nonsense with very little pushback (including things that don’t make it to the headlines), which really does not lend credibility to the idea of serious-minded criticism of the DPRK having any strong presence in anglophone media and therefore anglophone culture. On this point, because it is a “death by a thousand cuts” situation, it’s really just a question of how many examples you want.
I completely missed this comment, sorry.
Yeah, they are definitely restrictive with tourists, but that’s not the same as how citizens live. Your story sounds more extreme than others I have seen (where the general consensus is more generically that the visit was “on rails”), but I’m not about to call your buddy a liar. Citizens, it probably won’t surprise you to know, are not moved around in windowless vans (beyond the case of arrest, where I imagine they might be since that would be pretty normal for most countries).
They absolutely are, and many people would be excited to answer questions you have (including me, depending on the question). You just need to be careful not to come across as combative, because they’ll meet you in kind and it’ll be a dogpile.