commiewithoutorgans

joined 2 years ago
[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 20 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I literally can't imagine a better method of destroying the US empire than these sanctions

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Unintended may be somewhat true, in that nobody explicitly had that as a conscious reason, but it was an obvious result that they could've known beforehand. So I don't think it's useful at all to call it unintended. Just an easily understood and expected side effect

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 29 points 5 months ago

Libs and your obsession with whataboutism. This one isn't even "whatabout," the point is that the guy in this picture was fine, and in fact the army did everything in their power not to harm him.

In a complete opposite fashion, US drone operators gleefully shot random people and caused unbelievable harm to an entire region.

I proudly defend whataboutism when it's used to exemplify the necessity of some tactic elsewhere or to compare similar cases for better understanding. But this isn't even that

Yeah I should say, I'm not worried about theft as a phenomenon, I just wouldn't have an electric bike outside considering I don't earn enough to lose something like that. Theft is a tragic symptom but I also prefer not to be affected by it lol

But smart, having inside places is cool. Most places I go and bike to wouldn't have that

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 8 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Is bike theft not a major issue in New York It's the main thing keeping me from getting one. Bikes get stolen so frequently that I prefer my 100 buck bike, much more easily replaced.

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 4 points 10 months ago

Honestly, I see this text often quoted form the book but I don't find it super useful as a way to understand fascism. The steps and reforms were all taken for a reason and people agreed with that reason, even the apprehensive agreed enough to stay seated. I think this "separation" isn't the best thesis out of this book, because the Nazi Party didn't shift too much in terms of popularity throughout these shifts, except to grow more popular during wartime. The government promised something and many accepted those conditions or at least lent moral license to the achieving the goal and were unwilling to oppose the conditions.

Fascism is Liberalism when and where Liberalism fails to accomplish it's promises and must consume the people and stuff at the periphery to achieve its goals. A government is just as "far" from its people when it is doing good things that it's people desire as when it does bad things.

I love the book but have major issues with the ideological assumptions, mostly surrounding fascism's relationship to its people and to other ideologies

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 12 points 10 months ago (2 children)

They Thought They Were Free. Book caused me to reevaluate exactly how politics at individual and social levels happened and how fascism works without any individual being inherently "evil." Class politics and interests followed closely behind to explain how evil can arise among populations that all consider themselves "good people"

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Thanks comrade. Language philosophy is why I got into reading in depth books. The national question arises reallllly quickly once you try to understand this whole amazing tapestry of speech and writing around the world. And communism follows quickly to provide a framework for analysis and answers.

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Sorry that rant got off topic but I still want to leave it

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

The flattening of dialect continuums for either nationalist reasons or ease of reading a certain written version of important books (the Bible, often) has had some absurd results. The Russian dialect spoken in east Ukraine is not something that historically was spoken there outside of the influence from the Russian empire or the soviet union, but it's similarity to Russian was close enough for that to be an easy pickup. The dialect can shift more regionally until it's less intelligible and Russian was seen as always something different enough to need to speak it separately (as opposed to just shifting some sounds to be more understandable).

This whole thing gets flattened to meaninglessness and just "2 languages" or "2 dialects" because we obsess with this categorization with the desire for some meaningful Continuum through time. It's idealist to name this "distinction" as causal, but it still is easy to see the results of these processes as being tragic in so many contexts.

There is a gorgeous aspect to this historical situation, but of course we can't return to that: now we have standardized languages in much of the world and people who have been convinced to fight for those sets of ways of speaking. Idk what my point is exactly, besides that this is all socially determined (whether or not a language is mutually intelligible is determined by a social history, and whether it's considered to be a specific of some universal is also socially determined) and we communists should keep that in mind. It becomes material is liberation struggles, as well as during the oppression before it. But it's material under more primary material aspects

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Some really good artists at Hexbear too

[–] commiewithoutorgans@hexbear.net 12 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Hexbear hexbear-logo The best community on the internet

view more: next ›