A perfect encapsulation of the notion of them being into women making babies, but not giving a shit what happens after birth. AKA: They don't care about human life, they just want women to be breeder role.
That's fair as a general thing, but I didn't really mean it as a "moral argument"? People have good reason to have developed a viscerally negative view of policing if their experience has only been the US. So part of my point there is just how abnormally bad US policing is and some reasons why it is that way, to help ease off on the instinct that if they are horrific in the US, they must always be horrific everywhere. Yes, part of it is the standard "the police are there to protect capital, etc.", but it's not just that. The US developed from colonizing, genocide, slavery, none of which it ever really reckoned with as more than reformist things that were extremely hard-won. In post WWII, it also became a global capitalist empire and the breeding ground of a vicious anti-communist world campaign. All of this is going to have consequences on what policing ends up looking like.
The whole "they favor the capitalists" thing is true for the US, but also somewhat of an oversimplification. The worst crimes done by US cops (such as extrajudicial murder) are more often carried out against people who are considered non-white, for example. That's something you won't see covered in a purely class analysis.
I'm not trying to be snarky or pedantic when I ask, what is a cop to you? Would you consider a cop to be any enforcer of a formalized state structure that has a monopoly on violence? Anyone who takes on an armed role for organized community defense?
It's very easy and sensible to go with ACAB for the US, but when we're talking about for example a communist vanguard in defense of a working class state socialist project, if we just say it is identical fundamentally, then what are we left with to defend against the violence of the colonizer, imperialist, etc.? Or if we were to say it's bad when it's a "dictatorship of the proletariat", but good if it's community defense, what constitutes the difference and how is the 2nd one strong enough on a practical level to achieve liberation?
Also worth noting, I'm pretty sure US cops are some of the worst in the world, even when compared to other capitalist countries. Like they developed in part from slave patrols and in modern day, have been known to get psychopathic training that glorifies murdering people. On top of the fact some of them are literal gangs.
Their cops murder people too
According to what information?
It's a pretty sad state of affairs, that "issue." There are people who genuinely do care about human life, but got swept up in the anti-abortion rhetoric. But then there are also people who just use it as a cudgel to claim they give a single shit about human life, while supporting, for example, US imperialism. So it can really be a bunch of BS.
I do know a Catholic who eventually came around to the position that the government shouldn't be trying to stop people from having abortions. They still don't believe in abortion, but that part is less important anyway compared to people who actively want the government to restrict it. I might have made a difference there; whenever it came up, I would tend to push the position that it's damaging to women's health and autonomy for the government to try to stop it. Not that it means much in the US context, where I live, since Roe v Wade, the main federal bulwark for abortion rights in the US, was overturned.
Semi-related, drives me up the wall when I hear Catholics talking about pregnancy like their God is hovering over them and going, alright, some sex happened, lemme get a look here and decide if I want a pregnancy to happen this time. But as rough as my portrayal of it is, I don't think that's far off from what they belief, theologically, which is why some of them don't even belief in birth control and whatnot. I wonder if it will eventually die out if science is able to map out and then teach a thorough understanding of fertility. It seems like one of those things where ignorance has the blanks filled in with God.
Han Duck-soo, a technocrat serving as acting president following Yoon Suk Yeol’s removal from office this month by the country’s constitutional court, said “the role of the US was huge in making Korea what it is now”.
Yeah, the US destroyed large parts of Korea, massacred many of its people, and continues to occupy it to this day, preventing reunification.
“After the devastation of the Korean war . . . the United States gave us aid, technology transfer, investments and security assurances,” which helped make South Korea “a very comfortable investment environment for foreigners”, Han told the Financial Times in an interview.
AKA: Once the US was finished destroying relentlessly, they swooped in to profit off of taking over and rebuilding in their image.
In light of this debt of gratitude, Seoul — one of Washington’s closest security allies and economic partners in Asia — would enter negotiations with Trump seeking to find “solutions which are more win-win for both, rather than taking their actions as the objective against which we should fight back”, Han said.
"debt of gratitude" more like literal gun to head
That's a lot to go through, I'm sorry. And thank you, may we all find our way to a more communal, loving society.
Oh wow, that's bad. Thanks for the details.
I'm sorry you deal with that. Personally, I don't have it quite that bad in terms of isolation, but ideologically, it is similar. I'm the odd one out in people I'm closest to, having the views I do. And though I'm with some family, it doesn't feel how I expect it would in a culture that intrinsically values family and community. I don't want to get into too much personal detail about it here, but I'm sure you are familiar with the nuclear family standard of how things are in the US. To the point that ones who stick around family more and longer are probably the odd ones, compared to most other cultures. So instead of feeling comforted by it, at this point in my life I more just feel like there's something wrong with me.
But yeah, I think the impact of loneliness is underestimated sometimes and emotional pain is a real kind of pain. Not that it's a competition who is suffering more or less and in what ways, but just that it is something to recognize as a real harm that's being done.
Oh and best of luck with your backpacking goal.
Gotcha, thanks. Do you know of any good sources on it I could look at for the details? Like operations they've taken credit for, for example. The only concrete example I can remember was something about Egypt from years back and at the (lib brain) time I thought it was cool, but given what I know now about imperialism and how it operates with claiming tyrannical any country that opposes it in any way, they were probably on the side of imperialism there.
I needed this laugh, thanks. 😄
At risk of sounding like a "I'm 14 and this is deep" kind of statement, I was thinking like, "If you were in hell, would the devil really say 'mwahaha, this is hell, suffer' or would he insist to you the whole time that it's heaven and you're taking it for granted."
I don't mean it as a literal theology question for people who believe in that stuff, but I think about it in relation to the US. I know there are worse places to be in terms of quality of life, such as some of the most imperialized nations, but the US may have the most intense contrast between propaganda that says "we're the best" and what the day to day is actually like. A lot of people live paycheck to paycheck but are told it's the greatest country or the like. People's options are narrowed by the limits of transportation (heavy reliance of cars), the intense competition of jobs, etc., while having a vast industry and culture of motivation "if you believe it, you can achieve it" kind of hype that is almost never about utilizing logistics or working together or leaning on each other (presumably cause that stuff is a bit too close to scary socialism, wooo). A lot of people are lonely and struggle to make friends outside of work, college, etc., but are told be an island unto themselves (in whatever variety of words you can think of).
In short, although USian people are broadly, as far as I'm aware, not starving yet (not saying there isn't anyone who is, just in the broader sense), they are probably broadly emotionally starved, communally starved, and other such forms of basic human needs that are less immediately obvious, but nevertheless part of any healthy society. But the solutions to these things would no doubt threaten the dam of anti-communism, so people get gaslighted about how good they have it instead and get fed constant narratives about how to be a better individual. Like imagine if you were actually literally starving and the ones with power over food, who can bring in an abundance of it, were telling you that you need to do these certain rituals to improve your appetite, so you can be strong with less food. It's such a bizarre "country" when you put it in perspective.
Edit: I feel like I posted something very similar to this in the past and I don't know if I'm actually remembering, or if it's just that the same general criticisms are very familiar. Maybe I need to touch grass lol.
Serious question, has "anonymous" been on the right side of history, ever? I know the shtick is supposed to be that they're not a centralized organization, so I guess they could host a myriad of ideologies, but since finding my way to anti-imperialist and communism, I've never heard of anything associated with anonymous that sounds coherently anti-imperialist, let alone in support of socialist projects specifically. They just seem vaguely anti-authority.
Um, didn't covid start under Trump 1? I mean, the US's handling of it all was terrible, still is, but the republicans are part of that. How are they gonna pretend like this is a democrat thing.
I don't even know what to say about the lab leak bullshit, that seems par for the course, US imperialism lying about another country to vilify it.
I have limited knowledge of Mandarin, but that tracks with what I remember because there's something about order of importance in how the language is formatted. I don't know when all it applies and when it doesn't, but I remember like with day for example, it wouldn't be "I go to the park at 9:00am on Sunday." It would be ordered more like (rough literal translation from memory) "Sunday early morning 9:00 I go to park" or "I Sunday early morning 9:00 go to park". So 中国万岁 is probably one of those cases where the country name would go first because it's considered the important part and then "long live" comes after.
There are USian liberals and conservatives alike who love to go for the "maturity" argument, but "maturity" ends up just being a stand-in for "a cynical view of humanity" and "a dogged persistent belief that mass suffering is an inevitable attribute of the human condition and tweaks around the edges are the only way to accomplish anything."
Not every couple of people bullshitting about whatever topic they feel like deserves an audience to hear them out. And I put it that way because that's more or less what a lot of podcasts boil down to. There are some that are more organized and researched, but there's also a lot that is effectively just "listen to some people talk about stuff." Since you can't chime in to the conversation and voice your disagreement, that may make it more annoying to get through. Either way, you aren't obligated to give it a fair shake.
As far as the anger goes, that may be something to understand better regardless. There's usually something else behind anger and it's not just about anger alone. But I wouldn't be feeling ashamed for not wanting to finish a podcast episode.
So far, none of the companies Lead Safe Mama checked have said they will work to get lead out of their product, Rubin said. Several sent her cease-and-desist letters, which she said she ignored, but also posted on her blog.
Yikes.
Yep. Although it's weird as a term because by this point, it's more like macrotransactions in practice with how much they charge for some of the stuff.
On Emotion and Humanity
Amid capitalism and patriarchal socializing, some of you may have a difficult relationship with emotions. You may come to view them as a kind of inconvenience or flaw in the way of being a well-oiled machine. That when others talk of processing emotions, it means you need to process them like one might oil a squeaky gear on a machine, so that you can go back to running smoothly.
But this understanding of emotion has it backward. Experiencing and processing your emotions is itself a part of what makes you human. When you do this, that is what is "running smoothly" in human terms. The nature of a human and a machine is not the same. We are judged by our humanity and a machine is judged by its efficiency. For us to compare, a broken gear is not equivalent to a broken arm, but instead is more equivalent to a broken morality. It is when you repress, distract, and otherwise deny yourself the time and energy to process and experience emotions that you are becoming more comparable to the sque
Therapy intensifies my dislike of individualist western society
It's not even that it's "bad" therapy exactly. It's clearly well intentioned and thoughtful, with a lot of thought put into it, and that's a lot more than some people get from therapy if stories are any indication (and better than some other experiences I've had with it). But the part that shows up over and over again in the background is how focused it is on the individual. It sounds like it sort of makes sense at first, you are there to address your own problems, after all. But the thing is that a therapist has no solutions for what is beyond that. And the solution they often do have, in my experience, is some form of rugged individualism; be better at being you in a vacuum because you can't control others and most things are outside of your control.
Self-improvement can be a thing, I don't think that's somehow wrong. Healing from trauma can be a thing. But the most abled, neurotypical, "healthy" of individuals in western capitalist society are still dealing with a lot of bullshit f
The Shared Hallucination of Individualism: The Denial of the Ecosystem and the Collective
Individualism, especially as the "rugged individualist" point of view, tends to get presented as some sort of triumph over limitations. As the story often goes, a person is dealing with circumstances beyond their control that range from difficult to traumatizing. Rather than back down, the person goes through some kind of experience of toughening up, if they are not already built of grit and steel, and they power through the trying circumstances, coming out stronger and more capable.
This romanticizing of struggle glosses over those who suffer and come out weaker. It glosses over those who suffer and are annihilated by it. And importantly, it ignores the push and pull of being a part of an ecosystem and a society of some kind; an experience that every human being shares.
Individualism, then, is not describing reality, but is denying it. Worse still, it is in some societies not a fringe view hardly known by anyone. Ironically, individualim is in some societies a view collectively shar
I suck at capitalism
Or being competitive. Or business. Maybe all three. I can be professional in a workplace, when I actually manage to get into one. I can work hard. But the process of finding work is soul-sucking. The work itself, even if theoretically meaningful in a vacuum, can still be part of a soul-sucking process. The ever-changing landscape and "I got mine" rat race to stay above the water and "get yours" depresses, rather than motivates, me.
I don't want to be a personal brand, I want to be a person. I don't want to sell things, I want to build things. I don't want to profit off of people, I want to help people.
And sure, some of these things aren't always mutually exclusive. But when they are, capitalism makes sure you suffer for it. Chip away at your humanity or lose out on stability. Angst of the soul or angst of the stomach. Neither makes you a happy, healthy human being.
I try to be patient with it. Take it one day at a time. Work toward a goal. Improve on myself. For what world? What fu
The Illusion and Disillusionment of Chatbots
The Illusion
Chatbots have become a robust technology, with the best of them capable of imitating a real person to the point that some users will wonder if they are talking to a real person, even with an explicit statement on the page that they're talking to a bot. Even basic chatbots have had a degree of capability to draw people in, such as with the rhetorical method of asking them simple questions one after another to get them to open up and affirming what they say.
Capitalism has created a lot of loneliness and estrangement, and chatbots have entered in as a niche response to that. Notions such as "talk about something that you don't feel you can talk about with others" are appealing, especially from an entity that can validate you no matter your background, your beliefs, your personality. On the face of it, it's a kind of liberalism taken to its magical height; everyone can be exactly who they want to be in their own little space and receive no judgment or poor treatment for
I need to limit myself to here for a while or something
This will be a US-centric post, fair warning if you don't want to hear about more of that.
I've been more on twitter and reddit (I know, god...) recently in the week of the election and its results, and my main takeaways are:
- Liberals keep going mask off fascist in one way or another
- It seems like there's a concerted effort across social media posting and news articles to spin the democratic party loss as anything but the democratic party's fault, which often involves blaming one minority group or another; excuse to be racist? mask coming off? or just cynical use of them to shift blame? I don't know, but the end result is racism either way. There's also a fair amount of "voters are 'stupid', etc." that portrays them as well informed and conscious voters who know what they want and are asking for it, but simultaneously don't understand what they're asking for and deserved to be punished for it when it comes back to bite them (???).
- Liberal still act like clever retorts on twit
Communism in religion?
So I overheard one person I know telling another person I know that "socialism and communism are evil and the church is very clear on that" (referring to the catholic church). And I'm trying to channel my burning frustration about it into asking what people know about communism and how it has interacted with religion more generally, but also catholicism especially, now or historically. I super hard doubt what this person said was even remotely correct, but I could believe that the catholic church takes a wishy washy fence-sitting stance because it tends to on a number of things.
At any rate, it's something I should know better because I do have catholic people in my life and so sometimes there may be a need to talk to them about these things through the framing of religion to get past the "communism is purely atheistic" type thinking.
Answers from your own knowledge or resources that go into it are both welcomed. I don't really know how to approach looking for it on my own in this in
Mask wearing and such
Basically, wanted to know where people are at with mask wearing (as it relates to containing covid and all), I know it's been a while since it started. And I've seen people who say covid can still be threatening, like through long covid and such, even if the initial impact doesn't tend to be as bad. Being in the US, it's especially hard to tell what makes sense because the gov sorta gave up on containment a while back and only ever half-assed pushing mask wearing. And wearing a mask alone was a controversial thing in some places, even in the very beginning. Then there's vaccines, which of course help, but seems to be a thing like the flu where you have to get boosters to be fully covered for variant strains.
So in general, I'm wondering stuff like:
- Do you still wear a mask or not and why? And do you have distinctions like large crowds or anything like that?
- How does mask wearing compare by country, from what you know? For example, I'm sure China has a more pro-mask-wearing cul
The Anti-Science Infantilization of the Modern Tech World
Disclaimer: This may read bleak, but I'm not in a bleak state of mind. I will post a comment with my thought process behind it.
The Anti-Science Infantilization of the Modern Tech World
You get up and read the news. Halfway across the world are things happening you have no control over and if you put yourself out there and protest it, you get told to stop speaking when a politician is speaking.
You go on a job website and submit an application, but you may not ever receive a rejection and if you do, you will likely receive no information on why your application was rejected and some other person's wasn't. Was it something you did? Was it nothing you did? You don't know.
You go on a dating app and try to match with people. If you're a man, you probably send out a lot of likes or messages that never get a response. Does your profile suck? Are you sending poor messages? You don't know. Maybe they're never getting seen in the first place. If you're a woman, you probably receive mor
Apathy as an unconscious coping mechanism for dealing with hyper individualism
I feel like I could do a big write up on this - I could if I wanted to.
Which incidentally is the theme here. As a point of focus, there is a song by that name, which can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUuU99c_9mY
It appears to be parodying the kind of person who has apathy, or even aversion, toward participating in "normal social standards" and insists that they could do it if they wanted to, but don't want to.
What I find interesting about this, as it relates to a forum like here and the stuff we're able to recognize and talk about, is that I suspect there's some connection in that mindset to hyper individualism. Notably, the mindset in question is not "I can't do it," or "the system is stopping me," or "I am revolted by what it wants me to do" on their own.
The mindset appears to be more like: "I kind of want to be normal, but something is in the way; however, because I can't accuse the system of being at fault, it has to be something wrong with me. Therefore, wh
How do you deal with selective apathy?
I'm not sure how else to put it. As an example, someone who cares about issues of LGBTQIA+, but when it comes to issues of capitalism pushing exploitative practices in video games, they are siding against the player and doing the "it's on you how you spend" shtick.
I suppose another way to frame this would be "how do you deal with selective empathy?" Because that seems to be how it in some cases, that the person cares about the thing that personally impacts them, but otherwise, they'll side with the exploiter in a heartbeat.
It disgusts me when I see it in action, so much so I almost wrote this as a rant post in the comradelyrants section instead. But I feel it's a topic that deserves more discussion attention than that.
In general, the mindset that goes something like:
"So this company dropped some spikes on the sidewalk."
"Well I think if somebody stepped on them, that's on them. It's really obvious that they are there and I went out and walked just fine and had a good time, I j
Dealing with the "blah blah so and so fled communism" talking point
If there's already been discussion on this at length that someone knows of, feel free to link me.
I've been thinking this over because it's one of those recurring talking points that comes up. I may have even talked about it here before in passing, but I don't remember for sure.
But I wanted to talk about the core of how BS it is and the main way I see it get used. Which is that of someone saying "my [relative] lived in [socialist state] and fled it", or they will leave out the first part and just say "people lived in [socialist state] and fled it." And then the implication or outright stated, "Why aren't you taking this as proof that communism bad? Clearly communism bad!"
The primary way I've seen people counter this is pointing out that those who were fleeing were sometimes, well... members of the former exploiting class. Which is true.
But I'm not sure the talking point is even worth entertaining to that degree. Because like:
- As far as I've seen, nobody provides actual har
How do you deal with family members who are relentlessly liberal?
More specifically, this is about people bothsidesing the ongoing genocide that zionists are committing, but I titled it more generally because this is something that can be difficult to deal with in general.
In the past, I've tried to be diplomatic and meet people where they're at, slowly imparting information where I can and presenting my views where I feel able to. I rarely actually get worked up about these things in person and am generally able to go through it with people patiently, but this is something that is really pushing me to my limits.
I think what is most galling to me about it, that I find as a theme in liberal thinking and struggle to be patient with at times, is the arrogance of it. I put a lot of time into these things, time that they clearly haven't put in, only to have them speak to me about it as if their position is equal and worthy of listening to simply because it is theirs. As if we are exchanging views on our favorite TV show.
I will be plain too, in saying
Hero complex vs. legitimate collectivist mindset?
My instinct is that the first (hero complex) would tend to lead someone to adventurism, but I'm not super clear on what the second (collectivist mindset) looks like in practice. Having grown up in the US, where individualist seems to be pushed to an extreme degree and collectivism equated to being a hivemind, it's a bit difficult sometimes for me to understand what collectivism looks like in practice.
Where it gets especially difficult for me, and why I thought to come ask here where people may be able to help with the distinction, is that I have people-pleasing tendencies to a degree that seems unhealthy; in the sense of not valuing my own needs and boundaries to the extent that it's difficult for me to be properly equipped to help others in the first place. In the vague land of hypotheticals, I get that difference; ok, I make sure I am taken care of to the extent that I can function effectively and then I can help others, right?
But in practice, where does this line make sense for