Look at the perspective near his hands, either it's the most crooked console ever or it's AI

pointless summation, that just simplifies to n(n+1)/2 :P

Whether their occupations and annexations where extractive or expansionist in nature, and whether they qualify for the definition of imperialism, is discussion that can be had, although I have neither the time nor energy to have it here. What stays unchanged past this talk of semantics is the fact that they were an authoritarian and expansionist state. To quote Rosa Luxemburg:

When all this is eliminated, what really remains? In place of the representative bodies created by general, popular elections, Lenin and Trotsky have laid down the soviets as the only true representation of political life in the land as a whole, life in the soviets must also become more and more crippled. Without general elections, without unrestricted freedom of press and assembly, without a free struggle of opinion, life dies out in every public institution, becomes a mere semblance of life, in which only the bureaucracy remains as the active element. Public life gradually falls asleep, a few dozen party leaders of inexhaustible energy and boundless experience direct and rule. Among them, in reality only a dozen outstanding heads do the leading and an elite of the working class is invited from time to time to meetings where they are to applaud the speeches of the leaders, and to approve proposed resolutions unanimously – at bottom, then, a clique affair – a dictatorship, to be sure, not the dictatorship of the proletariat but only the dictatorship of a handful of politicians, that is a dictatorship in the bourgeois sense, in the sense of the rule of the Jacobins (the postponement of the Soviet Congress from three-month periods to six-month periods!) Yes, we can go even further: such conditions must inevitably cause a brutalization of public life: attempted assassinations, shooting of hostages, etc. (Lenin’s speech on discipline and corruption.)

• Rosa Luxemburg, The Russian Revolution, 1918.

1918, this was written well before Stalin's reign of terror, in a time when general sentiment towards the revolution was full of hope. Even anarchists where quick to support the revolutionaries, but quickly became disillusioned from what they saw. To quote Trotsky, the man himself:

The working class [...] cannot be left wandering all over Russia. They must be thrown here and there, appointed, commanded, just like soldiers [...] Compulsion of labour will reach the highest degree of intensity during the transition from capitalism to socialism [...] Deserters from labour ought to be formed into punitive battalions or put into concentration camps.”

Then later in the year, as the workers were becoming angered at their treatment:

the militarization of labour...is the indispensable basic method for the organization of our labour forces

And

Is it true that compulsory labour is always unproductive? [...] This is the most wretched and miserable liberal prejudice: chattel slavery too was productive. Compulsory slave labour [...] was in its time a progressive phenomenon. Labour [...] obligatory for the whole country, compulsory for every worker, is the basis of socialism.

I'm sure the Ukrainian free soviets where happy to be liberated, or the sailors of Kronstadt. I'm sure the Spanish workers were glad to be shot in the back in the name of the party. The people of Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were without a doubt thrilled to be occupied. The land grab in Finland liberated plenty of people, they were welcomed with open arms, yes? Communists leaders around the world felt so liberated, in fact, they bonded together in third-worldism to escape the influence of the СССР.

你说什么?

Who is talking about campaign contributions? That is a whole other issue. I'm talking about the revolving door between politics and private industry, about how you need personal connections to get the ear of politicians and these connections can be bought, and how politicians gleefully accept laundered bribes from private interest groups. There are, of course, lobbying groups doing good (like some NGOs or advocacy groups), but the system of lobbying itself is deeply flawed. But I guess that's sorta inevitable under capitalism.

I'm not even from the US, just watching in horror as the dominant global superpower turns to open, unapologetic fascism. So continue belittling my lack of civic education if you must, but I'm afraid I'm more informed about your political process than a majority of your electorate. I wish I didn't have to be.

and it's been diluted by money

That's why they said "any paid lobbying is bribery". While anyone can sign a petition to your representative and that's technically also lobbying, what we're talking about here is not that. In a democracy, every person gets their voice heard. With lobbying, only the dollar speaks.

That's true. Imperialist ideologies like capitalism or the state socialism of the CCCP have an advantage in spreading their influence globally. But there's nothing in principle standing in the way of one world, one federation, a million tribes. Anarchism does scale quite the well in that regard

(most) Anarchists don't have a problem with scale, just with hierarchy. We can have democratic and free associations at any scale.

I want my terminal to just work, so all this kitty stuff is overboard for me, but good for them!

It sounded conspicuously like "girls kissing" :3c

This community fr

So many bottoms and/or subs and not one top and/or domme in sight

uhh I mean :3 >///<

To add to that, season 1 (up until the end of highschool, basically) is pretty self contained. If you care about being able to binge, I'd say give the first season a shot, it's good! They just recently picked it back up with season two, now in uni

Im Kontext von Elektrizität ist Power aber nicht der Strom (das wäre current), außer man redet sehr unpräzise umgangssprachlich. Power wird beim täglichen Sprechen zwar ähnlich wie Strom im Deutschen verwendet, dabei wird aber einfach die Leistung als Repräsentation des elektrischen Vorgangs genutzt, so wie im Deutschen (eigentlich ja fälschlicherweise) der Strom. "Wie viel Strom verbraucht die Lampe" fragt ja selten nach Ampere, sondern meistens nach Watt. So wird z.B. im Kontext des Ladestands und Stromverbrauchs (ha, noch so ein Begriff) von Geräten oft über "Power Management" gesprochen.

Ansonsten korrekt, Power ist kontextabhängig. In der Naturwissenschaften meint es zumeist Energie pro Zeit, also Leistung, in der Gesellschaftswissenschaft meistens Macht.

Helix!

Vielleicht hat sie deshalb so viele Rutschen

Oh I agree, I am happy with Helix and use it as my main editor already. I like that they'd rather take their time to figure out how to make plugins work well.

Nennen wir es Selbstverwaltung

Die Unterscheidung "governance <-> government" lässt sich irgendwie schwer aus dem Angelsächsischen übersetzen

Uhhg, I've been waiting for module support for helix for forever, now. It's a planned feature, but it's been that way for ages now