You forgot tech bro capitalism: we made an app that pays you to do other people's dishes whenever you want to, and we will run at a steep loss until we're the only game in town. Later we'll squeeze the workers and the customers for all they're worth. Our CEO is a narcissistic sex offender.
Did he really say this? Isn't he famous for finding mutual aid in nature? I think he said something like competition is the way of predators and that's what many people, including biologists, focus on, but most of nature does a lot of mutual aid
I think it's kinda a semantic dispute. Rules are mostly a human construct, utilized to organize a hierarchy of understanding of the natural world and how we interact with it as social groups.
So, I'm not really sure if an idea like mutual aid can be used to accurately describe copacetic relationships outside the human experience. Mostly because when nature engages in mutually beneficial relationships, there isn't a goal of organization, nor is there any understanding of hierarchy.
These types of relationships could better be described by someone like Bookchin, as a network of natural codependent relationships is more in the realm of ecology than it is a political science.
I wasn't really disputing that he applied it to nature, just giving my two cents of why I don't think that application is really appropriate.
It's kinda an apple to oranges comparison. For example, we wouldn't be excited about conducting mutual aid with a fascist organization. We understand that fascist would be more than happy to take part, and eventually use that relationship to destroy us.
Nature in comparison is full of relationships that start as mutually beneficial and then become parasitic after a slight change in ecology. The examples of mutual aid in nature are also likely products of survivorship bias, the organisms that find harmony in mutual beneficial relationships are the product of filling the gaps left behind of other mutually beneficial relationships failling.
To condense my rambling..... We can find examples of mutually beneficial relationships/actions in both nature and human society. Technically all forms of commerce is a form of mutual beneficiary action, but not all mutually beneficial actions are mutual aid. Mutual aid requires intent to organize or intent to diminish the dependency of the current organizational hierarchy.
I think the difference would be that the concept of mutual aid is meant to build something further than just surviving within a niche of mutual benefits. It's a means of political organization, not a means of simple existence.
Nobody but the person writing this article thinks body cams will "solve the problem" but they do make us safer when they are used, and give us further investigative powers when they are turned off by accident/intentionally.
I always wonder what the political left would look like in different European countries in the 20th century had it not been for the influence of the Soviet Union. Soviet influence ran, in my humble opinion, like poison through the veins of European socialist organisations. It seems to me like successful left wing mobilization is directly correlated with a relative lack of Soviet influence.
Yeah. They executed a lot of leftist thinking and set back progress for decades. And inadvertently were the reason for the red scare still deeply ingrained in many
Even ignoring the executions, they set the party agenda for a lot of European communist parties, struck down independent local organization (which were more in line with traditional communitarian ideas), and made the political left wing something that could more legitimately be written off as a foreign influence rather than a legitimate political movement because to an uncanny degree, that was just what it was.
This reflects my impression in countries like France - in Spain they of course took it to another level.
Stalin was also partially to blame for the rise (and, to give him his due, fall) of Hitler. The recalcitrance of the Communist party in Weimar Germany was a big part of what prevented a left coalition from being able to take power and cut the Nazis off at the root.
To be fair, in the German context the conservatives were also terrified of the socialist democrat party, who were relatively moderate and if I remember correctly did not have too close ties with Soviet. Hindenburg made the fatal mistake of being more afraid of moderate socialists than of radical fascists.
I also wouldn't give Stalin too much credit for defeating Hitler. The Soviet Union only turned on Germany when they were invaded, and Stalin's military strategy was ruthless and incredibly inefficient. When the Red Army freed Europe I'd argue it was in spite of Stalin rather than because of him.
Maybe I'm looking at history with a view to avoid giving Stalin credit for anything, but turning on a fascist country only when they invade you does not impress me much, and ordering your soldiers to march into a meat grinder without weapons is not an efficient military strategy.
You mean the coup, revisionist, governments of Khrushchev, Brezhnev and the following reactionary anti-communists that destroyed the USSR were actually bad for leftism? Color me shocked.
Even “tankies” would agree that all the anti-communism, anti-Stalinism and anti-Leninism of the USSR after Stalin really fucked communism and leftism all over the world.
Or do you think “tankies” think the USSR after Stalin was “based”? What even is this take?
Uhum uhum, it’s been “bad”. Like it’s only been one of the best countries in history, if you like, actually materially analyse human history and stuff.
Do people like you think what, Sweden is a good country? Or there has been 0 good attempts at social organization in human history, and we better just kill ourselves and give up?
Or rather, my personal position is that indeed the USSR sucked (likely in different ways than you think), and it was still one the best nations ever. We should learn from what it did right, but also what it did wrong.
What even is this indeed. I was talking about the influence of the Comintern, through which the Soviet Union set the agenda of socialist parties all over Europe.
The Comintern ended in '43, but there's a broken part of the European left that never stopped sucking up to Russia. These days they're thankfully just a bunch of weirdos that nobody really gives a shit about, but back in the 30s this stuff mattered.
Your point being the USSR was influential because it was.. what evil?
Doesn’t it make sense they were influential because they were like the only socialist state at the time? And they actually did support many, if not most, anti-colonial and leftist movements all over the world. Like, if you were a leftist in Africa, and needed help fighting against colonialism and stuff, there was only the USSR around to help you. And they did help, a lot.
They had the largest increase in quality of life in history prior to China, they pioneered space exploration and computation. They had the most advanced laws to protect minorities, to guarantee equality for women etc. Their universities were free for people on the 2nd AND 3rd world to attend.
How exactly were they so terrible? And please, don’t list things every country did exactly the same or worse.
Or do you think all the good they did is completely nullified by the bad?
Would it be best for humans to stop trying to do good, never try to learn from the bad, and just give up?
It's a great read and gives a lot of insights into the dynamics I'm describing. The infighting between leftist fractions gets pretty technical, but Orwell does a great job with it.
Orwell is a piece of shit traitor who worked for the UK government to fight communists. AND he was a racist piece of shit. I will never read any books by him, thanks.
I refuse to read explicit anti-communists who worked for fascists states outing communists and disrupting their parties.
To be fair, Orwell writes in Homage to Catalonia that even though he fought alongside Communists, he was there to fight against fascism, not for communism. I think it makes sense that the communists are not all that eager to praise him; that they are too ignorant to read him is their loss.
No matter how you put it, Stalin was certainly a more effective anti-Communist!
True, I always read him as at least sympathetic to the original communist struggle, no matter how much he despised Stalinism and authoritarianism.
It does, however, make sense that people who in all likelihood consider themselves Stalinists wouldn't be the biggest fans of Orwell. What doesn't make sense is that these morons still exist at all, but that's a different issue entirely.
Most people nowadays also seem to buy into the idea that anarchists worship chaos and destruction. I'm not sure exactly where that idea comes from, but it's certainly convenient.
It's been propagated by the detractors of anarchism. The same defamation was used towards the republic when monarchies where the rule rather than exception. People often equated the concept of a republic with chaos and disorder, just like they now do with anarchism.
Yes. Even when your phone is powered down, some models still ping cell towers. If it pings one, they know your distance to the tower. If it pings two, both towers know your distance, and the overlapping circles would reveal two positions coordinates, one of which you were at. With some contextual information, it's easy to know/prove which one you were at.
If it pings 3 towers, your exact location, and unique identifying information sucha as your phone's IMEI is revealed. So don't bring a cell.
Corporates are even bold enough to brand this as a nice to have feature, they call it "find my device" I think? But we can totally trust them to keep this data absolutely private and secure ! /s
Samsung actually offers e2e encryption for location data using a pin code but unfortunately it's disabled by default for some reason. also only available for phones, not other pingable devices like wireless earbuds
Well, e2e encryption doesn't give you any guaranty if the encryption and communication protocols are proprietary and you didn't set the encryption key(s) all by yourself. Samsung could very well have the private keys to decrypt the data and give it to anyone they wish.
I don't think that's really the concern - I think OP was thinking of general metadata that can cause authorities to identify who was there, where exactly and when, and who was also with them - this is power authoritarians wishes they had for a thousands of years, and here we are...
Very funny that they would use this phrase, since ‘oppositional defiant disorder’ can often be just badly diagnosed ADHD. And ye, we don't tolerate rulers since they always make things shittier long-term, nothing is a "disorder" about that.
Like, I get the point, but if you are too much of a coward to put your face with the cause, I am automatically assuming you don’t really care and just want the attention
Now if we’re talking about dictatorships and shit then yeah, and I absolutely Americanized this because of the college campus protests, so I retract my statement for everywhere but America.
Yes. Though I am from the authoritarian state. But I wouldn't say the US is that much different. Sure they might not murder you outright, but they can and will make your life at least a little more miserable
How is it a half measure? Not everyone can (or should) be a symbol
You could post your legal name and other socials on here... It would do nothing to make you more convincing imo. But by that logic, not doing so is a half measure
Maybe attention isn’t the right word, basically I feel like you don’t actually support the cause, you just want to pretend you do.
The people who actually care are willing to take those punishments and the sheer fact that they are willing to do so is what shows they care.
Not showing yourself, shows a lack of dedication to your cause, you aren’t willing to sacrifice, other than some time, you won’t have any permanent consequences.
It’s a “put your money where your mouth is thing.”
They want to pretend they care to make themselves feel like they are doing something, but not sign their name for the cause.
I mean, if they arrest you that impedes your ability to continue protesting. There are reasons other than a lack of dedication to keep your identity protected.
The fact that you aren’t willing to take that hit shows a lack of belief in the importance of the cause.
Obviously it matters to you, a little at least and for various different reasons, because you are out there, but the people that really care about their causes are full in their support of them.
It’s like how so many people say they support something, but aren’t willing to sign their name to the petition.
No, anarchists don't force others to take arrest risks they're not willing to. Everyone has their own tolerances and they can support the cause in their own way. Stop trying to pressure people.
I mean, if you're out there at all you're risking taking a hit (quite literally). Like, when you go to one of these protests you could be slammed to the ground, tear gassed, shot, or arrested. If you're willing to risk that I'd say you're pretty dedicated.
I think it's reasonable, even tactically advantageous to keep your identity protected. You're never going to accomplish much with one protest, and if everyone gets arrested on bullshit charges after the first one it's much harder to organize a second one.
I mean, yeah. You can accomplish a lot with your face exposed too. You can always risk more. But these things don't have to be all or nothing like that.
there's a difference between being willing to take an arrest and getting arrested for something stupid. that's like saying that the point of an army is being willing to die for your country, so the best and bravest are the ones who enlist and then immediately commit suicide. be willing to take a hit, but be strategic about the hits you take and avoid taking a hit for no good reason. it's about getting the thing done, not proving that you're super legit.
Is the possibility of winning you over worth removing someone who is already actively involved? Are you more likely to join a protest if the risks and consequences you face are higher? What about all the people who have already been arrested for protesting recently - has that motivated you to get out and join them?
The fact is that tons of people, especially in the US, love to sit on the sidelines critiquing every protest for whatever arbitrary reason and will insist that they'd be won over if only they did something differently. But then, if they do things differently, they'll just find another reason to complain, because that's all they actually care to do.
I've never understood this prevailing viewpoint you expressed that protests are meant to get more people to join a cause. The point of a protest is to assert disruptive force and to threaten to assert further force. If you see a group of people gathered together doing stuff and happen to think it's cool for whatever reason, cool, sure, whatever. But it's not about you. Protests are not candidates that you decide whether to vote for or not. The point is to communicate to those in power, "We have to capability to get this many people out and organized, and we are going to be a pain in your ass until you give into our demands."
I mean yeah, but (at least in the US) cops have a habit of trampling your rights to protest. Even if you did nothing illegal they can (and will) still harass you after the fact for bullshit, made-up reasons.
They'll assault you in the moment too, but protecting your identity won't protect you from that.
There's actually an old anti-kkk law in Ohio they've been talking about still enforcing, it says if three or more people commit a misdemeanor together while concealing their identity it becomes a felony. It would be interesting to see how that played out in court today.
Maybe attention isn’t the right word, basically I feel like you don’t actually support the cause, you just want to pretend you do.
The people who actually care are willing to take those punishments and the sheer fact that they are willing to do so is what shows they care.
Not showing yourself, shows a lack of dedication to your cause, you aren’t willing to sacrifice, other than some time, you won’t have any permanent consequences.
It’s a “put your money where your mouth is thing.”
They want to pretend they care to make themselves feel like they are doing something, but not sign their name for the cause.
@pbpza I vaguely align with this, but don't really have much capability or hope now. Even having difficulties furthering my (admittedly niche) interests here on the fediverse (federation problems, not many comments).
I am not quite sure what makes this a co-op and not some other community, conservancy, union, club/meetup etc. if it's remote?
Sidenote, not much in the way of actual projects but you'll see me in db0's project (closed PRs 1-3, 2 bits of character art w/animation). I am interested in polygonal art (both 2D and 3D) but have not found a good workflow for me. I would probably rather work solo (if I can do anything) and for programming I want to use nim-lang which limits my options. Might want to use Raylib, but 3D vertex colors was the last thing I tried and those didn't work for me (I could maybe do a simpler 2D polygon style, I have a format/loader started but it needs a lot more work with implementation to be viable). 2/3 of my threads showing my simple 3D art are visible on your instance.
I have life issues too, a change of living conditions would be nice but I don't know if I could pull my own weight plus I am just not really a sociable person. I can think of a lot of ways that might make me useful, but probably not substantial enough especially as I probably couldn't sustain any of it as a strict daily job.
Anarchism
Active