Never forget this Tuesday September 11 with more than 3000 victims, in 1973, when the CIA helped an bloody Dictator Pinochet in his military coup against the democratic president Allende in Chile. Just 50 Years ago.
Who is this for? Looking at the Apple Store, they sell an official USB-C cable for less ($19, but you can obviously find good quality third-party cables for much less).
And they can use their current phones with them, no? No one is forced to upgrade - they can easily buy another lightning-having iPhone when their current one croaks and should be safe for the next 20 years (buying used iPhones) if their stupid accessories are so gd important
People who have accessories with a lightning adapter probably. Speakers, docks, etc.
Are those common? I don’t think I’ve ever even seen a speaker with a built-in Lightning dock.
I remember these iPod docks were very common at the time of the 30-pin connector. However by the time Lightning came around wireless audio became more commonplace with Bluetooth, AirPlay and other related technologies (CarPlay, smart speakers etc.)
Not in the last couple of years, but 11 years ago when it was introduced, probably.
Airplay was already around when the 30 pin connecter was still there, and they were also popular back then. I remember using a 30 pin connecter speaker with a 30 pin to lightning connecter also because it could charge my phone at the same time.
Realistically, the market for such accessories is likely fairly limited, but that in the end also results in a higher price (no scale in the market after all).
The way I think about adapters is that you have a Lightning cable and attach the adapter so it turns into an USB-C cable. I guess you can also think about adapting the port. Wild.
This post assumes that a meaningful amount of defed instances are caused by simple lack of agreement. Often, it’s an orthogonal matter - it boils down to instance A actually understanding something about the userbase of instance B and saying “I’m not dealing with this shit, it’ll make the instance worse for its own users”. For example: the typical user of B might be disingenuous, or preach immoral prescriptions, behave like a chimp, or be a bloody stupid piece of trash that should’ve stayed in Reddit to avoid smearing its stupidity everywhere here.
Are instance admins too eager to pull the trigger for defed? Perhaps, in some cases; specially because it handles groups of users instead of individuals. But those cases are better addressed through actual examples, not through a meme talking on generic grounds.
The cool part is, if your instance admin starts doing stuff you don’t like, you can super easily just go to a different one, or even go about hosting your own that you control and decide who to federate with
Yup. As a side effect: admins that are too eager to pull the trigger might get their own users pissed, and they’ll eventually leave. So a successful admin needs to make sure that the defed is the best for his userbase.
Well, once they fix the whole "each instance copies the media from other instances automatically" thing. I'd love to self-host a vanity instance if I didn't have to either worry about CSAM or just nuke the entire pict-rs facility via script.
...actually I wonder if that's an option on kbin. Even if the Mastodon interoperability is a bit wonky right now I like the platform working with both services on ActivityPub (thus why I'm here).
Making it mandatory and something you can't opt out of is not acceptable. "Work as a knockoff as a CDN" shouldn't be a requirement of running a vanity instance. That's a barrier to entry without much benefit.
See what I’m going to do is I’m going to make the nazis look equally bad to all these other things. That way the nazi atrocities will look less problematic and I get to smear my enemies with a tainted term.
You’re trying to hard to see what you want to see in order to sound morally superior for Internet high fives.
It is clearly a half assed joke saying that if you call a group horrible, someone with get butt hurt and respond accordingly. Which in a round about way is exactly what you did. Any further reading into it is on you.
Just so you know, Nazis have used assertions exactly like what Zoldyck said literally since the day after the nazis were defeated.
One name for it is “double genocide theory” which is used to a) diminish the crimes of the Nazis/ even to the extent of genocide denial and b) equate fascism and communism (an absolutely absurd claim, to be clear. Ask about it if you’re unaware!)
This is not something we regularly go around doing, we are very careful with what stuff we call nazi shit. We’re careful not to make the word lose its meaning. This was an example of a common nazi/nazi-adjacent talking point, and we take it seriously when we encounter it.
Its just like “Blue Lives Matter” is thinly veiled racism. other examples include 1488, the 14 words, ‘states rights’, etc.
It is clearly a half assed joke
They may have thought it was just a joke when saying it, but the intent doesn’t matter, because they may also have known what they were doing and did it on purpose, because they’re a nazi/ nazi adjacent.
You seem to know what you’re talking about, and not going to debate you on any of the points you just brought up. I certainly don’t disagree with anything you just said. I just still feel it’s a stretch to assume that comment is equating all of those things that were listed. That’s not what I took away from it at all, and still don’t.
just still feel it’s a stretch to assume that comment is equating all of those things that were listed.
I’m not sure I understand, Isnt that explicitly what the point of the post was? to equate all those things so that communists would get angry at them? what point was that comment making, in your view?
In my view, I don’t think it was aimed soIely at communism. Can’t speak for the intent of the poster unless they weigh in though. My view when saying they wanted to test something and then say several groups were horrible was to get a reaction from those that belong to said groups as a sort of half assed shotgun technique. I really didn’t expect it to get a rise out of anyone reasonable which is why I made my initial comment. All of those groups listed have various sized vocal subgroups that will aggressively defend their view points with a “them vs us” take.
That said the view points themselves are very different so that is where the equivalence stops.
I can understand that. From my perspective, as a communist, I probably would have come down on them even if they just said nazis bad US bad Australia bad
In this case I heartily agree, but we again have the issue of lackadaisically equating things to the nazis. Australia sure is a terrible trash fire of a settler colonialist planet killer, but they aren’t nazis and they didn’t do the holocaust
I mean yeah because the US does the same horrible horrible shit other existing countries do just more of it. Mentioning the smaller problem while ignoring the bigger problem(that we are closer to) is just how liberal brainwashing works.
Extending to the political party specifically for Germany, but not the others; could be worth doing that.
Like, EVERY country has its good people that hate the horrific actions of its administration. It can cause issues and paint xenophobia if you don’t identify and shame the bad actors. Instead, you get Chinese people that live in poverty thinking America hates all of them for having thin eyes.
Better thing to say imo: fuck Republicans and the CIA, fuck Putin, fuck the CCP.
Trying to claim the term “Web3” is a futile battle. It is already widely understood to mean crypto and blockchain. If I see a job posting that says the company is built on Web3, I know immediately that the job is built on scams and grifts without having to ask further questions. Web3 as a term is ruined already.
For this to work it must be a different term than Web3. Maybe “Web 3.0” is different enough?
Know what you did was ignore my comments regarding you being a shitty person, so you could try to make this about your original comment again, which it never was. Go fuck yourself and eat shit
I mean lemmy.world does actually kinda suck. They block piracy communities, don’t know a shit about cyber security and can’t keep their servers online for more than a day before they go down. The only reason why people use lemmy.world is because they want to avoid lemmy.ml.
There’s several reason i dont use my lemmy.world login much at all anymore. But when I was there, it was because it was supposed to be “the right instance for me” according to the info I had access to. I knew nothing about all this lemmy/federated stuff (my only federation experience was with star trek… and federated architectural 3d modelling coordination programs like Revit/BIM360). So i joined the “right instance for me” and guess what? it kinda sucked. but it was frustrating. I just wanted things to work, but there was drama over hexbear and others, and half the time the servers were being ddos’d. So i jumped ship to lemmy.zip and discuss.online as a backup. Could just have easily been me this user was insulting, a few days ago. Insulting me would not have pushed me closer to switching instances, it would have just convinced me further that this place is just as, if not more toxic than reddit. I didn’t vote to de-federate hexbear, or any of the other recent de-federations related to piracy (insert legit argument about server hosted content vs. US law), and I was still trying to get my bearings.
Just because lemmy.world does “kinda suck” doesn’t mean we should berate their users, thats antithetic to the entire idea of federated communities interconnecting this way.
If Reddit can host a piracy community, why can’t lemmy.world do it? I made an account the day lemmy.world defederated with that community. After I noticed that I immediately deleted my account and switched to sh.itjust.works and lemm.ee is there as a backup. But you’re right, we shouldn’t hate on innocent lemmy.world users who don’t know any better. It’s not their fault that the admins are such morons.
reddit.com is Reddit.Inc. with investors and lawyers and content curators and admins galore etc.
Lemmy.world is idk some guy named ruud in a basement with servers or something idk. The point is they aren’t equivalent resource pools to protect them from legal issues.
Right, but AFAIK he hasn’t even received any legal complaints. He could have done nothing, and only defederate when some shitty media company complains.
Yeah, I don’t want to hate on lemmy.world for no reasons, but the things I described earlier turned that instance into a shit show pretty quickly. Which is unfortunate.
I can’t blame him for wanting to avoid legal issues before it gets to the point he is receiving notices, C&Ds and law suits. That can get very expensive, very fast.
It’s not like it’s hard to make an account on another instance to look at piracy related content.
It’s not like it’s hard to make an account on another instance to look at piracy related content.
That’s right, but lemmy.world claims to be an instance for anyone, which it isn’t anymore. It’s not neutral anymore.
I can’t blame him for wanting to avoid legal issues before it gets to the point he is receiving notices, C&Ds and law suits. That can get very expensive, very fast.
It’s not like you immediately get sued, you first get a DMCA takedown notice. At that point, he could just defederate and everything would be fine.
Note that not all Web 3 v2 final (1) features are required to be labeled Web 3 v2 final (1). Please consult vendor documentation to determine which features are supported on their device.
Abusing terminology, especially by marketers, is frustrating and cringe. But don’t underestimate the value in having a simple, shared term to describe a paradigm many things fit into.
I think it’s useful terminology, but only very generally and in hindsight. Web 1 is a pretty clear era in the 90s and early 2000s, characterized by simple static blogs and personal websites, and email. Everyone knew this would be big, but nobody figured out how, that was the dotcom bubble. Web 2 began with the rise of big tech companies like Google and Facebook in the late 2000s, it has been characterized by social media apps, centralized platforms hosting user created content, funded by targeted advertising and data mining. Web apps became possible and smartphones took over. Every product became a subscription service.
I think we’re at the start of web 3, but it’s hard to say what that is yet. The big tech companies are crumbling and there’s increasing unrest at the old system of web 2. Fed up users are turning to platforms like this. There’s a lot of demand for crypto nonsense like NFTs. AI is changing the way we do everything.
I hope that web 3 is the age of decentralization because that would be awesome, but it’s impossible to predict the future.
I mean… We are getting to a point where die off of a good chunk of the World-Wide Web due to bad actors and drying-up ad revenue isn’t implausible. The Web is only one part of the Internet.
Blockchain and crypto are both decentralized, which is exactly what Web3 is defined as. Just because they came before federated websites doesn’t mean the definition is exclusive to them. I would call “Web3” ruined, rather I would say that ActivityPub is the first great implementation of it.
PS: The distinction between Web 3 and Web 3.0 is giving me some real USB 3.2 Gen 1 vibes.
This isn’t just stupid. Anyone over 20 remembers that it wasn’t this hot for this long. This requires that they tell themselves that the heat is for some natural reason.
Or they pretend that that one really hot day that made the newspaper in 1972 is perfectly representative for the other 364 days, because it’s always warm in summer.
True, but we need to get them to acknowledge that okay, it was 102° F one day in 1972. Yesterday and today were the first days in 2 weeks or more where the high was less than 100° F where I live.
hell, you don’t even have to go back to 1972. I remember in my area growing up (90’s), breaking 100 was something that would maybe happen one or two days out of a whole summer, and it was a whole thing - treated in the same way you might treat a really bad storm in winter.
This summer half of every week has been above 100 since July - our “breaks” from the heat are like mid-90’s.
I wonder how bad it’s going to have to get before everyone who isn’t literally mentally ill will have to admit that this isn’t normal
I live in Canada and it feels like half the country has been on fire this summer. The Premier of my province doesn’t even think climate change is real and is currently stripping away environmental protections from our best land so his buddies can build subdivisions and destroy it
It isn’t that way everywhere though. My part of southeast Ohio has consistently been below average. I know other places have to be extra, extra hot to reach the increased global temperatures, but millions and millions of Americans simply are not extperiencing any kind of increased heat.
The average person, even in the southern US where it’s warmer, seems to understand that it doesn’t snow as much as it used to. I’ve heard numerous people mention it over the years. It’s when you try to get them to consider why that might be the case that their brains start turning to mush.
It’s when you try to get them to consider why that might be the case that their brains start turning to mush
It’s not their brains turning to mush, it’s their rational thoughts bumping right up against decades of propaganda by oil companies, the right wing media, and conservative politicians that have ingrained the idea in them that believing in climate change makes you part of the radical left.
And ultimately it’s easy to get people to (especially conservatives, who - by definition - are resistant to change) not believe in climate change, because it’s scary as fuck, and because solving it will involve huge overarching societal changes. Much easier to pretend it doesn’t exist. That’s not just climate change, that’s just how the human brain likes to deal with unpleasant facts - hell, that’s how most people cope with the concept of their own mortality
We grew up in the south, right on the edge of the Midwest though. I remember one time my wife’s grandpa talking about how when he was a kid they all had ice skates because the ponds would freeze in the winter and the kids would skate. I was like that’s cool but the ponds don’t really freeze that solid in the winter.
It’s neither. It is wilful ignorance. All those studies sorting political affiliations by education, IQ and whatnot never show a difference that is nearly as large as these kind of comments suggest. There are small trends, but not more.
The average IQ of republicans isn’t much lower. They just choose to squander their potential. Never underestimate the potential often human beings to lie to themselves. It is one of our most honed skills.
It’s also probably a factor, that when you pretend global warming isn’t man made, that you can’t do anything against it so you don’t have to change your way of life
Since that flag tried storming the capital building. I actually like the original meaning of the flag, but it got cooped by meat heads. I do like the pride and women’s rights versions of the gadsen flag.
I’m not sure if you’re aware of this, but flags are inanimate objects that lack the ability to make conscious decisions like “storm the capitol.” People make those decisions, and people can carry whatever flag they so choose while doing so whether they embody the meaning of that flag or not, as evidenced by much of those same people also carrying conflicting thin blue line or maga gear. They could have chosen to storm the capitol carrying antifa flags, and besides the fact that you’d likely be cheering them on rather than admonishing them for the same behavior exhibited by your percieved enemy, the flag waved would largely be inconsequential to anything other than “your support.” In fact, you’d likely point out that ~1,003 have been charged from the incident which is not only a small percentage of the total supporters of either side, but is a small percentage of the crowd that was even at the rally that started it, meaning more people who fly either of those respective flags didn’t “do it” than did.
Of course, that isn’t propaganda-y enough for most, or is too propaganda-y because I’m only supposed to talk bad about one side not both. Oh well, c’est la pipe.
Her views are 100% bog standard modern “libertarian,” because her works are the most significant factor in the shaping of those beliefs, but in her day libertarians were anarchists just beginning the ideological split into today’s actual libertarians and anarcho-capitalists/“libertarians”/racist and pedophilic liberals and fascists lying about their real goals to useful idiots.
Rothbard, famous racist, slave desiring, apartheid supporting, pedophile ideological founder of anarcho-capitalism, who has quite a lot of suspiciously pro-fascism quotes, technically started the process in the 40’s, but it didn’t gain steam or co-opt the term libertarian until the populatization of “libertarianism” thanks to Rand’s works.
So yes, everything you just said is technically correct, but is still deliberately misleading in modern context.
Her views are 100% bog standard modern “libertarian,”
Wrong. She praises monopolies, hierarchical systems with hereditary aristocracy, money bending rights, some people being more human than others etc. She’s rather very roughly Darwinist, with the idea that the less you try to compensate for strength disparity, the better, and at the same time she’s rather centralist. Almost fascist.
Basically she’s an inverted Bolshevik, which is not surprising considering her family history. A Bolshevik from capitalists, if you like. Not even similar to libertarianism. Her ideas have simply nothing to do with liberty. She was sufficiently honest to explain these things herself.
and anarcho-capitalists/“libertarians”/racist and pedophilic liberals and fascists lying about their real goals to useful idiots.
I’m ancap (rather distributist as in Chesterton’s views, but that’s harder to explain), so this BS you can leave to yourself.
I’d generalize this as anarchist ideologies attracting people who’d like to get rid of certain limitations most others would consider sane. Like fucking children, stealing, killing etc. This is, sadly, a real tendency, but I’ve met such leftist anarchists too.
Rothbard, famous racist, slave desiring, apartheid supporting, pedophile ideological founder of anarcho-capitalism, who has quite a lot of suspiciously pro-fascism quotes, technically started the process in the 40’s, but it didn’t gain steam or co-opt the term libertarian until the populatization of “libertarianism” thanks to Rand’s works.
You forgot to say that he also kinda liked USSR, at least in his book, “For a new liberty” or something, a very interesting person surely.
Also Rothbard’s and Rand’s followers were always very different people. I’ve never met a person who’d like both. It’s a bit like tankies think that “liberal” and “fascist” are synonyms, completely removed from the reality. If you want to have some idea about libertarians, you should talk to them and not your leftist friends.
So yes, everything you just said is technically correct, but is still deliberately misleading in modern context.
It’s especially important in modern context. Ayn Rand is basically a spoiler for libertarianism, a strawman which every leftist uses against people whose ideology has nothing in common with her. And in reality she was just, like I said earlier, for capitalism what Bolsheviks were for leftist ideologies. Rather economically misguided and too impractical.
I mean, you can just read the sources, Rothbard’s most known books, Ayn Rand’s Atlas and other stuff, and make your own opinion. The only common thing between them is disdain for state regulation and leftism. But the root of Rothbard’s ideology is simply incompatible with the root of Rand’s ideology.
The former builds on natural right and non-aggression. The latter builds on people not being equal, and some being shit under the boot of others, better and more useful. These are in direct conflict.
I mean, explaining something to a tankie is similar to trying to teach a pig fly.
I have read, much, much more of Rothbard than I like, which is why I despise him personally with an incandescent fury, the lying hypocrite and diseased builder of a rotten foundation.
His only enjoyable work was The Betrayal of the American Right, because I enjoy watching a fool recount the way the people who would become the neoliberals ate his stupid face, the way actual libertarians had warned him would happen from the start.
You know, using the word “neoliberals” just spoils your message due to this word meaning technically literally nothing. Empirically the least fuzzy description of it is “something that leftists don’t like”. It’s literally leftist slang.
I don’t think there’s anything more “actually libertarian” than Rothbard, but one can disagree with any particular thing (and I do with many). It seems you are pushing your ancoms from an unexpected orifice again.
But, of course, Chesterton’s and others’ distributism is even better, but one just can’t agree on such a thing with people without a certain cultural component.
Tankies aren’t communists, they’re authoritarians with the red aesthetics. They agree with fascists on every valuable part of their worldview, and only disagree on which historical genocidal dictator was totally innocent actually
How do you define “democratic?” Would North Korea be democratic if there were two candidates instead, where they fought in a pretend culture war, but one of them really just deferred to the other if they won? North Korea has different parties too, you know.
Anybody who screeches about authoritarian regimes exposes themselves as being intellectually bankrupt, and can be safely ignored. A great explanation of why this is a nonsensical narrative peddled by western pseudoleft cym.ie/…/left-anti-communism-the-unkindest-cut-by…
Because anyone can call anything what they want. Is the Patriot Act very patriotic? Call something what it isn’t and mock people who call it out. It’s a form of double talk.
I would not. They’re trying to erase the cultures of any non-Han Chinese and suppressing any lgbt groups. How does that support the “from each according to his ability to each according to his need” creed?
Reducing all the nuance of Marxism, socialism, and communism to
“from each according to his ability to each according to his need”
is problematic.
It’s not going to lead to much explanation and it ignores the hundreds of thousands of other words that Marxists have written.
This is in addition to the problem that “from each according to his ability to each according to his need” is the goal of communism and you’re arguing with someone who (rightly) says communism hasn’t been reached.
LGBT rights in China are admittedly at a frustratingly slow speed. Other comrades more familiar than I am with Chinese politics have suggested that the democratic centralism means that as they do advance, it will be collectively, and without a conservative backlash as we see in the US
This is like really basic geopolitics my dude, China is a thoroughly capitalist economy by any definition that isn’t being massaged specifically to exclude them.
… is this supposed to be some sort of gotcha? Did I commit a whoopsie by using the term geopolitics to refer to how one of the top 3 global superpowers runs its markets?
You did not " not share my exact thoughts", you did not even grasp the topic. In the former there is some overlap and some deviation. In the latter there is no overlap.
No, because MLs aren’t necessarily tankies. And I do consider tankies a subset of Communists. Just not the very bright subset.
“Tankie” means someone who’s more interested in following a communist team rather then a communist ideal. Even if the team leader is just a grifter.
If you acknowledge the short comings of certain states that don’t really follow the “from each according to his ability to each according to his need”, you’re not a tankie.
Anarchists follow their team too; they’re opposed to any state whatsoever, no matter what the character of that state is and no matter the achievements of that state. Their team is the abolition of the state and anything that works towards that goal, no matter who it comes from, is considered by anarchists to be anarchist(ic). By this definition they would be tankies too.
As to lemm.ee: Here’s the policy. Long story short: Tankies don’t go harassing lemm.ee communities and aren’t doing illegal shit, spam, suchlike, elsewhere so they get a pass.
Failing to acknowledge that authoritative measures arise not through ideology, but through material conditions, is anti-Marxist, anti-dialectical, and idealist.
Nah, I didn’t do that. I just pointed out that they are either a supporter of capitalism (or reactionary politics) or they support revolutionary/evolutionary socialism, all of which are inherently authoritarian in their own ways.
The material conditions that give rise to authoritarianism is a different question altogether. I was specific in my choice of words for a reason.
Do you mean libertarians, or “libertarians” as per Murray Rothbard’s quote:
“One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, ‘our side,’ had captured a crucial word from the enemy . . . ‘Libertarians’ . . . had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over…”
Capitalism was extreme as well when compared to the feudal order. But eventually they fought, they won, and now we get to wake up every day at 6 and drive 45 minutes to work.
“I like capitalism with minor concessions (won by communists) that will continually be rolled back over time.”
Fuck dude, add some god damn spice to your politics. Milk toast is better with chili powder. Maybe read some books and come up with your own opinion via critical thinking too.
Won by communists? Bruh. My country has climbed the ranks as one of the best countries in terms of HDI, happiness, etc. All the communists ever did was threaten and spy on us.
Pure communism will never happen and will never function. Humans are human and don’t want equality, we need something to thrive for.
No it’s not, because that literally has never happened. The propaganda of “under communism everyone will eat dry bread and live in grey cubes” is both not rooted in actual examples. In those times and states there were both still a privileged elite and the majority of world superpowers were not only not participating in the sharing of resources, they were actively attacking it either indirectly through political pressure or directly through literally killing people.
If we had actual true global equality everyone would be doing better than you’re probably doing right now.
Any concessions capitalists have given the working class in your country are likely due to their fear of a proletariat uprising in your own country because a socialist country was on your doorstep. Turns out when people see that other people are able to seize back the power in their country and don’t have to lick boots they start to think, “huh, maybe we could do that here too.”
This scared the shit out of those in power, so they gave social concessions. After the fall of nearby socialist states, you’ll see those concessions slowly erode as capitalism begins eating its own ass again and they “need” more profits at the expense of your social welfare. If it hasn’t happened yet, just wait until your country can no longer export the levels of exploitation they need for unlimited growth.
Go read a history book and think critically before posting such stupid shit online again. It was the capitalist countries who began shit with the communist countries and that continues to be true to this very day. Ask yourself, how many foreign communist military bases were there? Sure sounds like they were the aggressor compared to capitalists in this regard.
We need to stop differentiating between liberal and fascist tendendcies. Anyone who aligns with NATO ideals is a fascist, period, regardless of what label you claim.
He is right though. It isn’t a fallacy, the usage of the word tankie is so far removed from content that it is a bad term and more thought terminating than anything.
Tankies were originally a small subset of some Western and some, mostly East European, socialists and communists which were in favour of a (para-)military response to the revolt in Hungary in 1956. It was a complex situation and even people not on the side of Nagy within Hungary were in favour of the Soviet action.
The term now was used, and amplified by intelligence agencies and Western media, to decry the Soviet action and more importantly de-legitimize several communist groups. In that sense the functional usage of the term is similar, but the question is where would the slur hit actually?
In principle it would hit a small sub section of MLs who followed Khrushchev’s decision. Many people within the pact did see the de-Stalinisation and how it was communicated as problematic, as it enabled opposition forces to claim ground in countries. Nagy tried to do introduce reforms, the most far reaching: “Hungary to leave the Warsaw Pact and declare neutrality in the Cold War.”
Countries thinking about leaving the dominant two powers spheres of influence during the Cold War were often met with violence. See the Jakarta Method for more information about that (i.e. Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia, the whole of South America). During that time colonialism was also still relevant and colonial powers did use excessive violence, this is another part of the book.
Now what you and others do is labeling people who are to the left of the Soviets at that point as Tankies. Which is doubly wrong and cynical. What is interesting is that the slur can be traced back for the last 6 years to the US and there to more right wing places. It wasn’t primarily a phrase that was used by leftists. However after the heating chamber of the alt right online people used it to label even people who are democratic socialists at best.
In that sense it is a continuity to the Red Scare, to not have to engage with content.
Bullshit. Everyone’s a tankie. My dog is a tankie. Tankie doesn’t mean shit, in the four years it’s been revived, nobody has ever been able to give me a universal definition. It literally just means “people I don’t like”.
I’ve seen anarchists get called tankies. I myself am a Marxist-Leninist but because I may be better at conveying my thoughts and opinions I don’t get called a tankie, while other MLs do. I literally have the same opinions they do, but anarchists sometimes think I’m cool with them lol.
tl:dr “Tankie” means someone who’s more interested in following a communist team rather then a communist ideal. Even if the team leader is just a grifter.
If you acknowledge the short comings of certain states that don’t really follow the “from each according to his ability to each according to his need”, you’re not a tankie.
By your definition, every community is a tankie because every communist rejects idealism. If these are the only two options, the only option left is to choose a team. But that can’t be right because you imply that some communists aren’t tankies.
Further, does it count as a definition if other people use the term in different ways?
If so, how do you know who is a communist and who is a tankie without asking them how they decided to show (critical) support for XYZ?
By your definition, you must first know whether someone has strong reasons to support XYZ before being able to decide that they really decided because XYZ was on the right team. That would be exhausting and fraught with the problem that nobody is going to say they didn’t do the reading; if they give an argument, how do you determine whether it’s valid or a cover for ‘choosing by reference to team’?
I’m unsure if it’s possible to define ‘tankie’ by reference to ‘communist’ without also defining the latter and showing how they’re different.
ah, you think I don’t have definitions of those words?
“Woke” as we’re using it today start around the 1920’s America and the was by the black community to refer to white people who were aware of and sympathetic to social injustices committed against the black community. It’s sense evolved to include anyone belong to a majority group aware of and sympathetic to an oppressed group.
“Tankie” refers to people who profess their love of communism, but pick allies not on action, but on team affiliation. Any short coming of their favorite communist™ state isn’t an internal fault, but something the evil “west” has committed against them. Which, to be fair, the CIA loves fucking around in South America,
The tankie isn’t at all much different from the “patriotic” Maga head. A Maga head will scream about how free America is, but defending it whenever the county, or more specifically, their team, starts restricting personal freedoms of lgbt individuals, minority rights, or women’s and particularly women’s reproductive rights.
Both tankies and Maga heads will preform mental gymnastics to try and rationalize why the gays can’t be married even though the text of either group doesn’t have any problem with them.
I don’t have any problem with textbook Communist. So long as they can acknowledge the short comings of how it’s been applied so far and how it’s been subverted by people who want to consolidate power and wealth. Same logic goes for Capitalists. In principle, both systems are viable economic models, although textbook communism is the more progressive one. But both, at least as applied by real and would be super powers, are corrupt and dangerous.
Any short coming of their favorite communist™ state isn’t an internal fault, but something the evil “west” has committed against them.
To be fair, as you said, many of these problems are because of the International Community™. As for the rest, maybe all support should be critical, with increasingly less “critical” the less there is to criticize.
Both tankies and Maga heads will preform mental gymnastics to try and rationalize why the gays can’t be married
I haven’t seen anyone on Lemmygrad express that view, and I certainly support our LGBT comrades.
I haven’t seen anyone on Lemmygrad express that view, and I certainly support our LGBT comrades.
I’ve seen it else were. Gonzalo Lira might be a special case though. I mean you have to be a special kind of stupid to spread Russian propaganda while in Ukraine. He’s also complained that women don’t dress up anymore while looking like hobo for his online “debates”.
Point being is that it’s well known that Russian and China aren’t lgbt friendly and supporters of those countries either need to be ok with that or intentionally ignorant of that. I have seen some snide comments on other communist forums towards lgbt people. The rational, if there is any, is that childless people don’t belong in a long term society.
Well, perhaps you’d be relieved to know that on Lemmygrad, we condemned the Russian Federation for its recent anti-LGBT policies then.
Tell me, what should a communist do if they’re a citizen of the U.S. and the US were to make voting mandatory, punishable by death? Should we die rather than vote for someone we disagree with, or should we pick someone we think might be marginally better?
That’s how we feel about Russia — we don’t pretend to think they’re communist, and there are things we disagree with, but they’re still better than the US, so we vote for them.
No that won’t happen. This is a tactic by whatever group that is so butthurt about having left wing views on the internet to try to tone-control Lemmy. If they can get everyone to agree the slur tankie is bad, they can claim anyone that supports a left wing government that imposes a policy that restricts US freedom to exploit that country is a Tankie.
Yes it’s calling them tankies. They currently seem to be keen on framing it as “buzzword” or “undefined culture war slur against the whole left”, while in more or less the same breath of course still stanning for North Korea and calling China communist and ignoring that they’re called out by the collective rest of the left for that. With that exact term.
Which is on brand for them. The original “tankies” were cheering on the Soviets violently crushing uprisings by other communists for attempting to practice the “wrong kind” of communism, AKA “Anything other than complete submission to Soviet oppression.”
That’s the sole identifying mark of a tankie: a desire to crush dissidence of their peers through violence, particularly if their victims share their professed economic ideology. Tankies aren’t communists: they’re fascists cosplaying as communists.
Well I’m not a communist so I’m kinda the wrong guy to ask but you’d be surprised, Lenin is on that list for me. You know the guy who warned everyone that Stalin must under no circumstance be allowed to lead. A lot of good analysis, alas his solutions often had first solution syndrome, meaning they were insufficiently hardened against good ole power dynamics taking over because, as Marx so rightly observed, it’s in a class’ interest to act in its own self-interest and ultimately the nomenklatura is a class as distinct from the proletariat, or even party base, as priests are from believers. I’m pretty sure if the guy had Lenin’s failures to look back at he’d do a lot better, though.
If you want something random to read to learn from I’d recommend the Anarchist Library. And Bookchin in particular.
What’s wrong with you calling ancaps fascist? I mean, they are not more or less fascist than anyone in this pic except for the tankie getting pummeled, and the tankie always has this coming.
ML works just fine if you assume a benevolent dictator with a merciful, honest, and well educated population of party leaders who will listen to agricultural, industrial, and economic experts instead of taking a hard line ideological stance on everything and not try to force the abolition of personal property before society is ready.
Where did you learn that? The school of enlightened centrism? How do you explain the Nazis putting every communist they could find in a concentration camp? They just violently disagreed on the wording of the exact same position?
How do you explain communists exterminating every kulak they found? How about the mass slave labour of the gulags? How about the holodomor and the destruction if the Aral sea?
Different rhetoric, same genocidal, authoritarian bullshit
I’ve kept chickens. They do not understand the family concept. Roosters will happily rape their siblings or their mothers, and hens will enforce a gruelling pecking order even if it means someone dies of hunger/beatings 😢
That one whooshed right over your head eh? He’s saying that chickens families are not, in fact, the same as human families. They don’t form a family unit with bonds above those of other chickens. It’s mostly because they’re chickens…and not humans and it was a dumb comparison for PETA to try and make.
Pointing out how chickens relate to other chickens does not mean it’s an endorsement for cruelty…you stretched big time for that one.
I make this practically correct binary because in practice more than 90% of all livestock is kept in inhumane conditions.
The theoretical possibility of an ethical way to raise and slaughter livestock is irrelevant to my argument and in essence a straw man because I don’t argue against a hypothetically well raised and humanely slaughtered livestock but against the fact that in reality livestock is mistreated, tortured and killed in horrible conditions in most of all cases.
If I go to the supermarket and buy meat I am all but guaranteed that the animal has suffered.
If you raise your own livestock out on open field and treat it right I don’t have a problem with you. But you don’t, do you?
And even if you just are a carnivore I don’t have any problem with you, you can live your life how you see fit. I don’t really care.
But if you go to the internet to shit on people that care about animals to feel better about the fact that you don’t, I think you are a dick.
Not saying that applies to you specifically, but I have seen examples in this thread.
Possible.
The majority of people I know in person would disagree I hope.
I agree that I am pretty combative here, but I am also tired of the ever same old and disproven arguments. I am not even vegan myself, but ridiculing people for trying to save animals is just low imho so I kinda don’t care if I am an asshole to people that do it.
Well, either you’re really bad at expressing yourself through online comments…or you forgot to add a /s to the end of your comment. Certainly seems to me like you’re still a bit confused.
But what it does do is point out that PETA is full of shit and you shouldn’t listen to the organisation that runs kill shelters becaus they think you shouldn’t have pets.
The fuckers have actually STOLEN PETS and “euthanized” them inside of a day, when the animal was in good health and in a loving home.
I assume that you are vegan and dont contribute to the industrialised mass killing of sentient beings in any way? Otherwise you seem quite hypocritical.
PETA takes any animal. So those no kill shelters that you probably love so much have to get rid of animals and send the animal to the next shelter in the chain. Eventually, that could mean PETA shelters. Guess what that means? The most aggressive animals, the most disabled animals, the most sick animals, the most expensive to take care of animals, and otherwise those least desired by those looking for companion animals, are likely to end up at a PETA shelter. They don’t have the funding, the staff, or the safety protocols in place to deal with the never ending supply that breeding creates. If you don’t want PETA to kill animals, which they don’t want to do, encourage the ban on animal breeding so there are fewer of these cases. Also stop pretending that your local no kill shelter is separate from that process. They just offload the bad press to PETA. Do not buy animals. Rescue & adopt.
Lmao this bullshit again. PETA only euthanizes animals that are suffering and beyond saving. They accept animals that are rejected by those “no-kill” shelters that are more concerned with how their statistics look than helping suffering animals, which sometimes means euthanizing. The whole “PETA hates animals” thing is just another way for people to justify their own behaviour against animals. Do you honestly believe PETA is some kind of evil organisation that’s out to kill animals out of pure spite?
Unfortunately yes, I don’t like that, that’s abuse, but I’m not against murdering and eating things. I support stopping cruelty towards animals whilst they’re alive.
I wonder if they would do the same free in the nature. Locked together in tight spaces and restricted freedom will change the behaviour of every creature.
This is the default behaviour for chickens. I can’t think of any chicken like creatures that exists in the wild that resembles. The chickens I kept had plenty of room both inside and outside. Outside was a predator proof fence around a large area with different kinds of vegetation, bushes and wet and dry environments (I also had a couple of mallards). Inside they had running water, things to climb on to roost, and various boxes to lay and sleep in. Every week I cleaned their living quarters and threw down fresh bedding. They were not for food or for egg production. I ate and gave away the eggs they laid.
Edit: to keep the roosters from doing the dirty with close relatives, I swapped rooster with other people that kept poultry as a hobby
yea i do the same with mine, they roam free in the garden during the day and have a protected outdoor and indoor area so its basically a large playground for them and still the behavior you mentioned is what i see as well. also chickens in the wild? the measures i had to take to keep my chickens safe from foxes, martens, cats, dogs… is just crazy, they have zero defense capabilities so i dont know how they survived ubtill we kept them as livestock
Chickens originated from the red jungle fowl which is a much leaner and flighted bird (as are certain breeds of chicken) We’ve made modern chickens into something that can’t survive in the wild, much like we turned wolves into pugs!
i love my chickens, they eat all my scraps and weeds from the garden, fertillize my garden, fresh eggs every day which i trade with neighbors for his surplus veggies or a a batch of waffles. its a nice way to live
I would assume that large chicken farms would separate the mother from the chicks long before any family bond could be established. There are a lot of viable concerns about how the animals are handled and treated, but the issue of separating a family is just not one of them.
So you consider humanity superior in morality to chickens right? Which means that you identify the horrible things they do as horrible, and deem them unacceptable and definitely shouldn’t be repeated by a being of supposed higher intellect and control over one’s own actions beyond simple instincts?
Seems like an even better argument against eating other animals and especially, especially industrialized factory farming if you ask me, where everything you said is still done, but by humans to the chickens.
Even, given the above, the op deemed chickens immoral that does not make all chickens’ actions immoral. Preening, roosting and eating grain are not immoral activities.
Defining only the horrible acts as horrible is a circular argument as no definition has been provided as horrible.
Other than those three, you really stuck it to the carnist, chief.
This reminds me of when Weird Al told Canadian (or maybe Australian?) fans who wanted to watch his movie, “there’s Very Probably No way to do this. I know you probably have a TORRENT of questions, but I don’t have time to answer them right now.”
Once in a while maybe you will feel the urge To break international copyright law By downloading MP3’s from file sharing sites Like Morpheus or Grokster or LimeWire or KaZaA
Happens to some SE Asians in North America too, because the edible straw mushroom from SE Asia resembles one here called “death cap”. Amanita phalloides. What’s fucked up is right before it kills you your symptoms actually improve, so people get discharged from the hospital and think they are going to be ok. I forage mushrooms but I stay away from white gilled mushrooms completely.
Yeah I had my yard full of destroying angels last summer, when they first showed up I was all “sweet! Mushrooms!” Because they look real similar to agaricus. But then I saw the white gills, and was all :(.
And I made sure to tell my kids not to mess with them and why.
The non-KFC surface of the earth testifies to the fact.
We don’t want to be the arbiter we just kinda got stuck with it cause no one else was left. If you could all not kill each other for 50 years we would really appreciate it.
Everyone keeps arming bombers and shooting boats. This is kinda a no-no for us. Could ya not. We really don’t want to get involved in regional shit.
I mean most of this shit is pretty unpopular with Americans. Unfortunately the US has been sliding deeper and deeper into fascism for a while now, so what we want is less and less important.
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.