We had a skip-level with a director today who told us our 3 day in office is going to become a 5 day. When asked why, he couldn’t articulate a single good reason. It was a “management decision” made by a bunch of tone-deaf fucks who never go to the office or get paid so much money that the cost is trivial. It’s time to start unionizing everywhere. Fuck these class traitors.
Fully remote is the only way. In my experience hybrid workplaces are just as toxic. It could turn into full time office out of the blue like mentioned here or generally the ones showing up to the office get a bit of a preferential treatment if the boss also regularly shows up at the office.
Not all jobs can be remote, while some can. Not all remote jobs can be 100% remote. That’s great if you can, but someone has to go swap out failed disks or see things hands-on because of whatever reason. And there are isolated networks too.
Our hybrid situation works and the manager knows it. He’s in the office all the time because he’s trying to be available to everyone, but we are scattered around that and other campuses. He feels it’s part of his job while understanding other jobs can be remote or hybrid. He only cares about the end result. Not saying upper management might say something stupid, but not likely as we’ve had a flexible work environment for ages. Since the Before Time.
Not all jobs can be remote, while some can. Not all remote jobs can be 100% remote. That’s great if you can, but someone has to go swap out failed disks or see things hands-on because of whatever reason. And there are isolated networks too.
I’m curious why even bring that up? No one is suggesting jobs that physically require your presences in a geographic location to be Fully Remote. When people are saying things like “all jobs should be fully remote” they’re referring to all jobs that can be fully remote should be fully remote.
Yes I agree. I probably lost some of the context in my reply, but I was just saying there are degrees of remote work that aren’t 100% and that’s fine. We do have some 100% staff, but I sometimes want to go in. I get reconnected with a good group of people. I could hand off some of these mundane duties to others, but I choose to do them and go in. I get to help some of the younger folks on the team that do go in all the time as they are trying to learn.
I hate online meetings, so i go to the office 2x a week on days i schedule a lot of meetings
It also helps that i’m a very quick subway ride to the office, and i understand not everyone has that luxury. But that’s a choice i made to live in the city instead of a 1hr drive to work
Hybrid work only works if you actually coordinate what happens in the office.
My employer softly demanded everyone return for 3 days a week to “collaborate”, but I work with customers all day so coming to the office just meant taking Zoom calls on my laptop in the middle of a barebones open floorplan office, instead of in the quiet of my well-equipped home office. Thanks to my sane managers, I’m getting away with only one day a week right now, but that’s my least productive day.
If I’m ever demanded to be present the majority of the time, I intend to haul the mountain of IT equipment my employer doesn’t understand that I need for my job into the office to make a point. I’m doing them a favor by running that shit at home, really. I’d probably blow a breaker plugging it all in, knowing the state of the office wiring. Sorry, looks like I need my own office for all this if you want me here.
LOL My employer wants us to come in at least two days every pay period (every two weeks). But, of course, we’re not all going to go in the same day - we can’t, there’s literally not enough space - so instead of calling in to meetings from home on those days, we’ll be calling into meetings from a cubicle.
WHAT IS THE POINT? They’re having a difficult time convincing us this is a good idea.
A little more backstory: We’ve been fully work-from-home since the pandemic began. They decided to renovate the building, so we all brought our stuff home and archived or destroyed stuff we no longer needed. So we’ve been work from home for almost four years now and things are rolling along nicely. It’s really difficult to argue that we somehow need to be in the office now.
I had an employer who fully renovated their offices to the cost of multiple millions and then dragged staff back in. I got a full remote job and haven’t looked back.
Not only that, but any hybrid job ties your location within some reasonable distance from physical offices. Sure, I don’t need to commute daily, but I also can’t like 100 miles away from any office.
We need to start founding them on our own, it isn’t just going to happen. These fucking CEOs and investors need to be put in their place. They’re deliberately flexing on us, deliberately increasing our stress levels and impacting our lives and health. These fucking leeches would be nothing without us doing the real work for them.
I agree, but have no knowledge on how to create a union but I’m sure someone much smarter than me has experience out there in the lemmyverse so made the below post asking for help:
“We’re just not wired to save,” said Brad Klontz, a certified financial planner and expert in financial psychology and behavioral finance. Our brains are instead programmed to focus on our immediate needs.
Hahaha, this guy can legit go fuck himself. We’re in a fucking Gilded Age where we’re being fucking bled dry by fucking corporations ripping us off, nickel and dime-ing us to death, and just fucking over customers as much as they can to make a buck.
But nooooo, it couldn’t be that half the country isn’t paid a fucking living wage!
You couldn’t get by in the cheapest places in the country.
Right now Lubbock, Texas has rents roughly $900 a month for a one bedroom apartment (Lubbock is cited in many studies as one of the cheapest rental markets in the US).
Minimum wage is $7.25 in Texas.
To afford a $900 apartment on your own, you would need to be making $16.87 an hour.
The average wage in Lubbock is $26,413/year, or about $13.75, which is about three dollars short of a renter allowing you to rent that place (income per month x 3 is the standard).
So, even in the cheapest places to rent in the country nobody can actually afford to live alone.
But sure Klontz, you fucking clod, it’s that “wE’rE jUsT nOt wIrEd tO sAvE!” What a fucking crock of shit. Can someone who knows this person in real life maybe try slapping the fucking stupid out of his idiot face?
EDIT: Shit like this why idiotic people like Trump voters don’t trust “experts.” If he’s an expert I’m Mickey Fucking Mouse and Disney can just try suing me for existing.
I won’t lie, I’m lucky and make a good living but I still had to pay $17,000 just for groceries last year for a family of five. It has gotten fucking crazy!!
We were also wired not to be born rich with a silver spoon up our asses. We’re wired for higher education to cost 180% higher than it was 20 years ago. We’re wired that our healthcare expenses can cause bankruptcy if we develop a serious illness that requires surgery. We’re wired that car insurance went up 20% in one year. We’re wired that grocery costs went up 35% in one year, in some states. We’re wired that all these gigantic cost increases happen, but our compensation only goes up 2.5-3% depending on employer…or we’re laid off entirely.
Everything you just said was extremely well put, and this guy needs to be TOLD to fuck off.
I have pretty decent savings, but I also live in a country with public health care. With some health incidents in the last few years that required the ER, I suspect that in the US I’d be broke.
This is true. I pay a lot for health insurance and it still cost me a lot to go to the doctor. Other countries got profit out of their health care. We can do it to. I don't mind paying taxes for healthcare.
Americans pay more for healthcare than any other country. In fact, Uncle Sam pays more per patient than any other government in the world, and patients still have to pay an obscene amount on health insurance premiums, high deductibles before insurance will actually pay for anything, and then a 20% co-pay on everything that your insurance company decides they will actually “cover”.
Both things can be true. I think there is something to the remark that people aren’t wired to save. I don’t feel like I can afford to buy frivolous things at every store I go into and I make decent money. On the other hand, I know someone making FAR less than me who literally does buy junk every chance they get.
I do feel like I am the outlier, I’ve been saving money since I was a child and everyone else around me tended to blow any lump sum of money as soon as they got it. Whereas I would spend 0-10% and put the rest in savings.
EDIT: Shit like this why idiotic people like Trump voters don’t trust “experts.” If he’s an expert I’m Mickey Fucking Mouse and Disney can just try suing me for existing.
He’s an “expert” in selling his services as a financial advisor.
In elections, it’s about choosing the candidate with fewer flaws and moral imperfections, even if not perfect. The lesser of two evils is often the better choice.
Reading shit I don’t write. I am not centrist. I do not support them. I just flat out don’t care. When they’re done with Muslims I would be happy to see the Xtians be next. But whatever. I don’t care.
Oh I get it. You just don’t. But whatever. Don’t get me wrong I’ll vote for Biden because I don’t give a flying fuck about bombing the Muslims and don’t want this place to turn into a tyrranical Nazi nation. But it’s pretty much the same. In less than a decade this entire planet will end all human life.
TBF, it’s not hard to parrot Hitler. When they put emphasis on him being a former corporal, that’s because he behaved like a pretty mundane former corporal. Was a born orator, though, which is hard to attribute to Trump.
Now Goebbels himself was more dramatic and original and just as good an orator as Hitler. Which means he’s being regularly revisited by modern politicians for his efficiency, and not because of just being mundane.
I say this as someone who opposes him utterly: Trump used to actually be a decent orator. It's... kinda sad, and kinda scary, in a way. I watched an interview he did from... sometime in the 80s, I want to say. I didn't agree with everything he said, but he seemed well composed and he made his points coherently.
Compare that to how he is nowadays and it's like it's not even the same man. Not just the raging psychopathy and egomania, but how he wanders off mid sentence and such. The cognitive decline is painfully obvious. When you figure this is a guy who had access to the best possible modern medicine his entire life, it's scary to see.
The whole point is to ‘normalise’ all the issues with Trump’s presidency so that the public just sees impeachment etc as a normal political process rather than a sign of something being seriously wrong.
Clinton’s impeachment was over a blow job in office. Bush jr was over lies and a cover up that brought us into a never ending war. Totally the same thing.
They don’t have to find a specific statute to charge him under, but they do have to present some sort of coherent accusation of wrongdoing to avoid looking quite so much like the absolute clowns they are.
They don’t care about looking like absolute clowns. They only care about appeasing Trump and MAGA base. Both say that Biden needs to be impeached. They don’t care why - just impeach him. If anyone says they look like clowns, they’ll just call those people “woke liberal elites working for Soros globalists” or “RINOs” (depending on whether they are Democrats or Republicans).
Then, if they lose their elections due to a blue wave, they’ll parrot Trump, claim voter fraud, and demand that they be installed into office because they won when you subtract all the “fraudulent” (read: Democratic) votes.
Normally I’d agree with everything you said, but the fact that they’re struggling with the impeachment process tells me they do need something more than just saying they don’t like him.
I paid attention to the legal side of things during Trump’s impeachments, so I’m quite sure “high crimes and misdemeanors” is open-ended and not limited to violating laws passed by Congress. It more or less means they can just make up a crime to fit the circumstances.
Why then are they struggling to find an accusation to charge him with? If you have another explanation, I’d love to hear it.
Jenny Kincaid, a grandparent of a student at Chimneyrock, told the local Memphis news station Action News 5: “I’m about to come unglued right now. I cannot believe … this is a kindergarten-through-fifth-grade school and they’re letting a satanic club come in here?”
The MSCS interim superintendent, Toni Williams, reportedly said there were no plans to prevent the club from operating in the district.
“I do not support the beliefs of this organization at the center of recent headlines,” Williams said. “I do, however, support the law.”
It’s a bit frustrating that it doesn’t make any of them actually reflect on their hypocrisy though. They just double down on the hypocrisy with no questions asked.
“ Pelham paced outside, holding a gun and yelling at police. He eventually went back inside and fired the gun several times. For their own safety, police left the property that night, and let Pelham sleep off his drinking."
I’d switch, but I’ve been on the Capy system my whole life, and it’s just much more intuitive for me. Everyone knows how long a Capybara is. How fucking long a meter is? Beats the fuck out of me, maybe a half cap?
Look I think the joke is as funny as anyone else but the “unit” is an animal most of the Americans its meant to lampoon most likely wouldn’t have even heard of.
And we’ll misapply it as well. The asteroid isn’t the size of 1000 capybaras, it’s as wide as 1000 capybaras lined up. Assuming it’s roughly spherical, it’s actually closer to the size of 524,000,000 capybaras.
Asteroids can be wildly non-spherical though, in shapes way different than capybara non-sphericalities, so it’s not only misapplied but likely also nonsensical… unless, it’s a giant capybara shaped asteroid.
True, but we’re only given the one measurement and can only assume it to be true and accurate. Even if it is non-spherical, so long as the “diameter” given is a true average we can treat it as spherical for this purpose. And, the 1000 capybaras “measurement” is still of by many orders of magnitude.
And the immediate concern is about what it can cost the economy. Not the social impacts regarding family, friends, and society as a whole but the economy.
We will sacrifice our entire society to protect our beloved economy!
You hit the nail on the head.
The entire point of an economy is to be a mere tool to better distribute goods and services within a society for the explicit benefit of said society. If an economy is working against a society, it is literally doing the opposite of what its role is.
Whenever theres a crisis under our modern global rigged capitalism, the first thing that happens is the well bribed, middle manager politicians come out to assure the citizenry that any and all cruel measures will be taken against society in order to protect our beloved economy. it’s a perversion of priorities. The tail wagging the dog.
Our modern global economy has turned humanity against humanity for the sake of stoking sociopathic greed, both in the few that have dangerous, society warping levels of wealth, and the billions of wannabe temporarily embarrassed millionaires fucking other peasants over for scraps.
The global economy needs to be smashed to bits and rebuilt with entirely different goals and values, or it will make our species destroy ourselves in the name of profit for a few thousand narcissistic asshole families.
We won’t though, we’ll keep following the owner’s orders to our doom, even after they’re barking them remotely from their luxury climate change bunker compounds protecting them from the climate apocalypse they caused, until the last peasants struggling to survive stop bothering to answer on the other end.
People are always like “Why is there no revolution!?”
Because most aren’t willing to risk their lives and their comfort to make the world better for everyone. “What do I get out of it?” they will ask.
Part of the issue is past revolutions didn’t have a ruling class that literally employed the best psychologists that money can buy to spew propaganda that has been scientifically proven to confuse citizens and change minds.
The idea that it will get easier to fight back against your oppressors as they grow their pile of tools and weapons with which to control society is a joke.
The longer is waited, the harder ripping off the fucking band-aid will be.
Wait too long and there won’t be a band-aid to rip off as mass extinction comes for us all.
Except one of them has a history of the science of psychology behind it, as well as the many certifications and education you need to be a psychologist, and the other was a propagandist with no deep scientific education behind them, no showing why the techniques they were using were effective (because they often weren’t). One of them has evidence and science behind them and the other does not. They are not the same things.
Literally different things.
EDIT: Also it is worth noting that modern propaganda began after revolutions against monarchies. The French state post-revolution was a hotbed of propaganda.
So, even by your argument, its clear that modern propaganda methods took root after the age of revolutions and at the beginning of the age of Nations.
None of those prove that a psychologist using well documented evidence on human psychology is the same as fucking nitwits naming monsters after people they didn’t like. I literally referenced the era of modern propaganda techniques, which coincides with a growth of the understanding of psychology in promoting propaganda. I didn’t say “propaganda never existed at all prior to the revolutions.”
But keep ignoring specific words I use to try to convince yourself you’re right. Seriously, comparing psychologists to people who named monsters after disliked people. Fucking laugh riot.
I’ll be waiting patiently for your semantic objection to something inconsequential in one of my sources so that you don’t have a bruised ego 😄
Right on cue, champ!
Honestly if you can’t see how invoking monsters to inspire fear is just a rudimentary employment of psychological warfare, I’m not sure you have any business speaking to psychology as a whole.
You think you’re clever, but you’re not. I’m not sure someone whose education seems to be focused on an era where psychology didn’t exist as a discipline should be expounding on it, either.
So, the people invoking monster names knew what psychological warfare was because they understood psychology? I call bollocks on that.
But keep telling yourself you’re right and just misunderstood. I’m sure that will mean fuck-all when you’re dead and nobody remembers you existed, just like me.
They control us through propaganda to make us as self-interested and sociopathic as them, as you said, using the major media they own and the policy making politicians they also own to make greed “rational self-interest” mandatory from Kindergarten through colleges of economics and beyond. Then they point to the society they’ve made cruel and selfish, and declare capitalism to be human nature, partly as a normalizing tactic, and partly to feel more peace about their cruel, withered hearts.
Their other major tool is what I like to call “subsistence opiates.” Pathetic niceties people cling to that often do more harm than good: social media, fast food, literal opiates, etc. Things that don’t make most people’s lives better, but allow them to endure the pain capitalism induces, and that they’re terrified that revolution would inturrupt the slow dopamine drip of. This is the main reason there will sadly be no revolution.
The good news is that will make collapse an eventual certainty. A house dependant on the impossibility of infinite growth will collapse, even if it takes the form of humanity destroying the habitability of its only world, as we are racing to do.
Because most aren’t willing to risk their lives and their comfort to make the world better for everyone. “What do I get out of it?” they will ask.
I don’t think this is it. I think it doesn’t happen because people don’t know who will be with them. If I knew there was going to be a general strike were 20 to 30% of the population stopped working, I’d be in. However, I don’t want to torpedo my entire life for a movement with no followers.
Slowly but surelly over the last couple of decades the political discourse moved from “best for people” to “best for money”.
By now politics isn’t about doing what’s best for people anymore (it’s what’s best for “The Economy” or for “Businesses”) though we get thrown a few never really fullfilled promises (almost exactly like modern marketing, even using Focus Groups to find out what are the things to say which will have the most positive reaction from the public).
And just like when companies successfully shift to a Marketing-heavy strategy, for Political Parties too the quality of their product - policies - went down as they shifted to marketing as a way to keep their “consumers” - i.e. voters - “buying” their product, and the price - in terms of how much wealth they’re extracting from the broader society for their leaders and their paymasters and how little they leave for everybody else - has gone up.
Unsurprisingly, by now more and more of people are getting dissatisfied even if most don’t quite get it how they got there.
It kind of makes sense to put it that way. Presumably, workers being unhappy might make some sense if it was a tradeoff between productivity and work-life balance.
But no, it’s bad for both social effects and economic effects
Although it’s still fiction, one has to wonder whether it’s more common for a drunk father to sexually assault his children, or for children to get their father drunk in order to sexually assault him, and how it would be reported by said father if the former were the one to happen.
My favorite things about Shakespeare as an English teacher was explaining the innuendos and explaining how Romeo and Juliet was absolutely not a love story lol
I had a young woman who was a freshman yell at me, crying, that Romeo and Juliet was the greatest love story of all time and it was adorable.
It’s sort of a love story, but it’s obviously a tragic love story. I’m not sure I’d use the word “adorable” but it could certainly be touching, especially to a teen girl.
I feel like some of that comes down to… Well, us, the adults. For some ungodly reason, we’ve been calling it things like “a love story” and “a tragedy,” and now people just don’t know what to expect.
We’ve also somewhat sanitized it. The pop-culture focus on it tends to be the lengths they go to in order to be together, or the families coming together at the end; but we tend to ignore that the couple is just trying to be together to bone, it’s full of dick jokes, and at the end they basically get cockblocked so hard that they die.
Actually, now that I think of it, Kenneth Branaugh is great and all, but I’d love to see a Seth Rogen adaptation of this one.
I’m a bit confused. Do the inuendos prevent it from being a love story? I always found it to be a tragic lovestory of two horny teenagers. I think hornyness is a common part of being in love.
I agree with most of this. I differ in that I think foolish love is a Natural and integral part of the age of the protagonists. The teenagers are not ať fault in my eyes. So to me, it seems more like a warning about foolish adults with the prime example being friar Laurence - seriously, wtf man, what were you thinking, you were supposed to know better!
It’s pretty fucked all around. It’s not just any two teens, but the children of two powerful families who are feuding for no reason. I think we can generalize it as a warning against foolishness in general. In the end, all of them were Fortune’s fool, not just Romeo.
The only book you need is the Bible and the only art is the CROSS. If you have time for entertainment you have time to work and if you’re a kid, go see your local pastor for “work”
And then they'll turn around and ban all of the ones that don't involve cross-dressing because in Shakespeare's time the female parts were all played by men.
Republicans only care about Shakespeare, beethoven, and other such classical plays and music when they can use it as a dog whistle in order to imply an inherent criminality and inferiority present in Black Culture
It’s not because of commercial real estate that offices are forcing people back.
It’s simply because managers who are in charge of making that decision prefer to be in the office.
They like everyone in the office, so they’re forcing it on everyone. Either because it makes them feel more powerful to look at all their underlings, because they enjoy working face-to-face (probably how they got high up in the company), or because they suck at their jobs and can only micro-manage by looking over people’s shoulders
Absolutely. This was the entire reason the CEO at my last company forced everyone to return to office, giving local managers zero latitude to allow flexibility. He sent out videos saying crazy things like “introvert or extrovert, we’re all energized by working in person together!” Just completely tone deaf bullshit. We got a month’s notice for when we had to return, and I found a new job in that month and am much happier now.
Zero reason for people to be in the office if they can be just as productive as home, and happier doing it.
I wish I shared your optimism. ChatGPT looks like a drop in replacement for some of the buzzword spouting VPs already but I wouldn’t hold my breath because they’ve been using it as an excuse to get rid of the rank and file instead.
I bought a house that’s further away from where my office was than I’d have ever considered buying if not for the permanent wfh change made during the pandemic.
I’m now a minimum of an hour away from where most jobs would be in-person, and that’s not something I’m ever willing to do again.
I also did this, and as a family we’re much happier, but recent return to office mandates now mean I travel 1.5 hours each way 3 times a week, also at a cost of $80 in petrol.
We’re not willing to give up our life to move back, so I am definitely keeping eyes open for similar paying jobs that have less in-person requirements.
You would be surprised at how terrible everyone is at passive time estimations without clocks. I literally had to take time out of my day to get this correct.
No do a choice of intervals like any of these 1-2-5-10or15-30-45-60 intervals and you will get the rough times but remember this you can NEVER look at the clock while you are timing yourself internally. Just put a timer and try and predict how closer you are eventually you will get really good estimates. I have had a 2 hour wait and was only 15 minutes off it’s actually pretty good.
Did you read the article? They took her to a psychiatric hospital, and explicitly note there’s a discrepancy about the time. I’m not saying she wasn’t abused, or that her whole story is fake. Just, we all know you can’t go 40 days without water. You can’t go a week without water.
You can’t survive 40 days without rehydration, but if you were given fluid intravenously, you can go without actually drinking anything. She states he injected her with something, maybe it was drugged, and maybe he hooked her up with an iv drip? I dunno. The whole situation is royally fucked up, any way you look at it
That’d have to be a pretty large IV bag for 40 days. If he was trying to kill her he wouldn’t have hung one up to begin with, and he wouldn’t have come back to change the bags if he did hang one up for whatever reason.
Perhaps the intent wasn’t to kill her, but only to keep her secure somewhere, and that’s why she had a tablet and phone and money and ID. (But why? Were they/was he in some kind of trouble, and they were (he was, since he left her literally chained to a fucking tree, implying she didn’t want to go/be with him (can’t blame her there) and he obviously couldn’t trust that she wouldn’t run off the first chance she got) planning on fleeing the country? Not enough money to buy a plane ticket, but a train ticket, maybe? Why else leave her with her ID?))
Maybe he did come back a few times and something happened to him where he couldn’t come back. (Why wouldn’t he come back? Did he get himself killed? What kind of trouble were they in, anyways??) (Although you’d think they’d have found an iv plug, or evidence of one. I guess it’s possible they purposely kept back information from being published, I know they do that sometimes.))
It rains a lot in some parts of India, hence the existence of the jungle where she was chained.
Maybe she survived by drinking puddles of rainwater within her range of movement?
That may not be enough water to sustain her forever, but it would extend her survival.
That, and lack of water and food can lead to delirium which can lead to losing sense of time.
She might have picked “40 days” as a Bible reference. That’s a pretty common number that represents a long time in western culture, even if they’re not directly referencing the Bible.
That’s a lot of mights and maybes. I feel the article did an ok job at leaving those out and going only off of what is known. Which is exactly what the news is suppose to be
I know, I am just someone on the Internet, but I was acquainted with someone who fasted for 40 days… twice (a little over a year apart I think)… in pursuit of some kind of spiritual enlightenment. He started out a little on the heavy side, and ended up, well, emaciated. Anyway, he did have water, which is where I think this woman’s story falls apart.
Unless she lied and did it to herself, because of the high chance of existing psychosis.
Not saying I believe that, but pointing out how someone’s word or claim means little until the bigger picture is understood.
Hav you ever been accessed of something you never did? I have, multiple times. I’ve even had to go to court to defend my innocence. People do fucked up things when they are not all there mentally and emotionally.
State police said body camera video and other information tied to the case is not immediately being released to “protect the integrity of the legal process”
Again: do it. The sooner we can cast off the yoke of the Middle East’s hold on our power generation via oil, the better. Things like this can only accellerate the process: good. Keep it up and accellerate even more.
Just a tip, in political circles acceleration is generally a term to avoid. It’s a loosely defined, dogshit ideology. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerationism
True, but I’m only talking about specifically cutting ties with the M…E (gradually) and transitioning to a green energy model ASAP, not about the wider political implications.
I mean, it kinda depends on what you think will make things better… Accelerationist ideology is mostly only effective for fascist. Fascism gains power by blaming current problems on the ineffectiveness of parliamentary governments, promising to provide stability with the use of a strong leader.
The left on the other hand relies on ideas like mutual cooperation and mutual aid, things that require more political and structural organization to bear fruit.
In post industrialized nations, it’s hard to imagine why things would have to regress in order to eventually progress from the current status quo.
Well first, I think it depends on your perspective. The French revolution and the 1rst Republic were overthrown by Napoleon. While Napoleon was one of the more liberal dictators, he was still an agent of some pretty terrible imperialism.
Secondly, there’s a reason why I specified post industrial societies. The most successful leftist governments had the advantage of being able to industrialize their nations. Being able to increase the power of a centralized government while simultaneously improving the quality of life of its citizens is one of the more powerful carrots in the revolutionary arsenal.
Not necessarily, just that post industrialized nations tend to swing harder right when people begin to lose faith in the democratic process.
I think part of that is due to the lack of strong mutual aid groups and worker organizations that industrialization creates as a byproduct.
If we look at revolutionary movements in the 20th century for the most part the industrialized nations were the ones who were overtaken by fascism, while unindustrialized countries like Russia and China transitioned to socialism.
It was one of the wildcards that early socialist didn’t really forsee, which is why everyone was so surprised that the first revolution to succeed was in Russia instead of Germany.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.