Yes they do. And it still doesn’t change the fact that the swastika means Nazism for Jewish folk and people who had to witness the horrors of WW2 and the Holocaust.
So, if a Hindu (while knowing what the symbol means for a Jewish person) went up to a Jewish person and waved the symbol in their face, it wouldn’t be so nice now, would it?
Similarly, waving the hammer and sickle in front of a Polish person and saying, “akshually it means worker liberation” would be pretty dickish.
The swastika is a holy symbol in Hinduism. Absolutely not associated with genocide for a thousand years.
The Nazis adopted it, and now Swastika = Nazi.
The hammer and sickle was used to represent industrial workers and farmers to unite against the bourgeoisie. The USSR adopted it, and suppressed Eastern Europe under abject authoritarian rule for half a century.
For individuals who have had to go through that crap, yeah… Why would they not hate it as much as the Swastika?
AI is new means of production. The fight mustn’t be against this new means of production. Rather, it must be to seize these new means of production.
“AI bad” is not a coherent argument.
Elon’s new soulless art generator
The riper the better
Unciv is a pretty cool game! It’s basically FOSS civ 5 that can be played on mobile. Huge timewaster haha
Interesting! Is there any way to combat this “false consciousness”?
What’s the guy gonna do? Sue them? He’s dead. Murdered by the capitalist authoritarians.
The only rightful place for kings is under the blade of a guillotine.
Schizophrenia is a serious mental health condition that affects how people think, feel and behave. It may result in a mix of hallucinations, delusions, and disorganized thinking and behavior. Hallucinations involve seeing things or hearing voices that aren’t observed by others.
So here’s the thing. I wouldn’t view it as impolite in all cases. It just… depends on the context a lot.
I have no love for my cultural heritage at all. The reason I came to Canada was to get away from… all that, right? So if you’d ask me excitedly about my “roots”, I would give exceedingly one worded answers hoping that you’d drop the topic. I don’t want to glorify the culture I grew up in, because there’s nothing to glorify. Ah, now if you wanted to have a sociological discussion about it, I would be very interested in talking with you. So as I said, “context”, right?
Often, racist white folk also tend to ask about “culture” as a sly way to remind non white folks that they “aren’t really Canadian” or whatever. Yeah, it makes no logical sense to do that, but well… It happens. So you know… It depends.
Lemme explain the sensibility even when we use 1.a.1. I said the idea of a nation itself should cease to exist.
An analog would be religion. If someone asked me, “what’s your religion?”. I would say, “I’m non religious”. I wouldn’t reply by saying, “my religion is atheism”.
Similarly, if someone asked me what nation I belonged to, I would say something along the lines of “technically, I’m under the jurisdiction of XYZ state, but I do not identify as a member of any nation.”
I’m hoping that this becomes the majority viewpoint. That’s how my answer is sensible even with 1.a.1.
And as for “will inevitably rise within any sovereign state which will persist for a long enough time”, it’s not true necessarily. Example being myself and so many other people (anarchists, lib socialists, even right wing libertarians). Yes, it has been true throughout history (descriptive), but I’m hoping it isn’t going forward (normative).
My bad. I incorrectly assumed that the above terminologies were common knowledge. I should’ve provided direct links. Well, here they are:
Difference between nations and states
Definition of a “nation-state”
When I talk about nations and states, I talk from the perspective of these definitions. As you can see, they’re not really synonyms. It’s not squabbling about terminologies. If we have a different understanding of what different words mean, then our logical arguments are going to look very different. I’m not saying that your definition is wrong or whatever. I’m just clarifying how I define these terms in my arguments. That way, you can understand what I mean to say.
As for the “questions” you posed… I’m not sure exactly what answers you want me to provide. I already told you that I do believe that states need to exist. We’re in agreement there. I just don’t think that it’s healthy for society to divide itself among different nations. Seems quite a waste of mental space, resources, etc. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That’s why I didn’t propose an anarchist vision. I do recognize the need for states. Just very very weak ones.
Nation states are a different case altogether though. You can have a multinational state. Sure, it is easier for a state to continue existing if the landmass it controls identifies as a single nation. That helps give it legitimacy.
I’d recommend reading more about nation states and why nations ≠ states.
How about the concept of a nation itself ceases to exist? How about free movement of people, very weak states, consumer cooperatives as the only capital controlling entities who are allowed to buy labor only from worker coops? Economic democracy, competition, choice and so on?
How about a world without kings and non consented rulers, a world where we stop wanting to conquer each other, and instead focus on conquering the limits set on us by nature? How about a world where we build a Dyson swarm, solve interplanetary, interstellar, and dare I say intergalactic travel?
Aight imma go cry myself to sleep now
From what I recall, the reason why they specifically reflect the green is to moderate the amount of sunlight they absorb.
Hence, if plant life exists, around red dwarfs, it is likely to be red in color.
And I’m not dead yet so I guess I’ll be alright
In “Way less sad” by AJR
China isn’t as successful at imperialism as the Americans. The American ruling class is just… Too good at being evil.
Doesn’t mean that China and Russia aren’t imperialist though. They’re just unable to beat the US… For now…
It’s matrices all the way down
The little girl on the left with adult hands… So fkin funny lol
Ok, rant time.
This is how the market is SUPPOSED to work: Demand high, supply low. Suppliers rush in to increase supply with the incentive of profit. Eventually, supply increases and profits become razor thin. Consumers (average folk) win.
BUT, there are certain sectors where monopolies/oligopolies form naturally. Not necessarily because companies are evil, but because it’s simply economically more efficient to do so. Rail being the best example. Why would another rail company build a parallel track to an already existing freight corridor that connects 2 companies?
Banks require to pass through a lot of financial regulation (as they should). Hence, oligopolies form naturally. Same with telecom.
NOW. Let’s look at our utopic market again. Profits should be high where supply hasn’t met demand. NOT where supply and demand are the same. This is very good for those owning the companies (capitalists), but not good for the consumers (us). In our ideal market, this profit reduction happens due to competition. However, we have established that some sectors naturally are prone to less competition.
Banks posting record profits (when banking isn’t exactly a sector that requires crazy investment to meet allegedly crazy increasing demand) is bad for the average person. Same with companies that are in sectors where not much investment is needed. Groceries being an example.
So what do we do to reduce profits in such sectors so that a handful of people aren’t ripping us off? Here’s my opinion:
The state should force oligopolies/monopolies to become consumer cooepratives. If this is too politically infeasible, then raise capital, start a state owned corp and immediately shift the operations to a consumer cooperative (of which every citizen is a member by default).
So TLDR: The stock market booming isn’t always a good thing. Sure, actually innovative corps posting record profits (from the new stuff they’ve worked on) can be a good thing. BUT, boring ass corps which aren’t exactly innovating posting increasing profits means that the consumer (us) is getting ripped off.