davel

joined 1 year ago
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 44 minutes ago)

Moralities aside, some find it liberating to stop caring what is & isn’t considered “weird.” Conformity definitely has its advantages, but at least consider the possibility that, for you, it may not be worth the costs. Take it from Al, or DEVO themselves for that matter.

As for morality, I’m not really a fan of it in its conventional senses. Philosophy prof. Hans-Georg Moeller, author of The Moral Fool: A Case for Amorality.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 hours ago

Okay real talk. I consider virtually all unions* in the US to be yellow unions. They are like that because, during the 20th century, all socialist/communist leadership was purged from organized labor. The unions were made into virulently anti-communist ones, for the purposes of the Cold War, but also for the purposes of declawing the labor movement. As a result, the unions don’t really work to develop class consciousness among the rank & file. And of course they don’t, because union leadership is in partnership with the capitalist class instead of antagonistic toward them. So the leadership is mostly aligned with the Democratic party and that party’s donor class, while the rank & file, having no class theory, are left susceptible to all manner of charlatanry.

(Things are worse still, if I get into labor aristocracy in the imperial core, but I’ll leave it at that.)


*One notable exception is the IWW.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 11 points 23 hours ago

Wasn’t there a huge scandal with Evergrande surrounding just how much of Chinese requirements were tied to real estate?

Yes, which is why the Chinese state intentionally popped the real estate bubble and left the capitalists out to dry.

.

“We will scale up the building and supply of government-subsidized housing and improve the basic systems for commodity housing to meet people’s essential need for a home to live in and their different demands for better housing,” an English-language version of the report said.

Compare that to Obama, who bailed out the private banks at the expense of people with home mortgages, banks that knowingly wrote those bad mortgages. Michael Hudson, 2023: Why the Bank Crisis isn’t Over

The financial sector is the core of Democratic Party support, and the party leadership is loyal to its supporters. As President Obama told the bankers who worried that he might follow through on his campaign promises to write down mortgage debts to realistic market valuations in order to enable exploited junk-mortgage clients to remain in their homes, “I’m the only one between you [the bankers visiting the White House] and the mob with the pitchforks,” that is, his characterization of voters who believed his “hope and change” patter talk.

The Federal Reserve is just the cartel of the US private banks, whereas banking in China is predominantly state owned. The Chinese state both runs these banks and has fiat monetary sovereignty, so it’s not answerable to the capitalists like the US is.

Bonus info on fiat monetary sovereignty: Why The Government Has Infinite Money


Not to mention, China has its own homeless problem - let’s not act like they’re doing so much better.

[Citation needed]

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 10 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

A “curious approach on billionares” sound much like billionares apologia to me.

Since you’re not going to actually read it, I guess you’ll never know.

A quick search for “chinese megayachts” will show what you are looking for.

I didn’t say there aren’t billionaires with megayachts, I said, “Do you see Chinese state functionaries tooling around the world in megayachts?”

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 day ago (14 children)

What an odd thing to wonder. Do you see Chinese state functionaries tooling around the world in megayachts?

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don’t think this concern is justified in most cases, but I’m not really in position to argue. If this were a common problem, I think I’d have heard about it, but outside of the occasional sensationalist news piece or Hollywood/TV thriller, I haven’t.

I do know an old joke, though: Before visiting a foreign country, it’s important to memorize three phrases in the local language:

  1. Where is the restroom?
  2. How much is it for one night?
  3. Power to the people! I support your revolution!
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago (15 children)

I don’t know what a “treat monster nature” is. I haven’t traveled much outside the core, so I can’t speak to this first-hand, but my impression is that most of the world is mostly a safe place to visit. There aren’t a lot of places that are going to punish you for renting hotel rooms and eating at restaurants as an American. Most people around the world know how to distinguish between America the empire and a civilian American spending money into the local economy.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago (17 children)

I don’t fully understand your question, and I doubt that I’m qualified to answer, because I have virtually every privilege, and I’ve never thought about international travel but from my own easy mode perspective.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago (21 children)

You say “travel the world,” but where realistically will you travel? Westerners tend to travel almost exclusively to other imperial core countries and to popular tourist spots in the periphery that cater to imperial core tourists.

5
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by davel@lemmy.ml to c/socialism@lemmy.ml
 

Interview with Gabriel Rockhill about his article, Capitalism’s Court Jester: Slavoj Žižek.

The interviewer doesn’t have much interesting to say IMO. I would skip over most of his segments.

[The cultural imperialist project] polices the left border of critique, but it does it at an objective vs subjective level. And what I mean by that is that there are coordinates for what the dominant discourse is, and what people need to know if they want to be in these conversations. And it creates a reality, which was very much my reality coming up, where I was interested in radical theory, because I grew up as a farm kid working construction. I knew what exploitation was. I knew what oppression was. I knew a lot of horrible things about the world because I was living them in the capitalist empire. And I gravitated toward what I thought were the most radical things, but I was not aware of the objective conditions that structured that radical discourse in such a way that all of the real discourses—which were anti-imperialist and liberatory—were actually largely excluded from those debates. And so I read a bunch of Negri and Žižek and Badiou and all of these people, and eventually realized, well, I’m looking in the wrong place. I’m looking in the place that the empire tells me I should look for radical theory.

 

There will always be some ineradicable incentive for unions to do things that benefit their own members even if they do some vague harm to society at large. Corporations will always try to exploit this incentive for their own benefit. It is easy to say in an abstract sense “Unions shouldn’t give in to that,” but in the real world, it is not easy at all. Should the United Mine Workers demand that coal mines shut down, because of the environment? Should the Machinists union tell Boeing to shut its factories where its members manufacture weapons that are used to blow up poor people on the other side of the world? Etc. Antitrust issues can sometimes be seen as just another big picture dilemma that does nothing to help working people put food on the table right now.

In lieu of solving this timeless tension in today’s little blog post, let’s think about the more modest goal of how antitrust and organized labor can work together more effectively. First, we all have to realize that we’re all part of one holistic policy goal. We think that allowing corporations to proceed unchecked down the road to ultimate power is a bad idea. It is bad for workers, who will be crushed, and it is bad for governments, who will be co-opted, and it is bad for all citizens, who will suffer as corporate power sweeps away regulations and rearranges all of society to benefit shareholders at the expense of everything else, like AI gone awry. Organized labor should make it a point to use its own political capital—a very real weapon, if Kamala Harris wins the White House—to support antitrust efforts and protect its enforcers. And the antitrust world should correspondingly recognize the fact that simply limiting corporate power by fighting monopolies will never be enough; unless there are unions inside of the companies to constantly exercise power on behalf of the workers, there is no actual institution that will be carrying on the fight to prevent companies from just proceeding right back down the same harmful monopolistic path over and over again. We’re peas in a pod here. Don’t want huge companies and their idiot billionaire bosses to run the world? Break them up, and unionize them. It’s the best program we have.

 

https://beta.maps.apple.com/

It doesn’t seem to support Firefox or mobile browsers, at least not.

Maps on the web is compatible with these web browsers

On your Mac or iPad

  • Safari
  • Edge
  • Chrome

On your Windows PC

  • Edge
  • Chrome
 

According to software engineer and blogger, Paul Biggar, however, one key detail on the methods employed by the Lavender system that is often overlooked is the involvement of the messaging platform, WhatsApp. A major determining factor of the system’s identification is simply if an individual is in a WhatsApp group containing another suspected militant.

Aside from the inaccuracy of the method and the moral question of targeting Palestinians based on shared WhatsApp groups or social media connections, there is also notably the doubt it brings to the platform being privacy-based and guaranteeing “end-to-end” encryption for messages.

Stating that WhatsApp’s parent company, Meta, makes it complicit in Israel’s killing of “pre-crime” suspects in Gaza, Biggar accused the company of directly violating international humanitarian law, as well as its own public commitment to human rights.

These revelations are the latest evidence of Meta – formerly Facebook – aiding in the suppression of Palestinian and pro-Palestinian voices, with the platform long having been criticised for taking significant steps to shut down dissent against Israeli and Zionist narratives. Those measures have included permitting adverts promoting a holocaust against Palestinians and even attempting to flag the word ‘Zionist’ as hate speech.

Questioning the accuracy of the report, a WhatsApp spokesperson told MEMO: “We have no information that these reports are accurate. WhatsApp has no backdoors and we do not provide bulk information to any government. For over a decade, Meta has provided consistent transparency reports and those include the limited circumstances when WhatsApp information has been requested. Our principles are firm – we carefully review, validate and respond to law enforcement requests based on applicable law and consistent with internationally recognized standards, including human rights.

 

I have no opinion and am just seeking clarification as an admin who occasionally gets complaints that I’m unsure how to address.

Thanks!

cc: @TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml (the most active !privacy@lemmy.ml mod)


Edit to add an example edge case: DuckDuckGo is proprietary, but is anyone going to argue against its promotion? Isn’t Proton Mail similarly only FOSS on the client side?

 

MetaFilter is a 21 year old noncorporate social media community that has taken its culture and moderation very seriously. Scanning the questions of their FAQ is probably the quickest way to look for anything that might be worth consideration.

A few innovations/pages/FAQ questions that come to mind:

 

Three months ago I posted about the Atlantic Council’s interest in the controlling the fediverse: https://lemmy.ml/post/6641106

I think these projects are the continuation of the successful American “intelligence community” censorship of corporate social media platforms. They even tried to formalize the system two years ago as the Disinformation Governance Board.

view more: next ›