Look back now with hindsight and tell me what would be better for Palestinians in Gaza. What we’re getting with trump in charge? Or what we might have gotten if every single person who said negative things about Harris’ stance had instead focused solely on how Trump’s stance was objectively worse per his own words.

Can you try to put that into words? Like, give me concrete examples of how Trump is worse for Gaza.

A weapon doesn’t kill or hurt less people just because the dealer who sold/gave it away said, “Genocide is bad, okay?”

Those bombs are gonna kill and hurt people no matter if it’s the Dems or the Reps sending them to Israel. There are lots of reasons why Trump is worse, but if you’re a Palestinian it really doesn’t make a difference if the weapon that kills you came from a racist man or a woman who condemns genocide.

So fucking predictable.

Remember when Biden stepped down? Do you remember how unpopular he was and the massive wave of hope and support for Kamala that showed itself? Well, what the fuck did you think was gonna happen when Kamala glued herself to Biden, and tried to appeal to center right voters? They refuse to make compromises with the left, try to appeal to the center-right, and then blame the left for not voting for them; classic center/lib playbook, the same thing happens in Portugal, same thing happened in 2016 USA elections.

I thought that Democrats would win DESPITE the absolute dog shit campaign, given everything about Trump, but it was still an absolute dog shit campaign by people who claimed this was the most important election of people’s lives, but then dug their hills in ideologically and refused to compromise with people on their left.

If the situation wasn’t so dire, it would be hilarious to see the double think by Dem voters in this thread:

• “How can Rep voters not hold Trump accountable despite everything he’s done!”

• “It’s not the Dems fault that they lost, despite trying to appeal to the center-right instead of the left; it’s never their fault! It’s the leftists fault for not voting Dem! Kamala did nothing wrong!”

PS:

To OP,

Thank you for keeping this community alive and posting so much; I don’t come here often and I’m generally more of a lurker than a commenter, but I really appreciate it.

From the article:

Cook himself was fined $8,442.64 for his part in the ordeal.

Better than nothing, but I don’t understand how the dude who threw the first hit is fined less than the one who is just firing back. It just encourages the idea that’s it’s better to be the instigator IMO.

D

Don’t give me hope.

I was really into D, but I gave up on it because it seemed kind of dead. It’s often not mentioned in long lists of languages (i.e. I think Stack Overflow’s report did not mention it), and I think I remember once looking at a list of projects that used D and most of them were dead. I think I also remember once seeing a list of companies that used D, and when I looked up one of them I found out it didn’t exist anymore 😐️

I don’t think there’s anything stopping modern games from having the same vibes, and being creative with graphics. I’d say one example of a modern game with high res graphics, realistic water, and even ray tracing, which still looks very unique and distinct is Paradise Killer. Another one that also looks quite modern in some ways while still being very distinct in its own way, is Heaven’s Vault. It’s a choice made by AAA studios because photorealistic visuals tend to attract more eyes and sell better, even if people get bored of the game quite quickly.

And the thing is, AC Unity - which came out in 2014 - still looks better than the majority of AAA games I see nowadays, and despite the large crowds which are a bit CPU demanding it still has much lower requirements than those games that look worse.

EDIT: And if you just want games that actually look retro and old school, there are some from indie devs doing that; examples include: Dread Delusion, The Case of the Golden Idol, Death Trash, Felvidek, Return of the Obra Dinn.

Are we really doing the “yet you participate in society” meme?

It does bring up the topic of climate change several times, and yet’s still more than the protest that do happen, but you never hear about because they don’t inconvenience anyone. There have been plenty of instances of protests vandalizing rich people’s yachts, for example, but that doesn’t make the headlines and people don’t care, so no attention is raised and it’s ultimately meaningless.

I think this is it.

The historians I know of actually seem to lean quite left of the average person; it’s the light hobbieists, who are often more interested in the aesthetics/surface stuff, who seem to fall victim to the alt-right stuff.

The scale on the left doesn’t start at zero, so the difference is smaller than the size of the bars make it seem. The difference between #1 Slackware, and last spot Arch, is 0.75 points in a 0 to 10 scale, but the bar size of Slackware is about 2.5x bigger than the bar for the Arch users.

Well, firstly, I think .ml doesn’t just lean heavily Marxist, it leans heavily Marxist-Leninist, which is different; secondly, it specifically has a lot of tankies, which is the specific thing I pointed out. Not sure why you would want to equate yourself with that, being that tankies usually refers to people who defend repressive, imperialist, genocidal, actions of madmen. The origin of the word is to describe British communists who defended the use of tanks against protesters in the Hungarian Revolution, and is also colloquial used to describe people who defend Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Kim Jung Un, and their regimes, and more recently to describe people whose views often are based on just being anti-west, to the point of supported the fascist state of Russia, for example. So again, I’m not sure why you’re equating yourself with that, but just remember you were the one to put on the shoe, I didn’t force it on you.

And I’m sorry, but the idea that it’s usually Anarchist picking fights with others is ludicrous, but it actually is the perspective that I expect from tankies, because for a tankie the idea of “leftist unity” is to fall in line with tankie values, and to kill or imprison anyone who does not fall in line. Marxists and MLs in general far outnumber anarchists in online spaces, and one thing you can often see is tankies and MLs in general bursting into anarchist discussions, and being anything less than civil. I have seen anarchists advocating for anarchism in anarchist communities that were in a ML instance or website, get flooded with comments from MLs. You can even be banned in .ml by just being critical of Russia or China; given that anarchists will always be critical of the state, I don’t really see how you can in good faith claim that “you’ll likely see no trouble even advocating for Anarchism”.

Historically, I find your comment even more revisionist. The USSR not only killed and imprisoned anarchists, but it also refused to support anarchists and other socialists in Catalonia during the revolution, and eventually took control of Catalonia - done by the Spanish Communist Party, which was serving USSR interests and even Russian officers - and began prosecuting them, for no reason other than that they had fought in the POUM against fascists, instead of serving under the communist party. The Korean People’s Association in Manchuria also suffered a lot of attacks at the hands of the Korean communists, who nowadays lead North Korea. And of course, there’s also the Black Army of Ukraine, that merely wished to see itself independent of the USSR; but of course, for MLs the right of self-determination goes out the window when MLs are the ones trying to subjugate you. All of this, is where the term “red-fash” comes from.

I also don’t really remember seeing an anarchist be that critical of Marxists, as I have of MLs, which are different; I’m not sure why you keep trying to merge the two into one, as there are plenty of people who think of themselves as Marxist but not ML, and others who are ML and think Lenin evolved Marxists ideas a lot and that Marxists are essentially living in the past and haven’t read enough theory.

In short: MLs, and tankies specifically, have historically heavily persecuted anarchists and wanted them dead, but asking for people to fall in line or be shot is not fucking “unity”. Not so different from when Liberal politicians ask for left unity by getting leftists to vote for them while making no compromises, but at least they are less likely to take you to a prison camp or shoot you in the head.

I’m really not interested in having a conversation with someone who is interested in sweeping all of this under the rug and pretend that anarchists just get prickly about MLs and tankies purely based on theory, and who wants to equate Marxists, MLs, and tankies as being all the same. I’ve even met MLs who distance themselves from tankies, but you claim to be a Marxist and still choose to run defense for them. Well, that’s your choice, but don’t complain when you get pegged for one, which is definitely how I see you now, and I really don’t have in interest with talking with you anymore after this.

It was just a tongue in cheek comment based on .ml being known for having a lot of tankies, which are not usually very friendly to anarchists; it was not meant as an insult.

As for anarchist societies that are part of the global community, that’s a bit of a Herculean task since no state will ever want to acknowledge a stateless society; but that doesn’t mean they didn’t exist. For a current one, you can look to the Zapatistas, which I’ve heard about but admittedly don’t know much about; and for other ones, you can look at the anarchists in Catalonia during the civil war, and Korean People’s Association in Manchuria around the same time.

Catalonia was stuck between Franco (supplied by Nazis and Mussolini, even officers) and the Republicans/communist party (supplied by the USSR, even officers), and not only did the Nazis and USSR take plenty of other territories, but before the war the Republicans, which were liberal, had won elections; so it can’t be claimed it failed because they were anarchists (and non-Soviet socialists and communists), especially with how well they did for a while with so few resources.

Manchuria was also caught between Imperial Japan and communist Korea, and finally fell with the Japanese invasion. Japan not only conquered Korea (which was obviously not all anarchist), but also a lot of other territory and killed a lot of other people, so the failure cannot be attributed to anarchism then either.

I can’t vouch for every Linux distro that claims to be user-friendly, but I’ve fully switched to Linux Mint a couple of months ago, and I’ve had no issues. The only times I’ve used the console are when I want to use it.

My biggest worry before fully switching was playing pirated games, or games that I bought outside of Steam, but using Lutris it has been pretty straight forward.

There really has never been a better time to switch to Linux.

Yes, you build up Anarchism, a network of horizontal structures, from the bottom up. You build up Marxism by building dual power via councils, unions, and other democratic structures that can replace the Capialist state. These are separate concepts with similar but distinct goals.

Right, but so it seems we agree? This post’s explanation of socialism excludes anarchism, among other forms of socialism, which was my criticism. It only focuses on ML, but titles itself “What the heck is Socialism?”

Perhaps I expressed my self wrong at some point, or misinterpreted something, but that’s the point I was trying to make from the start.

They do not.

Marxists are communists, for whom the end goal is a stateless, moneyless, classless, society. What do you think stateless means?

AnComms want horizontalism as the end goal

And as the process. Which is what separates them from other communists.

Anarchism doesn’t just happen or fall into place. How do you believe the US, for example, will arrange itself into horizontal networks of Mutual Aid? By building them up. You seem to have no concept of Anarchist praxis in the modern era, you can’t vibe Anarchism into being.

Building them up through grassroots movements. They don’t happen by taking control of the government and creating “elected committees” who then “plan production”, which is what the comic talks about doing (even adding a picture of Lenin), and which the other user - and you by extension - defended.

Well, it just goes back to the root of the word. Ancient Greece, where the word democracy comes from, was far from what we would call a democracy nowadays.

Not only did they own slaves (who obviously could not vote) but the only people that could vote, as far as I remember, were landed men. If you were not a man, or did not own land, you could not vote.

But yeah, I agree with your point.

(Said the dude from .ml)

I really don’t mean to be rude, but both you and the other user seem to have no concept of anarchism. I mean, what you said straight up makes no sense. Marxists and AnComms both have the same end goal, so what do you think the difference between them is?

Anarchist societies and groups exists and have existed throughout history; they didn’t have to be “build towards” by taking control of the government first.

And please don’t be telling me why you like or don’t like anarchism; I’m arguing about what it is. Whether you like or think is viable is an entire different conversation.

Admittedly, I only read the first couple of sentences, but that’s because, intentionally or not, you’re still avoiding and deflecting from my main point.

You admitted Trotsky was a bastard. You now basically admitted that Lenin supported Trotsky and wanted to be succeeded by him. But you refuse to admit that Lenin was a bastard and seem to want to paint him as some sort of martyr or misunderstood saint.

Do you do that same for people who support Netanyahu? After all, it’s not them who are responsible for the horrible things done to Palestinians, it’s Netanyahu! They just happen to support him.

Is it that hard to just say, “Lenin was a bastard”?