Like most of these kinds of problems, the answer can be boiled down to a simple commonality: The people who stand to lose the most from things changing for the better are the same people who have the most power to influence the outcomes. The only thing that can counter that is a strong labor movement.

Now, there is a more complicated question to be asked about why US labor movements have been less successful than their European counterparts, but that I don’t have an easy answer for.

The fact that people couldn’t tell the difference between a human and an AI made isekai is hilarious. This genre is just a sea of slop.

I wouldn’t describe myself as a tankie, but I do think I am more sympathetic towards the various communist projects that have been tried in one way or another. The difficulty talking about this is that there is all sorts of misinformation, so it can be hard to have a complete, coherent discussion on these issues. (and of course I know it can be coming from both sides, so it really makes things confusing) What’s more important to me though are the interpretations people have of these issues and how that informs their politics in the context of the real world that we live in.

What do I mean by this? While of course it’s important to critique past and current governments, it should be so that we can learn from their mistakes and do better in the future. I don’t really want to be defending some atrocity or failure of a state. I want to have an honest and productive talk about it. But in the context of living in the west, and especially the US, the propaganda line is to treat these governments as a complete and unique evil in order to justify both imperialism abroad and suppression of the left at home. They make it sound like their actions are just a continuation of our role in WWII fighting against fascism for freedom and democracy. But clearly that’s not the case. The US does absolutely awful shit all around the world and is buddy buddy with various oppressive/undemocratic governments. And this isn’t whataboutism. I’m not saying “well we did awful shit so it’s ok when they do it too.” What I’m saying is that by overly focusing your ire on these left wing governments, you reinforce the idea that the US is the good guy for fighting against them, that even if you have problems with the US, the other guys are way worse and it’s worth supporting US military interventions because of that. With that mentality, the military budget keeps growing, we keep bombing people who didn’t deserve it, we continue to justify our own authoritarian measures as being necessary for fighting against these existential threats. etc.

I’m sure for most on the left, especially anarchists, who participate in this, that isn’t their intention. They just want a better, fairer world and want to recognize injustice regardless of who does it. But the effect is still unfortunately to feed into the more right wing position on this. You’re working in an environment where the average uninformed person you talk to will at best not care about any atrocities the US has committed and at worst will view you as a crazy conspiracy theorist for telling them about publicly available information. Meanwhile they’ll gladly join in on getting angry about anything you say about a place they’ve been told is evil, even if it is a conspiracy theory. You have to consider that when you decide what to spend your limited time and political capital on.

That said, I don’t really know what to do with all that. I don’t think it’s right to go out of your way to lie about or defend actual atrocities, but how do you manage to do that without contributing to the oversimplified narrative of these places being cartoon villains? How do you get people to not fall for the manufactured consent for war time and time again while still acknowledging the things people treat like original sins that can never be atoned for?

I happened to read this recently. It’s mostly slice of life with a little “what weird things can my body do now that I’m part dragon?” I wouldn’t say there’s any action from what I’ve seen.

It’s kind of funny though, I don’t read much manga, but this is the second time in a row where I happened to read something only to find out Kyoani was going to adapt it not long after. Last one was CITY.

I couldn’t get through much of it either, but not because of the weird stuff, I like weird, the gameplay is just too… involved? Stressful? Exhausting? Like I’m ok with challenging games sometimes, but needing to spend a ton of time slowly trekking across fields and mountains while manually trying to keep your footing, managing a bunch of consumables, and occasionally needing to play walk through the ghost minefield with your baby detector while dealing with the rest of that is just not something I could keep up for as long as the game was going to go.

I hate that for a lot of these apps there’s no way to turn off these kinds of ad notifications without stopping the real notifications you want from the app.

Oh I was looking at system requirements on the store page. Is that accurate?

I got a new PC recently so unfortunately I am now on Windows 11. I’ve been wanting to make the swap to Linux but I can’t really make a clean break because at least some of the games I play a lot won’t work on Linux. I do think I’m gonna try to set up another hard drive with Linux on it to try to slowly start learning it and ideally move over anything that I can over there eventually and just keep the windows drive for those few games.

Does anyone have any recommendations related to that? Distro for gaming/ease of use? What’s the best option for setting up the dual boot? Anything I wouldn’t have thought of that’s relevant?

I’m not talking about personal actions. I personally believe in equality and I wish I could do more about that even if there are all sorts of personal reasons that’s difficult for me.

Corporations don’t believe anything. They’re just profit optimizing machines. They were doing rainbow capitalism when they thought it would be more profitable and now that they think the opposite is more profitable, they’ll do that. It’s as simple as that and hoping corporations would be allies in a fight for equality was always based on a misunderstanding about power.

It’s not like corporations don’t have power that can resist government action. Look at how effectively they’ve evaded taxes and regulations. The big international ones can threaten to take their ball and leave if they don’t like a country’s policies. And that’s when they don’t just bribe politicians to change them.

The workers at those companies are people though. Labor organizing was always going to be necessary to build up power for change. Not saying it’s easy and I can’t fault someone for worrying about losing their job, but if resistance was going to happen anywhere that’s where it would be. Not in boardrooms or alone in a booth.

But there’s the difference. It’s one thing to have convictions but not the means or courage to act on them. It’s another thing to have power, but lack convictions beyond whatever is currently convenient. The former could overcome those obstacles given the right circumstances. The latter never will.

It’s almost like their support for these issues was never genuine to begin with.

For leaks there is rarely going to be a way to know for sure. So you have to evaluate whether or not you think it’s reasonable given what you do know. We do know that they’ve done this kind of thing in other races. We do know that the party is funded by capitalist interests. We do know that the campaign didn’t really put forward a positive agenda and therefore had to look for other ways to gain advantages. As far as the character of the people/party involved, I’m not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt knowing all the awful things they’ve been complicit in. Lastly it doesn’t seem like it’s some crazy infeasible or irrational thing to do. We’re not talking about demonic sex cults or mind control or some nonsense. We’re talking about political maneuvering through media strategy during a campaign. The objective was rational even if it was unconscionable.

As you said, they thought it was a good strategy to optimize their chances at winning. Not only did they turn out to be wrong, but the act of trying to instigate one of the only two political parties we’re stuck with to take further right positions and possibly nominate a very right wing candidate is not an acceptable byproduct of the strategy.

Do I think we were headed in that direction anyway? Probably. As long as the parties aren’t willing to address the fundamental problems with capitalism, the door will always be open to a right wing demagogue who knows the right things to say. But spending your effort to speed that along instead of, idk, working on actually popular social programs, certainly didn’t help.

Did you not read about the part where their plan was to boost the more extreme candidates in the primary to try to get the rest of them to move further right in hopes that it would make an easier opponent for them?

That they realized they screwed up after the fact doesn’t change that.

Yeah you’re right, it’s nothing compared to helping Trump get elected.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/missteps-doomed-clinton-campaign/story?id=43422676

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-2016-donald-trump-214428/

https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

Yeah look how well it’s worked. Far right nutjobs have totally not been normalized. Nope.

Ah yes. Give money to the “progressive party” so it can do progressive things like funding ads for far right republicans in primaries:

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/27/1106859552/primary-illinois-colorado-republican-candidate-democrats-ads

Or backing “centrist” primary candidates against progressive candidates.

Very progressive. This amalgamation of rich people’s money and consultants is a great political ally.

I have less hope for two reasons:

1. These are still capitalist countries and thus the incentive for fascism still remains even if it gets delayed a bit.

2. The US is the largest, most dangerous military superpower the world has ever seen and it has shown time and time again that it’s willing to use that might to bully other nations into economic submission. No country is really safe if it decides to start going after them. The US hasn’t always won these wars, but even when it fails like in Vietnam or Korea, it does enough damage on the way out to cause massive destruction and suffering which has long lasting consequences. I seriously doubt the rest of the world is just gonna get to sit this one out and watch America self destruct.

idk. If western governments had any ability to learn or care, WWII surely would have been that moment. But after beating the endpoint of imperialism, they without irony or self awareness, just kept doing imperialism. I’m not holding my breath.

Even if it would, how would it ever get passed when the people who would need to pass it are the ones who are only in office because the system works the way it currently does?

This is just a recurring theme I’ve found when talking with liberals. They like to think about and suggest all sorts of policy ideas as though all we’re missing are some smart ideas nobody has thought of. It’s one thing to say we should have this, but it’s another to have any idea of how it’d be possible to do. Since they have no actual analysis of the system, they’ll just turn around and tell you to vote or call your representative. “We should get money out of politics!” “Yeah, well we checked with the people giving us money and they said no. So…”

There’s a difference though. To the extent that a communist society fails in it’s goals, it’s because of people’s failure to achieve them.

The problems with capitalism are inevitable consequences of the system. Competition is theoretically supposed to keep things in check, but that just doesn’t really pass the smell test for real life. We essentially never have markets that work like the mythical economic model of many sellers and many buyers so that nobody can be a price setter. Plus, competitions are meant to be won. Companies aren’t working to keep each other in the race. The goal is to drive out your competition and become a monopoly. Maybe there are brief periods where things stay competitive, but even small differences in success can compounded to further solidify your advantage, in turn making it easier to keep doing that. And that’s just if everything started our fairly, which it obviously didn’t.

Then there is the divide between capital and labor. In order for there to be wage workers, there must be a population of people who don’t own what they need to keep themselves alive. Otherwise there wouldn’t be capitalists, there would just be people using their own property to produce their own goods. And once we’ve established that this is a necessary part of capitalism, we have to acknowledge that workers wanting to be paid the most possible and to buy things for the cheapest possible is in direct opposition to the capitalist’s need to pay workers as little as possible and sell their goods for as much as possible. This isn’t some anomalously evil behavior, it’s the kind of optimization required to be the winner in the market competition. So even if you had a benevolent capitalist who decided to pay more and sell for less, they would just lose to someone else who is actually playing to win. And thus in the long term, the system filters out this altruistic behavior as a natural consequence of it’s mechanisms.

Furthermore, this need to divide capital from labor is in tension with the possibility that people could just take the stuff you’re hoarding. Because if they have nothing, you have an abundance, and you’re just one person, then it’d be the rational thing to do to take the stuff without having to work for you. Thus, in order for this divide between capital and labor to be maintained, there must be a concept of property rights that is enforced with some kind of organized violence, either by the state or by private security.

The other symptoms of capitalism naturally flow from these core principles.

• Corporate capture of the political system? Aside from the state existing to enforce private property rights in the first place, the inequality created by the outcomes of competition and the capital/labor divide creates power imbalances that can be used to influence governments more than those with less power.

• Climate change and environmental destruction due to over-consumption? You don’t make money from selling less stuff or from paying for things you don’t need to pay for. So you do things to induce demand like advertising, planned obsolescence, and influencing policy to kill green energy and public transportation, etc. There’s no reason for a corporation, a profit maximizing machine, to do anything that wouldn’t optimize it’s profits. If it did anything else, it would lose to someone who did do that.

• This meme: Privatization of public goods. If there is something you could make a profit from, a corporation must exploit that thing to maximize profits and win the competition. So there is an incentive to take things that aren’t commodities and turn them into commodities. This is sort of related to the divide of labor and capital as well. In order to be able to sell people things, they need to not have those things and not have a means of acquiring those things outside of buying them from capitalists, which in turn means needing to work for capitalists. If you had adequate access to food, housing, water, clothing, and medical care, you’d have no reason to buy those things from capitalists and would therefore have way less of a reason to put up with working for them. So those things must be withheld. This is also part of why there has been a problem with loneliness and the destruction of communities. Communities support each other. If your friend is willing to drive you to the doctor (or better yet, if there’s public transportation), you don’t need to call a taxi/ride share. If someone is willing to help feed you when things are going bad, maybe you don’t need to work another shift at some shitty job. If you have people you can enjoy socializing with by just talking or doing some free activity like taking a walk in the park, then maybe you don’t spend money to buy as much entertainment as you would if you were alone. Maybe you don’t have a social media account or don’t spend a lot of time on it just so that you can get some kind of socializing.

These are all bad things done to us by bad people. But the problem isn’t that the specific people in power happen to be bad and ruin what would otherwise be a good system. The bad people being in power is the inevitable end result of the system.

Same. I was also talking with some friends that have it and they also think I might. I already got a mess of other issues. I guess I’ll ask at my next psych appointment and see if I need to add that to the pile.