davel

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

The rise of the megacorps was in the late 19th century as imperialism, otherwise known as “monopoly capitalism” or the Highest Stage of Capitalism.

The stage we’re in now is a further advancement known as neocolonialism, which began in the mid-20th century.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Nothing’s colder than a dead crypto bro’s cold wallet.

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

Americans are in the war, but Western media aren’t going to broadcast that. We have support forces in Ukraine, we provide Ukraine with invaluable intel and targeting data, we have American volunteers in the International Legion (one of whom was killed in action this week, and he wasn’t the first). Biden announced yesterday that he’s going to let even more Americans directly fight in this war.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The very point we are trying to make here is that that is what the Dems tried to do, and it did not in fact work.

We said as much, but of course they didn’t listen, as is our Cassandra curse.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months 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 4 points 6 months 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 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That’s at least partially true, perhaps even predominantly, but there’s also the desire to have very lean distributions for containterization, and GNU is comparatively “bloated,” for lack of a better term.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml -3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The US has never been and will never be a democracy, because it was born of a bourgeois revolution[1]. The wealthy, white, male, land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers constructed a bourgeois state with “checks and balances” against the “tyranny of the majority”. It was never meant to represent the majority—the working class—and it never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (at least those not disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote.[Princeton & Northwestern] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

China, in contrast, practices democratic centralism. And its no wonder that the Chinese people are very satisfied with their government, because their quality of life has been improving over the last few generations[2], while ours has been dropping over the last ~40 years of grinding neoliberalism.

Your understanding of China comes exclusively from the imperial core propaganda you & I have been exposed to our entire lives. You’ll never understand it in any other way unless you investigate outside of the bubble we live in.

Try to mention Tienanmen square anywhere

You can in fact mention Tienanmen square anywhere in China. The idea that it is suppressed comes to you from Western propaganda.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

China wouldn’t. Russia would if it had its druthers, but since it presently doesn’t, it presently won’t. Putin tried to join NATO once, to join the imperialist club, but that was rejected, because the US wanted Russia Balkanized & plundered instead. Russia has figured out it’s better off allying with Global South countries than attempting imperialist adventures upon them. And this war has accelerated that allyship.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 months ago

I don’t know how someone can confuse internationally illegal invasions of sovereign nations on the other side of the world which resulted in the deaths of over a million people with a domestic terrorism intervention that ended the deaths being caused by terrorist knifing sprees, bombings, and vehicular manslaughters. You’ve really got your head up your ass.

 

The recent BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia, should mark the end of the Neocon delusions encapsulated in the subtitle of Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1997 book, The Global Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives.

Since the 1990s, the goal of American foreign policy has been “primacy,” aka global hegemony. The U.S. methods of choice have been wars, regime-change operations and unilateral coercive measures (economic sanctions).

Kazan brought together 35 countries with more than half the world population that reject the U.S. bullying and that are not cowed by U.S. claims of hegemony.

 
 

We have entered a strange, late-stage Empire era, comparable to the Soviet Union’s Glasnost, in which elements of the US imperial braintrust can see with blinding clarity Washington’s entire hegemonic global project is stumbling rapidly and irreversibly towards extinction, and announce so publicly - but their insight does not translate into evasive governmental action at home. The RAND Commission report elicited no mainstream coverage or comment whatsoever, proof positive there isn’t a concomitant effort to manufacture consent for its radical, far-reaching prescriptions.

Were the Commission’s recommendations remotely plausible, a multipronged PR campaign would’ve immediately ensued to convince Americans of the righteousness of the Empire’s mission, and the necessity of investing in US “defense” to the tune of trillions. The media’s silence on the report’s damning findings definitionally reflects an omertà among the US political class. They well-know American reindustrialisation can’t happen. So, the fatal “disconnect” between Pentagon operational and industrial planning identified by RAND will endure, and with it ever-intensifying US military impotence. We’re spectating the Empire’s final acts in real-time.

 

While there’s a permanent crisis of the family, there’s also a permanent opportunity for capitalism to re-assert its power via the reconstruction of the family.

Throughout the book, Cooper traces the ways in which neoliberal and neoconservative forces have united to essentially move the responsibility for social reproduction from public or state responsibility to private and market responsibility.

But Cooper is also keen to point out that left-wing responses to the crisis of the Fordist family wage have often ended up falling into a conservative trap of actually reifying the family as a singular transhistorical construction.

Melinda Cooper’s book: Family Values: Between Neoliberalism and the New Social Conservatism

 

I hope you go over there, get your little brain all scrambled up with PTSD, and then come back here and see how much the United States cares about you, pookie.

4
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months 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.

 

PATO: The Pacific and Atlantic Treaty Organization

Their cooperation is forcing NATO to build closer ties with like-minded countries in the Indo-Pacific. For the first time, senior officials from Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan took part in a meeting with NATO defense ministers in Brussels on Thursday.

They baddies are “forcing” NATO into this. The poor imperial core, being dragged around again. #AlwaysTheSameMap

Citations Needed podcast: The Always Stumbling US Empire: "Stumbling", "sliding", "drawn into" war––the media frequently assumes the US is bumbling its way around the world. The idea that the United States operates in “good faith” is taken for granted for most of the American press while war is always portrayed as something that happens to the US, not something it seeks out.

Also, doesn’t “CRINK” already have a name, the Axis of Resistance?

Anyway, death to POTATO.

 

John Mearsheimer is a realist who’s still and always faithful to the liberal international order, unlike the also liberal Jeffery Sachs. All-In Summit 2024: John Mearsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs

 

7
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by davel@lemmy.ml to c/atheism@lemmy.ml
 

Philosophy professor Hans-Georg Moeller, author of A Moral Fool: A Case for Amorality

For [Harris] the two things are the same: on the one hand objective moral truth (universal morality), and on the other hand scientific facts about what increases wellbeing and what doesn’t. […] I think the two things are very different from one another.

Just as religion is not something that depends on the existence of god, but is a specific social practice, a specific form of communication that relates to a certain unrealistic assumption; likewise morality is a specific discourse, a specific way of acting, that relates to and derives from making unrealistic assumptions about something that doesn’t exist.

Follow-up video: If Morality Exists Everything Is Permitted.

 

If I didn’t know any better, I’d say Democrats were the most gullible 😐

view more: next ›