pebbles

Oh cool, thanks for sharing! Biofilm is exactly where I tend to find them. I think they need a decent bit of oxygen, and if there is algae then they'll eat the bacteria attracted to algae's oxygen.

My most stentor populated samples were pond samples with a good bit of dirt and leaves that I sat on a shelf for a few days.

Once they've sat you'll see a film start to form at the top that wasn't there before. For me that film was made of really long bacteria all tangled together and tons of other life attached to and living around it.

This video doesn't have stentors, but it is of my thickest biofilm, a lot of stentors were found in the same sample: https://youtu.be/T3Bbg-ObTok

Good luck microbe hunting!

I never watch Doctor Who, but I know the last human when I see them.

Man this is really getting into the weeds. I don't have those histories in my head well enough to talk about specifics like that. (Though I do appreciate all that you wrote. It is interesting to read.)

If you're an anarchist, I cannot imagine how a western religious institution propping up a fascist regime's military dicatorship over half the old nation's territory benefits you in any way.

Me either.

I'm pretty sure the main focus is just about the abstract idea of a group wanting to leave a larger group.

How on earth does this benefit any kind of anarchist cause?

Secession is anarchist in the sense that it rejects and fractures a dominant power in favor of one that better represents folks. So not full anarchist, but definitely more in that anarchist than restricting that ability.

Secession is a tool. Of course there are going to be bad examples, but that doesn't mean it's never justified and never a good way forward.

What if you had just been annexed? Not allowed to try and leave?

Update:

Really?!? Maybe you are keeping your samples healthier lol. I think they are decomposers and show up in my samples that are starting to decay lol.

I would not call splitting the baby progress.

Not when you put it like that! Lol

Vietnam, for instance, wasn't liberated through division. It had to be reunited before either half was free from civil war. Same with Germany. Or Korea, for that matter.

In those instances splitting may have been an important step forward even if it wasn't the final step. (I don't remember the context that well for those examples) (I looked it up, at least in Vietnam, idk how you expected them to go forward without splitting given all of the external pressure.)

I think the world will always be in flux. Do you think we'll eventually just have a static set of countries with static borders and all of the people will be happy? If so, I'd love to hear why. If not, then by what actions do you suppose those nations change to deal with ever evolving groups, environment, genes, etc? Why would secession be particularly worse than other options?

For example, I'm not so sure the legitimacy of North Korea is affirmed by the existence of south Korea more than it is affirmed by their allies (China, Russia, etc). Why would we focus on South Korea seceding more than other countries supporting?

I really appreciate your tone. A lot of folks are (reasonably) offended with the framing.

I'm curious how those debates went. I see the utility of the union, but we've definitely also seen the tyranny of it. You definitely wouldn't get the states to become the union if they were all split right now.

What proportion of Texan's incarcerated population is forced to labour for next to no salary again?

This would be my first time actually.

Hint: no.

I always appreciate the hints.

Slavery is alive and well in the USA, and Texas is one of its largest users thereof now. So yes, I think the average modern Texan secessionist would be pro-slavery … because they already are.

Yeah I didn't really consider their prison population, solid point. Prison slavary is bad. Though I think it is good to note scale differences. Both are bad, it's just that slavery was much much worse in the past.

According to https://userpages.umbc.edu/~bouton/History407/SlaveStats.htm

During slavery in the US about 1/3 of folks in the south were slaves. Compared to the 0.4% of today in Texas that's pretty staggering.

So yeah, I'd go far enough to say that the average Texan isn't pro-slavery in the sense that immediately hits my mind. Enough belive prison labor though, so you can't say the aren't pro slavery.

That is a strange project. It makes me uneasy. Thanks for sharing.

From the website:

For Texas by Texans, TXC is a fast & inexpensive mineable blockchain-based cryptocurrency designed for generations of honest trade.

Lmao, I've not seen any crypto do anything like "honest trade". The main uses are rug pulls and drug purcheses from my understanding.

Rejecting the authority of a monarch is very different than putting up hard borders along an arbitrary line of demarcation and reinforcing residency by birthright.

I'd say progress is progress, even if it isn't perfect. Large scale coordination is more difficult than smaller scale stuff.

Secession, in this instance, affirms the rights of the monarch at a distance.

I can see this, but it also relives the residents that succeeded. Gives them a safer place to build infrastructure.

Obviously it didn't work. But more because neoliberalism valued trade over civil rights and private profit over public prosperity.

Yeah that kinda stuff is my lack of optimism. If inegalitarian systems come together to decide on law for the world, then we may not get good laws.

I think there is a lot of local work to do before I am confident in a global order. If we had systems that represent us well, then combining them to set global standards would rock.

This is the principle of Constitutional governance. Power isn't embodied in an individual, it is a social contract between all residents.

Inequality is on the rise globally, and has been for a few decades. So that social contract is being negotiated by parties on increasingly uneven ground. Therefore this statement is not calming to me. Lots of people agree to bad deals every day.

Edit: BTW thanks for sharing your views, I know I can sound kinda spicy at times when debating. We both obviously just want folks to have comfortable lives.

Skill issue

(Disclaimer slavery bad, I think I haven't spend enough time saying that in this post)

On the topic of secession and global citizenship: As an anarchist I disagree that secession is inherently problematic. It all depends on how governance works in the state. Leaving could make a lot of sense with a monarchy for example.

I think a central authority regulating global citizenship could work out. But to me centralization means having one big point of failure. Less people to bribe to make sweeping changes. (Ergo Trump)

If there isnt a centralized authority then 'global citizenship' would mean different things in different states, so it wouldn't give everyone the same rights, and may not be followed at all. I can't imagine coordinating the whole world, but maybe I'm not optimistic enough.