Lack of growth isn't the reason people in sub-saharan Africa (or anywhere else) starve. We produce more than enough for everyone, globally. It's a distribution issue.

Lmao at "Venezuela is socialist".

The issue is power itself. If "cop like people" are needed at all, they should be restricted in the power to the degree that they wouldn't be recognizable as cops to anyone living in a modern state, (ie not having firearms, not having authority to arrest, etc).

Regardless of your opinion on the issue, cops being "unreformable", and an institution that's inherently shitty, is the anarchist position, and the basis behind the sentiment expressed in ACAB. Which is why its shitty to read cop apologist/bootlikers in sublemmies like that.

There's also the part about "kids" not going to school, and, in contrast, "parents" not going to work. Subttly implying workers are parents and vice-versa.

I'm not inherently against this or anything, but the page gives me strong "hey, fellow kids" vibe.

Please tell me you're a troll.

"At least I can exist" being "dangerous precedent" is low key advocating for genocide, btw.

"to starve the upper class if labor" - you'll never do that with lifestyle changes.

Trying to minimize your participation in the rat race is a good idea, but not revolutionary in itself.

I broadly agree with this sentiment, however, I still find their uncritical support for demonstrably awful states (like states tend to be) distasteful.

Take the Uyghur issue, for example. Occidental propaganda wants us to believe that there's a literal, Nazi-style physical genocide, which isn't true. Tankies point that out and claim "victory", when Uyghurs are living in pretty shitty conditions, and the Chinese state is doing everything it can to erase their culture, even if no physical genocide is happening.

I think I read recently in an anti-cop sublemmy (ACAB? I forgot the name) that being against "all" cops is problematic, because, after all, cops in "proletariat-controled states" exert the will of the proletariat (unlike cops in burgeois-controlled states). And thus, they're good. 🙄

I get that these people are not a serious political force. And they're certainly not as insufferable as liberals (and they do much less damage, if any at all). But still.

This might seem weird, but it kinda bothers me that 55000 dollars just... Doesn't seem like that much money, lmao. Like, you're talking about literally buying power in the most powerful empire in history for... 55k?

Friendly reminder that Orwell was a socialist and fought as a volunteer in the Spanish civil war against fascists. 1984 was never meant as a critique of communism, the protagonist's job in the ministry was inspired by censorship work he himself had to do... Working under the BBC. Animal Farm is explicitly against Stalinism, which I understand how some MLs think is anticommunist (if you view Stalinism and Communism as essentially synonyms) but I feel like saying that Orwell was anticommunist is a misrepresentation.

Lmao at Saudi Arabia being grey. From outside the US this seems almost like satire, but I imagine it's genuine.

I didn't get it and I feel dense :(

I've heard a gym membership (if you can afford one) is a good way to get access to a shower.

Tbh, I found your "article" unnecessarily provocative, and not at all specific to free software.

I do think there's something to be said regarding minimalism in code and security, but I think a more insightful analysis would have been better here.

The mental gymnastics you need to do to believe being a bootlicker is revolutionary.

How does the repo size of these distros compare with Debian/Fedora/Arch?

I think the "bastardness" of cops is in direct correlation with inequality: more inequality invariably means more brutality is needed to enforce that inequality.

As an anarchist, I'm skeptical of the notion of "socialist states" since in my books socialism is worker ownership of the means of production. The state might claim that it represents the will of the workers, and so state ownership is the same as worker ownership, but believing that claim is incredibly naive imo.

Do you have sources that I could read? I'm admittedly not an expert in energy production, but a cursory search of nuclear energy seems to lead to a fairly good consensus that it is more expensive, more emmiting and slower to get up and running than equivalent renewables. I'd be interested in reading dissenting opinions.

Is that really still the case? With the huge gain in renewable efficiency over the last decade, I'd be surprised if it was. I also heard it takes a long time from the start of construction until a nuclear plant goes online, which makes them less than ideal in a climate emergency.

I'm a non-american (argentinian), and don't really feel comfortable sharing a platform with literal white supremacists.

You do realize that literally every single pseudoscientific belief is supported by "personal experience" right? Including literally every religion/cult. Anecdotal evidence doesn't make a claim credible, specially when its regarding medical treatment.

Contrary to what you seem to believe, we can prove things without experiencing them ourselves! You might want look into what a "double blind" study is, and what "peer review" consist of.

https://yewtu.be/watch?v=cz9ICFDk8Js&local=true <- excellent source on the Uighur issue. The TL,DW is that it is systematic cultural erasure, and not a physical genocide. Note that a systematic effort to destroy a culture should be considered a genocide in my books (and the creator of the term "genocide" agrees), but that's just not how the term is used unfortunately.

If anything, that site should be DDoSed for peddling dangerous pseudoscience

I don't think it matters either way. There's no ethical consumption under capitalism, and we won't dismantle capitalism by consuming "the right way".

Doesn't Wikiless get your IP address instead of Wikipedia? Idk if Wikipedia is the kind of service that requires a frontend, given that it's not run by a data-hungry corporation.

If anything, you could just use Tor.

"Idea havers" are just workers, if very well paid ones. I don't think I know of a single instance of a patent/intellectual property that is owned by the person or team that created it. They make stuff, get paid for it, and then the fruits of their labor (ideas) are owned by the companies that employ them. Just like any other labor, and no less exploitative.

I'm an anticapitalist but not necessarily a Marxist, so I got a better version of objection #3:

If labor is all that gives an object value, the consumption of resources and environmental impact is not accounted for, perpetuating the capitalist logic of "externalizing" costs.

Example: Object A takes 1 hour to make for a single labourer, while object B takes 45 minutes, but frees 50 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere.

I think it's clear that the value of A is not greater than the value of B, but LTV disagrees with me there.

I'd be interested to hear what's your take on this.

I don't recommend going down that road, looking down upon "the world" is an edgelord attitude that will make you feel isolated and miserable. You might be neurodivergent, or have trouble expressing yourself, that doesn't make you crazy or stupid, but neither makes the people around you crazy or stupid (or asleep).

Try to be empathetic towards people that don't understand you, even if it hurts. You'll be better because of it.

"Time fraud" sounds like a bs crime in a sci-fi dystopia.

A "degoogled" world is still a "facebooked", "amazoned", "microsofted" world. We need decentralized alternatives in general.