
Historically speaking we absolutely love kings, but I get the point
Historically speaking we absolutely love kings, but I get the point
Only half my life ago, but as a surly teen I didn’t yet have the vocabulary to explain why
Lmao it took exactly two waterlogged jets for president big boy to peace out and start ignoring the knesset’s calls
Oh I see, someone set all the “go upwards” switches to Off
As one disenfranchised peon to (presumably) another, I feel that the extent to which each of us is part of the problem is the extent to which we are forcibly prevented from becoming anything else. The problem is very profitable, so participating in the problem is made compulsory while organizing to solve the problem is made illegal and dangerous.
Oi, I’m avin a bleedin 'art attack over ere
The main question for me is one of impact: “Who is it hurting”. I only take things from big box stores, never ever from individuals or family businesses. My morality was formed through contemplation, like you said, and I see it as having a two-sided relationship with my experiences: Something that evolved out of how things are but informs how I think things should be: Nobody should go hungry, nobody should be impoverished or victimized. Surprisingly, just believing these things makes you a number of enemies these days.
Bang with the ban gun. get em outta here
If that’s not an option bullying is good too
Why yes, members of the US military would never agree to particupate in many, many illegal wars since 1945
I think most county medical authorities accept “hamster” as a cause of death actually
“I can speak to what’s obviously right in front of me, and so can anybody with eyes in their fucking head.”
libertarian as in capitalist?
In 1959, Anna Louise Strong visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, breaking off hands, and hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling. The exhibition presented photographs and testimonies of victims who had been blinded or crippled or suffered amputations for thievery. There was the shepherd whose master owed him a reimbursement in yuan and wheat but refused to pay. So he took one of the master’s cows; for this he had his hands severed. Another herdsman, who opposed having his wife taken from him by his lord, had his hands broken off. There were pictures of Communist activists with noses and upper lips cut off, and a woman who wasremovedd and then had her nose sliced away.23
Earlier visitors to Tibet commented on the theocratic despotism. In 1895, an Englishman, Dr. A. L. Waddell, wrote that the populace was under the “intolerable tyranny of monks” and the devil superstitions they had fashioned to terrorize the people. In 1904 Perceval Landon described the Dalai Lama’s rule as “an engine of oppression.” At about that time, another English traveler, Captain W.F.T. O’Connor, observed that “the great landowners and the priests… exercise each in their own dominion a despotic power from which there is no appeal,”
Liberating people from inhumanly cruel and merciless theocratic overlords is good actually, and I hope we can cultivate more of that energy here in the US.
Exerpts are from “Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth” by Micheal Parenti. The whole essay is quite good and not very long. https://forum.ableton.com/viewtopic.php?t=88773
What’s a non-authoritarian state?
I take comfort in knowing that the high tech future we were promised at the turn of the millennium isn’t dead after all, it’s just happening in China
A very funny NGO report on “net-enabled anarchist extremists” that talks about the SRA like it’s the PLA
Much like all the gig economy bullshit companies that collapsed when money became less free and economic gravity got turned up a little, I think these huge healthcare companies that came up during end-of-history neoliberalism and that look imposing, are actually really unsuited to the pressures of the new and innovative “you will be killed” model of socioeconomics.