SubstantialNothingness [comrade/them]

There are traditional libertarians (i.e. anarchists, anarcho-communists, etc.) and there are Rothbardian libertarians (liberal market reformists primarily in the Anglosphere). These two groups tend to be diametrically opposed to each other.

The latter is never serious (except as a grift). It considers freedom to be a pathological form of positive liberty, where socioeconomic status grants the right to oppress lower classes (which is of course very appealing to conservatives). The US Libertarian party belongs to this version. It was named after traditional libertarianism but it is not actually a descendant ideology (as demonstrated by conflicting stances on fundamental principles).

The former doesn’t believe in the “magic of the free market,” and focuses instead on eliminating the financial systems that create hierarchy out of inequal access to resources (because the chains of capital impede negative liberty / the right to not be oppressed). As such, it is incompatible with Rothbard’s version. This type may organize with socialists or communists, or may seek an immediate anarchist revolution, depending on the variety and individual. I’ll let you judge this type of libertarianism for yourself. A common criticism is that it is too “Pie in the Sky.”

On a final note, I will argue that the Wikipedia entry is incorrect in stating that Libertarian socialism is unique in rejecting private property. In general, all traditional forms of libertarianism reject private property because it is a vehicle for inequality that propagates hierarchy and oppression. See anarchist communism for another libertarian ideology that opposes private property.

e: I should add I’m mostly talking about the radical, unadulterated versions of these ideologies. Individuals can be more or less radical, serious, committed, aware, informed, etc. If you were to say almost no libertarians see it this way and that in practice they are nearly all silly, I wouldn’t really feel compelled to argue lol. That’s been my overwhelming experience too, although with a few notable exceptions IRL.

Updates on floods in West and Central Africa this year, and a discussion of climatic trends in these regions (not good):

[Phys.org] Climate change-worsened floods wreak havoc in Africa

Look at that, the climate change subs captured by climate change deniers are on the list.

I would bet that almost every sub on their list is already full of astroturfers talking to themselves lol

Honestly at this point I think Bernie’s currently vocal “supporters” are actually conservative Dems using him like a cudgel to guilt-trip and exploit progressive voters into moving to the right. Bernie doesn’t seem to mind playing right into their strategy - maybe he doesn’t know, maybe he doesn’t care.

At the same time I don’t think progressives are even a functional political bloc anymore which makes it all kind of funny. It’s like the conservatives crossed the finish line and won the race 4 years ago, but they didn’t realize it so they’re still out there running all by themselves.

not willingly, no

This is a binary reality - it’s warmer or it’s not. And it takes like 5 seconds to confirm that it is. But this many people haven’t taken even 5 seconds to check over the past 24 years.

There’s no way that all those sensors over the past 100 years have been erroneous in just the right way to create a consistent illusion of warming. That’s like the smallest tail risk in the history of statistics lol

And the question doesn’t ask anything why there might be warming, it’s a simple quantitative question and these people still can’t face the reality.

What action would you tell them to take?

What is it they need? Where is the state currently failing to support them? Like, what would actually make a difference to people in the community?

I would suggest identifying that, and then building a community-based solution (if possible/appropriate).

Teach people how to hold power for themselves rather than begging for scraps from the political establishment.

Sure it’s easier said than done but that’s my antidote to electoralism.

Hopefully they gained some new data and insights from dealing with the ALBMs, like radar profiles and flight characteristics.

It must be difficult to strike a balance between not exposing too many assets to a SEAD/DEAD campaign while also keeping enough of them online to protect important installations. Like, if you hide your AA, then the distraction drones can score direct hits on targets that would usually be well-defended. Whereas if you expose the AA and it gets hit, those same targets still become exposed and you lose critical air defense assets. However I’m sure they have a lot of resources dedicated to planning for these circumstances.

It’s about liberals accepting atrocities under Biden that they would not under Trump

I agree with the sentiment, but in my experience it depends on what you consider “accepting.”

They also accepted everything under Trump imo - they just accepted it with the occasional fruitless protest thrown in the mix.

Had millions of people not been killed by COVID, would the world be less tolerant to genocide?

Only marginally, I think. The world was already primed before covid imo.

You know that does sound vaguely familiar. Thanks for the info!

I had no idea Tate converted to Islam.

It’s really interesting and full of twists and spins and all that, but I think I’d like off this rollercoaster now. Please and thank you.

The thread on the LivestreamFails sub or whatever? What a display of bad faith rhetoric that was.

And yeah that was one of the big strategies, to pretend this was supposed to support Palestine somehow. It’s fucking twitch - they don’t care about supporting anything except themselves lol

I don’t think there is proof exactly, but several users have said they’re blocked from signups when VPNing through Israel (I haven’t tried), and a supposed screenshot exists of twitch support confirming one person’s ineligibility over email. That seems like pretty convincing anecdotal evidence to me but you can judge it for yourself.

Wise of you to ask.

edit: apparently it was not at all new and signups weren’t totally restricted (according to twitch it had something to do with email verifications? the link is in the parent comment). there was a lot of confusion around it and, again, it was wise of you to question the accuracy

I posted my comment after getting a good laugh at a subreddit having a meltdown. They were saying the same thing - twitch is anti-semitic, hasan this asmon that, etc. It just sounds so outlandish that twitch would take a political stance that it makes me think something is forcing their hand. Like, surely they weighed the cost of the guaranteed backlash, right?

edit: the policy was old. i was judging it from the wrong context. parent comment edited

It definitely could be, it just seems abnormal to me from what (little) I know of their moderation practices.

edit: looks like you were right about it being pre-emptive, although they actually did it last year and people just rediscovered it

I had not really considered that but why now?

However, I had not heard that this policy (according to another comment) existed for several months until just now. That will probably change my outlook at least somewhat, but for now I haven’t had time to really process it.

edit: It was actually a year old so that changes things even more lol

re: twitch banning israel

Twitch must have a (corporate) good reason for the ban. They almost certainly didn’t do it out of a moral responsibility. (prove me wrong twitch, i dare you)

I think it’s likely because they’ve recognized a significant algorithm abuse (bot/shill) campaign, which could constitute as fraud or laundering due to the monetized nature of the platform. Spotify has had a lot of issues over the years which you can read about. If there was a campaign and a large part of it was coming from a specific subset of IPs, it would be a crude but potentially effective strategy to just pull the plug on them.

It sounds like existing users are still allowed, though, which pretty clearly indicates that they wanted to recognize a legitimate pre-existing israeli userbase (and which will likely prevent major retention loss after a few months of protests).

If that’s the case it’s kind of funny blowback. But I worry about what it means if a bot/shill campaign reached twitch’s threshold for concern right now. Psyops tend to shortly precede physical ops, and if I’m not mistaken the whole world is waiting for Israel’s next move.

edit: some people are saying this policy has been around for several months now so take that into consideration with my last paragraph

I take it back! I take it all back.

u/sewer_rat_420 reports that the policy has been active since 10/7/23. Like many others, I saw the big reaction and believed the comments saying it was new. Because that would make sense, right? Too much sense apparently. This is a clown world after all.

I’m filing this one under “lessons learned.” Sorry for propagating misinfo.

And since I totally, definitely learned my lesson, here is a source for it being an old policy and more details about it: https://xcancel.com/TwitchSupport/status/1848191418377830708

lol you caught me as i was deleting it. i still believe in what i wrote, but you can read my explanation if you check the edit. i would be a hypocrite if i risked my IRL relationships to gossip with strangers.

edit: i don’t think my friends are hexbears but even if they’re not, i should focus on finding ways to constructively discuss my concerns about their social media usage with them personally.

maybe i’ll form a more coherent framework for my ideas and try discuss them in a way that doesn’t refer to individuals.

e2: constructively rephrased for hexbear consumption:

posting is almost never praxis. being an IRL role model by working with real and potential allies to build action-and-community-oriented movements is praxis. at least please accept that not everyone you engage or do not engage with will consider it praxis. don’t let the astroturfing distort your perspective or make you an in-person nihilist.

the human-to-human connection is everything imo. spending too much time among bots and shills trying to manufacture narratives - plus the struggles of making meaningful connections in contemporary life - can make that very easy to forget or ignore. building bridges is hard and active work that may test our patience and compassion, but it is worthwhile work (as long as we are doing it mindfully). it usually starts with failure but failure is not a good reason to quit trying.

we need to be cautious of potential social media addiction and our justifications for our usage. not because it is morally bad or strategically useless, but because we can unintentionally become victims of our social media use. it can divide us, addict us, distract us, crush our hopes or build up false hope, exhaust us, alienate us. it can tear us apart. social media use almost always comes at a cost and it is often hard to recognize. it’s still a very new way to interact (but it is already very controlled). if it is masking a mental health issue (or any other issue) then it’s important to acknowledge that fact and to address it appropriately.

make meaningful connections with IRL allies. respect your responsibilities to them. grow those responsibilities. but don’t believe that being burnt out proves your commitment. research the lessons learned by activists past. if a plan fails, adapt. any plan. focus on building good things up, don’t worry too much about breaking bad things down. “build it and they will come” as they say lol