GarbageShoot [he/him]

They absolutely are, and many people would be excited to answer questions you have (including me, depending on the question). You just need to be careful not to come across as combative, because they’ll meet you in kind and it’ll be a dogpile.

c/askchapo , depending on the question

None of its supposed assets make up for the corporate overlords who run it and promote or permit all sorts of terrible things

Adam Johnson and Nima Shirazi

Citations Needed, excellent reporting on the way corporate news distorts various issues to shape public opinion, occasionally with historical examples going back to the antebellum period.

Reddit is notorious for astroturfing. The lemmy hivemind(s) is the lemmitor hivemind from people socialized on Reddit who came to lemmy and brought that shit with them. Same with other instances like .world, but worse because they have fewer legacy users.

It’s so annoying. I already had a liberal proactively bring the election up as though it wasn’t an open and shut case, as though it’s not just the even-more farcical version of what happened just like 5 years ago. There was a flurry of unsubstantiated accusations, because those are easy to make, and then reactionary media treats those accusations as though they were credible, and eventually proper investigations find that the accusations are so much hot air, but that can’t happen quickly enough to prevent the manufactured crisis of the accusations.

What do you mean fiat doesn’t work on a finite planet? Current economic models certainly don’t work on a finite planet, but fiat was here before them and will be here after they are long gone.

what is a good way for the working class (90%+ of all humans) to save and succeed in this current environment?

There isn’t one. A big chunk of that class can do just fine and you probably already have good normative answers in that respect, but the current economic model is one that demands poverty. Even with all of the ridiculous developments in production we have, the available infrastructure even with the qualms we might have with it, and all the other things going for us that you might want to list, the closest that the current economic model has achieved to escaping its age-old need for having a sizeable portion of the able-bodied population unemployed is by slightly expanding that same portion and then having them sell themselves by the hour and minute in the Gig Economy. If you want that whole 90% of the population to all be able to do well, you need to change the system they are operating within.

tl;dr I don’t have an answer for your problem, but I have some thoughts on it that hopefully might contribute to you finding an answer.

I think it’s probably bad to think of the homeless, etc. as being drug-addled and especially as being dangerous. Usually, if they do have a drug problem (especially alcoholism) it came after becoming homeless and not before, and functions as a way to self-medicate to ease the pain of their terrible conditions. There is, of course, a strong correlation with mental illness that they are often also self-medicating, but “mentally ill” does not mean the same thing as “dangerous”. You probably don’t want to have them as a baby sitter, but that’s much more because of mental illness impairing their ability to care for others (and often themselves) rather than there being a realistic chance they would actually hurt the child directly.

People, religions, politicians, corporations and so on speak of charity as a great thing, and it’s certainly not a bad thing, but there being a need for charity for people to survive is a symptom of a system that doesn’t care for a substantial portion of the population that lives in it, and typically brutally exploiting those people. Charity is like a bandage, it can help to tend to a wound that has been inflicted, but we must ask “Why is there a wound in the first place? What inflicted it? How can it be prevented?” Your society, like mine, is organized in part to hurt these people in order to exploit them. No amount of charity can change that fact, only a change in social organization can change it.

Look Jack, if you don’t like it, you can vote for the other rapist

One is a country, one is an individual, to say that any individual is more important to the war than the United States is the literal definition of Great Man Theory (i.e. childish nonsense).

This is without getting into other considerations like how Netanyahu is a scapegoat for faux-progressives who want to deflect away from how this genocide has enthusiastic support from many powerful institutions within Israel. It is an Israeli project much more than Netanyahu’s personal project.

P.S. Assassinating Putin wouldn’t end the war in Ukraine either (nor would assassinating Zelensky or Biden)

The NED is notorious for basically being a CIA cut-out

Tibet was de facto independent for a while, but it re-joined China voluntarily circa 1950. About 10 years later, with some help from western agitation and assets, the theocratic ruling class felt too threatened by development empowering their serf population and sought to secede in order to maintain their fiefdom. Mao sent in the PLA and crushed the secessionist revolt.

You really can’t “no u” this one because of Imperial China, the PRC’s claim to Tibet is completely valid. You’d probably have more luck trying with Xinjiang, though evidently that is viewed as slightly played-out now.

You Ain’t Been Doing Nothing If You Ain’t Been Called A Red

It might be helpful to the survey to include a y/n so they don’t need to guess whether you are a dom or a sub in that situation

The only thing it’s useful for is an approximate answer to the question “Who does the Economist Group want to lionize?”

but works alot more like the type of socialism that’s common in Europe.

i.e. not the socialism of Marx

but I still think the Nordic countries are what most people would refere to as at least a little bit socialist.

If you ignore that country with 1.4 billion people and a few others, i.e. the majority of country calling their countries socialist.

Maybe the proper term is social democratic?

Yes, that is the proper term

Only one of those four is white, and it’s a classic reactionary tactic to downplay him compared to the Georgian and the older Han Chinese example

Because authority carried out under the pretenses of private property is whitewashed in liberal states, who are the ones in your question doing the “considering”.

Always neat to see another fan of CSB/Woolie around. I haven’t seen your instance name before, at least that I can remember.