Urist @ Urist @lemmy.ml

Posts

1

Comments

592

Joined

2 yr. ago

Infra-materialists unite!

I am from the Nordics. Spoiler: the rich get rich from exploiting workers and national resources, or inheritance from someone else that did.

Look at university professors' pay compared to that of a broker if you think we have a merit awarding income system.

Could it be that the beets are too expensive, by which I really mean that the proletariat is exploited and denied the benefits of the surplus gained by their increasing productivity.

Hey, maybe an ensuing US civil war where the US nukes itself turns out to be the best worst timeline for the rest of us.

FYI: This is a fork of the original InnerTune-project (which I had used up till now) that is no longer updated. Thankfully, exporting and importing works well for those that are on the old one and want to switch.

Many of these have C-bindings for their libraries, which means that slowness is caused by bad code (such as making a for loop with a C-call for each iteration instead of once for the whole loop).

I am no coder, but it is my experience that bad code can be slow regardless of language used.

Are you trying to imply that it was staged and that they shot Trump's ear for plausibility? If you want to make a conspiracy theory, at least make it believable.

Eh, they are Danish. Settler is the wrong term for them if you are trying to make out a continuity from classical colonialism to neo colonialism, as Denmark did not really have colonies in the classical sense (with one minor notable exception and the domination of Norway through its personal union for 450 years).

Denmark's history as a thriving social democracy in the modern era also makes it less of a perpetrator of the violence spread by modern bourgeoisie democracies than what your comment implies, in my opinion.

Lumping every Western nation together into some imperial core makes it harder to study the material conditions of neo colonialism.

As an example of the point I am trying to make of the importance of studying the material conditions of the global north as well: Denmark-Norway was the first European country to abolish the transatlantic slave trade. The reason for it is obvious, they did not really have colonies to speak of on their own.

Any bloodless revolution is done through an implicit threat of violence. It is just the losing side being smart about how they lose.

I tillegg om du er dansk, vil eg påpeike at Danmark mista eineveldet sitt då dei tapte Napoleonskrigane i 1814, som også var grunnlaget for Noreg sin uavhengigheit og demokratiske grunnlov.

As a mathematician I will reiterate what my supervisor told me: Math is not hard, it is only we that suck at it (said in context of me complaining about having used way too much time on what I in retrospect found to be simple).

Good, we should take notes.

I knew about that, but I thought it only applied to personal information (with limitations with regards to there being some professional entity collecting it). If I make a statement to the press that goes on print, I cannot demand them recalling papers in order to be compliant with GDPR.

That being said, I am by no means very knowledgeable about this.

How so?

Lmao, human rights of private property my ass. Personal property is not the same as private property. Fair proportional taxation is 99 % at some bracket.

Or you could make them so high that they are de facto an appropriation of funds.

In Norway they transfer their assets to their kids and send them to live in Switzerland for them.

Exit taxes for chuds.

The most optimistic explanation I have been able to arrive at is that they are less intimidating for fragile male egos. However, I concur wholeheartedly: Extremely creepy.

Also, Americans are usually more prude, especially when it comes to the female body, than what is healthy (I understand that you would not want to make an attempt at social change starting in the workplace though).

(yes, we exist, we read Marx AND Adam Smith - imagine that)

I am pretty sure Marx read Adam Smith too, so I do not see why this would be controversial.

The biggest ignorance of most socialists and indeed communists is the idea that capitalism is a political system. It is not.

Well, capitalism is primarily an economic system (more on that later, I guess), but as it influences and is influenced by politics, it cannot be separated from the political system that fosters it (everything is political, what parts of our societies can really be claimed to exist truly outside the sphere of politics anyway?).

what if I'm a libertarian socialist, or even an anarchist

If you claimed to be a libertarian or anarchist without being a socialist, I would not take you seriously since the former necessitates the latter. I also thoroughly agree that

Anyone who believes that a "free market" is an unregulated market is an idiot

and would like to add that anyone saying a classist society is compatible with anarchism is so as well, since the power and authority both inherent to and needed for upholding said social classes is contradictory to the nature of anarchism, and moreso of individual freedom itself.

Now onto your description of capitalism:

Capitalism is a system where we virtualised ownership or property as a form of valuing said property automatically, instead of employing appraisers everywhere

I am not quite sure what you mean by "virtualised ownership", but I would infer that you mean that capitalism is characterized by property (including capital) being realized as private property, through which independent firms and people may extract surplus value from the product of labour and thus accrue capital.

Now, both labour and value take on specific meanings within marxism, different from that of Ricardian economics (and thus neoclassical economics), which is developed from the works of Adam Smith. I am not quite sure whether you advocate for more of this (neo)classical valuation when you speak of "employing appraisers everywhere", but this valuation is a feature of capitalism that Marxists ultimately seek to destroy by rendering obsolete (I would also like to add that it is a "bad" valuation, since it places value of commodities in a pseudo arbitrary fashion where a portrait of Hitler might garner more value than a vaccine).

It's not a political system, it's not a judicial system, and it never was. That's the big brain rot, the big conjob, that and the fact that the liberals will always claim there's only one form of capitalism - which again, China has thuroughly disproved. It's literally just usury, but applied to property rather than currency. It's a tool, a double edged sword, which in it's current, centralised form fosters dialectal matetialism - yeeeey Marx & Engels.

Surely we could categorize different "types" of capitalism, but why bother when all are bad and need to be abolished for the sake of humanity? I understand how you connect private property to usury, since on a surface level it bears similarity. However, private property in the form of capital is much more nefarious as to how it exploits the labour power of the proletariat than a mere contractual transaction (I lend you X amount and you pay me back 1.2 * X amount). It is inseparable from the social conditions that force the proletariat to sell their labor power, not at a freely agreed upon price, but by the price the capitalists are able to enforce om them through their commodification, i.e. valuation, of labour.

I would say that my reading comprehension is okay, but I am unable to discern how the subject of your last sentence, that I referred to above (are you still talking about capitalism?), is somehow "fostering" dialectical materialism, to which you seem confusingly sarcastically enthusiastic about.

I can assure you that I would indeed not like to see the world burn, since I as well value human beings and all the other entities that live within the world. I also am very much sceptical of so called "strong men" with simple solutions, even though that does not dissuade me from advocating appropriation of private property on behalf of the public.

Both are scapegoats. You need the individual, you need the community, you need the collective.

Socialism is anything but. A socialist mode of production is the means by which the individuals may flourish. I tried to arrive at it earlier while talking about how libertarianism necessitates socialism. A social contract is necessary, because true individualism is not possible for multiple beings living in the same space, i.e. with cojoining spheres of influence.

If my actions influences the world of others, and by extension their possible actions or results thereof, we have arrived at the need for a social contract that allows both of us to act "freely". This is what socialism functionally is, and why you cannot reject it as neither a libertarian, anarchist nor a humanist

Now, I would assume you are feeling that I am being unfair to you since this is not directly what you say you are rejecting:

Don't come here with that bullshit, because then I'll reject you like I reject centrists, moderates, conservative, social democrats or any of the other liberal rebrandings, let alone tankies and "rip the system down" imbeciles who have blood on the tooth.

I reject all of that, because for thousands of years, naturalism has reigned. It's time for humanism to take it's rightful place, and that rejects all political ideologies and forces you to actually think - which people don't like to do.

However, by rejecting all political ideologies and in its absence believing that "thinking" will transform our current state of society into a socialist mode of production that allows that which you are welcoming, I think you have misunderstood the role of ideology and are de facto rejecting the future you describe to want. Ideology is the product of thinking really hard about the world that is, the world we want and the means by which we could achieve it. As such, ideology is the tool that we agree upon to make actual change, other than what we already made inside our own minds while thinking really hard.

I would like to see humanism in its rightful place, as a product of a socialist mode of production. I am therefore willing to exert my will upon the world, along with my comrades that want the same.