rip bozo. rest in piss.

this probably won’t happen, but: i hope the hero gets away with it and isn’t some fringe Libertarian.

i see. so we must escalate the security dilemma and bolster the capitalist military to defeat the Oriental Hordes to protect our managers’ very peaceloving and democratic ways of life. only once the capitalists have installed someone nicer to manage the Orient can we hope to return to begging the capitalists to relinquish their weapons and their power, of which they now have more of, and which many more people have been integrated into. in the meantime, leftists need to put their shit on hold. none of this will contribute to the rise of the far right or stoke xenophobic tendencies. i’m not a nationalist; joining the military is simply the forward-thinking thing to do. military service very famously attracts good people with good intentions. this is definitely not a right-wing position based in false consciousness and a Tom Clancy-esque view of geopolitics. this posturing has no relation to how we ended up in this situation. the fact that all of this benefits international capital is merely a coïncidence. mutually assured destruction means nothing to me.

with business going so well for the MIC, Gaza beach resorts should be open just in time for the postwar economy to swing back around! we could all use a little time in the sun after making everything worse.

/s

Use the tools that you have right now, and figure out something better once you have the breathing room to do so.

the military is not my/our tools. it’s the state’s tools.

our tools are being torn at to make way for a war economy, for a war that isn’t ours.

and if you tell me you’re not advocating for joining the military, then who does?

If it’s to provide opposition to Russian aggression, that is something that should be done. I am fully behind opposing fascism and imperialism.

‘social’ patriotism is still fascism. the proletariat have nothing to gain in a war waged under capitalism. you can oppose the war without supporting the military-industrial complex. revolutionary defeatism remains as relevant today as it was a hundred years ago.

just as then, this clash of civilisations narrative is creating a left-to-right pipeline and disappearing comrades into militaries or (if they refuse) prisons. anticapitalism is being sidelined for ‘national unity’ and ‘social cohesion’. money that previously didn’t exist is now allocated to US-bound tributes and funding for corporations which are in the business of fucking killing people, to support the nationalist programme of a Banderite State as these two capitalist countries grind each other’s lower classes against each other. surveillance becomes a ‘necessity’ to defeat the Evil Nonwhite (read: Nonhuman) Hordes. the Bad Refugees need to be expelled to make space for the Good Refugees. housing and funding for refugees and integration programmes suddenly materialises, and these Good Refugees get expedited (and sometimes exclusive) access to such help. literal nazi ideology and dogwhistles are rehabilitated to make all this more palatable.

where is the antiïmperialism in this? where’s the antifascism? i am convinced militarist-patriotic ‘left’-ists don’t personally know any comrades from Ukraine.

• https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/evasions-on-the-left-over-ukraine
• https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/aotearoa-workers-solidarity-movement-the-betrayal-of-donbas-no-war-but-class-war
• https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anonymous-anarchist-antimilitarism-and-myths-about-the-war-in-ukraine

[…] forced resettlement from land these people lived on. But this obviously doesn’t mean the land is owned by those people now […]

the subject of this thread is about land that indigenous people who are alive right now had access to before it was turned into a concentration camp right next to their homes.

as expected of a right-wing libertarian named ‘Lain’ who calls people ‘left-oids’ .

you could’ve kept this to yourself. go back to 4chan.

there is no contradiction between private property abolition and land-back.

private property abolition is about ending rentseeking and recommoning the means of (re)production.

land-back is about self-determination and reparations for the descendants of these genocided peoples; peoples whose destruction still benefits the living descandants of settlers. it’s about returning to broken treaties, ending extractive capitalism on their sacred land, and ending the process of enclosure which cuts them off from their culture, families and neighbours. it’s about restoring rights and laws of stewardship to the people who actually live there and have a connection to the land.

land-back doesn’t mean transferring private property. it means reöpening it and giving indigenous peoples back their right of stewardship.

land-back is private property abolition. it’s also an environmental movement.

cele is plural

https://pluralpedia.org/w/Plurality

i am happy that you exist and i envy your clients 💙

but you are technically coercing them into compliance if they’re going to be removed from a project, relationship, etc.

this is an ongoing discussion within anarchism.

ideally, removing someone who wants to remain should be the last resort of a group. ideally, someone would not get to this point unless everyone else in the group (at some point) wanted them there.

this is where relationship anarchy and restorative and transformative justice come into play:

• avoiding situations where people feel trapped in a social situation, and
• promoting confrontation, dialogue and active listening when people are uncomfortable.

for disclosure: i’m not for relationship anarchy, but i’m not against it, either.

where you defer to someone else for their expertise because maybe they’re the only doctor available who can treat your illness, so you need to do as they say to get better.

you have the right word for it: expertise (see my other comment).

it becomes a hierarchy if the doctor involuntarily hospitalises you or uses the courts to force you to undergo the treatment; the power (force) to do that is authority. so long as you still have the power to challenge or otherwise discuss the prognosis, it is not a hierarchy, especially if the treatment is gratis and libre.

Expertise merely refers to one’s knowledge or skill in a particular field, but my understanding of CPR or ability to bake shortbread cookies does not make me an authority over you. Other than the conflation of force and authority, this is one of the most common confusions people have about anarchism, made worse by the fact that there are some anarchists who still use authority to refer to both command and expertise just because Bakunin did. Personally, I find that creates needless confusion. If you’re using the word authority to describe everything from slavery to knowing how to build a bridge, then why use the word at all? Just use the word expertise when you’re talking about expertise. Listening to medical advice isn’t a hierarchy. Having expertise doesn’t give me the right to command you unless I hold a position in a hierarchical power structure that grants me that authority. As Bakunin himself said:

…we ask nothing better than to see men endowed with great knowledge, great experience, great minds, and, above all, great hearts, exert over us a natural and legitimate influence, freely accepted and never imposed in the name of any official authority whatsoever, celestial or terrestrial.

— Andrewism, How Anarchy Works » Dissecting Authority (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrTzjaXskUU)

a hierarchy (from Greek, for ‘rule of priests’) is a structure which creatures superiors and subordinates.

Like if I invite a bunch of friends over to help me move into a new apartment, is there a hierarchy because I’m telling everyone where to put the boxes?

if your friends want to help you, then they’re helping you. they of course needs to defer to you for instructions, because you’re the one who knows what you need help with. if they’re doing so without the guarantee/demand of anything in return (because they care about you), then this is mutual aid.

Just when will my human rights, which are grounded in the constitution

the US constitution is an ideological rag and a liberal holy text written by and for wealthy protocapitalists seeking independence from mercantilism. it wasn’t written for you, just as it wasn’t written for women or BIPOC. the police and courts serve the state, not persons.

a digital wallet with ZKP could resolve ‘are you old enough?’ without the query ever needing to leave your device.

without a digital wallet, it could be done with fully homomorphic encryption.

both of these would be innovations which i feel require guided development. innovation counter to the goal of the legislation, which is surveillance. innovation driven by the self-proclaimed purpose of ‘protecting children’; innovation driven by the impetus to make it harder for people to masturbate.

since the general attitude right now has been ‘require agegates and just leave it up to The Market™’, then the solution in practise will probably be a private third party that brokers this information, probably with a natural monopoly, that will charge exorbitantly for their API, have Google Analytics running on every page, leaks like a sieve, leaves logs everywhere, and will probably get caught selling data, which will incur a one-time fee equal to 80% the size of the company’s rainy day fund, and maybe the CEO will be asked to step down, shielding the rest of the C-suite from consequences (and allowing them to just do it again). they’ll work closely with law enforcement, they’ll be breached in the first year, and probably have a huge leak 4 years later.

in that time, due to real changes in the law or jurisprudence, or companies just ‘playing it safe’, age verification will come to encompass queer identity, sexual education and health, war coverage, counterculture and even history. more online regulation just means more barriers to entry which means a larger monopoly for multinational corporations.

i think there are better uses for this technology than controlling pornography.

the provider knows who’s asking because of the IP address and API key of the requester. if it uses a form with a redirect, they even know your IP and what page you were on, tied to your legal identity. if the provider makes any API requests to a government registry, now that knows the when, the how, and (categorically) the what. short of a statement of ‘no logs’ and an audit to confirm as such, there is definitely logs. hackers love this information. data brokers love this information.

the problem is not the service knowing. it’s anyone knowing. the provider deänonymised you the moment you gave your id. the precise implementation details are important here.

the problem is that people are being verifiably linked to their ‘adult’ preferences. this is data that is being generated, in bad faith, and handled by multiple parties. your legal identity should not need to be tied to this information. this information can be used against you both now and in the future.

we’ve already seen in the US where there is a push for information about gender and basic sexual education being labelled as ‘adult’. when i was in school, information about countries like Cuba, Afghanistan or China was considered ‘too mature’ (or marked as ‘terrorism-related’ by the school firewall) for children; i could see this thus extending to require age verification before you can access ‘subversive’ information, on the basis of ‘protecting children’ from ‘political extremism’.

… because it was flagged by Lightspeed? or is Discord doing something of their own now too?

i wouldn’t find out till after her death that my grandmother had a PhD in computer science. she became a housewife and pretended her whole life to be tech illiterate because she was ashamed of being a technical woman, apparently because of the hatred she got during her studies.

they have, but they assume:

• ‘for-profit’ means ‘good’ because ‘they have a lot of money’.
• ‘proprietary’ means ‘good’ because ‘the code/infrastructure is obfuscated’.
• ‘widely used’ means ‘good’ because ‘more people with the skills to manage it’ and ‘it’s widely supported’.
• ‘open source’ means ‘bad’ because ‘anyone can analyse the code for exploits without reporting them’.
• ‘self-sufficiency’ means ‘bad’ because ‘that’s anticompetitive’.

they hear the phrases ‘supply chain attacks’ and ‘24/7 premium support’ and they’re sold. the more responsibility they can foist onto third-parties for when something goes wrong, the less liability they have.

in a lot of ‘developed’ countries: government at all levels are structurally forbidden from managing their own infrastructure. to ‘maintain the free market’ and avoid ‘anticompetition’ lawsuits, they procure development contracts via bids. Microsoft has the money and dominance to not only lobby governments to adopt their software, but can also outbid most other companies, and pays a lot of money to ensure there’s an army of Microsoft Certified™ office workers and technicians everywhere.

every time the government tries to do something by itself, or to exclude one company or another from the bidding process, the industry lobbies crawl out to screech about ‘competition’ and ‘free market principles’.

‘‘effective’ ‘altruism’’