I’m the one blind to reality? You actually think Bernie had any sway over any one of the moderates who dropped out to give Biden the win? They were loyal to the Democratic Party, not Bernie, and certainly not to their principles, if truly they had any.

She’s a young woman with strong opinions. That’s enough to make conservatives pop a blood vessel.

It seems like you’re going down the Silicon Valley Techno-Libertarian rabbit hole, so I highly recommend looking into some Anarchist critiques of Libertarianism and reflecting a bit. This is a trap you’re stumbling into.

That’s literally just politics.

This gives the same energy as saying “it’s just business” after doing some heinous shit.

Name a more iconic duo than Marxists and Anarchist-erasure.

You seem to think that Anarchism is just the extreme/pure form of Libertarianism, and that it’s just about more/less government, which couldn’t be further from the truth.

I’ll acknowledge my bias upfront, I consider myself an Anarchist, so keep that in mind as you read my comment.

American Libertarianism presents itself as being about “small government,” which makes it sound appealing to people who are skeptical of authority but have a very shallow understanding of politics. In truth, it’s an ideology that holds individual property rights as superior to all others. To an American Libertarian, any infringement on their property rights is the most egregious possible violation of their freedom.

Anarchism means “without rulers.” Anarchists oppose all forms of exploitation and oppression, which is described as any arrangement in which one person or group exerts authority over another person or group, usually by force. They favor organizing society via “voluntary free association,” which is when people make decisions together on the basis of general consent. To an Anarchist, private property (as opposed to personal property, there is a distinction) is just another way for someone to exploit another, such as when a landlord collects rent.

This text explains what anarchism is pretty well.

The fantasy is the competent opposition to all of those things.

Kentucky amendment 2, which would have redirected public funds to private schools, failed miserably. Of all the red states, Kentucky seems to be somewhat unique in its’ strong resistance to Republican attacks on public education. It is, after all, why we have a Democratic governor. I only hope that continues to hold true.

Because the electoral college was established with the explicit purpose of giving less populated states an advantage, and that would defeat the point. A lot of my fellow Americans don’t know or don’t want to admit that the electoral college was intentionally undemocratic from the start.

Pantheon.

Really thoughtful and smart sci-fi animation. Don’t want to spoil it so I’ll be vague, it has the most realistic depiction of modern tech and how people interact with it than any other show I’ve seen. Really great commentary on big tech corporations and even a bit of geopolitics. Super ambitious yet it somehow pulls it off.

There is also a scene that still gives me nightmares (not even joking, I still dream about that shit) which is more than any horror movies or shows have done for me. Anyone who has watched it knows exactly what scene I’m talking about.

I believe a large portion of the electorate that vote Democrat are liberals who weren’t fans of Biden but hated Trump, and intended to vote for Biden only to prevent Trump from winning. Kamala would not lose this contingency of voters even if they think Kamala is too progressive, but she would gain new voters who previously felt unrepresented. Only anti-Trump conservatives (a tiny but admittedly growing voting bloc) might jump ship.

Kamala chose to appeal to conservatives to steal votes from Trump and because it gets her more wealthy donors. It’s possibly a winning strategy, but it is not the only one, and this one abandons the progressive voting bloc in favor of conservatives in a time where younger people are trending leftwards. This is a move that will have long-term consequences.

I disagree, I think if she had campaigned as the most progressive Democrat in history that would have sparked a massive wave of new support, but it would have put her campaign up against a lot of wealthy and powerful people. She chose the easy path by cozying up to capital interests, and this strategy gets us nowhere. At best it staves off the worst of the growing fascist movement for a time, but at the same time moves the needle further to the right. I think it’s shortsighted.

Having seen her progressive voting record I wouldn’t have expected her to campaign as a “moderate” and go back on every progressive stance she ever held either. In short, I don’t trust her to be consistent.

Or, hear me out, discard the left-right metaphor for the nonsense that it is and refer to ideologies by their names. There is no left, there are communists/socialists and anarchists. There is no center, there are liberals and conservatives. There is no right, there are fascists and “libertarians.”

The left-right metaphor is a set of training wheels, and by continuing to use them you sabotage your own political understanding.

A rising tide lifts all boats has always struck me as a strange metaphor for them to use. To me that conjures up thoughts of welfare, UBI, irreducible minimums, safety nets, etc. It seems like a great metaphor for the opposite of what they’re using it for.

Narrative-driven games give players the illusion of choice. To me this seems like it would lend itself to being even more effective than traditional propaganda because it’s capable of tricking the player into thinking they came to a conclusion on their own.

Don’t get me wrong, I love Disco Elysium, but it is very effective communist propaganda. Propaganda has a negative connotation but is not inherently bad or dishonest, though it certainly can be.

Are you just supposed to carry that around with you everywhere? Do you wash it in the sink after every use? If I were a trans man I think I would just use a stall.

Put those monkeys underwater and you might conclude that drowning is in their nature. I know of the studies you’re referencing regarding monkeys being taught to use money and I’m aware that they were done with monkeys in captivity. In the same vein, the debunked study about “alpha” wolves was done on wolves in captivity and observations of wolves in their natural environment countered the study’s findings. Our actions are a result of the context and material conditions that we are in.

People dominate others for personal gain because they live in a system that rewards them for doing so. Place those people in a system that rewards them for helping others and the very same selfish impulse will make them saints. The “tragedy of the commons” is enlightenment era defeatist bullshit. The commons existed and were managed by people for thousands of years before capitalists enclosed them and dared to claim that it was the inevitable result of human nature.

If that’s something they need then that’s something they should get. No one will be happy doing nothing forever, in that year they will likely find something that makes them happy, especially if opportunities are made available to them.

These kinds of movements are a consequence of over-exploitation. The “lie down” movement - also “let it rot” - is similar to the “quiet quitting” movement in the US. People will not be motivated to contribute when they are struggling and do not see any benefit to trying harder. If these people were fairly compensated for their labor and had greater autonomy over how to contribute they would not lose motivation. Alienation from the result of their labor is also a huge contributor; feeling rewarded for your work can be as simple as seeing the result (a teacher seeing their students find their passions, for example).