Notices by sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net), page 8
-
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Tuesday, 06-Aug-2024 03:38:26 JST 
sj_zero
https://www.npr.org/2024/08/05/nx-s1-5063345/misinformation-online-fueled-all-out-race-riots-in-the-united-kingdom
The headline of this article is misinformation online.
As far as I can tell, the story of a bunch of schoolchildren getting stabbed by a migrant is absolutely true. So where's the misinformation? 3 kids are dead. That's true. Where's the misinformation? -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Monday, 05-Aug-2024 22:12:14 JST
sj_zero
The leader of Bangladesh has fled to India.
It took me a while to figure out why there were protests, it seemed like the media really wasn't interested in talking much about it.
Turns out 55% of government jobs were held in a "quota system" that set aside jobs for the descendants of "freedom fighters", women, and minorities. Only a tiny portion of jobs are judged by merit. In 2018 there was a big movement to dramatically reduce these quotas and they won, but recently the changes were rolled back leading to the current protests.
It seems crystal clear why the establishment media isn't taking about the motives behind the riots in detail, it's a riot against something they're all fundamentally in favor of implementing here. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Sunday, 04-Aug-2024 09:44:15 JST
sj_zero
"Trump Shooter Cause of Death Revealed" -- I found this news headline unintentionally hilarious.
Was it the bullet to the face? I bet it was the bullet to the face. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Thursday, 01-Aug-2024 11:08:53 JST
sj_zero
Everyone should really try to set up a searx instance on their machines. There's only a few hundred users right now. If enough decent folks started running it and scraped a little piece of the Internet they care about (you can even set it up as a proxy server to scrape any site you've been to) then we'd have a search platform that, while imperfect, would at least actually have all the sites places like Google refuses to show. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Thursday, 01-Aug-2024 07:55:47 JST
sj_zero
In a recent effortpost I analyzed the socialist nature of German national socialism, Italian Fascism, and Marxism. In today's language we could consider them to be respectively racial socialism, national socialism (the term national that the Germans used refers to an ethnostate while today we consider a nation something more like a land and it's government) or state socialism to avoid confusion with German national socialism, and class socialism.
Both Mussolini and Hitler cite Marx in their ideology. Mussolini was a member of the socialist party prior to his creation of the Fascist party, and is named after 3 different socialists. Hitler may have opposed Marxism and Bolshevism, but many of his writings and speeches credit Marx explicitly in the creation of National Socialism. His intention to exterminate the Jews was borne of the same ideological framework that had the Soviets exterminating the Kulaks. Engels published an article advocating for the genocide of Hungarians as not appropriate for inclusion into the dictatorship of the proletariat which also helped justify the German genocide of Jews. Although Hitler rejected class socialism, he often described how his ideology was socialism perfected, without the flaws of Marx. Later, Ludwig von Mises pointed out that German national socialism implemented 8 of the 10 points of socialism laid out by Marx and Engels.
Fascism makes sense as state socialism, a left wing continuation of the enlightenment project intended to be the next step after feudalism and capitalism. This can be understood easily because neither racial fascism nor state fascism intend to restore the monarchy or the nobility, and instead to collectivize the nation under the racial folk or the nation-state respectively.
This all continues to make sense in the framework I've laid out, of "racial socialism, state socialism, and class socialism". They all implement socialism, but in different ways that aren't compatible with one another. As a result, they will all ultimately clash with each other (and even fascists and german national socialists clashed over their ideologies despite being allies)
Some people think fascism and national socialism are right wing because they're authoritarian, nationalist, racist, and seek to preserve existing hierarchies, which all can be quickly refuted.
You can also see the whispers of angry Marxist in saying "it's authoritarian so it's right wing" well does that mean every communist state ever is right wing? It doesn't seem a legitimate analysis to assume something is right wing solely because it is authoritarian. Rospierre's reign of terror was undoubtedly authoritarian but by the standards of the day extremely left wing.
Nationalism also seems like something you can't really peg on the right wing specifically. Were there no Soviet patriots? Considering Stalin's one nation policy that seems unlikely.
Racism is a non-starter. Marx himself was highly documented as deeply anti-Semitic despite being an ethnic Jew himself, and shockingly racist even for his time In Marx's time, there was little distinction between the capitalist and the Jew, and in his essay "On the Jewish Question", he writes "What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money". Many socialist regimes implemented state racism such as the Russians cracking down on Jews or the CCP participating in the Uigur genocide.
As for maintaining or restoring old hierarchies, that's also obviously wrong. Both Germany and Italy had an existing hierarchy of nobility prior to the takeover by fascism or German national socialism, and those ideologies sought to reconstruct society in its own novel image, a hallmark of socialism in the 20th century. One might consider it right wing that there were any hierarchies at all, but by that measure marxist and boshevik socialists were also right wing since they all ended up building new hierarchies in place of the old.
This understanding of what marxism, fascism, and german national socialism is important because today everything is claimed to be nazi or fascist if the speaker doesn't like it, but we need a real framework for what is and is not fascist. Simply saying "I don't like that" does not make something fascist or national socialist, it needs to fit within the frameworks of racial socialism or state socialism. We can define violence against fascism as violence against state socialism.
So back to the topic at hand, would I agree that violence is justified to fight such a thing? Well, that's tough to say. It's easy to say about Italian fascism since my grandfather did fight them and justly so. On the other hand, Spanish fascism existed well into the 1970s and only ended because the dictator died and his heir just happened to give up power to create a liberal democracy. And in yet another point of view, the left has created the postmodern bureaucratic state and largely staffed it, creating the current situation where 120 years ago the government made up 10% of GDP but today makes up 50%, and the so-called free market that remains is overwhelmingly regulated so much that it's ultimately the state in control. Outside the context of world war 2, I don't think I'd be willing to use violence regardless of how much I disagree with it. The government won't stop doing this simply because I physically attack it. In fact, it's likely to make things worse. We have countless examples of such, including situations like the Reichstag fire which justified state crackdowns.
Political violence by be cathartic, but often it's ineffective, or even horrific. The French Revolution may have killed off many from the aristocracy, but the reign of terror turned into a crime against humanity, a purge of anyone remotely dissenting until the crowd finally turned and ended the reign of terror by purging those tasked with purges. Violent revolutions in the Soviet Union and China resulted in mass death and further tragedy. By contrast, a lot of good things have come from people winning the argument relatively peacefully Europe's relative democracy didn't come about through revolution, but by convincing the royal families to give up power over time. The world slave trade ended not because of a particular act of violent revolution, but because anti-slavery won the moral argument.
With respect to current movements that widely use violence allegedly in pursuit of attacking fascism, I don't see "antifa" burning down FDA offices or central bank buildings or department of education buildings or welfare offices. So why don't they attack these elements of state socialism if they oppose fascism? In my opinion it's because they're lying. Opposition to fascism is a facade being used for good old fashioned thuggery.
Who do we attack? Anyone we don't like! If you think killing a baby in the womb is an unjustifiable violation of that baby's human rights and that shouldn't be allowed, then we don't like you and we'll attack! If you think local law enforcement should arrest people who have committed actual crimes that violated other people's rights, then we don't like you and we'll attack! If you want to vote for someone who wants to reduce state interference in the economy, we hate you and we'll attack!
Other than the fact that nobody wants to piss off violent terrorists, nobody believes that the violence is remotely in the name of opposing fascism. Often those antifa folks seem to be fighting in pursuit of more state socialism rather than less. They aren't fighting for liberty or smaller government, they're supporting and supported by the state, and part of the state that wants to encompass everything in our lives. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Tuesday, 30-Jul-2024 21:45:30 JST
sj_zero
There's some stuff they seem to have done right, considering the etymological roots of algebra, alchemy, and alcohol. The Islamic golden age and it's aftermath should be a lesson but our ruling class doesn't read history. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Tuesday, 30-Jul-2024 21:37:58 JST
sj_zero
The story of the arabs curating Greek writings then those coming back is one of the most interesting out there. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Sunday, 28-Jul-2024 21:59:13 JST
sj_zero
Yes, the conception of a nation as just a geographical area and a democratic government slapped on top is I think a product of the modern period's colonialism, resulting global empires such as the English, Spanish, Portuguese, and to a lesser extent powers like France, and existing nations like the United States that don't have those long histories and relatively unified ethnicity. In that sense, premodern states were effective ethnostates.
I'm using the word in the modern sense since that's how we use it today because it helps people (including myself) who were confused by the concept of national socialism in a postmodern world that doesn't see nations that way colloquially anymore.
I'm hypocritical in my distaste for the use of the word neoliberal in such a way that it represents an effective growing of government while pretending to do the opposite by reducing public services. I recognize that that is how it is come to be known now, however.
Something a lot of leftists don't seem to realize is that the social liberalism is just a tool for the destruction of capitalism. In every example on record they'd open up to degenerates until they're in power then they call that behavior anti-revolutionary and crack down. Every time. I could see a winning ideology that proposed socialism but also was against the absolute degeneracy of the Weimar Republic being tempting for communists who want to get closer to socialism and see what the Weimar republic showed them as capitalist decadence and decline suggesting all capitalism was about to collapse. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Wednesday, 24-Jul-2024 10:03:48 JST
sj_zero
Watching Airplane from 1980.
You know, you'd think a comedy from 44 years ago wouldn't be able to surprise me, but it gets me now and again. Pretty entertaining. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Tuesday, 23-Jul-2024 13:58:08 JST
sj_zero
A lot of people are so caught up in their deep hatred that they can't see anything else. It's frustrating because people doing that aren't all bad people, some are otherwise quite lovely, and it's really annoying that they are so blinded. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Monday, 22-Jul-2024 22:15:14 JST
sj_zero
I've been really finding that almost all the western movies and music I consume are over 10 years old.
And you might go "Oh, well you're just getting old and you like the nostalgia", but a lot of it I've never seen before!
Not to mention, stuff not out of the west I'm enjoying weekly. It's just the Hollywood system that's failing to produce anything I want to watch.
(I guess there's been a very small number of examples of good stuff made in the past 10 years I watched and enjoyed, but not many, and they sort of prove that it isn't like I'm dogmatically avoiding western media made in the past 10 years) -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Monday, 22-Jul-2024 09:11:22 JST
sj_zero
You're right, and I think both parties need to be held to account a lot more for what they do in that regard. They wait until they're no longer in power to introduce legislation then blame the other party for not passing it when they had the capacity to pass it often just a few years prior. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Monday, 22-Jul-2024 06:41:58 JST
sj_zero
I told my 2 year old that Joe had dropped out and he said "That seems like a highly suspicious decision. Clearly she only got 2% of the vote in the primaries in 2020 she simply isn't electable and everyone knows it. I wonder if this is a strategic decision whereby the Democrats will essentially throw Kamala Harris into the volcano proverbially speaking so they don't damage the credibility of any candidates with any chance of winning 2028?" -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Saturday, 20-Jul-2024 04:43:13 JST
sj_zero
I find the common defense of Biden to be really funny.
"He's been at meetings! With important people!"
People sleep through meetings with important people every single day that's not a defense. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Saturday, 20-Jul-2024 04:05:38 JST
sj_zero
Yeah, your problem is not enough caffeine.
(And as a nod to continuity, I stopped with coffee myself because it was harsh on my stomach and I've got a pretty iron stomach!) -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Friday, 19-Jul-2024 22:45:19 JST
sj_zero
Part of the problem is that they're just tourists so they think the Republicans win every court case they get to scotus, which isn't true -- if SCOTUS was just an organ of the Republican party, Trump would be just about to finish his second term in office.
Most people criticizing don't realize for example that the court has had an overwhelming number of cases that ended up being 7-0 recently, and there's cases where some liberal justices and some conservative justices combined to get a slim outcome. They're not politicians, they're judges and have a different view of the world. Under Trump most Republicans hated Roberts for example.
Many such people think they would have opposed the Nazis if they were Germans in 1936, while loving who the establishment tells them to love and hating who the establishment tells them to hate and not realizing their behavior would have aligned them directly with the Nazis in Germany in 1936. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Thursday, 18-Jul-2024 06:28:32 JST
sj_zero
I have to admit, it really sucks that crunchyroll turned off the comments. There'll be a really spicy episode and it's like "oh boy I wonder what the comments have to say about this?" and then you realize it doesn't say anything because crunchyroll is a bunch of pathetic losers who are scared to death of their users. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Tuesday, 16-Jul-2024 19:35:18 JST
sj_zero
And what's really interesting is that the commies themselves refute themselves. Western civilization produced a kind of utopia with universal suffrage, limited suffering, vast material wealth, and virtually no war. Despite that, the commies claim the path to utopia was immoral therefore the end result is immoral. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Tuesday, 16-Jul-2024 19:25:42 JST
sj_zero
Ethics get complicated there too -- if you're a consequentialist, do you go by the actual consequences or the intended consequences? If the former then what is ethical can only be chosen in retrospect so you're trying to predict what will be ethical by trying to predict future outcomes. If it's the latter, then incorrect consequences can justify overall wrong actions as justified even if successful implementation will always result in negative outcomes because you're just wrong.
That's where imo you do need a base of deontological ethics, hard lines you don't cross, because otherwise you can find yourself either never knowing what is ethical until after the fact leading you down a rabbit hole of betting against God predicting the future, or you can break your whole ethical system by biasing what you think the consequences will be unconsciously. You can the consider consequentialist perspective for more complicated ideas once you stop yourself from doing things you'll regret later if you get the consequences wrong or sometimes even if you're right -- if you become an ethical monster you might be right but you still have to live with yourself afterwards. -
Embed this notice
sj_zero (sj_zero@social.fbxl.net)'s status on Monday, 15-Jul-2024 09:48:46 JST
sj_zero
Something a lot of these people don't realize. America in 2024 isn't Stockholm, it isn't Wellington, and to be fair (since I'm a canuckistani) it isn't Ottawa either.
If you're not in the US and you look around and try to judge what's going on there based on the leftists you know, then you're going to make a mistake. "Oh well the people around me are ok" -- yeah, that's great, neither Stockholm, nor Wellington, nor Ottawa are potentially already in a low key civil war. America certainly appears to be. If in any of our countries we had just one of the major political events of the past 8 years it'd be part of our history we talked about forever, but the US keeps getting hit with one after another after another, and the reaction with the US only shows how fractured a society they have -- something insane happens and half of people are actually kinda game. The level of low key civil war is so intense that people in other countries think it's chill to pick sides and say it's ok for you to kill your hated political opponent, which I need to point out isn't normal!
Imagine if any one of our countries had violent riots break out for 6 months in a bunch of our cities, killing dozens of people and causing billions of dollars of property damage. That would be the most defining moment of our generation. If someone tried to shoot Pierre Poilievre, that'd be shocking to the conscience, not something to cheer about! Same with Christopher Luxon, same as if someone tried to kill Magdalena Andersson. But we don't think about that because the toxicity of US politics is so normalized.
So when you go "Well the leftists in our countries are so normal so they wouldn't do that" -- well it's a different country and the Americans have done that repeatedly so stop thinking with your local common sense.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the