Can we get the stance of these candidates on protecting the right of protestors? Because those aren't stopping and neither party seems to be terribly concerned about (pulls list of the 45+ concurrent issues caused by 80% of their corporate donor base)?
No, that's not part of policies? It's only about identity brandishing? Damn. Welp
On the second day of protests; police escalated from rubber bullets to concussion grenades to TEAR GAS.
And Walz did his best to make protestors fighting police brutality look like "white supremacists from another state" to crank up renegade policing efforts.
The four year anniversary of his death was weeks ago. I know we don't got memory THAT short. If this celebration is because of individualistic joy, let's be candid. This is where my nervousness comes in; we're not asking for change if we do not concretely have a plan of accountability (and writing letters don't count, not in metropolitan governances)
Not everyone was a KANG or QWEEN, nor did everyone want to be free. Dr. Joy DeGruy talks about Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_Traumatic_Slave_Syndrome (and she specifically writes about African Americans, the diaspora has its own issues; looking at folks like Adiche and her stances as well).
If your identity can only be defined by that of your oppressor and is only limited of the dimensions of which they _permit_ you to exist, you're barely free in your mind. It's giving the praxis of "Plantation Theory": https://www.worldcat.org/isbn/9781953307606
There's a reason why one of the biggest shifts during the COINTELPRO aftermath was to split the identity of Black people into "native" Black people and "migrant" or "foreign" Black people. Without actual solidarity, nothing can be achieved.
The Internet has no real concept of consent. It goes too roughly against so many business models. Reading Google's inaugural white paper on search and advertising, that was their effective declaration.
Now we have app stores that make money on re-boosting apps filled to the brim with ads, a known vector of malware and resource drain. A Web that "relies on it" because companies fight so hard against municipal and communal Internet resources. And the foot soldiers (unknowingly or not) whose identities and stability rely on this digital abuse.
Companies like this need the rest of the world (and primarily the developer community) to believe myths about our ability to understand and build things the same way the United States government and media worked to build a climate of fear around crime (both in the 90s and post-9/11). It's effectively baked into the devices we use because we can't push back against VPs at these behemoths; their investors refuse such logic.
Hence my wariness of folks who claim "opinions my own"; but pockets are _lined_ by these practices with no evidence of pushing against these narratives.
If a company can take money to support immigration detention centers (like Microsoft and ICE), or general apartheid and censorship (like Google and Palestine+China) or fund and back violent labor practices in remote locations (like Apple, Samsung and LG in China+Mexico+Chile and other parts of the global South), they can start to wash their hands by either funding efforts to improve privacy or instead build their moats through culturally shielding campaigns (like self-praise on building worker pipelines with some of the highest rates of attrition in the industry) or doubling down on anti-user-privacy efforts (by preventing browser choice or increasing the difficulty of one's ability to protect oneself from the corporate-sponsored violence of the Internet).
@ntnsndr Your book and these two are in this corner of my shelf called "Governance Beyond the State" and this thread is nudging my need to start it sooner
Do people actually create a new resume for _every single job_ that they're applying for?
Not asking folks who review resumes but folks who are in the midst of applying and have landed a role within the last five years. I'm just confused about how sustainable that is.
You're not supposed to be anti-American in public. The only kind of dissent that's permissible is regarding sports and music (maybe food). But you disagree about politics or history? TO THE SOCIAL GULAG YOU GO!
One day, we'll get into national sports as a form of body fascism, how it reinforces jingoistic tendencies, warps inclusion through tactics mirrored by the military and has reduced the joy of sports into something that mirrors the nature of the Roman gladiators (one of the reasons why American sports like football and basketball are keen to use Black bodies but rarely respect them enough to keep them alive when no longer valuable, like football and concussions).
I wish browser permission requests allowed for some kind of safe prompt as to _why_ a site's asking for permission. I trust nothing that requests canvas permissions because of their use of tracking but that gives me bars on the screen at times :(