Well we were taught about the trail of tears as a thing that happened a long time ago. But it’s all good now. But my family having strong tribal connections. Tribal leader on my father’s side a couple of generations back. We’re all on the official tribal rolls. And I was old enough to have gotten the reparations doled out in the 1980s for what happened to my great great great ancestors. A whole $10,000. Which is better than a kick in the teeth. But definitely not any sort of compensation for what was stolen.

So I knew about the Indian schools and some of the other heinous shit that Canada and the United States had pulled unlike so many others. But even I was surprised to learn that they were still current and operating well within my lifetime. People treated as if it’s a long ago solved problem. There are people still alive and well today that have families destroyed or lost family because of it. And there’s plenty of other shenanigans. Probably the most depressing part is that United States and Canada weren’t all that alone. Heck China is more or less doing it today. To cultural groups whose identity differs from the Vanguard parties chosen monoculture.

I would say that all Americans were. Republicans/conservatives overachieved however.

What makes you think you are? Identifying with the sort of people the person who coined the term and defined it. Would have rightfully seen as their enemy.

We have the regulations for a reason. We’ve already tried the less/no regulation thing. That’s the reason we have the regulations. Granted the regulations are ineffective. However the people in charge and Society at Large will not do what it takes to solve the problem outside of regulations. Things like ending generational wealth that almost every Tech bro to an individual benefited heavily from. Or ending they’re very exploitative business practices.

I’d be fine with these regulations ending. So long as Society was ready to replace their more neutered threat with something more meaningful. Like the guillotine. Hell who knows. A quick test run on Bezos, Thiel, and Musk might get a decent portion of them to straighten up and fly right. But as long as Society at large worships the new bourgeoisie. Removing regulations from them will only speed up the run-up to another bloody violent revolution. Which I think most people don’t want.

Maybe you should look into why we have those regulations. - an actual libertarian

I like Anton’s content. The forced smile at the end always kind of weirds me out a bit. I’m sure there’s a story behind it or something. But that’s not a comment on the content he produces. It’s definitely watchable

Mould is great. Matt Parker too.

John isn’t perfect. But he’s one of the closest to being. He was pretty spot on.

Comedians are not always well informed. But a well informed skilled comedian can speak truth to power to its face where most others would struggle.

Oliver has a skilled research team most “news” shows could only dream about. Because most these days don’t have one. And they can spend at least a week at minimum doing a deep dive. Often much more. They don’t shy away from controversy. Finally when they do make a mistake. They generally correct within the next episode or two. Always before the main segment. While everyone is still watching them. Not trying to speed read it on the outro as everyone is tuned out as so many shows do.

Not unless you live in a country with a low standard and cost of living. And not likely even then. Because even at a Payday they generally work ed for larger businesses and weren’t a freelance Craigslist sort of thing. That and here in the United States there’s too much free competition to really be effective for them to pay anyone over here as well.

Definitely. In a lot of developing countries with basic internet access these people can actually make good livings doing that. As long as they’re skill in the foreign language is adequate enough. Though today a lot of that is being taken over by basic low-end generative machine learning models. Something else false information faster than it takes to debunk it.

I though it was ass to mouth.

Its been a long slow boil. And Nazis were only part of the problem. In the early 1930s many businessmen and Republicans in the US plotted a Hitler style coup against FDR. They did worse than Hitler, but escaped most consequences. And over the last century quietly plotted and built. Here and abroad. Fostering the “right kind” of fascism. Theirs.

It probably would have gone on a little longer. Because I don’t think they were quite ready to actually try to coup again. But they’ve been socially engineering a new class of supremely manipulable Voters who lack any critical thinking skills. However a childish malignant narcissist managed to get the attention of that tool. And stole it from the Republican fascist. Basically largely spoiling the plot. And causing them to have to move before they were ready.

Also the ability for instance Global and often still largely Anonymous communication made propaganda easier and cheaper than ever before. The old style leaflet drops over territories were never very effective. And even radio broadcasts or easy to thwart. Now enemy Nations only need to pay a few people for online shitposting in hot beds lacking critical thinking. And they can turn their enemies people into their own tools.

Someone literally did up a version of the car in blue. With the American flag on top of it and called it the General Grant.

If someone actually does a General Sherman version. It should start off with some nice tasteful flames around the wheel wells and along the hood. Rising up into an ash black across the rest of the body symbolizing the burning South.

Organized anarchism isn’t anarchism anymore.

It is a literal organizational structure. Just a very flat one. You are using a colloquial malapropism. Not the actual definition/understanding of the ideology.

I’m not talking about just the atrocities. I’m talking bare economic efficiency

Economic efficiency is literal atrocity. Which is more economically efficient. To responsibly extract resources and pay fair value for it. Or to oppress and steal to obtain resources? Cobalt mining in the Congo as it exists, exists because of economic efficiency. It is advantageous and efficient for the company’s buying it that there is no government power there to oppose them. Instead buying from Regional Warlords and child slaves mining it. They don’t have to worry about safety regulations etc etc etc or any other externalities of the mining actions. Very efficient. Also an atrocity.

Anarchism is about consent. People can consent to organize. There’s nothing prohibiting it. Is it quicker or easier to organize people without their consent by force? Absolutely. Is it good? That’s the argument you’re making. Might makes right. Brutal, authoritarian dictatorship is very efficient, economic and otherwise. There’s a reason people don’t like it.

I suggest you actually look into what the ideology of anarchism is. And not just go with the pop culture/ angsty teen definition.

My problem with that is that it isn’t about disorganization. That is a fundamental and widely perpetuated piece of misinformation about what anarchism / communism actually are. Anarchists can organize just fine. Now if what you want to argue is that detached highly concentrated power is capable of ordering atrocities and enforcing people to commit the atrocities in their name? Then yes they absolutely have the advantage. But in terms of actually doing the business of the people and governing. No there is no advantage. In fact it’s often a disadvantage. Being insulated from the needs of those they govern and the effects of the poor policy they put in place. It’s antithetical to good government.

In terms of modern ideological dogmaticism? No. Pragmatically I think it’s possible to get very close. History has proven that. “Class” has never been a necessary construct. It’s always negative, hurtful, and exclusionary. Statewise, it’s always been more against nation state and to smaller extents even city-states. Large overarching structures. Keep in mind I’m coming out this from an actual Dejacque libertarian / anarco communist leftist perspective. Governance isn’t the enemy. Just large overpowerful bodies with concentrated power.

They talk about it like that because that is how the propaganda both Pro and against talk about it. The fact is Soviet Russia and China started out basically as forms of marxist leninism. They aspired to be communist but weren’t. But they loved the word. And used it a lot. It’s like Nazis having socialist in the name. It didn’t make them socialist.

Practicing communists? Look towards communes. They are the only groups actually practicing communism. Whether they were the hippie communes Bohemian communes etc. Those are what communism in general would look like. Not explicitly but overall. Each commune is its own group that governs itself but could cooperate with similar outside groups. Soviet Russia and China were never communist in any sense.

Probably because you haven’t read much on the subject. Marxist theory speculated on how societies and economies could transition into communism. He and others created the philosophy and Concepts involving it. But were not communist strictly speaking. At least not in anything other than the state of the individual.

Engles, and Lenin mistakenly thought that by replacing the authority and power of the wealthy with their own people. That they themselves would not fall to the corruption of power. And eventually over time the authoritarian state would somehow magically wither and die. Leaving them with a classless stateless society. Keep that in mind that is important for understanding whether something is communist or not.

Was Russia classless or stateless? No Russia was a state. And they had plenty of different classes. ML never eliminated that. In fact all the current Russian oligarchs have direct ties back to the political Elite of Soviet russia. And instead of transitioning into a communist Society they’ve transitioned into fascism.

Now let’s look at china. Is China a state? Yes. Not communist then. Are there different classes of people in china? Yes not communist then. Their claim on even socialism is somewhat tenuous at best. But they are definitely not communist. And at this rate will never transition into communism. Xi Jinping has moved into the Emperor’s Palace and is all but Emperor in name only at this point. He and his wealthy friends will never relinquish power to transition to communism. They will stay as they are until he dies. And then there will be a power vacuum. There may be some in fighting but someone will replace him and China will continue on until there there is another Revolution to replace the failed Communist Revolution that put them in power. Are they transition into open fascism as well.

They’re laying around all over the place. The thing is none of them want to run right now.