Unfortunately you never really build a tolerance. Thankfully you do build up an energy that Kim can redirect to power his necromancy.

“only in times of war”

Lmao how does that work when you put your military bases in someone else’s country? That makes the place perpetually in a time of war.

Not quite but there’s overlap.

What’s your favourite author and food?

I ask this knowing that I don’t know if I could answer if myself because there’s so much choice. I’ve stated my favourite author before, then re-read them years later to be disappointed. I used to really like Conn Iggulden but I’m a bit scared to re-read him and confirm that he’s a favourite. I tried to get into his Rome series and put it down after a couple of chapters.

Food-wise, even harder. My most memorable meals have been Vietnamese or homemade pizza.

Edit: I’m not bad, thanks.

Tell me about it. When I first learned that the website developed and run by Communists had Communists on it, I couldn’t believe what was happening.

The only moral stance is to post about the US election in lemmydotEthiopia, the Australian election in lemmydotSuriname, the Bolivian election in LemmydotAlbania, and so on, but only if it’s months out of sync. Anything else is suspicious.

That fits nicely because it’s always people who have and will continue to have enough food in their belly that they can indulge in an extra meal while indulging in fantasies like ‘one more election cycle, pleeeease, I trust them to stop murdering millions of innocent people, just one more election cycle and then they’ll fix everything, pleeease’.

What’s non-wealth-based fascism?

Fr when I’m filling in my spreadsheet for the people I have to watch, it’s a lot easier if everyone goes in column A or column B.

Column A is titled ‘Radical speech but thinks that voting will change anything – no action required’.

Column B is ‘Radical shitposter – maintain eyes, no immediate action required’.

The other columns, though – damn it’s a lot of paperwork.

Column O, ‘Organising their community, feeding people, and providing healthcare’ is the worst. Luckily for me, the agency’s action means they don’t stay on the list for long so the paperwork is finite. I probably shouldn’t be saying all this as it’s top secret. But we do know what’s up in our department.

Monsieur 'andprint

Corporate social media is bad for your health. Not only have I been mentally healthier since I stopped using them, I’ve also been a better, kinder, more patient person to others and to myself.

I’m skeptical of how much positive work can be done on corporate platforms. In the past, I have been informed by radical tweets, etc. But these themselves have not radicalised me—just gave me ammunition and incensed me.

Arguing directly, one-to-one with a person is not going to change their mind. Online or offline. To reach people, you need to persuade them, which requires them to be in a receptive state of mind. That’s not possible when people feel attacked and get defensive. You can overcome people’s defenses. But it takes work and requires an environment in which they’re willing to lower their guard. These corporate platforms are instead designed to keep you arguing, antagonistically, with limited possibility of reconciliation.

On corporate online platforms, you are also contesting with the following:

• you aren’t friends with or close to your interlocutors, rarely will you even have a relationship beyond a few posts
• if you are talking to people you have existing relationships with, the incentives are perverse because strangers are able to disrupt things
• the people you argue with have no motive or even the opportunity to come back to you and build a relationship
• the format of online communication is determined – and re-determined at a whim – by the owners; and they pay more to psychologists and spooks to craft a certain discourse than you will ever earn in your lifetime
• that format is actively hostile to creating lasting, meaningful relationships, of the sort that people feel so invested that they are willing to change to fit in
• written communication online can involve:
• • language differences
• • cultural differences
• • ‘playing to the crowd’ mentality (i.e. simply assuming/imagining that onlookers who agree with you are watching and supporting you, making it hard for people to back down)
• • lack of ‘tone’, body language, expressions, etc, to soften the message

Many of these problems are surmountable. I think we do a good job of things on Lemmygrad, for example. But the environment here has been carefully constructed to facilitate good faith conversation. The opposite is true of Facebook, Twitter, etc.

There are also minor exceptions to the above problems with the big platforms and some methods of escaping the traps. One of which is organising with others. In general, working alone, you’re starting with too many disadvantages. The odds are stacked against you.

I know why you’re disenchanted because I’ve been there before. Give yourself a break. Go back in a month’s time to see how you feel. Give yourself another break, etc. Then decide whether you want to keep using those services, with some fresh perspective.

Is it the metadata or because people will be able to recognise you from you art?

Why shouldn’t you? Because you might get doxed?

I suspect the number of Indian immigrant doctors abroad is due to brain drain rather than an abundance of doctors/lack of need in India.

This is so the Brits can send their new conscripts over to fight Russia to protect their heritage rather than because NATO is getting directly involved.

And you think this has what to do with modern China? This is like criticising the USSR for Tsarism. You realise the CPC overthrew the previous system? And when it did, it had the cultural revolution to overcome the trappings of that system, for which it is regularly criticised?

That’s fantastic! Well done!

What next? Do you think you’ll keep going with just Duolingo or will you start adding in some other kinds of resources?

I’ve been told that, but I haven’t seen any kind of evidence supporting the theory.

The example you’re discussing is the evidence. Reorientation does not mean fully reoriented. It means things are changing. An example that shows a changing relationship is evidence that relationships are changing. This remains true even if you don’t like the type of change or if things go back to the way they were.

At the moment we are still witnessing quantitative changes. Enough of those and we will see qualitative changes. The fact of quantitative change does not discount the fact of change i.e. reorientation.

Georgia is not in the EU.

The article still manages to paint China as the bad guy and gets in a few shots at Russia. Look at this:

Beijing didn’t limit its global influence efforts to propaganda. It announced an ambitious COVID assistance program, which included sending masks, ventilators and its own vaccines – still being tested at the time – to struggling countries. In May 2020, Xi announced that the vaccine China was developing would be made available as a “global public good,” and would ensure “vaccine accessibility and affordability in developing countries.” Sinovac was the primary vaccine available in the Philippines for about a year until U.S.-made vaccines became more widely available there in early 2022.

Xi you sneaky mf. Propaganda of the deed with Chinese characteristics.

Fr, though, the US is run by truly, truly despicable people. The US could’ve chosen not to limit its global influence efforts to propaganda or straightforward coercion but instead it doubled down. Not content with murdering 1 million of it’s own, it killed countless others in the shadows. For anyone wondering whether the US ruling class would rather destroy the planet with nukes than change it’s ways or give up power, there’s your answer.