You can just learn the alphabet without learning any vocabulary.

How about meditation? It’s literally sitting around and doing nothing, except mindfully and if you notice your thoughts wandering you let them go.

In the US war on Vietnam, the anti war stance of the US population of draft age had a significant effect.

Just one more humanitarian intervention…

If you went on top of the empire State building and threw multiple hand grenades on the street below, where white people could be walking, would you call that malicious? Or a terror attack? Can you see how him shelling a neighborhood where brown people live is similar? I’m not trying to be mean, but anyone who struggles to see how bad this is, might just have their ability to emphasize impaired by racism. It might not be their fault, people often absorb racists believes unconsciously or have a hard time extending the same amount of empathy, they would to white people to racialized people, if they rarely interact with them. People reading this, who suspect this might apply to them even in a limited way, should really take this to heart and try to reflect on their racist biases and ability to empathize.

deleted by creator

Yes, 100% agree

Forgiveness can be great in certain circumstances, but it has to come from the victims, not from the perpetrators, enablers and benefactors of the violence (Democrats).

I appreciate the critique, but no, money is not

only worth anything because if you don’t pay the state then it will do Bad Things™ to you.

That’s “modern” (from 1905) monetary theory (MMT), which ignores that money is a commodity and can and did historically exist before states.

Michael Roberts writes:

Modern states are clearly crucial to the reproduction of money and the system in which it circulates. But their power over money is quite limited — and as Schumpeter said (and Marx would have said), the limits are clearest in determining the value of money. The mint can print any numbers on its bills and coins, but it cannot decide what those numbers refer to. That is determined by countless price-setting decisions by mainly private firms, reacting strategically to the structure of costs and demand they face, in competition with other firms.

Marx argued that money in capitalism has three main functions: as a measure of value; as a means of exchange; and “money as money” which includes debt payments. Marx’s theorisation of money as a measure of value derives from his labour theory of value; and this is the main difference between Marx and the Chartalists/MMT supporters, who have no theory of value whatsoever.

Money only has value if there is value in production to back it. Government spending cannot create that value — indeed some government spending can destroy value (consider the case of armaments, for example). Productive value is what gives money credibility. A productive private sector generates the domestic product and income that gives government liabilities credibility in the first place. When that credibility is not there, then trust in the state’s currency can disappear fast, as we have seen in Venezuela, Zimbabwe and Argentina.

MMT essentially boils down to good old keynesianism in the end. It’s still a thousand times better than neoliberalism of course, but merely reformist, not equipped to handle capitalism’s crisis and not willing to transcend it.

Maybe, but no reason to get lazy though. It’s citizens are way more powerful and better armed than it’s victims. They have way more moral responsibility to do something and who will build up socialism inside North America after the revolution, if there’s no strong, organized left? The reasons to get out and organized are no where as strong as inside the empire and the excuses not to do it nowhere as weak.

No one will bother to come and rescue US people from capitalism, if they don’t demonstrate the will to at least take responsibility and rule themselves after. There’s no way around preparing for revolution, even if you think it will rely on outside help.

Maybe just editing it to say it’s not real quote would be enough. Also, at this point, it probably doesn’t matter.

Good sentiment, but bullshit quote. Fanon only indirectly criticized peaceful protests.

Here’s a real Fanon quote:

“Colonialism is not a machine capable of thinking, a body endowed with reason. It is naked violence and only gives in when confronted with greater violence.”

I think you should delete this post and stop seeing anyone as credible, who uses famous comrades names and image to spread their own ideas. I mean, I agree with the content, but still. It’s like using AI.

Yes, they are compradors.

They have always represented imperialist interests. Their prosperity is tied to the imperial project. Specifically in Lebanon for example:

The 14th of March coalition was constituted of compradors. Most of them being part of the Lebanese bourgeoisie: owners of banks and gas stations and shareholders in many companies. Together with the 8th of March coalition parties, they ran the Lebanese government for 18 years.

It’s similar for the current government.

That’s the whole point. “Israeli” politicians outright say so.

Statistically: the answer is clear.

Human beings are social animals. They need social interaction to survive. Being isolated is recognized as a form of torture. Interactions being draining is often a consequence of contingent societal factors rather than an essential property of interaction itself.

Also artists and fans are boycotting Spotify, because they are against the imperial war machine and genocide.

Even if AI someday does become profitable short term, total profits will still go down long-term, because all profit comes from human labor (or exploiting nature). All any technology ever does in capitalism is to replace human labor, thereby putting more pressure on the empirically proven tendency of profits to fall. Profit gains from technology can only ever be short term and relative to competition who hasn’t yet adapted the technology. Once everyone has, prices drop, adjusting to lower socially necessary labor time.

The only way for the billionaire class to keep profits flowing a bit longer at this point is to do what we already see them doing now: get rid of the free market by enforcing monopolies with captive markets, bonded labor and merging big capital with an increasingly violent and warring state apparatus: capitalism inevitably leads to fascism-imperialism every time.

AI lends itself to this because of the centralized nature of data centers, the already monopoly based business model of tech companies and the political power and influence those monopolies hold. On the other hand, there is some potential, if not revolutionary at least disruptive potential, in small scale, specialized, open source models that can be trained with fewer resources.

The only alternative road to fascism, of course, leads to communism.

I think you’re both right. They are right about religious institutions in class societies. You use the word “initially” and are right about religion in those very early, classless societies called “primitive communism”. When people started using agriculture, classes arose with material surplus, patriarchal structures formed to manage inheritance of that surplus and over some time, the violent suppression of oppressed classes by the ruling class was taken up by various institutions that coalesced into states. Religious institutions fit in here. They became tools of oppression or were oppressed and destroyed themselves. Those that survived fell in line. And their task in class societies is to produce hegemony. In a revolutionary moment, religion has sometimes been adapted to serve liberation and that could happen again.

It’s important to make these two distinctions when talking about religion. First, between individual believe and organized religious institutions. Even a deeply religious person can still condem all religious institutions. And second, based on the societal context: religious institutions at what time, in what society? Religious believes of members of which class? Do they help to liberate or oppress? Do they urge to accept circumstances or to fight for freedom? Both is possible.

There’s also a third distinction that comes up often: between orthodoxy (for example what’s written in holy scripture) and lived historical reality.

Personally, I’m an atheist, but I have religious friends who I respect deeply.