• 0 Posts
  • 46 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2024

help-circle


  • Calling bears predictable is something an overconfident documentary actor would do. A bear can at any moment decide to just rip you apart. Any “docile” zoo bear can still decide to just shred their keeper at some point.

    But that’s enough about the metaphor. The point was choosing between certain death and a human with all the possibilities that entails.

    It wouldn’t just be caution to choose death in that situation. It’s paranoia to assume that any random man will just do horrible things to you. Going through life with that paranoia is nothing a mentally healthy person would do. I would definitely blame a woman who really thinks like that. It’s not just crazy but also insulting on a personal level. But the good thing is that I don’t have to be near any like that either.



  • That is way more than just patriarchal society. If a woman would rather be stuck in a room with a bear than a man she doesn’t know, there’s something psychologically wrong with that woman. The only way you’d choose a bear over a stranger is if you have a prejudice that all men are violent or rapists. Because the bear will most likely kill you.







  • Could is what should be. That is what we also should act according towards.

    Instead of attacking symptoms, attack the root cause. Which still is capitalism. Corpos will use energy that damages the environment because they will seek the most profits and least expenses under a market economy.

    LLMs and AI would still be developed under any other system. Capitalism doesn’t invent things, all it invents are ways to commodify things.






  • This strategy is dishonest though. We cannot use all the same methods of the far right and ruling class.

    There’s a conflict of interest between wanting people to think critically and then lying to them and only slowly letting them learn parts of a truth. In another example, you can’t have a democracy when all parties try to deceive the voters. That will damage the concept of democracy and the existing supposed democracy.

    There is also the danger of falling your own rhetoric and propaganda. Prime example of this is how fascism was created. Mussolini actively engaged in nationalist pro-war propaganda as he thought the continued war would lead to the conditions necessary for socialist revolution. He wasn’t wrong about that as then revolutions broke out in several successors / breakaways of the Russian Empire, in Germany and in Hungary. But eventually he fell to his own propaganda and created fascism.



  • RedPandaRaider@feddit.orgtoComic Strips@lemmy.worldInfighting
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    The Soviet Union was established before the Nazis existed. There was no need to ally with anarchists against them when they didn’t exist yet and waged war.

    A better example would be the Spanish civil war where communists, liberals and anarchists did fight on the same side until infighting broke out due to an ineffective and non-authorative government. Meaning they failed to establish a leading ideology which could have prevented this.



  • RedPandaRaider@feddit.orgtoComic Strips@lemmy.worldInfighting
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    21 days ago

    The opposite is the case. What worked historically is organizing in an ideologically united platform.

    Vanguard parties won revolutions. Ideologically diverse big tent organizations have always eventually broken apart and none has brought a revolution thus far.

    And working with liberals has never been a good idea. They’re not a part of the left, they belong to a right wing ideology. That would be like saying we should work together with Nazis, because after all they have socialist in their name.