Sigh Allow me, @RiverRock@lemmy.ml.

The US-backed Maidan coup and US & Ukraine-supported fascist paramilitary attacks on eastern & southern Ukraine:

• Reuters, 2014: Leaked audio reveals embarrassing U.S. exchange on Ukraine, EU
• Leaked recording between Nuland and Pyatt: audio | transcript
• Counterpunch, 2014: US Imperialism and the Ukraine Coup
• BBC, 2014: Ukraine underplays role of far right in conflict
• Human Rights Watch, 2014: Ukraine: Unguided Rockets Killing Civilians
• Consortium News, 2015: The Mess That Nuland Made Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland engineered Ukraine’s regime change without weighing the likely consequences.
• The Hill, 2017: The reality of neo-Nazis in Ukraine is far from Kremlin propaganda
• The Guardian, 2017: ‘I want to bring up a warrior’: Ukraine’s far-right children’s camp – video
• WaPo, 2018: The war in Ukraine is more devastating than you know
• Reuters, 2018: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem
• The Nation, 2019: Neo-Nazis and the Far Right Are On the March in Ukraine
• openDemocracy, 2019: Why Ukraine’s new language law will have long-term consequences
• Al Jazeera, 2022: Why did Ukraine suspend 11 ‘pro-Russia’ parties?
• Jacobin, 2022: A US-Backed, Far Right–Led Revolution in Ukraine Helped Bring Us to the Brink of War
• Consortium News, 2023: The West’s Sabotage of Peace in Ukraine Former Israeli Prime Minister Bennett’s recent comments about getting his mediation efforts squashed in the early days of the war adds more to the growing pile of evidence that Western powers are intent on regime change in Russia.
• Internationalist 360°, 2022–2024: History of Fascism in Ukraine: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV
• NYT, 2024: U.N. Court to Rule on Whether Ukraine Committed Genocide

 
NATO expansion:

• George Washington Univ., 2017: NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner
• Orinoco Tribune, 2022: Former German Chancellor Merkel Admits that Minsk Peace Agreements Were Part of Scheme for Ukraine to Buy Time to Prepare for War With Russia
• Al Mayadeen, 2023: Zelensky admits he never intended to implement Minsk agreements
• Jeffrey Sachs, 2023: The War in Ukraine Was Provoked—and Why That Matters to Achieve Peace
• Jeffrey Sachs, 2023: NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine

 
NATO in general:

• The Intercept, 2021: Meet NATO, the Dangerous “Defensive” Alliance Trying to Run the World
• CounterPunch, 2022: NATO is Not a Defensive Alliance
• Noam Chomsky, 2023: NATO “most violent, aggressive alliance in the world”
• Thomas Fazi, 2024: NATO: 75 years of war, unprovoked aggressions and state-sponsored terrorism
• Gabriel Rockhill, 2020: The U.S. Did Not Defeat Fascism in WWII, It Discretely Internationalized It

So both sides bad. Good media consumer; stay paralyzed by hopelessness.

It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.

The reason the rich & powerful put so much effort into shoving that bullshit down our throats is that the truth threatens their legitimacy. We’re not supposed to see that a better world is possible.

Calling someone a Russian bot isn’t a disagreement. It’s an ad hominem of the bad-jacketing variety. We’ve run out of patience for this BlueAnonsense.

The dbzer0 admins seem to think so, from what I’ve seen, but you’d have to ask them.

The point is, unless you have the receipts to prove it, don’t call someone a bot.

No, dbzer0 is its own thing. What they have in common is they’re both run by socialists.

You said it yourself: for suggesting that he had an alt account. That could get you a ban on dbzer0 as well, in that case for “bad-jacketing”:

https://wiki.dbzer0.com/divisions-by-zero/the-golden-rules/

2. Don’t be shitty. i.e. telling people to kill themselves, or bad-jacketing is bannable.

The Wikipedia page for the Wright brothers suggests otherwise. Preceding theory informs practice, which in turn informs theory, ad infinitum. They wouldn’t have gotten off the ground without standing on the shoulders of giants’ previous theories, or without creating/updating theories from their experiments and then putting those theories to the test in practice.

Marx, Engels, and Lenin didn’t sit in a room and build castles in the sky. They (1) learned their predecessors’ theories, (2) deeply investigated the contemporary moment of the world, (3) updated preceding theories and developed new ones based on those investigations, (4) tested those theories in the real world, and so on in a dialectical manner.

Thank you, @antifa_ceo@lemmy.ml!

You’re just brainwashed.

You just arrived here on Lemmy, parroting every Redditor talking point, and we’re brainwashed? Sorry to pop the corporate media bubble you’d been living under.

Also brainwashing isn’t real, in fact it was a CIA cold war psyop. The True Story of Brainwashing and How It Shaped America

“Here, then, is the brief history of brainwashing,” [Timothy] Melley writes in a 2011 paper for Grey Room. “The concept began as an [O]rientalist propaganda fiction created by the CIA to mobilize domestic support for a massive military build-up. This fiction proved so effective that the CIA’s operations directorate believed it and began a furious search for a real mind control weapon. The search resulted not in a miraculous new weapon but a program of simulated brainwashing designed as a prophylactic against enemy mistreatment. This simulation in turn became the real basis for interrogating detainees in the war on terror.”

Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing”

we don’t have capitalism.

🤦 To say that is to say you don’t have even a Wikipedia-level understanding of capitalism.

People think there’s one trick, one system, one thing that will fix shit.

No, people don’t think that.

Nothing will but work, time, effort, good judgement.

Correct.

What worked yesterday, won’t work tomorrow, at least without updating it.

Correct.

I don’t want to put in another fucking ism, I want to buckle the fuck down and fix the shit that’s wrong.

People who don’t learn or develop theory can buckle down all they want, but they’re not going to get very far because they don’t understand anything.

It is a lot of work, time, and effort, and some of that is necessarily intellectual work, if you actually want to succeed in changing the world. Otherwise it’s like saying you want to be able fly without developing theories of physics, aerodynamics, and internal combustion engines.

Has anyone caught that albino whale yet, New Bedford?

You may want to know that not many at lemmy.ml are fond of crypto, and c/memes is for memes, not crypto advertising.

Slurs are socially constructed; opposing its use affirms its existence.

It exists whether you affirm it or not.

I’m saying there’s no point in opposing it because that’s not how you get actual social change!

Wikipedia: Paradox_of_tolerance

Dissent: A Struggle, Not a Debate | Liberal appeals to truth will not stop fascists.

At the base of that anti-fascist reasoning is a well-founded objection to the idea that white supremacist speech, which is white supremacist organizing, is best felled with more speech rather than disruption. It requires an extraordinary ignorance of history to presume that, in defending the unbounded protections and privileges of white supremacists, we also somehow ensure the fair treatment of people historically marginalized by the media and oppressed by the state. Shutting down white supremacist and other oppressive speech reflects a robust understanding of how speech functions in the world.

Speech is used to do far more than express opinions and ideas about the state of perceived reality. We do all kinds of things with words. In 1962 the philosopher J.L. Austin introduced the notion of speech acts. All speech is enacted through speech acts, Austin argued; the act is the thing done or achieved with our utterances. Some speech acts assert opinions, some describe states of affairs, but many utterances also complete or attempt certain actions: demanding, promising, ordering, threatening, persuading, and so on. Whether their propositional content is true or false is less relevant than whether, for various contextual reasons, they succeed in performing their intended acts. (A judge, for example, has the authority to perform the speech act of sentencing someone to prison, while I do not.)

When we limit our concerns to questions of which ideas and opinions we should permit in various publics, we miss the entire terrain of how speech works. Contemporary debate consistently, and incorrectly, treats speech simply as a tool for sharing opinions and holding up various representations of the world. This view found its ultimate expression in the notorious July 2020 Harper’s “Letter on Justice and Open Debate,” which advised that “the way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away.” It was a given for the signatories that what was at stake was no more than the circulation of “ideas,” some of which, they admitted, are bad.

But when political figures and groups gather and speak in the public sphere, they’re not only positing beliefs about the world, offering their thoughts up to the so-called marketplace of ideas. Such speech is not so much organized around expressing the interiority of the speaker, or describing something, as much as it is organized around the listener. When, for example, Tucker Carlson speaks in horror about “The Great Replacement” of white people and their privileged standing, he indeed offers a false description of the world, the falseness of which has, time and again, been pointed out. But the utterance doesn’t primarily function as a description to be tested for truth or falsity; the listener, if white, is being told to feel threatened or, if non-white, is being imperiled by being named as a threat.

Counter-speech, insisting on the anti-racist truth, might challenge the constative elements of the racist utterance. But pointing out the truth often does little to disrupt the performative force of white supremacist speech acts. My argument is not that racist, fascistic speech should not be tolerated only insofar as it is understood as an action, rather than some sort of mythic “pure” speech. That sort of reasoning—attempting to define the line between speech and action—has bogged down all too much First Amendment scholarship. I merely submit that liberal appeals to truth will not stop fascists.

There’s something peculiar about “free speech” discourse: it has all too many people sounding like the state, insistent on establishing immutable rules and laws, under the pretense of a universalist approach unbesmirched by histories of oppression and power. But it is both offensive and fanciful to pretend that we’re in some sort of Habermasian ideal speech situation, which the woke left is now undermining with a tirade of cancellations. This is the “white ignorance” that philosopher Charles Mills argues can reconcile “liberal egalitarianism and racial hierarchy.” As long as we live under racial capitalism, some people’s speech will always be freer than others. Limiting the excesses of white supremacist and transphobic speech acts in our midst is the least we can do.

I don’t know why you keep picking the dumbest hills to die on.

• https://sh.itjust.works/modlog?actionType=ModBanFromCommunity&userId=13590983
• https://lemmy.world/modlog?actionType=ModBanFromCommunity&userId=9590648

You‘re not even trying. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their use for the purpose of obtaining profit. This socioeconomic system has developed historically through several stages and is defined by a number of basic constituent elements: private property, profit motive, capital accumulation, competitive markets, commodification, wage labor, and an emphasis on innovation and economic growth.

Good thing most of us don’t live like animals or think like you: we live in a society.

Even in the US, at least some effort is made to not let the disabled who can’t care for themselves or financially support themselves die in the street. https://legalclarity.org/what-does-ward-of-the-state-mean-for-adults/

The appointment of a state or public guardian is a measure of last resort, as courts prefer to appoint a family member whenever possible. State wardship occurs when the incapacitated adult has no spouse, willing family members, or a previously designated agent to take on the responsibility.

Some Lisps will accept a literal Unicode lambda character.

It’s a racket, where liberalism is the “good cop” and fascism is the “bad cop”. We get liberalism when things are running smoothly for the capitalist class, and we get fascism when it’s not.

Liberalism and Fascism: Partners in Crime

Huh, I haven’t looked at C++ in decades, and I didn’t know they’d added lambda functions/expressions, in C++11. Apparently you can shorten it further: []{}