Don’t worry everyone, this is just their love language.

Brill. One of us.

It seems to me that the US is unfortunately too “-ist” to elect AOC.

I’ve tried it with forgejo, the recommended implementation involves spinning a temporary vm to run the integration and deployment processes, quite resource heavy and slow comparatively to the vm I have that’s running forgejo.

I think there’s an option to have the forgejo server itself run the commands without spinning up vms, but it’s not recommended due to security considerations as they’re running with the same privileges as the server - not a concern if you are the only developer connecting to a private instance of forgejo but something to keep in mind.

That’s funny. But the glass is not in a superposition, the answer to the question is. It’s a glass that contains water and is just sitting there observable by all probably sick of being subject to stupid questions that have no meaningful answer.

Yes. If the next action is to add it’s half full, if to remove it’s half empty. If nothing then it depends on the previous actions.

Exactly - or the next action. The question “is the glass half full or empty” is a false dichotomy, the answer is: it is impossible to know without further info.

Maybe related to massive mail voting - just speculation haven’t seen breakdowns.

Forget about the nominally right wing media, look at how the NY Times have covered every threat to democracy, ever. From Hitler to the business plot to Trump.

You cannot arrive at a true communist state through violent revolution.

It’s possible that what you say is true but Marx himself in poverty of philosophy thought you couldn’t arrive without it.

I guess my overall point is that Marx was a man of his time with similar failings and sensibilities of men of his time - amongst other things he was homophobic, he was considering people in groups wholesale in a way that’s rather distasteful, and in a way that allowed later supposed followers to use these writings to fuck over whole populations.

I’m not sure why people are rising up to whitewash these things - they don’t negate the other insights anymore than Newton’s insane occult obsession negates calculus or the theory of gravity.

I mean while i agree with the premise of that argument this sounds a lot like ‘no true Scotsman’… which instances do you see as being in the true spirit then?

what

I’m not sure what you had trouble grasping - I explained the thought in detail in the paragraph following.

And if I quote him saying the same things about the peasant class

I don’t see how making the same horrible comments about another whole class of people counteracts the horrible comment about others.

“Your honour, and if I show that my client stole from other shops, not just the one he is being prosecuted for, wouldn’t you concede that that negates the theft from this shop?”

First I think what he wrote goes beyond them lacking the revolutionary potential and specifically being an active obstacle - I think the words were “significant counterrevolutionary force” and “more likely to sell out to reactionary intrigues”.

But either way, to be honest I don’t see a functional difference between Marx’s beliefs and every implementation of the communist manifesto known to date.

That is, it doesn’t matter what he wrote or believed in his heart of hearts if it can be interpreted in such broad strokes as to allow the implementation of the dear leader mindset with his writings as a touchstone without fail.

And it doesn’t matter what he thought should be done with the lumpen elements if he thought of them as less than, disgusting, parasitical, and even objecting to the cause, (his writings certainly show disgust in my opinion) - true believers to the cause will see them (as they have) as obstacles and will do whatever needs to be done to remove them - as they have.

Well - here’s the thing with “lacking revolutionary potential” and a dear-leader mindset… anyone dear leader deems lacking is labeled lumpen and thrown to the furthest gulag or has their rights removed and confined.

Eg in Stalinist Russia certain groups like the Roma, Crimean Tatars, Chechens, Koreans or homosexuals were labeled as such wholesale.

In modern times the Uighurs need reeducation etc.

But he did write quite extensively on Lumpenproletariat.

vagabonds, discharged soldiers, discharged convicts, runaway galley slaves, swindlers, charlatans, pickpockets, tricksters, gamblers, procurers, brothel keepers, porters, intellectuals, organ grinders, rag-pickers, knife-grinders, tinkers, beggars; in short, the entirely undefined, disintegrating mass, thrown hither and yon, which the French call la bohème.

That is quite a few groups he considered subhuman, where half the ‘cleansing’ operations under communism have derived their theoretical excuses from.

Seems unlikely given that ascetic hermits around the world are known for living to a ripe old age.

Impossible, they know that’s electoral suicide

Indeed. Today’s nyt poll has trump ahead in some battleground states. No time for complacency.

People that want to be able to yell “fire” in packed theatres without consequences and own nuclear weapons at home are truly the most oppressed ideology.

It’s also a mistruth that people don’t change their minds. Look at the rise and fall of any brand, religion or cult - some people had to change their minds.