You're craving for connecting is interfering with your connecting.

Pass

Yes, absolutely. Gabbard literally just revealed the existence of over 100 bio labs in foreign countries, including Ukraine. There's literally nothing the US government isn't doing to try to advance every aspect of their fucked up agenda. Epstein himself was convinced he was breeding better humans and he was literally protected by US intelligence

Call me an accelerationist, but I fully encourage the bourgeoisie to outsource their thinking to a.i. as often and as thoroughly as possible.

Yes! I think you're right. Silicon trillionaires is the best way for them to prove they're inherent intellect and worth as superior to the rest of us!

Nah, all of the people in that strip are underpaid. Tipping waitstaff is a mechanism to tie their ability to feed their families directly to sycophantic ass kissing behavior. It's essentially a way for the rich to know they can get dancing monkey entertainment anywhere they go.

Well yes, the owners didn't want to pay black waitstaff, but also tying it to patron tips meant that they had to perform fealty and fawning and "good humor" under abuse in order to get paid. It's both a way to underpay and a way to control and break the spirit.

Start with the difference between logographic language and alphabetic language. These are both written forms of spoken languages.

So part of the question will be: "is there a difference between spoken languages that first developed a logographic representation and spoken languages that first developed an alphabetic representation?"

In logographic languages, you're not generally representing sounds, you're representing concepts. In alphabetic languages, you're generally not representing concepts, you're representing sounds. If you invent a fundamentally new logograph, no one will know what it represents nor how to pronounce it until you tell them. If you develop a new letter, no one will know how to pronounce it until you tell them.

In an alphabetic language, you can combine letters to produce new words that may or may not have any relationship at all to similar words. The components in alphabetic languages essentially only carry a sound and no other meaning.

In a logographic language, you can combine logographs to produce new representations of concepts that generally have to relate to the concepts attached to the component logographs. Sometimes people can work out the new pronunciation as well.

Fundamentally, the ways in which we encode information in logographic versus alphabetic languages is wildly different. And since there are more concepts than could ever possibly be fully written down, these technologies need ways to expand. In alphabetic languages, we make new combinations of letter to make new words, but we also use idioms, phrases, and metaphors. Rarely do we make homophones and homonymns, but it happens. In logographic languages, nearly every logograph stands for multiple concepts by default.

At this point, it should start to become clear that if I am translating a text as text, without the context of the entire conversation, without hearing the spoken language, and without understanding the intent, subtext, poetic devices, and history of it all, then it's very very easy to get totally lost when trying to translate.

Correct. It's not a tankie predilection, it's a human predilection. It is used by humans to influence other humans throughout history in widely varying contexts.

Your comment is an example of virtue signalling in that you are signalling that you don't participate in that "bad thing" called "personality cults" because you are "a good person".

There is only one world, we think anyway. In the Marxist view of the world, Rights are human-invented construct that serve a function. If the only world you want to live in is one where Rights are an objective reality that inhere to entities by some magic, I don't know what to tell you

I mean, that's just your opinion. There are plenty of places that ban communists and Marxists for the position. The communities you're raging about are not yours and you have no claim to them. Let them manage their own community the way they want to manage it. You opinion has been given it's due respect.

The image you posted indicates that "true leftists" are different from tankies because true leftists "believe in" a bunch of concepts that are socially constructed as "good things to believe in"

No one gives a fuck what I believe in. That is true. No one really needs to.

Your second sentence I disagree, both from a theory and practical position, but history will tell us.

I know. It's not looking good at all. But it's clearly an attempt to prevent a more significant loss so I'm just holding my breath

Actually it's incredibly subjective. Objectivity itself is an incredibly suspect concept and the idea that we should all be striving to reveal the one single objective truth is a feature of failed philosophies and in particular fascist worldviews.

Marxism doesn't claim to be objective, it is a methodology for working with complex interconnected convolutional dynamic systems. Not all Marxists arrive at the same conclusions in theory, and they don't all interpret observations to indicate the same thing. However, as more observations are made and examined, Marxism provides the path to converging closer to a shared and comprehensive understanding, just like any science does, because it's not a series of factual claims but rather a process of developing understanding.

Is that your official definition of Leftism?

A lemmy instance is not a political movement.

The fact that you haven't observed communists being banned from liberal spaces is most likely because you aren't running afoul of the ban and those that are you don't see because they're banned

I believe humans need society to exist and I believe humans should continue existing and thus I believe I should work towards sustaining human society. I have come to the belief that Marxism is the best analytical toolset for proceeding through the process of cultivating that sustainable human society from where we are today.

Yeah, that's not why they police their own community. It's because they are creating a community that doesn't have to deal with the incessant aggression and conflict from uneducated propaganda-riddled idealists who spend their days moralizing at people they disagree with.

It's a preference thing, not an ideology thing

My take done short and lossy: the US just wants Cuba and Venezuela to become like China. That should give us hope.

The medium version is that so long as Cuba doesn't lose control of the commanding heights of the economy and the government isn't controlled by private interests, they'll be fine. It's more dangerous having compradors and spies more integrated into your economy, but the conditions in Cuba don't allow for independence. It's very difficult for any major manufacturer to get goods there, and the US blockade makes it economically untenable. Cuba can't say no to the US if the US is willing to starve all of the people there.