6·
11 months agoConsider posting what you did.
Free speech enthusiast.
Long term lemmy dot world user, left after their anti communism and created accounts at lemmygrad as well as dot ee
Lemmy world admins are doing a disservice with creating a firewall for hundred thousand users to the idea of and work done by the lemmy developers.
- 0 Posts
- 52 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
Cake day: August 2nd, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
01·11 months agoThere is also the “unexpected” or “unknown” and social character of the internet.
2·11 months agoand they’re still really unlikely
1 in 1000 is not really unlikely if it is in regards to your life ending.
However even taking your number it would lead to devastating pictures.
2 married people with 4 grandparents 1 aunt 3 friends and 3 kids means every year 22±5 out of a small 1000 family neighbourhood will be affected by car deaths.
Assuming that a relevant time period is from the birth of a child till it is 30 and therefore might have had a child of their own, so 30 years we get that around 66%±10% of families will be affected. Instead of only 1-3 families during that time.
You did not lift the veil of ignorance, you created a new veil of diffusion.
It would mean that two out of three families would lose a close person within a 30 year generation due to cars, instead of only a small percentage. This is the power of the 17 times!
The alternative of train rides would mean that within a generation virtually no family is affected by car deaths.
There is quite a bit wrong with your comment. The odds don’t change whether you give them in km or billion kms. However “the odds of dying on each of these” is wrong: Those are not the odds.
As you wrote what you wrote it would mean that only 2 people in the whole US population of 300 million would die on a car.
(annualized) death rate was 1.66 per 10,000 vehicles
The 17times more likely is telling the truth. Of course you could do look at miles consumed per mode of transport, but the point will remain that trains are much more safer (and some people die on them rather by old age, than accidents).
In addition the way you present the numbers with leading zeroes means you have no academic experience in the field of data presentation. Which shows.
2·11 months agoThanks I try to achieve at least 30% good and 70% bad comments.
For questions like that pretty much no newspaper is trustworthy.
However you made a claim that is a known propaganda lie, I gave you sources, yet you do not say: “I was wrong, I will delete that sentence from my post and make a disclaimer to it!”, no you try to defend your lie.
You say “while it wasn’t specifically true, you could imagine that over 70 years in some countries of 1.2 billion it might’ve be true somewhere!”
Again, family of mine was prosecuted in the liberal western FRG for homosexuality and sent to prison. 30 years earlier they would’ve ended up in death camps.
12·11 months agoThe numbers will sink in the next 20 years for pretty much all “developed” OECD countries. Including the US, UK, France, Germany… yet how often do you personally write about that problem? When even people like professor Reich of Berkeley mention the 40(?) trillion $ wealth transfer due to shrinking population and that mostly to a small group of population with reduced demand for housing you seem to focus a lot on a country you are not living in.
Do I think China faces challenges? Surely. Do I think the capitalist market oriented parts of it will lead to problems that are integral to capitalist market systems? Sure. The CPC has much more power to act on it though. China is currently able to house its population much better than 30 years ago after the crisis of the fall of the Soviet Union. Germany’s capital is missing 600k affordable flats at the same time.
Lets see how things will play out, but similar articles were published every couple of months for the last 20 something years. That generates sentiment.
The mother of a friend of mine was homeless in the GDR. She got a flat, she got education, she got work, she got a nice family, she had healthcare, they bought a house. My friend is much worse off now.
Che on the other hand was a homophobic bigot who attempted to eliminate the queer people from Cuba
Liar. You are spewing propaganda. You could read AskHistorians for that.
You are quite reactionary. Seek groups and listen, you need to be participating in collectives to grow as a person.
That site has yellow fascists / yellow monarchists, "An"Caps listed, they aren’t anarcho anything.
That is not correct. Black and red has a variety of meanings, anarcho syndicalist ones being part of them. Anarcho communism is now more common for that combination. I do absolutely agree with you that they would join in and kick the gadsen person and my gay comrades would join in, too.
But France wasn’t the only example of a republic at that time, and what even inspired the French revolution was the United States establishing itself after breaking away from England
That is very wrong and not historical correct. However you don’t talk to historians, but think for yourself without evidence or archives so you will never accept that.
And yet throwaway is a racist and aligns well with nationalists:
This shit is why not every migrant is good. They bring their shitty homophobic culture with them.
They would be cheered for with that sentence in Nazi bars.
A little step, but an important one.
Do you label yourself as libertarian or something like that? This post and the other one hint at it: https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/1115631
Is in your eyes the problem the “corporatism” of capitalism? If yes it would be funny that a person that ate that propaganda is defending fascists, since you would be carrying water for fascists.
Yes. I typed in “White Supremacists 2020 USA” and this is what I got in the first rows:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally
Look at those flags: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally#/media/File:Charlottesville_‘Unite_the_Right’_Rally_(35780274914)_crop.jpg
1 Nazi flag per 2 Gadsen “Tread on me” flags and per 3 confederate flags.
Meanwhile when you search for “tread on me” flag usa 2020 you will get a vast majority of right wing white supremacists posing with that flag and little else.
_crop.jpg){kind=link}
Just like I would never care about the ends reached by colonialist means.
That is good and yet: Which country are you living in?
I would like to add that liberal well of people and large land owners which also labeled themselves as somewhat liberal in Italy before the Fascists came to power were quick in allying with the Fascists and enact violence against socialist and communist groups and structures they supported, for example unions. The liberals did use violence to shut off that political and economic enemy, yet they didn’t then to fight the fascists and also didn’t ally with socialists to stand against the fascists.
You can find very extensive studies about that which use voting shares before the take over and alike.
To put it bluntly while liberals espouse liberal values when the situation is rough they - or be it people with means, economic, political, parliamentary or party mandates - regularly did chose to fight socialists, anarchists and communist to not rock the boat and to not be uncivil.
He is right though. It isn’t a fallacy, the usage of the word tankie is so far removed from content that it is a bad term and more thought terminating than anything.
Tankies were originally a small subset of some Western and some, mostly East European, socialists and communists which were in favour of a (para-)military response to the revolt in Hungary in 1956. It was a complex situation and even people not on the side of Nagy within Hungary were in favour of the Soviet action.
The term now was used, and amplified by intelligence agencies and Western media, to decry the Soviet action and more importantly de-legitimize several communist groups. In that sense the functional usage of the term is similar, but the question is where would the slur hit actually?
In principle it would hit a small sub section of MLs who followed Khrushchev’s decision. Many people within the pact did see the de-Stalinisation and how it was communicated as problematic, as it enabled opposition forces to claim ground in countries. Nagy tried to do introduce reforms, the most far reaching: “Hungary to leave the Warsaw Pact and declare neutrality in the Cold War.”
Countries thinking about leaving the dominant two powers spheres of influence during the Cold War were often met with violence. See the Jakarta Method for more information about that (i.e. Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia, the whole of South America). During that time colonialism was also still relevant and colonial powers did use excessive violence, this is another part of the book.
Now what you and others do is labeling people who are to the left of the Soviets at that point as Tankies. Which is doubly wrong and cynical. What is interesting is that the slur can be traced back for the last 6 years to the US and there to more right wing places. It wasn’t primarily a phrase that was used by leftists. However after the heating chamber of the alt right online people used it to label even people who are democratic socialists at best.
In that sense it is a continuity to the Red Scare, to not have to engage with content.
Luckily the US would never in the 1950s use regime change in countries, for example it would never use military force in Guatemala to ensure the profits of the United Fruit company and the CIA director’s family or
alike
1948–1960s Italy 1949 Syrian coup d'état 1949–1953 Albania 1953 Iranian coup d'état 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état 1956–57 Syria crisis 1957–58 Indonesian rebellion 1959–2000 assassination attempts on Fidel Castro 1959 Cambodia, Bangkok Plot 1960 Congo coup d'état 1961 Cuba, Bay of Pigs Invasion 1961 Cuba, Operation Mongoose 1961 Dominican Republic 1963 South Vietnamese coup d'état 1964 Brazilian coup d'état 1965–66 Indonesia, Transition to the New Order 1966 Ghanaian coup d'état 1971 Bolivian coup d'état 1970–1973 Chile 1976 Argentine coup d'état 1979 Salvadoran coup d'état 1979–1989 Afghanistan, Operation Cyclone 1975–1992 Angola, UNITA 1981–1990 Nicaragua, Contras 1982 Chad 1996 Iraq coup attempt
Source? For all three claims please.
That is the thing with states, i.e. the USA, the state power enforces laws. Just as Max Weber’s theories go.
However in the USA it often seems that corporations and economic elites do have quite a say in things that are related to doing away with employee laws, without many push-back.
Anyhow, are you in a union? Make your friends get into unions. However if you do you have to be willing to strike, willing to be internationalists and willing to organize. Try to achieve 45% union membership rate within your company and the subcontractors working with you.