Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)HH
Harrison [He/Him] @ Harrison @ttrpg.network
Posts
0
Comments
191
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • And to Germany's communist party, fascists were also distasteful, bigots, and extremists, and they would lead to the collapse of capitalism.

    This would be a good mirroring response if it had any amount of truth to it. To the Communists in Germany, the fascists were their mortal enemy. The two parties were fighting in the streets. The Communists saw the fascists as a capitalist system, they certainly were not under the impression that fascism would bring about the end of capitalism.

    A declaration by the Communists that the Fascists would collapse under their own contradictions is not evidence to the contrary, or evidence that the German communists tolerated the fascists.

    Liberal and libertarian are not the same thing and cannot be conflated, and authoritarianism isn't anything with a state.

    I swear, the political compass has rotted people's brains.

  • Under capitalism, the capitalist class controls the media, and can use their wealth to control the political class.

    A democracy can only make choices so far as it's voters are informed, and when a group controls most sources of information, it can control the democracy as a whole.

  • That's a misrepresentation of old English. Man used to be neutral, and was modified by were and wif respectively for man and woman. Wife comes from woman, not the other way around.

  • Firstly, liberals are not left of centre, they are the original capitalists, the ideology that socialism was built in opposition to.

    Secondly, Liberals will always side with fascists when push comes to shove. To liberals, Fascists are distasteful, bigots and extremists, however, fascism does not threaten the liberal system. It does not threaten the liberal ruling class, at least inherently, whereas socialism is an existential threat to that class. To a liberal economy, to a liberal nation.

  • The source you linked talks about uranium reserves. Mineral reserves, known and unknown deposits, refer explicitly to the known amount of economically minable supplies of that mineral.

    Discussion around them can be misleading, especially for a growing industry, because as a resource becomes more scarce, it becomes more economically viable to mine difficult deposits, this growing the reserve. On top of that, the effort and technology tend to yield new methods of both mining and refining that increase yields.

  • Eco-fascist outcomes come from Eco-fascist methods. How do you propose to accomplish this degrowth without subjecting the world's population to genocide and privation?

    Human nature is to strive, to fight for a better life for themselves and their communities. The preservation of agrarian lifestyles and "harmony with the planet" a bunch of backwards romantics push is not more important than the betterment of the species, no matter how much people cry about it.

    If people need to live in dense cities, then they will live in dense cities.

  • The biggest enemy of the left is the right, it's just that everyone on the left can agree that they're terrible so it doesn't come up in discourse too much, whereas the people who are on your side but want to do things a different way will take up much more of your attention.

  • It's not weird that it specifies a computer program, the use of the term to mean the standard option comes from computing. It's the value chosen when the computer defaults, as in fails to pay it's debt (in this case debt being the value it was looking for).

    I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that people prefer meat because it's the default option and not the other way around.