Actual hot take incoming to spice things up: I think calling to boycott the new wizard game was dumb liberal politics. Boycotting never works and never does anything, you're just wasting your energy. I didn't play the game because it was mid as fuck. All in all I think way too many people wasted too much of their energy being mad at the dumb game.
Children breadtuber hasan consumers and the adults separated themselves during this time.
I dont know I dont watch Hasan, protesting Harry Potter game doesnt do anything
i think its reasonable to boycott it, but you shouldnt put so much energy into defending the boycott. kind of a waste of time.
As much as I hate the term virtue signalling... the boycott was virtue signalling. Does no material impact for trans people or their struggles, but it makes you feel good about yourself and gave you a reason to feel smug towards others.
Again, boycotting just plain fucking doesn't work. Never has, never will. It's better to spend your energy building actual organizations dedicated to trans rights or whatever is the issue.
I thin Hasan's take is pretty good here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8HRX-8x0eU
Agreed, someone should have firebombed Warner Bros. corporate office instead /s
I also believe there is no ethical consumption under un capitalismo!! Buy buy buy! (treats por all)
Or, just, I dunno, make whatever consumer choices you think fit both your means and politics best and don't try to police other people trying to do the same because that's always going to be a game where nobody wins.
Also it's just a fucking video game, it's not the same as I dunno going to southeast asia for child sex tourism.
And considering how evil companies are, is the money going to JK Rowling from the game sale going to way more evil than the 30% cut Xbox gives to Microsoft? Microsoft works with the US military. It was as if this was the only game that evil people profited on
It wasn't a boycott. It was asking people not to buy it. At least that's all I've ever asked anyone. Like sure, we can't make enough of a difference to stop them from making a sequel or whatever. But we can just show solidarity to our trans and Jewish friends and family. It wasn't a huge ask.
yeah, this was very much not a boycott as much as trans people saying "hey, maybe don't buy this since the money goes directly to an antisemitic transphobe" and cis people having meltdowns about that.
genuine hot take. it's demonstrably untrue that boycotting never works (in situations where the bulk of consumers of a product or service can be organized as a bloc it certainly does), but i agree that the attention given to it was disproportionate to the harm it actually represents and the benefits of focusing on it.
Yeah you sure are gonna need to be careful with that take.
Fascism, especially Nazism, was only particularly possible because it learned from the atrocities of colonialism.
This doesn't diminish the horrors of either and both should be treated as evil.
Lebensarum wouldn't exist without manifest destiny.
Not exactly. I have, however, seen people use this opinion to downplay the horrors of the Holocaust, which is why I agreed that you really have to make it clear that's not what your intent is.
It's common enough that when I see this take I immediately go :fry: until I can figure out the person's angle.
There's that weird subset of antisemites who aren't quite nazis but have managed to contrarian themselves into something very alligned with it.
To be clear, I'm not saying that's your intent, just why being careful with ones phrasing is important when talking about this.
Edit: Gotcha, thanks for that context hah
It reminds me of how people who use the existence and horror of slavery before and after the Atlantic slave trade to downplay the significance of the Atlantic slave trade.
Churchil killed 4 indians and 1 iranianian for every jew hitler killed.
So yes both are bad.
where'd you get these numbers? maximum counts for both iran and bengal are in the neighborhood of 3 million, that'd be parity with jewish victims of the holocaust, and less than half of the overall non-combatant victims of the nazis.
and the highest estimates for iranian deaths both in ww1 & 2 are working from United States population estimates, which is a strange source to put faith in
For bengal ive heard 20 million as a conservative estimate. The iranian famines are estimated from 1 to 13 million. Bu we know that the qajars had a similar revenue as the otoman empire. So we asume a simiral or larger population given that the otomans probably had higher tax eficiency. Yet at some point in the early to mid 20th century iranian population is reduced by half. So that it is now similar to turkey alone. The famine probably acounts for a large portion of that.
20 million in bengal would've been a straight third of the population & i cannot find any references to such. 13 million iranians would be quite close to the entire population of iran, depending on your source.
these are wildly inconsistent numbers with any references i can find online, and while im willing to entertain some amount anglophone bias in the data the fact i can't even find 'disreputable' assertions resembling yours does not give me much confidence. i feel like you've combined/seen combined stats of fatalities over multiple events and pegged them to the ww2 churchill ministry.
there's no doubt such deaths can be blamed on the british over centuries of time, just not during ww2's duration
Nazi Germany did to Europe what,Europeans have been doing to Asia Africa Americas,Australia since the 16th century.
I didn't realize this was a hot take. I always thought "Fascism is imperialism turned inwards" was well accepted around these parts.
coffee/caffeine addiction serves the interests of capital, which is why it is not only legal, it is encouraged.
Only thing that work gives away for free is a stimulant :thonk:
This is why I don't consume caffeine except on weekend mornings. Work only gets all-natural, stimulant-free labor from me.
It also taste good tho, somethings are just a "happy" coincidence. I feel like a lot of us intervention is them just exploiting something /weakness that already exist rather than creating something
Just because it serves the interests of capital doesn't mean it's unpleasant or can't be otherwise enjoyed, just needs to recognised for what it is: a drug that enables people to feel better about shitty working conditions.
Okay but lets be fair and say coffee isnt made for capital, its being exploited by capital.
If i were in my hippie arts and crafts commune, id still want coffee
I went and got a sugar free Monster just now cause I wanted the taste of ginseng a little bit.
Plastic bottle hidden valley: pesticides
Powdered ranch mix in mayo with buttermilk: yimyum
The discourse surrounding reduction of working hours and workdays in a week is completely dominated by office workers and their perspectives.
Without a broader restructuring of wages and overtime pay (or of society) it will only serve to further alienate workers who already work more than the standard work week or are on call.
nothing we do is anti-imperialist, few of us have done any actual action against the war effort.
me whenever some 30 member first world CP releases a statement of solidarity with some faction that will never read it
Some ways yes, but not as important as IRL work
i'm pretty sure that's the median position here. it is anti-imperialist to oppose NATO in their war. which is the same as Russia's war. because it's obviously a power struggle between two bourgeois powers.
I mostly agree, but I think there's nuance to it. To want for some kind of victory over US/NATO hegemony seems reasonable. It's kind of a lesser-of-two-evils affair, no?
Sectarianism doesn't really make any sense.
No leftist movement in the west is organised enough to actually make any impact in the real world.
Whether or not you shit on someone for being a tankie or a trot, "anarkiddy" or whatever, no worker's life is going to be affected.
No matter if you think the Kronstadt event was justified or whether Makno was based or not, it means literally nothing for people who have to toil everyday.
Distinguishing yourself as a marxist-leninist-maoist-gonzaloist or a 1920s anarcho syndicalist is completely meaningless if you aren't doing anything meaningful in real life, with real workers.
True, but I think you missed the point.
I was specifically referring to the kind of person who's entire political life and experience revolve around the internet.
I'm high as shit right now, but my point was that caring about any "faction" is meaningless without contributing to anything in real life.
Theory without practice is a waste of time.
I was specifically referring to the kind of person who’s entire political life and experience revolve around the internet.
annoying yes, so thats the type we should be sectarian towards
no western lefty org's ideas about foreign policy actually matter though, they have barely any to zero power in their own countries, let alone the rest of the world
doesn't mean they won't bitch about them to everyone
Sectarianism doesn’t really make any sense.
For small movements yeah, its dumb
for bigger ones its absolutely necessary. There is many a useless ideology that are inherently counter-revolutionary. Maoists, MLs, and Anarchists are fine though. The ones with no impact should be eliminated due to the division they will put in the party. Revolutions dont just dirty your hands, you will bathe them both in blood.
Telling the Estonian PM Kaja Kallas that her grandfather deserved to be gulaged 75 years ago.
:stalin-shining:
If youre acab that same energy should be towards military and rich people.
You dont get a pass just because ur a well meaning lefty
I agree. I'd give some leniency to rich kids, because they're kids, but the burden of proof is higher if you want to come back from either of those things.
Sorry, I use kids colloquially for people my age and lower (20s-teens)
The common defense i find valid is that people can be propagandized in the most propagandized nation to ever exist and are just going to make mistakes.
Nothing is going to wash the stain off of service but I feel like cancelling someone indefinitely who wants to do better is a stupid puritan move. You would have made the same decisions if you were born as them, arguing against that isn't coherent with a materialist perspective.
Same goes for former cops and rich people who want to give me their money.
Like fuck Engels for being a rich person but also cool he actually did something useful multiple times for people like me. I have the capacity to feel both ways and I dont feel like its an invalid way to look at things
That's fair but if you were an American over here you wouldnt be immune to doing the same thing they did. I don't think you're wrong for hating Americans and American military, you should, especially the ones who were in your country.
Also, personally, I do say that about people join ISIS or were Nazis.
I feel its not the bad actions that make you a bad person, it's when faced with the "badness" of what you've done, if you don't change and do what you can to make it right then you're a bad person.
Yes, agreed, except in every tofu thread I read here, there's a few people who say "just heat it in a pan with a little oil and drizzle with soy sauce" as if they're describing a delicacy and not the equivalent of a hot couch vegetarian's Tuesday dinner. Or the people who say they eat crumbles right off the block. I swear I've seen it here, I'm not crazy, stop ripping my shirt :eric-andre:
Simple is good too though, i really enjoy white rice and some soy sauce.
Vegetarians biggest L is that they always try to compare their food to already existing meat foods rather than letting them be their own things.
as a vegan i feel like this is a uniquely American thing since “American food” is entirely meat based dishes like burgers, hot dogs, etc., and vegans/vegetarians try to replicate that even though there are plenty of naturally vegan dishes in mediterranean, asian, latino, and african cultures
Yeah im absolutely speaking from that perspective and i completely agree
Half of us do that, half of us don't, mostly because half of you are more interested in traditional vegan options, and the other half (at least in America) won't consider it if they can't have something that looks like a sausage on the side of their plate.
I'm a soups and curries kinda loser, so I don't relate that much, but lots of people - both meat-eaters and vegans - like that fake stuff.
Me. I do that. You get a taste for it after a while. Still much better properly spiced and cooked though.
i mean obviously you're supposed to put seasoning on it
Thank you. People say tofu bad and then go to the ends of the earth to marinade and season and fry and bake and rest and ensauce a slice of beef - if it doesn't taste good, just put the same amount of effort and culinary knowledge into making it taste good as you would most other things???
This is why Allah (blessed be his name) gave us mapo tofu.
Therapy is good and it should be included in universal healthcare.
there is a dingbat subset of leftist who believes that all mental health issues are only caused by capitalism and that abolishing capitalism would magically fix that.
to prove this, they cite the works of a dude whose depression was so bad he unfortunately unalived himself.
does capitalism compound and worsen people's mental health? yes, it absolutely does. same as it absolutely worsens people physical health.
that's an enormous oversimplification of the arguments of the anti-psych movement
to prove this, they cite the works of a dude whose depression was so bad he unfortunately unalived himself.
I seem to recall that you got in trouble for making a similar, although far less pleasant comment, about the author before and you got in trouble for it. Am I thinking of someone else?
Not hating on your argument though, you're completely right.
I don't think I did, but I'm not surprised other people have similar opinions.
The way he died normally wouldn't be relevant, but he specifically wound up destroying himself in part because of his incorrect conclusions about mental healthcare. Conclusions he stubbornly included in a lot of his work.
It's necessary to name so that people understand in part why so many leftists strongly disagree with that reductionist viewpoint.
