I ventured over to the website "disboard" to try to find more online friends that are at least slightly left of "hunting the poors for sport"

I came across "Leftist Alternative" and I'm 99% convinced this was a fed honeypot

https://disboard.org/server/1085633149540777994

Show

I answered all of their "prerequisite/verification" questions. Mostly my answers were of the variety of "Amerikkka imperializes the planet for the 1%" and "it's not the left vs right, it's the 99% vs the 1%"

They gave me a LOT of push-back for not acknowledging the "genocide" in China. But it really went downhill when I said that the imperialism of Ukraine by both USA and the Russian was/is a fairly nuanced topic.

Obama Admits US Role in Ukraine Overthrow

Pro-US, Nazi-glorifying government

Ultranationalism, anti-semitism, neo-nazi pogroms, and attacks on LGBT groups.

Ultimately I ended with, "Every war is a banker's war" and included I was against any/all imperialist movements (including Afghanistan, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, Haiti, Congo, Liberia, and Sudan), but I could definitely see why NATO advancing, despite saying they wouldn't move a single inch towards Moscow, would incite a push from Russia to get their old trade buddy back (not to mention Blackrock/JPM front-running grain futures before the invasion and then vying to steal the mineral rights away from Ukraine in exchange to build it back up)

This really set the feds off..

"OH YOU HATE JEWS DO YA?" - 'Leftist' Alternative

"Wait... huh?" - Me

"A 'Bankers' War Huh??? We could just tell you were an anti-Semite"

"Are you insinuating.. that all Bankers are... jewish?" - Me

It immediately devolved into ad-hominems from the "lefties" so I left that right-wing hell-hole :(

Is Every "Leftist" Discord a Fed Honeypot?

Or are the lib brainwormsreally just that deeply ingrained at this point?

Edit: Missed an end "

  • FOSS_Propagandist [none/use name]
    ·
    4 months ago

    I'm interested in your opinion about the term enshittification. It's a Doctrowism and even though it's a little imprecise, frequently misused/understood, a little childish, and it isn't my first choice, it's the term that took off. Do you know a better phrase? Not trying to put you on the spot. You always have good takes.

    • hello_hello [comrade/them]
      ·
      4 months ago

      It's a good term if you want to vent out your anger, but many who use the term don't apply to already existing theory and instead use the term to smear the corporation or software which wronged them. It gives off the impression that there are "responsible" companies who distribute nonfree software and those who abuse their customers. Of course, as Marxists, we understand that software itself is capital and in a capitalist system, the owners of software will be the ruling class and their class interests will prevail. Software is an incredible tool for creating surplus value for capitalists as unlike material goods like steel or fruit, software can be morphed and changed to increasingly extract more and more profit with anti-features and malware to yield immediate results.

      It's to say that I'm wary of populist terms like "enshittification" that can obfuscate the long standing feud for free software. All proprietary software is harmful and it's better to point out the anti-features of these programs rather than appeal to people's intense emotions which, in my two years fighting this fight, are incredibly fleeting. Free software vs. proprietary software is always a valuable distinction to make since it orients the conversations to people's rights rather than the grievances of customers. Hell the term "enshittifcation" has the danger of invoking a reactionary nostalgia for a gilded age that never existed.

      • MaeBorowski [she/her]
        ·
        4 months ago

        It's been a while since I skimmed through that Doctorow essay, but I have always thought the term, at least as originally intended, implied that enshittification was an inevitability, a direction that any and every proprietary social media platform under capitalism will tend towards over time. If so, it seems it is still mostly in line with what you're saying, and should help make clear that the nostalgia people have for the "good old times" on a profit-driven platform is false, since the kind of degradation that "enshitification" refers to is inherently built in from the start.

        • hello_hello [comrade/them]
          ·
          4 months ago
          • https://doctorow.medium.com/my-mcluhan-lecture-on-enshittification-ea343342b9bc

          Doctorow's ideas has a lot of radlib stuff in it.

          It’s a three stage process: First, platforms are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.

          No, the platform was never good to their users because the platform was proprietary. He keeps praising the civilized "European/Western data privacy laws" but doesn't actually confront the origin of the problem which, in its essence is nonfree software and capitalism.

          That TikTok is brainwashing millennials into quoting Osama Bin Laden?

          Yuck.

          But the capitalism of 20 years ago made space for a wild and wooly internet, a space where people with disfavored views could find each other, offer mutual aid, and organize.

          The capitalism of today has produced a global, digital ghost mall, filled with botshit, crapgadgets from companies with consonant-heavy brand-names, and cryptocurrency scams.

          No, the capitalism of 20 years ago is the introduction of NDAs and nonfree licenses, of large corporate interests accumulating capital and training university researchers to become worker drones, essentially robbing the academic field to be put into factories. It was always bad, especially for minorities to be on the internet where there was little to no representation as technology used to be only an upper class hobby. The beginning of the end was 20 years ago when MIT researchers saw more value in proprietary software and control rather than keeping the software free. The material analysis stretches as far as Doctorow can retrace the steps of corporate giants and not those resisting the takeover since the 80s.

          Wild and wooly internet is just a libertarian nostalgic fantasy. Bullshit takeovers were happening then and are happening now.

          Martin Luther King said ‘It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can stop him from lynching me, and I think that’s pretty important.’

          Yuck, why are you quoting MLK here in a talk about your social media treats going bad, real radlib energy.

          He mentions nothing concrete you can go and support, just explains the problem in a milquetoast fashion. No mention of the GNU Project, Fediverse, Open Source Initiative, Right to Repair, Freedesktop, Linux etc. It's the same level of analysis as succdems going over why capitalism is broken but saying nothing of the solution except "we got to do better y'all".

          He mentions nothing about software freedom, and that's what I take issue with. There are more people in tech (especially em_poc and queer people) than ever yet still a frightening fraction of them actually know the history of resistance. Enshittification doesn't help build a platform, it just builds resentment, the fact that it blew up in liberal circles is just making it seem like more of a red flag.

          GNU Project despite not taking a clear stance against capitalism, is still more helpful since it provides people with an alternative worldview.

          I might make a more organized post about this, but that's just my ranty response to the term enshittification being as popular as it is.