It works too. Even Lemmy has plenty of people supporting censorship of opinions.

Especially, if ygu have the “wrong” opinion on a major conflict or what does and does not count as genocide.

All Cheetas Are Busty.

… I’m sorry

Wow. He didn’t even smacktalk Kirk himself. he just said that the shooter was a MAGA-head and that Trump didn’t seem to bother that much.

Even checks out on the allegorical level. The matrix is the capitalist system we’re stuck in.

That’s most likely it. Thanks a bunch!

Maybe I should have flagged my comment as a quote or something. ;)

The blue-gray gnatcatcher! He’s killing the owl! Stop him!

There are bands that I legit can’t buy the MP3s from.

I’m sure that small to medium artists don’t get fleeced by Spotify and get a ton of money from a service that almost everyone in the west is using. /s

Y not? Aren’t the twin towers sad, too?

Don’t forget Chile in 1973

It’s also the instance rule. Not the community rule. But yeah: They intrpret the rules how they please. Reminds me a bit of their idol: Stalin.

The power of the babe

I’m not saying that thir “human nature” talking point is a strategy by the powerful to justify their position. But it sure helps rationalizing it in that direction.

According to anthropological research. gender discrimiation stems from economical circumstanges.

Also, this seems more like a fucking racist policy, first and foremost, rather than a primarily sexist one.

Edit: Link to a video explaining how gender discrimination comes about

I call your infodumps without actually engaging in what I write rude. That’s why I’m so sassy, comrade.

Engels was using the most useful interpretation of authority. “Structural monopolization of power” is still the imposition of the will of one class over another, anarchists still attempt to structurally oppress the bourgeoisie.

As I said in the other thread: you don’t engage with anything I write. You just claim “no” and don’t explain any logical errors in my statement. You’re just restating your claim and dump an unhealthy amount of text in order to make yourself feel smart.

Collectivization, ie equal ownership across all of society globally

Not a realistic model of the world. The sphere o| influence ends at some point. There’s no reason that I should have a say on what a bakery on the other side of the world should bake. Not even in a “communist” society.

A horizontalist society necessarily contradicts the role of higher levels of administration […]

Strawman. Administration/expertise is not authority.

essentially petite bourgeois cooperative

You claim that without backing up why it would be petit bourgeoise

You might not have used Lenin’s buzzwords, but you’re an authoritarian Marxist. Not every Marxist is authoritarian.

As for your last point, socialism is not communism. […]

Another non-sequitur infodump. Also, I reject your teleological notion of “early hunter-gatherers”. Also also: This mode of “pure” relations of production that you try to swipe under the rug has been the norm for about 99% of humanity’s existence.

Removed by mod

So you disagree with the meme too. Cool.

the most useful definition of authority is the imposition of the will of one class over another

No, that’s Engels’ lackluster definition (actually, Engels’ definition was worse, since he claimed that laws of physics were “authority”. Authority is structural monopolization of power. What you’re describing is more on the line of “violence”.

even anarchists must be authoritarian towards capitalists.

Only with a wrong understanding of “authority”.

The argument between Marxists and anarchists is one of collectivization vs horizontalism

Those concepts are not contradictory. You can’t “horizontalize” something without collectivizing it.

but in both cases you can’t eliminate class overnight, and as such the working class must oppress the capitalist class to keep it in check.

The moment the capitalist class can be “oppressed”, it seizes to be the capitalist class.

Marxists would argue that the system, even if horizontal, would still be considered a state assuming class isn’t abolished

How such a “horizontal state” would be possible with classes is something no Marxist has ever been able to explain to me. Also, you’re not speaking on behalf of all Marxists. Just MLs, maybe.

and class cannot be abolished entirely without full collectivization of property globally.

I’ll go tell all those socialist regions that just abolished the bourgeoisie within their regions. /s

Removed by mod