Anarchists recognize class as a social construct rather than a biological imperative or a free market condition. As a result, they will often make a point of transgressing or undermining the pageantry that class-centric organizations cling to.

Its not that they think “no classes” will be a result so much as they think “explicitly defying class” is a political act.

Real State of Exception Hours

Circus subscriptions just went up again.

You, a socialist: “Please, I’m begging you, sports should be a municipal amenity not a profit driven cash grab.”

Me, an American Capitalist: “And then they made me pay for parking! And then I had to give Ticketmaster an extra 12% on top of the entrance price! And then half the stadium was just 20’ advertisement billboards! And it’s all going into the pockets of a dozen extremely rich oligarchs, most of whom don’t even live here!!! JUST LIKE COMMUNIST RUSSIA!”

Getting really far out into the woods and seeing the Milky Way in all its glory is a transformative experience, without a doubt.

Maybe we have it backwards. Maybe the light pollution is what causes the Autism and we just got lucky with Pluto before the sky was closed up.

Thousands of people suddenly start staring into the night sky, exhaustively cataloging everything they see, and writing long journal entries arguing over whether a vague flickering dot is a planet or not.

And you think Pluto caused Autism?

Nobody with empathy wants to burn down a state building

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CYTcQUKTVY

the bloodline ends with my ugly face

Highly unlikely, unless you’re fixated on the specific mother/father combo. You won’t be the first person who failed to reproduce with a shared set of ancestors. Just support your community and make the lives of your procreating peers easier. That’s all any ancestor can ask of you.

Teenage motherhood for the first child, sure. But women can continue having children into their 40s without significant difficulty. No guarantee that the firstborn will be the one who thrives relative to younger siblings particularly if the mother is an inexperienced or impoverished mom as a teenager.

So you really need to look at the median motherhood age, not the first opportunity of pregnancy.

It can still be worth adding generators and wiring to exercise machines to offset energy consumption

It seems like a lot of extra overhead for marginal benefit.

tickets (while important) take a back seat to a rich commit history

I’ve found people who do one will manage the other with ease. But “oops! No ticket” is a canary telling me their commit log is going to be shit.

But honestly, has anyone ever been able to just reach the ticket history and know everything about a project without asking someone?

I’ve been able to find out the status of individual half-finished bugs off a ticket log and work/reassign it quickly. Without a ticket in queue, I’ll either discover the issue has been completely ignored or that multiple people pioneered their own boutique fix without talking to one another.

A big project with lots of people and moving parts that doesn’t need each individual tracking their own status and needs because the Project Manager is keeping everything up to date and keeping the Senior Managers off your back is invaluable.

Go Live was buttery smooth. We were all in and out by lunch, even after having to address a hang up on the fly.

Good project managers are worth their weight in gold

only to have an underling whisper in his ear that Godzilla just made landfall.

Do I really need to open a ticket for this

Yes

UNIRONICALLY, ASSHOLE! IT’S THE FIRST THING YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE!!!

Fucking “hey guys, we are bringing in someone from another department and they need to catch up. What’s the project looking like?”

“I don’t know. Nobody wrote anything down and now it’s scattered across six didn’t PCs in various states of dysfunction.”

IT guys think they’re all Michael Jordan right until they get the ball.

Studied computer science. The answer is yes.

NP = P, folks. Pack it up and go home.

In his own words:

Glenn has proven himself as a journalist with his reporting of Edward Snowden and much more.

Snowden provided his doisser to a wide range of journalists and was published in a litany of different venues, from CNBC to Reuters. Greenwald worked with Snowden alongside Laura Poitras, Barton Gellman and Ewen MacAskill to build up the PRISM story, then defected to The Intercept when he wasn’t getting the kind of personal publicity he wanted. Then left the Intercept because he - once again - wasn’t getting the personal publicity he wanted. But he’s long since exhausted his journalistic bona fides. Now he’s just a pundit.

The other big story he was involved in - Operation Car Wash - ended up itself being an effort at regime change intended to destabilize the Brazilian govenrment and install a fascist dictatorship via Jar Bolsonaro.

Which people do you recommend if Glenn Greenwald does not meet your standards?

Stick with The Intercept, the magazine he left behind, if you’re interested in the machinations of American politicians. Ken Klippenstein is sold and has a good DC beat.

But otherwise? David J. Roth at the Defector is always a good read for East Coast local news. Derek Davison, at the Nation and Foreign Exchange, is a sold source of international news. Max Read does great work covering Silicon Valley.

You’ve got plenty of options who are more relevant and more interesting than Tucker Carlson’s Best Friend.

what kind of conversation are we supposed to have with fascists and people openly calling for an end to both your and my liberties?

Depends heavily on who you’re dealing with. Obviously, very hard to talk to a cop in the middle of cracking your skull open. But a lot of Americans are polarized into fascism through mass media and other forms of propaganda. You have to talk to them like you’d talk to anyone else. And you have to get them disconnected from the fascist media stream as best you can.

It’s less about a specific conversation and more about building trust relative to their mass media of choice. No single thing you say is going to outweigh a daily dose of right wing agitprop. So divorcing people from that mass media has to be the first step, either by keying them in on how and why the network is uncomfortable to listen to or by engaging them with alternatives.

there’s no debating that we all deserve to live and to exist.

The fascist theory is, at it’s heart, that egalitarian coexistence is impossible. You are in a tribal war of domination and you either win or you die.

The counter has to be evidence to the contrary. Introducing friends and family to people who are “the enemy” but are clearly no threat. Reminding them of who they’re being asked to reject.

Okay, sure, but Greenwald’s an absolute fascist-apologist piece of shit who only hides behind a liberal-libertarian veneer when it is convenient.

Past that, the problem you run into with dissent is that it is heavily predicated on whether you are willing to endorse the dissenters. The more alien a community’s political views and activities, the less tolerant admins become. The cause of Luigi Mangione is the most notable one, as certain communities seem to reveal in cannonizing his image while others furiously scrub out anything but the most derogatory mention of his name.

How do you distinguish between the dissident Freedom Fighter and the dissident Terrorist? What do you perceive as the limit of tolerance towards the intolerant? What kind of advocacy is constructive and what is merely provocative or trollish?

When you’ve got a guy like Glenn paling around with Tucker Carlson and bemoaning the Woke Antifa Left one minute, then crying over their own community of MAGA Truthers getting deep sixed by the Deep State, it seems the very idea of legitimate “dissent” is predicated on whether you align with it or not.

It’s a very mixed bag, dependently largely on the personal views of the moderators at-large relative to the speakers. For the most part, the mods at .world seem egalitarian and amicable to liberalish dissenting views. We haven’t seen a slew of censorship/bannings over arguments about veganism or Israel/Palestine or capitalism vs socialism.

But the “y’all deserve to get banned” mentality is largely tied up in the idea that their ideas are bad for being outside the spectrum of your allowable discourse. Meanwhile, a community like .ml or Truth Social doing a censorship/ban on content is morally repugnant because its limiting conversations that are inside the spectrum of your allowable discourse.

The technical mechanics of these communities are the same, everyone’s just arguing where the lines should be drawn.

It all just looks like hustler-flavored consumerism to me.

The folks washing down their adderall with huel and reviewing their ring stats on one screen while they’re checking their crypto speculations on the other is non-negligible.