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/)W

Wolf

@ Wolf @lemmy.today

Posts
1
Comments
557
Joined
9 mo. ago

  • Constitutional right to a wild garden with weeds and bees to be tested in Ontario court

    Jump

  • I understand what you are saying, but growing up the term 'weed' was always used in the 'undesirable plants' sense and the term 'invasive species' is more accurate when you are discussing them specifically. When I first started gardening, the guy who trained me defined weeds as 'any plant the client doesn't want growing on their property'.

    Stuff like dandelions and such.

    Dandelions are a complex topic. While some consider them "Noxious Weeds", other people recognize their value as important sources of food for insects, they attract pollinators, and they also release ethylene which is a gas that encourages fruit setting and fruit ripening, so they are sometimes grown as 'companion plants'.

    Dandelions are only weeds if you don't want them there, like any other 'weed'.

  • You are stardust.

    Jump

  • I was going to say I am column A and B, but I don't cry about it.

    We ARE miracles, we ARE "The Universe experiencing itself" and we are insignificant on the cosmic scale. Those things aren't mutually exclusive.

  • Vance says he’s prepared to be president ‘If God forbid, a terrible tragedy happens’

    Jump

  • Yeah, that's a weird way to spell "New National Holiday".

  • Get two birds stoned at once. BAAAAAAAMMMM.

    Jump

  • I wish it had more Macho Man.

    RIP.

    I watched a few more of his mash-ups, none of which quite live up to this one imo, but it seems like he puts the Macho Man somewhere in each one of his videos :)

  • Get two birds stoned at once. BAAAAAAAMMMM.

    Jump

  • Lol. You might be able to appreciate DragulApt. I unironically love it!

  • Get two birds stoned at once. BAAAAAAAMMMM.

    Jump

  • There’s no such thing as a “good billionaire”.

    I never claimed she was a 'good billionaire'. I'm saying it's possible that she will choose to do some good things with her money. I'm not saying she will, just that I am willing to allow her to prove me wrong before I decide against her.

    When more money is made compared to the labour that is put in, it usually leads to some kind of oppression/injustice.

    I agree, it 'usually' does. However in this case I'm kind of having a hard time figuring out where this oppression/injustice is happening. She's an 'artist' and people who enjoy her work buy/listen to her music. It's not food, shelter, healthcare, or any of the other things required to live, it's music and people would likely survive just fine if they never heard another song about how terribly Taylor's ex boyfriend had treated her.

    And (again- this is just through the grapevine), but I hear that she gives large bonuses to her staff- payments that are above and beyond the agreed upon amount she 'owes' them. I suppose it's possible even likely that she doesn't give them a fair share of the profits, but I have no proof of that either way- and I'm not even sure how you would go about determining what a proper share would be in this case, but it sounds like at the very least she does more than most employers. Maybe not the perfect scenario but ill take flawed over terrible any chance I can get.

    On some level you can ignore this injustice, but here we are talking about potentially 2 billions.

    Point out the injustice and I'll happily criticize her for it. I figured it could probably wait until the Musks, Ellisons, Suckerbergs, Bozos, Pages, Brins, Trumps, and their ilk had been reckoned with but if a pop singer is really that big of a problem count me in on the hate train.

  • Get two birds stoned at once. BAAAAAAAMMMM.

    Jump

  • Trailer Park Boys rock!🤘

    I was more addressing the other commenters who did seem to be slagging on her.

  • Mastodon says it doesn't 'have the means' to comply with age verification laws

    Jump

  • The biggest issue is that so many people see it just as you do, left vs right, instead of liberty vs authoritarianism.

    For the most part the divide between "Left" and "Right" politically speaking IS the divide between Liberty and Authoritarianism. If you look up the History of the terms its easy to see this. Those terms originated during pre-revolutionary war France. The "Left" supported freedom from Tyranny. The "Right" supported the Monarchy. This has remained largely true ever since then.

    Where the waters get muddy is so called 'Authoritarian Communism'. When Communism was first being discussed it, along with Anarchism in general, were correctly labeled as 'Leftist' ideologies. Under both the 'State' is abolished completely. You can literally go no further left than voluntary association and abolishment of the state. As far back as Karl Marx, elements of 'Authoritarianism' began creeping into 'Communist' thought. While Marx was a relatively enlightened thinker- neither he nor Engels were the originators of Communism- despite having written "The Manifesto". They were the originators of Marxism- an important distinction.

    The goal- indeed one of the very definitions of 'Communism', even under Marxism is "a classless, stateless, society." As such Communism is a form of Anarchism. Anarchy technically only requires the abolishment state, but the vast majority of Anarchists also believe in "Mutual Aid", and 'private property' is a nonsense concept in the absence of a state- which is why so many Anarchists identify as 'Anarcho-Communists'.

    Now clearly (in my mind at least), removing one of the fundamental ideas of communism- which is that 'The State' (and especially a 'strong/authoritarian' state) inherently upholds and enforces the class system in society and is a bad thing which needs to be abolished and you replace that with it's complete opposite- a 'Strong' State upholds and enforces 'classlessness' in society and is a good thing which should be supported, moves that type of "Communism/Socialism" from being a leftist ideology all the way over to being a far right ideology, as per the original and most commonly used metrics for determining if a position is "Left" or "Right".

    The problem with 'reclassifying' 'Authoritarian Communism' to it's correct spot is that A) the ruling class (Capitalists) who are firmly right-wing do not want to be associated with it as it removes power from them and places it solely in the hands of the state. Likewise 'Authoritarian Communists' do not want to be associated with Capitalists either for similar reasons. Leaving the only people who care about the correct placement of these ideologies as the actual Anarchists and Communists- which are considered 'fringe', 'extremist', and 'radicals' by society as a whole and no one really cares about our opinions.

    A 'True/Accurate' Left Right Spectrum would look something like...

    Anarchism> Communism> Democracy> Social Democracy> Neoliberalism/ "Libertarianism(U.S. definition)" > Conservatism> 'Far Right'> "Authoritarian Socialism"> Fascism

    Putting them in that order reflects the 'Liberty-Authoritarian' spectrum that is the "Left-Right" spectrum. You could of course argue placement and some of them could be rearranged depending on circumstances. For example I put 'Social Democracy' as further right than Democracy because 'Social Democracy' is still by and large a Capitalist system, yet if the majority of people in a Democracy were right wingers- then the order would flip, however this is largely right imho.

    For decades, the libertarian movement, as seen by the left, has been largely associated with the right, simply because of their professed support of the free market, and dislike of gun control...

    You are confusing 'The Left' with "Liberals". This is an extremely common and understandable mistake to make in the U.S. as there is a lot of intentional confusion. The 'Democratic Party', in particular since the 'Regan Era' is largely comprised of Neoliberals- a capitalist ideology. Capitalism relies on, and cannot exist without the exploitation of workers. As such you simply CANNOT separate 'Social' policies and 'economic' policies. Exploitation of workers IS a social issue- one of the most important ones- so if you support 'Capitalism' you are 'right wing' socially, even if you hold relatively enlightened positions in other areas.

    Also "Gun Control" isn't a clear 'left/right' divide either. Many leftists share the view of some right wingers that having access to firearms is an important strategy to resist tyranny. If anything access to guns is a Left wing position that was adopted by some on the right, as crazy as that may sound to modern American ears.

    “Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary”

    ― Karl Marx

    One of the key ways that "Libertarians" try to muddy the waters of what is a considered Leftwing or Rightwing stance is the mantra of 'Free Markets'. But what is really meant is 'Unrestricted Capitalism'. If there was ever a "Libertarian" who believed in "Free Markets" in the absence of 'The State' and 'Private Property'- well they would likely correctly categorize themselves as a Leftist and not "Libertarian" (Please note the distinction between Private Property and Personal Property, and in particular how it relates to the ownership of the means of production.) Also to note: That definition of "Personal Property" is written from the POV of people born, raised, and indoctrinated by a Capitalist system and is not exactly how leftists would define it. "Personal Property" doesn't have to be 'movable' per se- ones residence or even a village collectively could be considered 'Personal Property' by Leftists. What really matters is that it's property that you can personally make use of. If you build yourself a small house for you and your family- that is personal property. If you lay claim to vast amounts of land that you couldn't possibly work by yourself- that would be "Private Property" - which would require some form of 'State' to enforce.

    Now some so-called "Libertarians" will try to argue for something called 'Anarcho-Capitalism'. This is a mythical state of existence where there is no State, yet the people respect 'Private Property' rights. Ask most 'Anarcho-Capitalists' how they would propose to enforce private property in the absence of a state and they will tell you that they would hire Mercenaries/ "Private Police"/ a Small "private army"- Well at that point you are a Warlord. Which is the precursor to and one step removed from Feudalism. In other words by becoming a Warlord you have recreated 'The State', which is incompatible with Anarchism.

    But that same movement has been seen by the right as largely associated with the left, because of their views on things like the drug war, enforced morality, and anti-corporatism.

    It's unironically great that you support those things- but even 'anti-corporate' Capitalists are still capitalists- and still right wing- despite being more enlightened in other areas. You are basically no different than a neolib, but with worse takes on the economy. Neolibs are right wingers themselves. We basically don't have a "Left" in the U.S. The DNC is only "Left" of the GOP by relative positioning. The actual Left is growing day by day- thanks in part to the fascist takeover of the U.S., but we are still the minority for now.

    But there are still quite a lot of us truly anti-authoritarian libertarians out there who despise both left, and right leaning authoritarianism.

    But when I bring up issues of authoritarianism, I get “BoTh SiDeS?!” bullshit responses. Because YES, as we can see, BOTH SIDES do their own fair share of this authoritarian bullshit.

    To reiterate my point, authoritarians can only ever be 'Left Wing' in name only. Calling it any other way makes no sense. It's like saying a poor wealthy person or a sick healthy person- the two concepts are complete incompatible with each other.

    Plus, property rights are just a logical extension of personal privacy rights.

    PERSONAL property, not PRIVATE property.

    Now I haven't even gone into why the 'authoritarian' shift in "Communist" thought happened- and that is a whole other discussion. This rant was largely semantic but I feel it's important to make the distinction.

  • Get two birds stoned at once. BAAAAAAAMMMM.

    Jump

  • I don't follow sports and I don't care for most country or pop music, but other people are free to like what they like.

    I know she made a stand against record company greed, which I appreciate.

    She supposedly gave out like $50million worth of bonuses to the crew on her latest tour.

    She tried to keep her ticket prices lower than she could have charged.

    What Kayne did to her was incredibly rude and she handled that situation with class.

    Her dating Travis and attending his football games has somehow pissed off a lot of people for some reason and their response is usually something misogynistic.

    The right wing media seems to hate her.

    I heard she came out in favor of LGBT rights.

    Given that she started off as a country singer and seems to be moving further left, I can only imagine she's influencing at least some of her fans to be more compassionate.

    The only legitimate criticism I can think of is that she's worth about $2billion. She's been fairly good about being charitable from what I understand, and got most of that bread through her recent tour, so I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that she uses her money to do some good things.

    Out of all the ways that someone could earn billions "Pop Star" is probably one of the least exploitative ways to go about it, it's not like she made it by underpaying workers like most capitalists.

    I'm honestly a little annoyed by knowing so much about an artist who's art I don't even care for, but it's even more annoying that when I do hear about her, people are usually criticizing irrelevant things.

    Can anyone tell me a good reason why a Leftist should jump on the 'Hate Taylor Swift' bandwagon along with Fox News and Donald Trump? Just seems like a weird person to go after when there are so many more people actively making the world a worse place.

  • Who is the enemy?

    Jump

  • Do funeral homes in Canada charge grieving families 10k to bury their loved ones?

  • MAGA Puts Wikipedia in Its Crosshairs

    Jump

  • They are already happy. The point of all this is to keep people ignorant and the working class divided- and they are getting straight A's in that department.

    If you mean the people who blindly go along with whatever 'conservative' politicians tell them then never, because of the previous point. There will always be a scapegoat to blame, to keep them mad, to distract from the Billionaires draining their pockets and eroding their rights. Immigrants, leftists, women, minorities, lgbt people... anyone who is different so they can play on these peoples xenophobia.

  • Politicians Will Not Save Us.

    Jump

  • The U.S. has been taken over by fascists who are not so slowly dismantling everything that was good about the government and strengthening everything bad. We likely already don't have anything close to a democracy anymore.

    Yeah but theres a centrist neoliberal in Cali who has jokes!

    yay

  • Convincing people can be easy

    Jump
    • Can play the top games that most of your friends will be playing, thus allowing you to game with your friend group, unless you happen to be friends with people who play games that use Kernel level anti cheat.

    I know LoL is popular, but I also don't personally know anyone who plays it. And even if I did I wouldn't play League with them because I don't like the game. Not everyone is in the same boat.

    Also, this meme is a joke and not meant to be taken seriously.

  • Florida Deploys Police To Stare At Crosswalks, Stop Them From Being Painted Rainbow Colors

    Jump

  • We already live in clown world. We are beyond parody.

  • Microsoft Word documents will be saved to the cloud automatically on Windows going forward

    Jump

  • I'd rather chisel text onto stone tablets than that bs.

  • Language

    Jump

  • Right, but pretty much everyone but Linus and his sycophants agree that was a bone headed mistake. If you type "I understand what I am doing..." and you do not understand- you are asking for trouble.

    Granted, that bug shouldn't have existed in the first place but I feel like the warning should have raised a big red flag for a 'tech expert'. It almost feels like he did it on purpose to prove some sort of point about how Linux 'isn't there yet' but ofc there is no way to prove that.

  • Language

    Jump

  • I prefer the old school style menus and such. I stopped using MS Word around the time that they came out with the 'ribbon' style menus or whatever it's called, so if they 'update' it I sure hope it's as an option or a fork.

    I can understand people who grew up with it or who have spent years using it might like it better though.

  • Trump: 'A Lot of People Are Saying Maybe We'd Like a Dictator'

    Jump

  • Her

  • Trump: 'A Lot of People Are Saying Maybe We'd Like a Dictator'

    Jump

  • Unfortunately with how messed up our country is, and with how ignorant MAGAts are, when they say "Liberals" they mean Neolibs, and Progressives and leftists...

    When they say anything left of Goebbels they meant it literally.