If rights to one person contradict the rights of another, resulting in loss and harm then guess what? Individual rights aren't being mandated and upheld and that's not Liberalism
I dont think you're getting it, honestly. There are a ton of examples where liberalism exposes tensions between individual and collective rights, and most of them revolve around the right to property. Liberal democracies are constantly having to enforce new regulations because capital owners are constantly finding new ways to abuse their ownership of property in ways that harm others. You can say all you want that isn't 'true liberalism', but then what democracy would qualify then? What happens when the accumulation of wealth under liberal democracy leads to such a disparity of power that government can no longer function as a regulating body? hint, you're living it, bud
No, they don't, because that has never existed
Are you sure? There have been no examples of socialized systems of production?
I think you're confusing socialist and communist states with socialist and communist systems.
Mandated, unconditional individual rights ARE collective rights and also human rights
Not when those rights are in conflict with another individual's. The classic example is the individual right to private property, but there are many others. American liberals do recognize these limits and contradictions, but accept as granted the right to private property. It's the center tenet of leftist critique, so it makes a lot of sense why there's a lot of cynicism about liberals claiming to occupy the same space. Sure, they have some overlap, but the main contention is left unaddressed by American liberals and so leave themselves open to derision.
if Capitalism is not a regulated Market System then the USA is also not a capitalism
It's a type of regulated market system, but it's defined by its mode of production being capitalist in nature. Socialist and communist systems still employ regulated markets, but collectivize ownership over productive capital instead. Abolishing capitalism isn't a way of saying we should abolish markets, but to remove capital as the mode of production
Not unless you're creating your own personal definition. At best, liberalism means advocating for individual rights, and where you or I might disagree with the application of that idea is where individual rights are in tension with communal or collective rights more broadly
In what way does exchanging money for goods cause outlawing gay marriage or banning books?
Markets are not the same as capitalism. It's a description of a system that enshrines abstract ownership over systems of production. If you dont take issue with the coercive mechanisms within capital relations, then im not really sure where to put you 'on the left'.
I haven't excluded him as being vegan, I'm just not going out of my way to avoid calling him an antisemitic eugenicist. Just because the label sounds mean doesn't make the label false.
Sexism is expressed in a lot of different ways, and some are more harmful than others. It doesn't make the label inaccurate simply because it hurts your feelings. You can be a lot of other things in addition to being sexist, too.
You don't seem to have a problem with the use of labels when it comes to dietary choices, im not sure why you'd go to such lengths to avoid calling Hitler a eugenicist. You even used passive language by saying 'what he did with concentration camps' instead of stating plainly that he 'exterminated 6 million jews' in them.
The study he's pointing to is looking at why Harris/Biden's coalition collapsed from 2020. It's not exclusively looking at abstentions, but people who supported Biden in 2020 but didnt in 2024.
"Biden 2020 voters who cast a ballot for someone other than Harris in 2024"
Why? I don't see a benefit to the button at all. Even being able to register disapproval is better done via comment, anyway, and having to articulate it makes you far more likely to self-reflect and temper yourself than if you can just downvote every comment in a thread
That's just how a federated exchange needs to work, though. Without sharing which user is creating activity, there would be no way of verifying the legitimacy of activity without some convoluted blockchain process. On the other hand, sharing IP addresses isn't just unnecessary but more involved.
There's frankly no point in making votes private, anyway. Why should it matter who knows how you vote?
Important to note here, too, is that ip addresses of users arent synced across instances.
This is only a problem for people who care about the reputation of their user account - which is something people should be rotating out anyway if they care about their privacy.
IP addresses are not something that can be pulled from just any instance. You would need to be the administrator, and even then you'd only get access to the ip address of just your own instance users. AFAIK, at least - maybe they've made efforts to mask ips, too, but im not even sure how that'd work.
Federated posts and comments are copied from server to server. When someone from .world is looking at a comment from .dbzer0, what they are seeing is information that was synced from the dbzer0 server address, not the user's.
There was a brief moment when there was a vulnerability with linked images sent via DM that could route you to an external server and log your IP address, but that has been patched now by most instances.
As with anything on the internet: assume your activity is not private at all times, or take active precautions to mask your identity, or both. No opsec is perfect and often the only thing standing in the way of a hack or dox is the endurance and motivation of the bad actor.
Unpopular opinion but social media has always been fundamentally public.
Unless they're scraping private dm's on encrypted devices, this should come as no surprise to anyone.
The good news is that nobody has exclusive right to data on federated platforms, unlike other sites that will ransom their user's data for private use. Let's not forget that many of us migrated here because the other site wanted to lock down their api and user data so that they could auction it to google for profit.
Reposting these memes shows up on everyone's feed regardless of if they're subscribed or federated with .ml - i'm not speaking for 'everyone', only pointing out who your script is impacting, which is everyone in that subset.
I certainly have questions when you're loath to use it for literal- fucking-hitler.