[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Poor people can't afford to lend money when they're struggling just to eat and make rent. It's not a viable way for them to "keep up" with inflation.

But in a sense you're right: inflation (by itself) isn't the problem. The problem is that wages don't keep up with it. Because the labor movement has been failing not only to make gains, but to prevent failures (e.g. keep our effective wages from going down). Most forms of capitalist passive income keep up with inflation by design, which is no accident.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

As for environment, the US nuked themselves over a thousand times, mostly on the Nevada desert. People in the 1950s used to go to Las Vegas to watch the explosions, nowadays they still go for the casinos, and that’s after many of the old dirtier bombs got exploded above ground....

The US honed that skill by turning nukes into a tourist attraction for its own citizens over 60 years ago.

Here you go, you revisionist, gaslighting piece of shit:

The partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty

The fallout from atmospheric tests created a global health crisis. A 1961 study revealed that strontium-90, a radioactive isotope, was building up in the teeth of children living in the St. Louis, Missouri area, hundreds of miles away from the nearest nuclear test site in the Nevada desert. Efforts by thousands of scientists and the international public raised the alarm about contamination from atmospheric nuclear tests and urged global leaders to act.

By 1963, the international community had negotiated the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which prohibits carrying out nuclear tests in any environment that would allow radioactive material to spread across a country’s borders, including atmospheric tests, underwater tests, and tests in outer space.

The Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty dramatically reduced and eventually ended atmospheric nuclear testing. But nuclear testing did not slow down. Instead, countries with nuclear weapons shifted to underground test sites.

Just because a particular city nearby didn't suffer the effects of fallout doesn't mean it was under control and didn't have horrific effects on people literally hundreds of miles away. You are literally just spewing "clean nukes" propaganda straight out of the playbook of the U.S. arms industry. Go fuck yourself.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

This is a terrible take by someone who has heard plenty of propaganda by the arms industry but knows absolutely nothing about physics. Many of the products of the primary and even secondary nuclear reactions from a nuclear warhead are themselves radioactive and have long enough half-lives to do tons of damage in both the short and long terms. Whether or not there is radioactive material spread around is not simply a question of whether some of the original fuel remains unspent.

If all you're doing is spreading war propaganda, log off and go rethink your life.

EDIT: Folks, start here and read other materials by the Union of Concerned Scientists. Don't let this bullshit whitewashing of the dangers of nuclear weapons, their use, and their testing go unaddressed. And speak up against this kind of propaganda showing up in our communities—especially leftist ones.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 2 points 10 months ago

Freedom of speech and assembly clearly in action, here. Wow. Imagine a court figuring it could tell a union not to decide its stance on something. Fascist state.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

What, they didn't trot out Joe the Plumber again? SMH.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

I don't take that as a doomer view at all. It's the view that we must eliminate bosses. Which, to me, is actually a far more positive view than the one that sees having bosses as inevitable, but simply wants slightly higher compensation from the slave masters.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

I'd say more that there's no such thing as a fair share as long as bosses exist. But yeah, also true: to take real steps in the right direction definitely requires exerting power, not begging.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Of course political speech is illegal. Always has been. It just isn't nominally legal on paper. People have been indicted, prosecuted, and imprisoned for it constantly. A famous example is Eugene Debs, who was prosecuted under the Espionage Act and imprisoned for an anti-war speech he made in 1918.

Please don't be taken in by the veneer of moronic constitutionalist liberalism. The state punishes people when it feels like punishing people, and does so especially for political speech and dissent...for being an anarchist; for being a leftist. The propaganda it puts down on paper has never changed that.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Instead of the conservative motto, “A fair day’s wage for a fair day’s work,” we must inscribe on our banner the revolutionary watchword, “Abolition of the wage system.”

—Preamble to the Constitution of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW)

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 2 points 1 year ago

Sure thing. Edited to add a paragraph at the end about Raddit itself.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sure, workers can always allegedly "go somewhere else". You realize that private property and capital accumulation and market distribution have, in actual practice, kept us from doing so very, very effectively, right? Like, there's one or two large enterprises that are worker-owned and allegedly democratically managed. And even on the local level, co-ops are incredibly difficult to establish. You sound like a fucking propertarian, telling people to "just go somewhere else/start one yourself if you don't like it." I'm not sure why you expect anyone to fall for that shit here.

Are you sure you're an anarchist and not a liberal? Because you're working awfully hard to propose market-based solutions in order to seemingly protect private property relations against anyone who might want radical, use-based community ownership.

[-] StrayCatFrump@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I have a hard time understanding what they are “crusading” about. I believe they don’t know either

Pretty sure it's just enhancing and absolutely securing their own power over others. Seems pretty simple, really: whatever vector you can use to legally, extra-legally, or even illegally crush those who don't want to be ruled by you, foment hate and fear against them, take away their resources, and just altogether put them at your absolute mercy, you take.

Oh. I'm also talking about the right in general (liberals), not just the nominally conservative ones. Haven't met a liberal yet with any power who's not threatened by even the chance that leftist ideas will be realized. Those that aren't conservatives just don't seem to feel like it's quite as inevitable (why would it be when they co-opt leftist ideas and movements and funnel them into liberalism, making sure avenues like the Democratic Party are as radical as people can get), so they're more content to use legal and general economic methods to subvert, control, and starve us...at least most of the time (but then, there's always shit like election fraud like they pull against the Green Party, though).

view more: ‹ prev next ›

StrayCatFrump

joined 1 year ago