People who are saying to just delete Facebook or don’t use it aren’t wrong of course (I say that myself, to be clear I hate FB); but as someone who tries to buy and sell things secondhand (I see it as being environmentally responsible), this is largely becoming impossible to do locally without Facebook Marketplace. I honestly have some grudging respect for Facebook’s ability to survive just when you think they might start to become irrelevant. Things were headed that way for them, then they bought Instagram. And then the last couple years, it was sort of common knowledge that the only people who use it anymore are old folks and Nazis… and then FB Marketplace kills Craigslist and becomes the only app people use for local buying/selling.

Idk maybe there’s some opportunity here for some local buy/sell federated service?

I heard Elissa Slotkin in an interview the other day, and she would not commit to trying to pursue reduced funding for ICE, much less abolishing it…

The entire concept of “salvation” in Christianity is is dynamic, and has changed again and again over the centuries. Jesus was very likely a Jewish Apocalypticist - his message was that the end was near, and God’s justice was close at hand for the unrighteous. And after this was accomplished, God’s kingdom on earth would reign. The “salvation” Jesus refers to here is almost certainly salvation from the upcoming apocalypse - follow him, and you’ll make it through to see the Kingdom.

But then Jesus died. Even though he died, what we know from studying all sorts of religions and cults in history, is that death is often not the end. But the followers of Jesus had to evolve their thinking. So they came up with idea that, even though Jesus had just been killed, he would return again - and soon! To them, of course, soon meant soon. It’s why Paul talks about how marriage is pointless because there isn’t much time left. When this second coming never happened, and the decades rolled on, who Jesus was and what his followers were to be “saved” from changed. At this point the religion is gaining followers all across the Roman Empire. However, as different cultures find Jesus, Christianity itself incorporated ideas from these cultures. One such idea was the concept of an eternal hell of torment - something that was largely unknown in Judaism (outside of sects that had previously been influenced by Hellenism).

Eventually, the Church emerges and certain concepts of salvation become more formalized and standardized. These largely serve the interested of the feudal church - making the masses stay in line. Then you have Protestantism emerge not coincidentally with the emergence of capitalism, and Protestant notions of salvation that serve the interests of capital. Fast forward to today’s White Evangelical Christianity, where salvation only entails a sort of mental assent to a historical event (Jesus’ death). What you actually do - good or bad (like helping the poor) - is largely irrelevant to your eternal status. What matters is being in the “in group” that demands conformity when it comes to various socio-political concepts (abortion, homosexuality, et al).

Christian salvation is “confusing” because after the first couple centuries or so, it’s definition was forged in ways to serve the interests of the powerful.

“They wanted the taxpayers to pay for them to go on vacation because they decided they didn’t want to support law enforcement,” she said. “So, the breaking news tonight? I fired them all! They are FIRED from the office.”

Not a major point, but when an employee wants to resign they are saying that they want their PTO paid out, as they are entitled to under law or contract. That’s what those former employees were saying. Bondi is saying she fired them, but she will still have to pay out that PTO all the same.

I think the full text of the report regarding this is enlightening:

The survey also took Americans’ temperature about about capitalism, socialism, and even communism. Most Americans have favorable views of capitalism (59 percent) and unfavorable views of socialism (57 percent) and especially communism (86 percent).

Some groups stand out with greater support for socialism than capitalism. For instance, more Democrats have positive views of socialism (67 percent) than capitalism (50 percent). Strong liberals lead the way with 82 percent having favorable views of socialism compared to 28 percent who feel positive toward capitalism. Among Americans under 30, 62 percent feel favorable toward socialism, and 50 percent feel favorable toward capitalism.

Only 14 percent of Americans have favorable views of communism, while 86 percent have unfavorable views. Some groups like communism more than others. The percentages of Americans who feel favorable toward communism are as follows:

34 percent under 30.

29 percent of strong liberals.

28 percent of residents in big cities.

26 percent of African Americans.

I pasted the whole thing here because there’s a lot of interesting nuggets in there. On the surface, 59% having a favorable view of capitalism and 86% viewing communism unfavorably seems bad. But when you get into the details, I think it’s very positive for us. Fully 98% of age 65+ folks see communism unfavorably; the results are incredibly skewed by age (which I know, it’s not a substitute for class but it’s useful from an informational standpoint). That point about Democrats not just seeing socialism more favorably than capitalism but seeing it that way by a huge margin is encouraging to me. As material conditions worsen I think those people will be the easiest to push in our direction - I know we have issues with Democratic voters, but I think it’s reasonable to assume a very large number of them would be more inclined to support socialism or communism over outright fascism under certain conditions. Lastly, those points about big city residents and African Americans. Those results are not split by age. So given the shape of the curve of views of communism, I think it’s reasonable two assume that younger people in those two age groups view communism favorably by well over 34%.

I appreciate that Cato asked about communism and not just socialism. Having a favorable view of socialism will include a lot of people who just like AOC and universal healthcare. Not that those are bad things in themselves, but saying you like communism is much less ambiguous.

The old Top Gear with Clarkson, Hammond, and May. I feel weird watching it because Clarkson especially has become such an insufferable reactionary, and old shows really go hard on climate change skepticism. But when it’s at it’s best, I find watch three friends having a fun trip together to be very relaxing.

I certainly don’t disagree, but I think it’s very useful to highlight how this has changed (IMO) in recent decades. I think there was a time when the boomer generation was earning relatively good incomes that allowed them to live comfortably and accumulate wealth (mainly in houses and the stock market). I think this arrangement between capital and the (predominantly white) working class created a situation where even those workers without much wealth could be “bought off” and swear allegiance to capitalism. This wasn’t sustainable of course, as the postwar industrial boom and then the gains from neoliberalism were never sustainable. Couple that with the fall of the Eastern Bloc and with it the “threat of a good example”, and I would say that this arrangement lasted as late as the GFC at most. I think this helps explain how older people today - even if they are solidly working class - might still be hostile to anything they think is “socialism” while younger generations do not share those opinions, it seems.

I was reading Michael Roberts’ blog the other day, and he pointed out something similar. The official calculations for inflation significantly understate it for various reasons. However, if you look at actual labor hours needed to cover the essentials of life, and you use the median income amount from 1950 (for the US), then that number comes out about $102k per year. Said another way, for a standard of living based on real life, to have the standard of the median American in 1950, you would need to earn over $100k today. But if you take that 1950 median income and just adjust it for official inflation, you only get to like $42k.

I think this is often the case with Trump. However, when this does happen, at some point along the way there’s usually hints dropped about what kind of “deal” could be made (like agreeing to buy a bunch of US military equipment). But with Greenland, there has been no indication at all that Trump is interested in budging from full ownership of the island.

“Sadness is a weapon of bourgeoisie” -Iosef Lilianovich Dros

Thanks - I’ve seen Winboat mentioned several times in the comments, I’m going to try that first.

All Cuba has ever wanted, for decades, is for the US leave it alone and be allowed to trade with the rest of the world. Cuba has no means to fight back, so of course Trump and Rubio will pick on them.

This is Rubio, I think. Toppling Cuba has been his #1 goal his entire political career.

There really are little to no economic concessions Cuba can make, given the status of the blockade on the country. If the “deal” was just to let Trump build his own hotels on the island or something, Cuba might even accept that. Given this and who is in Trump’s cabinet, I think it’s reasonable to assume the only “deal” on the table is to accept being governed as US colony with Rubio as the viceroy.

As brutal as cutting off oil from Venezuela will be, the Cuban people got through the Special Period, I think they will survive Trump.

I haven’t heard of WinBoat before, I will check that out thank you.

It’s been a few years since I tried making my Zune work on Linux, I should give it another try, thanks.

It really is a great little device. I believe there has to be a market out there for a Linux device similar to it, something just for music / radio / podcasts.

Respectfully, the two things you are trying to compare are not really comparable in any meaningful way.

Edit: If I am being as generous as possible, I suppose you could stretch the definition of “colonialism” to include Tsarist Russia and Siberia (not sure I would agree, but let’s call it that). But even then, by the time you get to the USSR I don’t see how you could call it that, as opposed to the USSR literally just developing part of the Union.

These comparisons feel like people trying to compare Michael Jordan and Babe Ruth and asking which was the better athlete.

The source data shows that while active users are down, the number of posts and comments are near all-time highs. While you need new users to help counteract churn, I think the higher post/comments count points to what I think a lot of people feel here: that quality seems to keep getting better and better.

Regarding how to bring more people in, I personally like how different lemmy servers have slightly different characteristics but each seems to appeal to larger groups. I see a future where there’s probably a small-ish number of large servers that cover broad groups of people.