That’s a good point, it’s an interesting social phenomenon that people tend to be fond of Valve in spite of this because they’re seen as good stewards of the space. It’s like having a landlord that takes good care of the property and makes regular improvements. The property relations are still exploitative, but they’re doing better than most others would within that exploitative framework.
- 0 Posts
- 37 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: July 4th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
I’ve heard that, yes, but that doesn’t change the fact that the relationship Gaben has with Valve workers is inherently parasitic. He may be a “good boss,” but he’s still their boss, has ownership of all their work, and could fire them at will.
You cannot possibly earn a billion dollars. That money is the excess labor value of Valve workers. In the context of how our society is currently structured Gaben certainly isn’t the worst of them, but he’s still a member of the parasite class.
40·4 days agoThey’re just pals, nothing to see here.
Put those monkeys underwater and you might conclude that drowning is in their nature. I know of the studies you’re referencing regarding monkeys being taught to use money and I’m aware that they were done with monkeys in captivity. In the same vein, the debunked study about “alpha” wolves was done on wolves in captivity and observations of wolves in their natural environment countered the study’s findings. Our actions are a result of the context and material conditions that we are in.
People dominate others for personal gain because they live in a system that rewards them for doing so. Place those people in a system that rewards them for helping others and the very same selfish impulse will make them saints. The “tragedy of the commons” is enlightenment era defeatist bullshit. The commons existed and were managed by people for thousands of years before capitalists enclosed them and dared to claim that it was the inevitable result of human nature.
If that’s something they need then that’s something they should get. No one will be happy doing nothing forever, in that year they will likely find something that makes them happy, especially if opportunities are made available to them.
These kinds of movements are a consequence of over-exploitation. The “lie down” movement - also “let it rot” - is similar to the “quiet quitting” movement in the US. People will not be motivated to contribute when they are struggling and do not see any benefit to trying harder. If these people were fairly compensated for their labor and had greater autonomy over how to contribute they would not lose motivation. Alienation from the result of their labor is also a huge contributor; feeling rewarded for your work can be as simple as seeing the result (a teacher seeing their students find their passions, for example).
Communism envisions a society where there are no haves and have nots (classless) and socialism is put forward as the economic system that will get us there eventually. There are criticisms to be made about the method but the vision is good.
Capitalism does what you’re doing here, snarkily talk down to anyone who dares suggest such a society might be possible and is worth working towards, and puts forward instead that there must be haves taking advantage of have nots for society to function and that no other way is possible.
historically humans aren’t usually burning down libraries on purpose.
How on earth have you come to this conclusion.
The corporations that took control of the Internet don’t want us to remember.
Hospitals should unionize and sue the the ever-loving shit out of insurance companies for lost time. Not like our neoliberal politicians are going to do anything about it.
The Sun, a spectral class G2V main-sequence star The inner Solar System and the terrestrial planets Mercury Mercury-crossing minor planets Venus Venus-crossing minor planets 524522 Zoozve, Venus' quasi-satellite Earth Moon Near-Earth asteroids (including 99942 Apophis) Earth trojan (2010 TK7) Earth-crosser asteroids Earth's quasi-satellites 433 Eros Mars Deimos Phobos Mars trojans Mars-crossing minor planets Asteroids in the asteroid belt, between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter Ceres, a dwarf planet Pallas Vesta Hygiea Asteroids number in the hundreds of thousands. For longer lists, see list of exceptional asteroids, list of asteroids, or list of Solar System objects by size. Asteroid moons A number of smaller groups distinct from the asteroid belt The outer Solar System with the giant planets, their satellites, trojan asteroids and some minor planets Jupiter Rings of Jupiter Complete list of Jupiter's natural satellites Galilean moons Io Europa Ganymede Callisto Jupiter trojans Jupiter-crossing minor planets Saturn Rings of Saturn Complete list of Saturn's natural satellites Mimas Enceladus Tethys (trojans: Telesto and Calypso) Dione (trojans: Helene and Polydeuces) Rhea Rings of Rhea Titan Hyperion Iapetus Phoebe Shepherd moons Saturn-crossing minor planets Uranus Rings of Uranus Complete list of Uranus's natural satellites Miranda Ariel Umbriel Titania Oberon Uranus trojan (2011 QF99) Uranus-crossing minor planets Neptune Rings of Neptune Complete list of Neptune's natural satellites Proteus Triton Nereid Neptune trojans Neptune-crossing minor planets Non-trojan minor planets Centaurs Damocloids Trans-Neptunian objects (beyond the orbit of Neptune) Kuiper-belt objects (KBOs) Plutinos Orcus, a dwarf planet Vanth Pluto, a dwarf planet Complete list of Pluto's natural satellites Charon Twotinos Cubewanos (classical objects) Haumea, a dwarf planet Namaka Hiʻiaka Quaoar, a dwarf planet Weywot Makemake, a dwarf planet (307261) 2002 MS4 120347 Salacia 20000 Varuna Scattered-disc objects Gonggong, a dwarf planet Xiangliu Eris, a dwarf planet Dysnomia (84522) 2002 TC302 (87269) 2000 OO67 V774104 Detached objects 2004 XR190 2012 VP113 (possibly inner Oort cloud) Sedna, a dwarf planet (possibly inner Oort cloud) Oort cloud (hypothetical) Hills cloud/inner Oort cloud Outer Oort cloud
If you’ve had bad experiences with anarchists before I’m sorry, but in my experience anarchists have been much kinder and more welcoming than marxist-leninists, especially in person. Characterizing anarchists as the angsty atheists of the political world is a bit hurtful, but I can see where you’re coming from. In the same way atheists sometimes lash out against religious folks, anarchists sometimes lash out against marxist-leninists because of bad experiences in the past. A lot of anarchists I know went through a similar political development where they started being curious about socialism and were met with pretty harsh responses to questions about the more authoritarian aspects of marxism-leninism.
Point taken, but although it may not have ended well for the anarchists I believe their involvement in the Russian revolution was for the better since it could easily have gone in a much worse direction without them. Anarchists are always putting themselves in harm’s way to make this world a better place.
I appreciate that you don’t, I even have you tagged as “a polite marxist” so I must have had a positive interaction with you before, but many MLs I’ve debated before have downplayed anarchist contributions to the Russian revolution. I can understand how you might not encounter that very often since you’re not putting yourself out there as an anarchist.
I’ll admit my perspective may be skewed because I spend a good amount of time debating marxist-leninists, but I really don’t like arguing semantics unless it’s important to the discussion at large. For that reason I’ll often avoid using words in a way that will start semantics arguments that derail the discussion.
It’s also why I typically avoid calling people I’m currently debating tankies, because I think that makes them defensive and is bad for outreach. Maybe I’m wasting my time trying to change people’s minds, but if that’s the case then people who argue aggressively are definitely wasting their time.
I’m an anarchist and I agree with what you’re trying to say, but marxist-leninists are going to jump all over you with semantics arguments because of your unorthodox use of the word socialist.
Edit: I should mention you would be welcome in slrpnk communities. We’re primarily anarchist and have hexbear blocked for the aforementioned brigading, but we are welcoming to everyone so long as they behave themselves.
It is certainly not without historical precedent. Anarchists were quite heavily involved with the Russian revolution for example, although many historical-revisionist marxist-leninists would prefer to downplay that.
a fair amount of American sociological and economic standards are already steeped in socialist services
If you believe this to be true then you don’t understand what socialism actually is. You seem to be of the mind that any publicly funded service or welfare is socialist, and I don’t blame you for thinking this since it is what the mainstream American political discourse would have you believe.
In short, nine times out of ten, a socialist has absolutely no fucking idea what they’re talking about, but just parroting smug bullshit that they think makes them look edgy and educated.
When you say this immediately after demonstrating that you actually have no idea what you’re talking about it’s a pretty bad look. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
deleted by creator