Juice

joined 3 years ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Mayonnaise on corncob

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Take your time! I appreciate your willingness

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Sorry I still don't get it. Cops embody the violent coercion that is needed to enforce contracts and laws. Laws determine how contracts are made and what penalties for breaking them. Contracts are a legal confabulation that serve several functions, probably most relevant is they are the mechanisms that makes property ownership possible, such as land. Landlords have the personal property "rights" as outlined in property law and defined by the contract. Cops enforce the laws and contracts with violence.

Cops can only be landlords if they own property and collect rents. Landlords don't have the ability to use violence to enforce their property rights, they have to call the cops. They both occupy this weird class middle zone that is neither bourgeoisie nor worker: collecting rents doesn't necessarily make one a capitalist, land isn't really strictly capital; cops aren't proletarian workers though at one time they may have been working class with nothing to sell but their labor. Both are crucial to underwriting liberal private property relations which is the basis for capitalist exploitation and the class rule that emanates from it. But landlords have a completely different relation to production than cops, so they don't occupy the same class position.

I'm not debating and I'll read or watch anything recommended to me. I'm also mostly interested in specific and correct formulations of class, I study a lot and have high standards. If this is one of those things that is more agitational than strictly correct, I can live with that but if there is a critical formulation that I'm missing, or if this is a paradigm that other leftists are using to help formulate their views then I would very much like to understand

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago (12 children)

What's the theory justification for "landlords are cops?" Fuck cops and fuck landlords but what is the connection?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I've worn mine to protests and Palestinian people like go out of their way to interact with me, waving, saying hello, etc.,

I bought mine probably in June and wore it to a socialist convention in August in solidarity with a pro-BDS group that was the center of a big struggle session in the org. Honestly at the time it seemed a little weird (I was joking "solidarity with BDS and yt pepo in Keffiyehs") but that was like 15000 deaths ago. When the enemies are out in the open its easier to tell who is on your side.

Also "cultural appropriation" is a form of erasure. Since you wear it to try and save the culture of the Palestinians, to protect it and defend it, you aren't appropriating. Like, technically. Appropriation is taking the cultural capital of another culture that can be monetized and commodifying it, while erasing other forms of social and cultural capital that can't be made into commodities. This severs the cultural symbol from its original (now eliminated) cultural and social context, leaving only the commodity. At least that's my formulation

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

I almost never watch YouTube, I primarily use Newpipe or Invidious (when possible, almost always rate-limited it seems) and YT basically only recommends me Hasan Piker videos

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago

work and pay taxes

I'm just another ape

Colonialism: "Why not both?"

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

Ferrets have conservative views but they if we don't reach across the aisle to work with them, they're just going to get more isolated and extreme. People who always conflate ferrets with minks aren't interested in real change

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago

God is just a joke that a small group created a website about in 1994 and people took it too seriously

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago

Dialectics is when I'm right and you're wrong, and I'm a real leftist and you're not

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

I think it depends? A couple of years ago national hired a contractor to do some kind of campaign analysis (this was before the new left wing configuration of the NPC and a big reason we were able to get a majority) who got paid like a disgusting amount of money, and members went nuts and put an end to it. If we vote that a position should be part time or full time or how much it will pay, that's what the position entails. Not to say there is no funny business, but it is transparent. Its a big org so we can afford to have full time staff.

There is a local org that is like a split from a split from an old LaRouchite group that has fulltime staff and they're kind of a scam. And having fulltime paid organizers is an asset, take it from someone who just had a stress breakdown from working full time + family+ organizing. You want people who spend their best mental hours building your org. Even in our caucus, we publish a real nice slick mag and hold discussion groups in a bunch of topics including contacting international comrades. If someone wasn't working full time on that stuff we wouldn't be able to do any of it.

I would not like that there is no transparency about where the funding is coming from, hopefully its above board. Its one of the things that makes democratically structured orgs appealing. I mean it might not be that shady, they could be getting money from like the SEIU or something and not want to say, although you'd think you'd want to advertise that. But even so its a bad look

view more: ‹ prev next ›