Tankies when American presidential elections: “Fuck that, I’m not voting for a lesser evil.”

Also tankies: “Yeah, Putin is reactionary, but he opposes US imperialism so we should support him.” Or, when they see a centrist: “Pick a side, coward!”

I reject that kind of black and white thinking. We don’t have to classify people as either “cool” or “uncool”, or “good” and “bad”. We can criticize one thing someone does, while also praising something else that they do.

I’d say you believe in market intervention for necessities, or more specifically you believe in collectivization of necessities.

My favourite genre would be coop, so games like It takes two, L4D, DRG, Operation Tango, We were Here, Lovers in a dangerous spacetime, unravel 2, overcooked…

Kinda reminds me of how many people here seem to believe that anti-Putin means pro-US.

Also Mao: launches the Anti-Rightist Campaign

One issue I have with hexbear is that you can’t argue with its users on hexbear itself. Most comments from outsiders are deleted within a day, and most of the users aren’t interested in discussions and simply resort to name calling and personal attacks. The more “sophisticated” ones will tell you to “read theory”. The amount of hexbear users actually capable of producing arguments seems to be very low, at least from my experience.

These issues exist on other instances as well of course, but on hexbear its particularly bad. The only other instances this toxic I have interacted with were lemmygrad and exploding-heads.

No, I just have very different ideas what progress is.

Progress in my eyes is made when a society becomes more democratic, and when we solve conflicts without bloodshed.

In that sense, sure, the GDR was a step in the right direction, but nazi germany didn’t exactly set the bar very high.

The idea of socialism is nice, but you hardly have any progress if the system (be it built on free markets or planned economies) doesn’t work to improve ordinary citizens’ lives, but only to keep the powerful in power.

Personaly, I don’t care much about free markets or planned economies. I think the best approach, as so often, is a kind of blend, a social market economy that allows independent companies in a framework that protects workers, consumers and the environment.

Thing is, the specifics of the economic system aren’t important. What matters is that the people are the ones who decide them.

There is nothing wrong with pursuing a utopian society, but ultimatly you have no control over what happens in the far future (neither should you, future societies need to be ruled by future people).

The only thing you can control is the present and the near future, so what really matters aren’t the ends you strive for, but the means you employ while doing so.

Ah yes, my grandparents, the landlords. Wait hol’ up, they were working people, not landlords. GDR fucked them regardless.

“bUt tHAT wASn’T rEaL ComMunIsM” If neither the USSR nor China could achieve true Communism, then maybe it isn’t so much a realistic goal as a utopian ideal, a convenient justification for all kinds of crimes against humanity that occur in its pursuit.

If there was a way, there’d be huge corporations offering it as a service.

I think I can kinda understand where your friend is coming from. I don’t know how long y’all haven’t talked, but if a friend I haven’t seen in a decade suddenly decided to become part of my life as soon as I had a child, I’d think that’s mighty sus.

This isn’t about gender, my point would still stand if transgender people didn’t exist and he/him and she/her were all the pronouns we had. It is about identity, which parts of it we focus on, and how much information we subliminally reveal or require each time we talk about someone.

Gender is just a small part of identity, yet it is arbitrarily the one thing dominating and determining pronouns in the english language (and many others of course).

But I don’t feel like arguing any further, maybe you don’t understand, or maybe you just don’t even read what I’m saying.

But here’s an idea: How about you come up with some arguments instead of lazily referring to some perceived authority?

They/them is absolutely gender neutral, as it can be used for any person, regardless of their gender. See? I did it in this sentence.

Take my example from before: “A person is walking down the street. I approach them, asking for their pronouns. They smile and tell me that’s none of my business.” This works, regardless of the person’s gender identity.

Now use different pronouns: “A person is walking down the street. I approach him, asking for his pronouns. He smiles and tells me that’s none of my business.” This one only works if the person uses the pronouns he/him. (Btw, shouldn’t pronouns be sets of 3 like “they/them/their”, “he/him/his” or “she/her/her”?)

Gender neutral language isn’t about not recognizing peoples’ genders, its about omitting irrelevant information. Having gender specific pronouns draws attention to the genders of the people referred to, even if the point of the sentence is not about gender. At some point during the development of the English language, the consensus emerged that it is important to always know/mention the gender identity of everyone involved.

This is an arbitrary selection of a subset of a person’s identity however. For example, we don’t have pronouns indicating whether people are parents or not, or indicating their marital status.

Actually, we did have the latter with “Miss” and “Mrs”, until we decided that this distinction isn’t very inclusive, introducing the neutral “Ms”, equivalent to the “Mr”.

Point is, you could make up all sorts of pronouns including every aspect of a person’s identity. I’m saying that is neat and all, but if I just want to construct a sentence about a person going to the store, I might not know or want to include any part of their identity, be it their gender, marital status or age.

deleted by creator

Yeah, time for them to join NATO as well! 😄

Gender neutral language simply doesn’t have gender specific pronouns. It treats everyone the same, regardless of their gender identity. I don’t see how that could be considered transphobic.

If anything it is cisphobic, as the default “they/them” (as in the example above) is used primarily by trans people, while the typically cis pronouns “he/him” and “she/her” are not used.

Removed by mod

deleted by creator

Removed by mod

Removed by mod