Went to a birthday / Hanukkah party today. Happy Hanukkah to our Jewish comrades.

https://preview.redd.it/7bpq85o8ea7g1.jpeg?width=1884&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c49350567eb6730dcd1c410cb936526594c63b7f

Alt-Right Update:

Spencer and Fuentes, both widely regarded as both being feds who appeared out of nowhere and then the media just decided they were the leaders of ... something, are talking about how the problem is that Israel isn't actually a vassal of the United States and that if it acted that way then it would be B A S E D

https://x.com/FuentesUpdates/status/1999326540853817775

The average person involved in these things just wants to deport all non-whites, they aren't interested in these 1000 IQ justifications world imperial hegemonies these people keep promoting.

Because guess what? The original America First committee was an isolationist movement. "The left" broadly was against entry into WW1, but for some reason this new fangled thing called "fascism" was causing people to become warmongers thinking that for some reason the arguments made against WW1 suddenly didn't apply. This left the anti-war movement ... isolated, and they were essentially just isolationists who were left. Again the fascists benefit when leftists are retarded and drop things which the fascists gladly pick up.

Say what you will about isolationism being bad, but objectively for the entire rest of the world because of how destructive the USA is globally, an isolationist USA, even if it is hell for the people that live in it, would be better for the planet simply because the world would finally be free from its imperialist torment. "Harm reduction" in the context of "fighting isolationist fascism" in the USA is putting minorities in the imperial core as being more important than the global majority of people that live outside the imperial core. "Isolationist Fascism" like that of Charles Lindbergh in the USA and Oswald Mosley in Britain is a tendency which is an improvement over interventionist liberalism.

Fuentes' America First is "American Empire First" and he is insistent that America is an Empire of some kind of that is good. This is actually the worst of both worlds, because he supports "the empire" while also wanting to be racist domestically. There is a reason that the Prestige Press keeps writing "glowing" reviews of the Mexican fa**oty Ann. They no longer care if someone is "racist" or not, they only care if someone supports imperialism. Fuentes even says the "Demographics are baked in" so he apparently doesn't even want to deport people anymore? I guess he just wants the empire to be more racist even if the demographics of that empire are

This can be reconciled when you understand that Fuentes is a Mexican White Supremacist. His father was a Castizo and his Mother an Anglo. Castizo + Criollo = Criollo, so by Mexican White Supremacy rules, Fuentes got upgraded to a Criollo, which in his view should make him the leader of the mixed races masses, but by American White Supremacy rules non-white + white = non-white, so he doesn't get upgraded. Fuentes is really only "white" if there are non-whites to rule over, so his whiteness is contingent on being imperialist. By contrast the whiteness of others is contigent on not mixing with non-whites, so American White Supremacy has an isolationist tendency. It is still "imperialist" in the settler colonial sense, but it won't engage in global imperialism as instead it focuses on low population density places like the American Frontier.

Additionally, this isn't based on anything, but I just don't like Fuentes, he gives me the same feeling that everyone who is a Zio-shill does. He just "feels" like a Zionist, you know. Maybe it is just a gaydar, who knows?

The Alt-Right wanted to break up the United States and create a white ethnostate, say what you will but beyond the landback people, no group of IDPOLers has ever gotten to the point of just outright saying the USA entity should cease to exist. Spencer has actually regressed in that he hasn't really advocated for breaking up the United States to make a white ethnostate in awhile, instead he basically transformed into a Ukraine Lib who thinks the USA entity needs to exist in order to support Ukraine against Russia, even being a White Dude For Harris alongside Dick Cheney to make it happen.

It is clear that these people are only promoted because they are there precisely to make these 1000 IQ plays to keep the imperialist system running by any means necessary, and thus they need to somehow get an isolationist movement like America First to be some kind of "rawr lets conquer the world" statement.

I seriously cannot take Reddit anymore. If this is representative of society in North America, we are in big trouble. At this point, you cannot make even the most innocent post on any subreddit without being criticized, interrogated, or argued with. Almost all of the negativity comes from people that are confidently incorrect, and even if you are an expert in your field, there will always be someone to argue that you are wrong and still get more upvotes than you. I suspect the inherent anonymity of reddit empowers the most selfish traits in people. I don't know. But this whole experiment is absolutely caustic to society.

I had the opportunity to briefly meet Aaron Swartz before he passed away/the JSTOR leaks, and I'm confident he would be seriously disappointed at how this place has evolved from fun and niche little constructive communities into a massive thunderdome of sociopaths. And if that's just reflective of the society we live in, well fuck, I'm glad that I'm leaving America.

I'll be logging off after this weekend. I appreciate the relief this sub has given me.

Look line the Consiparcy theories are right again.

new Stanford Medicine study shows why mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines can cause myocarditis.

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2025/12/myocarditis-vaccine-covid.html

Turns out FIFA has raised prices for tickets to the World Cup final fivefold compared to four years ago. Final tickets start at $4,185, with most above $7,000. Group game matches are gonna be in excess of $250. Like how much gouging can people possibly put up with for the benefit of this overclass of dumbfuck freaks, really

How do you guys rate Robert Caro? I've started reading *Richard Nixon: A Life* by John A. Farrell and its giving me a real taste for books that explore power politics and US presidents. Caro's reputation is seemingly second to none. I'm a little wary because those books look fucking huge and people think he's not going to be able to finish the series on LBJ. Is he as good as people say?

Some french videogame won some kind of award yesterday and there are so much tears on my twitter because the dev are white french that I'm at risk of hyponatremia

About the new rule. Am i allowed to misuse my brain?

https://x.com/gothburz/status/1999124665801880032

Last quarter I rolled out Microsoft Copilot to 4,000 employees.

$30 per seat per month.

$1.4 million annually.

I called it "digital transformation."

The board loved that phrase.

They approved it in eleven minutes.

No one asked what it would actually do.

Including me.

I told everyone it would "10x productivity."

That's not a real number.

But it sounds like one.

HR asked how we'd measure the 10x.

I said we'd "leverage analytics dashboards."

They stopped asking.

Three months later I checked the usage reports.

47 people had opened it.

12 had used it more than once.

One of them was me.

I used it to summarize an email I could have read in 30 seconds.

It took 45 seconds.

Plus the time it took to fix the hallucinations.

But I called it a "pilot success."

Success means the pilot didn't visibly fail.

The CFO asked about ROI.

I showed him a graph.

The graph went up and to the right.

It measured "AI enablement."

I made that metric up.

He nodded approvingly.

We're "AI-enabled" now.

I don't know what that means.

But it's in our investor deck.

A senior developer asked why we didn't use Claude or ChatGPT.

I said we needed "enterprise-grade security."

He asked what that meant.

I said "compliance."

He asked which compliance.

I said "all of them."

He looked skeptical.

I scheduled him for a "career development conversation."

He stopped asking questions.

Microsoft sent a case study team.

They wanted to feature us as a success story.

I told them we "saved 40,000 hours."

I calculated that number by multiplying employees by a number I made up.

They didn't verify it.

They never do.

Now we're on Microsoft's website.

"Global enterprise achieves 40,000 hours of productivity gains with Copilot."

The CEO shared it on LinkedIn.

He got 3,000 likes.

He's never used Copilot.

None of the executives have.

We have an exemption.

"Strategic focus requires minimal digital distraction."

I wrote that policy.

The licenses renew next month.

I'm requesting an expansion.

5,000 more seats.

We haven't used the first 4,000.

But this time we'll "drive adoption."

Adoption means mandatory training.

Training means a 45-minute webinar no one watches.

But completion will be tracked.

Completion is a metric.

Metrics go in dashboards.

Dashboards go in board presentations.

Board presentations get me promoted.

I'll be SVP by Q3.

I still don't know what Copilot does.

But I know what it's for.

It's for showing we're "investing in AI."

Investment means spending.

Spending means commitment.

Commitment means we're serious about the future.

The future is whatever I say it is.

As long as the graph goes up and to the right.

A parody, ofc, but not far from reality.

Blue collar youtube does wonders for algorithm hygiene and mental health. One week of clicking on every POV video of someone driving a semi truck, loading trailers full of gravel or working on the flightline of a major airport has completely purged all traces of gaming and politics. Makes me want to clip a gopro onto my hat and do one of those videos.

The full video was already posted but goddamn do the most annoying leftist on this site really need to listen to this 5min section https://youtu.be/FE4ExWWKz6s?si=fRFbt4vfNzg34IHL&t=4732

Iceland pulled out of eurovision 2026 yesterday, Poland reportedly got close but stayed, likely to not risk offending Americans.

From today anyone pulling out will face huge fines, so it's likely there won't be more.

With Armenia and Bulgaria joining this means they're down 3 contestants.

There is a possibility Portugal will pull out as all but 4 of their contestant candidates have promised to not go if they win, meaning its possible if none of the 4 make it past the Initial round Portugal might have no one to send, but they could always send the best of those 4 regardless.

In one of the Montreal housing groups on FB, a poor young lady posted that she was direly in need of a 1BR apartment for $1,000/month and it was clear from her profile that she was just an innocent college kid. A few shitbags laugh-reacted her post. The comments (from tenants, no less) were largely defending the landlords, saying that if you want to have the "luxury" of living in a civilized Canadian city, you must be prepared to pay up.

I'm really looking forward to leaving this place.

We passed 100k members

I feel embarrassed to ask this late but what does PMC mean? I see it thrown around here all the time but don’t get it

Some random thought on the failures of the western world order:
The common motivation to tech-bro characters like Musk and Thiel (who happened to work together for a while) as well as that of their lackeys is a soul crushing alienation with their societies that drove them to fanatically pursue it's radical destruction.
Their ideological veneer may differ slightly in that for example Musk wants to remake it into liking him while Thiel justifies his social pyromany with antichrist fluff but the core objective is the same.

I guess this is nothing new and it sounds a bit corney but hopefully it doesn't make it less true.

To all you yuros/other people of foreignness:

What's with calling math "maths"? Why is that Bri'ish people can do well in maffs instead of doing well in maff? Where is this plural coming from?

The fact that Gemini3pro can correctly translate 95% of Chinese political coded slang into English is actually quite concerning.

LLMs will undoubtedly be used for censorship; currently, the only limiting factor is cost, but to what extent will that cost decrease?

If the cost becomes low enough, coded slang used to circumvent censorship will be eliminated. Either nobody will understand what you're saying, or someone will understand and explain it when newcomers ask, and this explanation will be captured by LLMs for decryption and translation.

Moreover, even with the continuous invention of new encoding methods, LLMs don't need to read the text; they only need to understand the intentions of the user (or the interacting users). At that time, the only thing that could limit its use would be the high rate of false positives.

I’ve come to realize that 80% of the racist and sexist meme accounts I follow, and only thought were taking the piss, actually are racist and sexist. Not sure what it says about me but it’s a bit eerie.

The alt right seem to have no problem with hiding beneath 50 layers of irony and self deprecation.

I’m tired of winter and having to avoid ice patches everywhere I walk. Contemplating giving up and just start falling every fifth step.

I'm really trying to get into Alien:Earth... But.... it's just not that good. There's so much good about it, but it doesn't synthesize into something to care about.

Been binging the Blowback pod, just finished Season 3 on North Korea. I wish they talked a bit more about Juche and they could have covered the August faction incident, or the Kapson faction incident.

I think the Kim dynasty definitely deserves criticism, and the they never really touch on it at all.

The sub hit 100,000 subscribers so I am formally requesting a purge.

Something I'm coming around on is the concept of "landback". BC is having a moment where the lack of treaties means that landownership for property owners is in question. For years people were all about the land acknowledgements but now they are all like "why did nobody tell us that this would happen?"

I maintain that what is likely going to happen is that some kind of taxing entity is going to be established that redirects funds to the first nation with a claim, but it is still funny watching people panicking over it.

I just watched the film Angel's Egg  (1985) in 4K restoration, highly rec to any 80's hand-drawn japanese gothic apocalypse as extended allegory of how humans fill the void between faith and reason cels

In another episode of capitalist fagocitation:

Netflix wants to get Warner Bros Discovery, film actors guild complain (actually, just the WG.)

My antipathy towards israel Vs my love of techno and trance

Anyone using qute browser?

I'm loving it so far, I didn't realize how much less enjoyable my mouse was making shitposting.

Cultural differences: In China, there isn't the same perception as in the West that not wearing makeup is unprofessional for women.

I was only reminded to wear makeup when preparing for interviews for a public institution position, because it shows how much effort you've put into it, like just being deferential respect to the interviewers.

Conversely, if you're interviewing for an engineering position, looking too polished, regardless of gender, will likely raise more questions. A male doctor with smooth skin and no baldness is just as likely to be distrusted as a female doctor with perfectly styled curly hair.

At other times, such as in a typical male-dominated STEM field, neither female students nor teachers usually wear makeup on a daily basis. If a female student/engineer is noticeably wearing makeup, people will usually assume she's going on a date today.

If you tell a woman in this environment, "What's up? Why aren't you wearing makeup? As a woman, you should be doing that," you would receive almost no support.

A female wearing glasses and with an oily face is more likely to be assumed to be proficient in her field than a male with a side parting and a clean face. Because it will be assumed that if you spend time on your appearance, your focus is not entirely on studying.

[removed]

Ruth Wisse tells Tikvah's Jewish Leadership Conference that devious Palestinians exploited kindly Israelis by provoking a war that forced them to genocide women and children.

"No antagonist ever booby-trapped its civilians and provoked a war that forced Jews to kill Arab women and children that would then prove the preposterous inversions that 'Zionism is racism' and that 'Israel commits genocide,' and so on."

https://xcancel.com/infolibnews/status/1996776079432843747#

What the hell kind of conclusion are we supposed to draw from this?

There's a massive nationwide protest of farmers in Greece right now. They have mobilized an army of tractors to block the land border crossings, basically halting trade and threatening major disruptions to the country's supply chain. In short, Greek newspapers revealed that tens of millions of Euros of farm subsidies have been stolen by the ruling government and given to preferential entities, implied to be used as campaign funds, but officially declared as simply fraudulent recipients. So Greek farmers are rightfully furious, and will absolutely rain hell on the country until this issue is rectified.

Meanwhile, I'm stuck in Québec, where the local government has effectively removed all restrictions on rent increases by allowing landlords to charge tenants for renovations. Myself and all of my friends are being hit with 10-15% annual rent increases. The response from the public has been an underwhelming yawn. Anywhere in Europe, the parliament building would be burned to the ground for such an attack on the working class.

Seen in Pittsburgh

https://preview.redd.it/to7figvmeb5g1.jpeg?width=3264&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f71c47fbeb6aa752a662cbb9ecb93a49ae0c4fa1

https://preview.redd.it/hrusxgopza5g1.png?width=1919&format=png&auto=webp&s=484f0e8cec1f2736198a582d6bdf8ded9b0796cd

Found a Jojo meme in the wild.

So Brevard county busted some kid manufacturing 7ohm from Kratom (legal in FL) which was actually legal up until a few months ago and they're acting like they're heroes who made the biggest drug bust ever. They actually compared this kid to Breaking Bad on steroids. Fucking retarded ass state.

There's been a seemingly endless number of conferences held by zionist organizations with speakers including the likes of Hilary Clinton, Bari Wiess, Ben Shapiro, etc just blatantly gaslighting the public or just having insane admissions and I'm wondering if they've lost their touch with propaganda or they just don't care.

(Zionist billionaire Ron Lauder, head of the World Jewish Congress, says Sheldon Adelson "was the greatest influence the Jewish people had in the White House, not only in Trump's time, but in Biden's time—and all the other times." He was "a one-man State Department for Israel.")

https://xcancel.com/infolibnews/status/1995977844372242849

Part 1 / 2

This was originally in response to someone posting about how Rosa Parks was a Zionist who asserted that "Zionism is not racism" and how one shouldn't idolize anyone, but the person said "except John Brown" so because I wanted to be a "well actually" nerd I posted about how because Kansas was technically declared a white ethnostate during Bleeding Kansas, John Brown could be described as the white ethnostate's strongest soldier, although that probably wasn't how he himself saw it as he was known for launching raids into Missouri and calling people cowards for only fighting slavers when they cross the border so it is a bit of misnomer to say he was defending the white ethnostate from slavers explicitly, but it is just one of those things which can be technically true if you squint.

More context demonstrates that Kansas being declared a white ethnostate is largely a product of the concept of "popular sovereignty" being taken to its logical extreme where people were basically just voting on literally everything and people really liked voting "yes" to things such that I think that technically Kansas was both a white ethnostate and had black suffrage at the same time at one point, and that it stopped being a white ethnostate because literally one guy made a speech and everyone changed their minds and agreed to let black people into the ethnostate, but at that point in time there also wasn't any black suffrage anymore.

Kansas had Four Constitutions.

The first one was declared in Lecompton, which is near the border with the slave state of Missouri. This was a constitution declaring Kansas to be a slave state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lecompton_Constitution

In response to this Free Soil settlers in Topeka got together and created their own constitution which banned black people from entering the state.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topeka_Constitution

Following the model of Oregon, citizens of the 2nd Territorial District petitioned the 1855 Free State convention to incorporate a "black exclusion" clause in the Topeka Constitution. This would have prevented not only the enslaved, but also free African Americans from residing in the state. It was rejected by convention president James H. Lane and others, who allowed the issue to be voted on separately in the January 1856 referendum; the results favored exclusion.

Yet the constitutional convention called by the radical free state element, meeting at Topeka in September, 1855, was in favor of excluding free Negroes from the new state. ... The free state party was anxious to clear itself of "the stale and ridiculous charge of Abolitionism." The Negro exclusion policy of the Topeka meeting was upheld, in a large majority, by the free state voters. "Three-fourths of the Free State settlers were in favor of a free white State," says Villard, "and the heaviest voting against the free Negro was" in Lawrence and Topeka.

The practical difference between declaring yourself to be a white ethnostate and "the ridiculous charge of abolitionism" is to take the position that one is not trying to abolish anyone's property, they are just saying they can't bring their property over here.

At the same time, it is notable that drawing the equivalence between free black people and black slaves is affirming the personhood of those slaves. Black slaves cannot be brought into the white ethnostate because they are black people, and people who are black are banned from entering. This inadvertently throws a wrench in the entire logic of slavery as the slaver will insist that there are no black persons entering as he is merely bringing his property into the state, but the free soil white ethnostaters are like "no fuck you, you can't bring black people here". Since black people are banned as people they can't be brought in as property.

why this situation came about is due to the implicitly assumption of "Popular Sovereignty", which states that the residents of the territory should be able to decide if slavery is legal or not UPON ADMISSION INTO THE UNION. However in the default state before the question of slavery is decided upon is just assumed that people can bring over as many slaves as they want. This implies that slavery is the default state of being as the land is effectively a slave state until some decision is reached. Declaring a white ethnostate by not actually banning slavery but just banning the people who would be slaves from the territory asserts that the default is actually to be a free state as slavery is only introduced when black people get introduced, as without black people there are no slaves. The default is to be a free state.

The reason this is relevant is related to the tenth amendment where any powers not explicitly reserved for the federal government are reserved to the States, or to the people. In this context a Federal Territory is a product of the Federal Government so the powers of the territory are limited by the limits placed on the Federal government. Popular Sovereignty asserts that "powers reserved to the people" outside the Federal government can still apply, which is how you get "the people" using these powers to create territorial governments that ban black people or allow slavery or granting universal male suffrage including black people etc. Popular sovereignty could basically do anything, but that it implicitly accepted that slaves could be brought into a place before slavery was officially legalized there it implied that slavery was within the "natural rights" that existed before government was put in place, and thus in order to combat slavery before official entry as a Free State you basically just needed to keep black people out entirely as a "right reserved for the people" was the ability to deny entry to whoever you wanted. The notion that the free/slave decision would only be made upon entry into the union and that before that both slaves would technically be allowed essentially just meant that unless you could rush in enough people to qualify for Statehood before a bunch of slaves were brought in, a new state was doomed to being a Slave State. This also implied that one needed the federal government to grant Statehood before slavery could be banned, but as evidenced but all the random nonsense the people of Kansas voted upon, apparently you could do literally anything you wanted before Statehood, so it is a bit strange that slavery and slavery alone was this default thing which could only be officially banned in a state upon being granted Statehood.

This was the Third "Leavenworth" Constitution of the four proposed in 1856. When you consider that under the Topeka Constitution that everyone had voted to exclude black people from the state in a referendum you can only come to the conclusion that the same people who had voted to exclude black people from the state had also voted for a Constitution that gave black men the right to vote. The fourth "Wyandotte" Constitution was the one that was approved by Congress, this one banned slavery and let black people into the state but did not give them the right to vote, so it reversed both black suffrage and white ethnostatism which had previously been voted upon via "popular sovereignty" and the only thing it kept from the two prior Free State constitutions was banning slavery. While the Topeka Constitution did not ban black people from the state in the Constitution itself but instead did so through referendum one can only conclude that a Constitution granting black men the right to vote did not actually reverse the prior referendum, so Kansas was a white ethnostate with black suffrage until the adoption of the fourth Constitution which reversed both. Interestingly the fourth Constitution has wanted to keep the white ethnostatism in it until literally just some guy made a speech advocating that black people should be let into the white ethnostate and then apparently people were all like "okay sure" and enough delegates changed their votes.

The constitution settled the terms of Kansas' admission to the United States, particularly establishing that it would be a free state rather than a slave state. The constitution represented a pragmatic compromise over hotly contested issues: it rejected slavery and affirmed separate property rights for married women and their right to participate in school elections, but also denied universal suffrage for women, blacks, and Indians.

Solon O. Thacher of Lawrence gave a rousing speech opposing the exclusion of African-Americans from Kansas. The motion to exclude African-Americans was subsequently defeated, despite the fact that previously, "all the Democrats and a few of the Republicans favored the exclusion."

Another issue delegates considered was that of women's rights. Clarina Nichols, social activist and associated editor of Quindaro Chindowan, an abolitionist newspaper, was asked to address the convention. As a result of her efforts, women gained the rights to own property and to participate in school district elections. In addition, the constitution assured that the state would provide for women's equal rights "in the possession of their children."

What we can conclude from this is that people were taking the concept of "popular sovereignty" seriously and they were literally just doing whatever the fuck they wanted and changing their minds on the fly. So these means that if someone in Topeka suggested "hey we should ban black people from the state" people were like "sure!" and then if someone in Leavenworth was like "hey we should give black people the right to vote" people were also like "sure!" and then if someone in Wyandotte was like "we should give women and black people property rights but not the right to vote" people were like "sure!"

(continued)

Parents, what apps do you use for young children (aged 3-6ish) that aren't complete fucking dogshit? Educational ones or ones that aren't overstimulating slop (like YouTube Kids).

Are people who discuss politics on online political forums in every country overrepresented by comp sci/soft eng people? Like programmers being online?

Rightoids and AI Image generators are a match made in hell with how much they love using the eye melting mush. Tbh all politicians now that I think about it.

Got any good websites to read marxism/coummnist literature, I mostly prefer first handcount if possible

https://preview.redd.it/mgp2yhu1pp4g1.png?width=649&format=png&auto=webp&s=314e049f8bc329f116e411ed82cc688168f43449

Sigh time to unzip my wallet for yet another gacha.

I've been thinking about Nigeria and how to distract from Israel Trump's administration is trying to point out that some genocide of christians is going on. This is untrue, while there are jihadists they aren't exactly genociding christians so much as trying to enforce sharia law. The killing of Christians is actually a product of the farmer-herder conflicts where the Fulani will kill those who mess with their livestock. The killings are therefore more ethnic in character than religious, but this has more to do with the herders tending to be a different ethnicity than the farmers. You find such conflicts replicating between bedouin and settled arabs even if both are arab.

Anyway if one is aware of what is going on in Nigeria such that you know that what is happening you come to the conclusion that Nigeria is quite a dysfunctional state. There are lie a million different conflicts going on an if you lump them all together you can come to the conclusion that some kind of genocide of Christians is going on even though not really. The Biafra War was a kind of genocide by starvation and there was a killing of Igbo merchants in the North as part of a Northernization campaign of commercial assets where the Northerners cut deals with the British where the British could retain partial control in exchange for Northern Nigerians owning shares, this was in lieu of full Africanization or Nationalization which would have taken the businesses away from City of London financiers. The Igbo were Christian and the North was Muslim but this genocide was ethnic rather than religious in nature.

The ironic part about all of this is that the Igbo were the most westernized population in Africa as they are the coastal people of the Delta and therefore outward looking and readily sent their children to receive Western educations which is why many of them dominated in business, the opposing end of this is Boko Haram in the which means Western education is forbidden, so in Nigeria you see the largest discrepancy with both poles being present. The Igbo were able to leverage their knowledge of the West to drive much sympathy for their cause so the public was on the side of the Igbo even as the British themselves supported the Northerners. This is similar to the phenomena where the West chooses to align itself with the Saudis who literally hate Western people and Western ideas while making enemies out of Iran where the Ayatollah cites deToqueville's Democracy in America assuming most Americans must have read it and you had Assad who was literally an Eye Doctor in London. The ruling class prefers working with people who hate westerners and everything they stand for, probably because the people who study the west largely assert they should be independent of it on an equal basis, whereas those who hate the west seem to have no problem taking western money and being subordinate to it. The sooner western imperialism falls the sooner the west will stop propping up these western hating regimes. Fucking Saudis man, hope Yemen or Iran overrun them some day.

Anyway, back to Nigeria and it being an utterly dysfunctional state. Some blame colonialism for this but Ethiopia is often in a similar situation (though ethiopia can be said to have done their own colonialism resulting in them having the mixture of ethinicities and religions that provide the strengthening diversity liberal anti-colonialists say are the reason African countries are unstable), but regardless the thing that is most notable is just have successful Nigeria is DESPITE it being a totally failed state. Nigerians dominate the business world of Africa to such a degree that every other African country hates them. The bourgeoisie is clearly thriving even if the country is not. What this means is that "having a stable country" doesn't actually need to be a priority in the capitalist system, your country can be completely falling apart with a civil war every other week and the bourgeoisie can be doing just fine.

If anyone wants to see the new (old?) narratives being churned up regarding the Ukraine war and as a consequence western brain-rot go check mapporn. They're posting maps about the Winter War and Continuation War. The comments look exactly like you think they do.

Bill Clinton doesn’t get enough shit for signing the Sonny Bono Act.

I'm seriously done with reddit. I posted in a data subreddit. It's a map visualizing the countries that do and do not extradite their own citizens. ie, if the nationality of the requested person precludes them from being extradited to another country. It's a simple map based on a study conducted by the Law Library of Congress.

There's a barrage of Canadians that have come out of the woodwork to call me all kinds of names because they disagree with a basic fact. Canada extradites its own citizens. That's it. That's what the map says. And tons of Canadians are going ape shit over it and asking me to fraudulently modify the data to change how Canada appears on the map. It's absurd.

I swear reddit was the worse thing to be invented, ever.

From the 15th century onwards, Western Europe gradually ceased to be patrilocality, but are still patrilineality. Inheritance rights still prioritize male lineage, and this inequality in property ownership led to the continued patriarchy in Europe. Neolocal residence(nuclear family) already existed in pre-industrial England and other regions.

Patriarchy resulting from both patrilocal residence and patrilineal inheritance represents a specific form of patriarchy. Within such systems, the phenomenon of the “uterine family” may emerge: women, deprived of formal authority, may attempt to exert influence over their sons in order to access status and resources within the household.

In these contexts, men often maintain particularly close relationships with their mothers, who may exercise authority on their sons’ behalf to manage the behavior of daughters-in-law.

Marriages are frequently arranged, with individuals having limited input in the selection of their spouse. Parental considerations typically prioritize the son’s ability to produce heirs and continue the family line, rather than factors such as physical attraction or emotional compatibility between the couple—after all, they are not the ones who will share a bed with her.

Mothers, in particular, may prefer to arrange marriages with spouses to whom their sons are not initially attracted, thereby preventing the emergence of rival female influences within the household. Daughters-in-law are often selected based on obedience, facilitating maternal oversight.

Women's limited self-interested choices within a patriarchal system reinforce the patriarchal system itself.

Prospective brides are frequently aware that, in their married lives, their mothers-in-law will share a more significant role than their husbands. In some societies, parents describe the marital process not as “finding a husband” for their daughters, but rather as “finding a mother-in-law.” Sexual relations between husband and wife may be treated primarily as a duty, with limited emphasis on intimacy.

Within the West, Italian men carry a stronger stereotype of being mother-bound, which reflects Southern Europe’s later departure from the patrilocal residence legacy compared to Western Europe.

[Disclaimer: This introduces the general dynamics of the paternal residence and paternal inheritance system, with specific case studies drawn primarily from East Asia rather than Europe or Italy. Europe is a reference, not the main subject. This is not an accurate description of European family history.]

Uh oh, looks like we hit the infamous 100k subreddit members mark finally. So when do we get our assigned turbojannie to clamp down on all our wrongthink?

Happy Thanksgiving to all--even the haters and losers!

https://x.com/realDonaldTrump/status/405778664039534592?t=TCwNbzYGwhgrtuVmn1LVdQ&s=19

Anyone got a scoop on arr Conspiracy? I'm seeing more and more anti-Zionist and class conscious posts there urging people to look beyond the two-party pantomime but knowing this is the astroturfed Fed-infested shithole known as Reddit, I find it suspect such a sizeable sub allows those posts without getting censored or shut down by admins.

So my question is: are they legit or stacked to the brim with Glown*ggers?

Another day, another train ride filled with people staring into their phones with headphones/plugs on and for the brief moments their gaze drifts away from the phone a look of disgust on their faces.

As we were nearing our station, a teenager was talking loudly with his mate and repeatedly striking the window with his fist complaining he couldn't feel anything from the shit drugs he took and that his head was spinning, no one paid him any attention and his friend could have been mute.

In the villages, people look suspiciously if not with palpable terror at anything that doesnt walk with a polo and jeans.

Children are growing in these environments, I wonder how it will turn out for the gardenoids 10 to 15 years from now...

Tl:dr I'm asking for political writing advice. 

I find it frustrating how much ink is spilled with no true completeness or practicality to it. But because I can't do shit for irl politics (tried for years, don't have the ability to organize and can't find organizers worth working for) then writing might be the only way I can maybe contribute anything. So the question is write what and how? What won't be pretentious pseudointellectual masturbation? What would be actually useful and if not completely novel then at least a novel distillation of older works? How do I approach goals and research and verification of facts, quality, novelty and utility? 

I'm thinking some type of total program defining and justifying the goal society and path to it all the way down to nuts and bolts. Not aspirational, but instead technical. As in no prose, no analogies, metaphors nor stories. Defining all terms until ambiguity and gaps are all gone. No "we'll figure it out after the revolution" or hand gesturing or waving at solutions or problems. No appeal to emotion or authority. Work things from first principles, clear evidence, detailed general models that can be applied to specific situations as needed. If something is truly unknowable/incomplete then that gap should be defined and explained and nothing should build over it. As in if the goal is A and there is a lower step C but the middle step B is unknown/incomplete, then that lower step C should not be included because it is unknown if it even connects to goal A. Practical information should be provably effective and feasible and as manual like as possible. No appeal to tradition or "in theory this should work" while it clearly doesn't irl (such as traditional labor organizing works in theory but not in practice). The only subjectivity/opinions should be in what goals/principles are chosen (such as economic equality). No hopefully or guesses. 

I need to read what has been written on these subjects and identify where those works have gaps, find works that fit those gaps, and then figure out how to fill whatever gaps don't have clear works that fill them. In short synthesizing what exists to have a single rather than multiple works and figure out what gaps actually remain in what others have written. 

Before that I need an outline of what I'm even trying to write. 

My question then is what do you think should be in this work? What questions need to be answered regarding how individual and social life should be and how to get there? What questions to answer to avoid being critiqued as utopian/idealist both in political goals and means? Questions can range from what should education be like to how do you ensure compliance to how do you recruit someone to how do you deal with enemy coercion. 

What books or other works are there that have tried this before? What do they never answer? What should I do to avoid failures of those past attempts? I'll probably get someone saying "read Capital", to which I ask what does Capital not answer and is there a modern successor to it given it's been 158 years. 

I don't expect to actually succeed, but rather hope to figure out enough of a skeleton that is valuable enough on its own for others to continue fleshing out. 

When the main goal is "something politically useful" there is a serious problem of defining scope. So how would you approach limiting scope?

Do you buy that 2016 Trump was to the left of Hillary as the political compass website argued at the time?

I wonder if there's an overrepresentation among youtubers/content creators of turning trans. I'm surprised because one guy who was married and had been a youtuber for years (and is Texan which makes it stranger) went publicly trans after supposedly 2 years of hormones. Maybe it's because content creators are far more online so that increases chances of contagion? Still kind of sad. Reminds me of another youtuber who recently went into months of psychosis talking about being a prophet for Jesus and becoming homeless, though he recently became lucid again but idk if that'll last long.

I get why the institutional capture of academia/media/etc by libs and then wokes might have happened due to both competition among careerists and clout chasers and was boosted by capitalists seeking to divide the working class, but I don't get why that capture was so nearly total and why the theoretically ultra democratic (small d) internet mirrors it so much rather than being a source of various prominent non/anti woke cultures (of course I'm only referring to the English speaking internet). The only significant online opposition seems to be from GOP party line types and even then it's fringe and unorganized.

Got recommended some rightoid YouTube channel and the first video I see is about "Black Fatigue" It's safe to say the comments were not full of people saying nice things about my race. There are legitimate problems to discuss but unfortunately to those guys it's all drowned out in a schizophrenic hateful mess.

GW1 Reforged is coming soon, stupidpol should make a guild.

Also, I watched 2 movies. Don't Go In The Woods was fucking hilarious. I don't even know what the plot was but I'm pretty sure 10 people died within the first 30 minutes and it had shitty over the top blood. And then Spaced Out, a 1979 sci-fi sex-comedy. Meh, but the guy stuck in the vibrator chair and the spaceship blowing up in the end was pretty funny.

How obvious was it in 2008 that Obama was a sellout?

Somebody recommend me a book about the battle of Stalingrad.

Somebody said "the west" in this bar and i almost broke my neck turning around.

Then she corrected to "the northwest" and man was I disappointed

If capitalists uphold the state in order to increase profits by pooling resources for security and working out disputes through the courts instead of direct violence, why then does the same effect not occur among for example the Mexican cartels? 

Afaik the cartels have a greater presence than the Mexican government and are constantly in conflict with each other. Why haven't they simply legalized their own activities to neutralize the government threat and handle their disputes through the courts? 

Or is it the type of people that affect whether violence occurs such that capitalists and their employees are drawn from a pacified population whereas cartels from a violent one? But couldn't capitalists still utilize security companies to brutalize competition without having their own people directly involved? And can't violent cartel members still value profit enough to see the utility of peaceful conflict resolution? 

Why do the cartels and similar organizations appear to behave so differently to other capitalists?

Lame to say it, but I got banned from redscarepod after making a comment about Steven Crowder 's stint as a child actor. I am wondering if the bans have been happening to anyone else.

The subreddit user count has reached 99000. Time for another purge! 

I only listen to real music.

jmail.com is a Gmail clone, except you're logged in as Jeffrey Epstein and can read his emails through his perspective