That’s the beauty of decentralized activism. You do it your way, I do it mine, and whichever works grows by success. Parallelized trial and error.

The above agitprop post is not anti-revolutionary, it is just not explicitly revolutionary. It does not make pipelining harder, as it transitions smoothly into agitprop promoting militant protection of communities and community activism which can mesh cleanly with revolution.

Liberals and progressives are both still solidly in the “work within the system” camp but are receptive to community building and counter-establishment action. I’ve seen them receptive to as far as underground distribution of abortion meds, and even activist vandalism. Most are still shy of the idea of taking up arms, and any mention of ‘revolution’. I expect you will end up getting better capture by just omitting talking about revolution and instead just talking about the actual practices and infrastructure that lead to it.

That seems like a pretty arbitrary rule which no other political groups doing pipelining adhere to. Outside messages often contradict as you go deeper with white supremacy, cults, and neoliberal rhetoric. They also constantly leave out the more extreme messaging on the outside and slowly ramp up the other stuff.

I don’t doubt you’ve moved leftists further left, but actually shifting centrists, conservatives, or anyone else does not seem likely with your approach.

Plenty of conservative libertarian farmer types who voted for trump would agree about the importance of community, but they will immediately check out if you even hint at toppling the government, or even mentioning socialized infrastructure. We need to adjust our agitprop so it can at least start reaching out that far, and by doing so we’ll be more likely to capture centrists for pipelining. We need a large portion of most countries if we want a global revolution, and we need agitprop that can gain that.

Again, whether necessary or not, you are immediately alienating anyone who isn’t ready for revolution by always putting it in the message. If we expect to ever compete with centrist and fascist propaganda, we must implement their same tactics in our agitprop, which means pipelining.

At the same time, what revolution means also varies. Some think hacktivism, asking for Jane, and other counter-establishment movements - for others it’s waging a guerilla war against the US government and the upper class. I just want to get the ball rolling, regardless of where it starts rolling.

Your comment reads like you’re shooting down this agitprop because it doesn’t have an explicitly revolutionary spin, which seems extremely counterproductive. If we only stick with revolutionary rhetoric, we will never attract those shy of revolution, who only understand it as a violent upheaval.

Forming communities and spreading agitprop which promotes more community formation is fundamental to any path forward. Communities are the best tool to saving anyone from the currently fucked situation, even if toppling never happens. It’s also the only means to build the trust needed for legitimate organizing. Agitprop only promoting community formation should not only be tolerated or accepted, it should be strongly encouraged.

Get a switch lite, yeah. I highly recommend playing star fox 64, Pokemon stadium, and the older legend of Zelda games. They are very good entry points into gaming and are all available via a Nintendo online membership.

Hey, I’m no Ubuntu user! … I’m a linux mint user. /j

Super Earth rectifies the massive increase in heroic sacrifices by increasing the total number of team members available for heroic sacrifice.

Yeah, that tracks.

Here’s the journal article the infographic cites

We’re nowhere near having the infrastructure or tech for a generation ship. At minimum, we need a moon base and breakthroughs it zero-construction to build one. This is in order to allow us the ability to make a structure that’s shielded from radiation enough to avoid adverse health effects to the occupants.

Having a cheap means for sending materials up to space like a space elevator or a kinetic belt would also be powerful for constructing one.

That would be innovation, which I’m convinced no company can do anymore.

It feels like I learn that one of our modern innovations was already thought up and written down into a book in the 1950s, and just wasn’t possible at that time due to some limitation in memory, precision, or some other metric. All we did was do 5 decades of marginal improvement to get to it, while not innovating much at all.

Jewelery making I think? The round tooth life is often used for winding metal wire and the toothed side is for actually grabbing things, so using the multipliers you could quickly switch between which type of work you’re doing.

That’s my guess.

Thank god

We had a similar experience here in the spring. Pretty ominous vibes out there.

I agree that the Lost Cause myth is romantic, and I’d say that Whedon used it very effectively as a theme.

I can’t really agree with Feral Historian’s take that this myth was ‘kinda true’ for the south as that seems to suggest that southern fighters are somewhat absolved of guilt. “They were just trying to preserve their way of life!” When that life revolved around assisting plantations in maintaining control over their slave populations, often by hunting down slaves, or acting as overseers of their work, rings hollow to me.

It reads the same as anyone who’s kept their head down to get by in an unjust system. You are culpable. And then fighting to try and preserve that unjust system makes you even more culpable.

I bet they’re related.

It’s only half an hour at 2x

We have groups like !mensliberation@lemmy.ca available for talking about men’s issues. The problem is that these groups often attract users who explicitly want to blame the issues faced by men, mostly or entirely on women. This derails the conversation similarly, and robs men of the autonomy to improve their situation, since if women are entirely to blame then there is little men can do to help themselves than pressure women to change (a bad solution). Plenty of users there try to shut that kind of toxicity down there, luckily. That does not stop that kind of interaction, though.

Think about the similar history of the Incel movement being hijacked by misogynists.

There are issues which both genders cause for each other, but there many more issues which every gender causes for themselves as well. It is best that we all own those issues we cause at the same time that we find solutions (for both internal and external issues) which don’t cause issues for others. Otherwise we’ll just continue in a war of the sexes.

This is potentially gender construct and sexism getting directly in the way of advocacy against real issues. Women start a protest advocating against a very real issue they face, by women for women, and it is spun as a direct attack on men. Same thing happens for men’s advocacy.

“…For the Master’s tool will never dismantle the master’s house. They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change. And this fact is only threatening to those women who still define the master’s house as their only source of support…” - Audre Large, in “Master’s Tools Will Never Take Down the Master’s House”

I don’t think most would blame many women for the practices they do in public to stay safe, despite the behavior explicitly being sexist. This is because we understand that in absence of these kinds of behaviors, women do actually get prayed upon, most often by men. It’s the reality of a dangerous world. however, we get angry when the statements and phrases used to justify these behaviors are said aloud.

What we fail to acknowledge is that that same kind of victimization is possible to a guy. Most guys would find the idea of deliberately using the bathroom at the same time as their friend as weird, possibly even girly. Machismo stereotypes and trying to conform to manliness actively makes men more vulnerable .

We also downplay women being violent, yet again a gender stereotype which not only lets women get physical in public, but actually also makes women easier to dismiss when they’re angry and yelling. This not only lets women get away with toxic behavior, but robs them of being taken seriously at other times.

These are both issues caused by gender, which is also actively defining how advocacy happens and creates an arbitrary divide.

That is very true. Often, it is reactionaries coming in trying to deny the existence of those issues blocking progress, not advocates for either. There are many actively trying to stop the conversation, and those very same individuals actively pose as ‘advocates’ while spitting vitriol. “There’s nothing wrong with how you act, it’s all just those progressives faults! No, you don’t need any help, it’s all fake!” This is explicitly just to shut the conversation down and strengthen the divide between gender advocates.