AnarchoDoom wrote (edited )

It's not fascist but hardcore neoliberal. There is a difference and if this party takes the full reigns of power you will see it.

Imagine Trump with the power over both houses. Or Trump coming back full force at the next elections. You can't say its "not more fascist than usual". There are fascistic aspects of neoliberal democracy, but it's base notions (like transnationalism, big business-driven bureaucracies, supporting ethnic & cultural diversity, a secular and democratic governance) that are incompatible with fascism.

While I can't moralize against that, it's not very good optics to be downplaying ANY government as "fascist", as not only it ain't really the case, but you end up trivializing a political tendency that is much worse than you believe.


AnarchoDoom wrote (edited )

If you think I'm the only one who's seeing apaling issues with this site, you're smoking some bad stuff. Like bongs out of Ziq's farts, maybe? ;-D

But no, as I said earlier, I ain't behind the DDoS attempts. And that's comforting to know... or discomforting depending on who learns this. I got other things to do than DDoS'ing for now.


AnarchoDoom wrote

This is some extreme level of hairsplitting imo. If you oppose one aspect or another capitalist development, this means you're at the same time opposing a reification of its Growth imperative. For an example, some Native people do a blockade against new lithium mining projects.... this literally is striking at the imperative for technological growth to meet growing evergy demands.

Degrowth, on the other hand, will point to ecovillages, social currencies, consumer groups and integral cooperatives.

No , these are just the means of subsistance proposed as alternative to the dominant imperative of capitalist growth. This is still congruent with anti-development views and strategies.

I might have been wrong in writing like the two terms are synonymous, tho. They aren't synonyms, but rather two somewhat different aspects going in a similar direction.


AnarchoDoom wrote (edited )

Being a fan of the Predator sequels/series reveals questionable taste in film, while the original flick was a shining gem. Julian's take on both indigenous culture and how it is depicted in the film is pretty liberal Lefty... tho I get that this film brought a much more brilliant and well-informed approach to the franchise, with a weird crossover of precolumbian anthropology and the sci-fi horror genre.

If I had been the filmmaker I would have perhaps just created a whole new antagonist, tho the Predator is (fitional alien race) is a very rich narrative device with the downside of having been spoiled by the past string of mostly-shitty franchise movies.


AnarchoDoom wrote (edited )

I think the best, simplest, most "objective" definition there can be is: "wildlife".

Or "life-supporting systems that can sustain without human interference":

Anything that requires human action is therefore artificial. But are animals still part of "nature" when they got changed by any human intervention?


AnarchoDoom wrote (edited )

Yes. The denial of your own phallocracy. Expressed and displayed here and abroad by your tiresome quest for domination over online anarchyland, ridiculously asserting yourself as the Pope of Anarchy, as if you even had anything original to bring.

And Patreon trust funds, lol