Comments

5

tlckl wrote

The kill counts under the Bolshevist nations were deliberately exaggerated, by various means, to promote the status quo.

I don't think it was necessarily exaggerated. It's just that it's oddly attributed. Famines and stuff happens, especially if the country is subject to embargos. Same with poverty, communism doesn't put minerals in the ground. The country can only be as rich as its working power and natural resources. Anyone who claims otherwise is dishonest. So, yeah, a communist country can be poor, people can starve.

Here's the thing though: The world is a deadly place, people will die, but we if we're good humans, we should try to minimize the suffering and deaths as much as possible. And capitalism has killed far more than communism could ever achieve.

If we do the same tricks as the black book of communism, and includes deaths which aren't related to the ideology, we can put something together. In fact, there are things which we can prove are caused by capitalism, without being dishonest:

  • Capitalist imperialism caused by oil and natural resources (nearly all imperialism)
  • People, especially children, who die from the lack of healthcare and/or food (world has enough wealth to feed and provide healthcare for every single person)
  • Third world workers' conditions
  • ISIS, which although not necessarily capitalist, is caused by capitalist imperialism.

This alone gets way above 100 millions, and even if we restrict it to a per-country basis (that is, we assume that we can only redistribute wealth within that country, and not on global scale), we still get above this number.

Next, there are all the people who were brought out of poverty by Soviet Union or China (to be clear here, I'm not a big fan of either, but they did bring a lot of people out of poverty, and they did save millions of lives). These must be subtracted from the death toll. I suppose you could do the same with capitalism, but the end result is still "we fuck over the third world, but we did it slightly less this year", so the end result is most likely a toll way higher than 100 millions.

1

tlckl wrote

It does ban hate speech:

The following types of content are explicitly disallowed and will result in revocation of access to the service:

  • Sexual depictions of children
  • Content illegal in Germany and/or France, such as holocaust denial or Nazi symbolism
  • Conduct promoting the ideology of National Socialism

On top of that, Germany and France has hate speech laws.

Also, it appears that the creator is left-wing (possibly far-left), so it is unlikely that it won't ban that kind of content.

4

tlckl wrote (edited )

I know this is subjective but: Better and easier food.

I don't mean "healthier", I mean in taste and convinience. It forces you to learn to cook yourself, and you will eventually be able to make a meal, which you think tastes well, in a relatively short time.

All the meat-containing meals can be replaced by an equally tasty vegetarian one. I know it sounds weird, but given enough experience, it is true.

Anyway, here's my favorite vegetarian meal: spaghetti bolognese. Get some meat substitutes at your local grocery store (most stores have them these days + you can stock a lot of them in your freezer) and a bunch of vegetables of your choice. Cut these vegetables out. Add a little oil to the pot and heat the vegetables in it for something like 5 minutes. Then put one or two glasses of peeled tomatos in the pot, plus one or two vegetable bouillons. Then let this cook for some minutes. Finally add the meat substitute, and cook it for some time. Seasoning can be done by adding some chili, basil, oregano, and salt. Then eat with spaghetti.

IMO it tastes even better than the meat version. It takes maybe 30 minutes to make, but it isn't that much of an issue because you can store it in your refrigerator for 10 days or more and eat it throughout the week, as there is no meat in it.

Here's some other arguments for it:

  • If you know what you're going for, it is cheaper.
  • You reduce your foot-print on nature.
  • Less animal cruelty.
  • Often healthier, or at least easier to control (although you should probably get blood tests once in a while to ensure that you're OK).
  • You can still eat delicious meals.

Disadvantages are:

  • You can't always eat the same meals as your friends.
  • Depending on where you live, some of the ingridients are hard to get.
5

tlckl wrote

Here's a few other instances:

  • icosahedron.website: Even stronger content policy than mastodon.social. Run by a comrade like mastodon.social.
  • anticapitalist.party: Explicitly anticapitalist instance.
  • gnusocial.no: Although not a Mastodon server, it is compatible with Mastodon. Home of rms.
  • lgbt.io: Mastodon for LGBT with extra moderation and anti-harassment measures.
  • mathstodon.xyz: For math nerds, run by AMS (American Mathematical Society). Supports LaTeX.
  • soc.ialis.me: For socialists. Mostly marxists. Be aware of tankies.
  • octodon.social: Nice domain. Run by a comrade. Not very moderated due to only one staff.

Ultimately, the choice is pretty unimportant. The only differences it makes are:

  • your domain.
  • the local timeline (if the instance is small, people may communicate within it and have fun there). This is partially the reason why there are so many specialized mastodon server.
  • trust (do you trust the owner to protect your privacy etc.?)
  • content policy and moderation (all the ones I've listed have good moderation, but you must still be aware that not all servers have that many moderators, so if you pick a low-staff instance, you will have to do some blocking by yourself)
  • possibly interface and modding.
5

tlckl wrote

So the network is distributed across several "instances". While nothing stops fashy instances from existing, they are excluded from communication with other instances. Racists can be instance-wide blocked even if they're on another instance.

The biggest instance, mastodon.social, has a pretty strong antifascist policy, explicitly prohibiting hate speech and fascism.

11

tlckl wrote

Nothing is really "hateful" against white people in that policy. I'm white, and I don't think I'm the only one. But the thing is that we're not the people who need anti-discrimination measures for our race. If this was an alternative reality, where whites were enslaved and fucked over by Africa, it would be totally different, but look around, it's not like that.

7

tlckl wrote

Here's my reason: Ads prime purpose is to increse consumption. They are a core piece in the consumerist society, and I don't want to contribute to that.

Consumption is exploitation, and I want to minimize the amount I help that, plus I don't want to waste my time simply to create profit, most of which is going to land in the hands of the ad network.

I'm happy to pay for content (well, provided that the money goes to the content creators and not someone else), and I prefer it over ads, because that way the money goes directly to who deserves them AND I as a person am not simply used as a consumer. I like Wired's way of doing it.

I also donate to various YouTube channels I like. I really like Patreon, but it's a shame that it isn't completely direct, so I send Bitcoin or Paypal when possible.