1
0

Can a guy who hasn’t had much luck with women until his 30s find love by then or is it already too late for him?

2
0
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by GaveUp@hexbear.net to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml

Yea we get it, they have good opinions and what not

But is constantly just barging into government buildings and offices with 1-5 people and screaming at politicians doing anything?

Also does anybody know what they spend their money on? They're by far the most well funded org, to the tune of millions, because the co-founder's husband sold his tech company for 1 billion dollars but from the little I know about them, they don't seem to use much money

I don't really see them doing much education either, unlike PSL which also mostly does protests but also a lot of educational events

3
1
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by rainpizza@lemmygrad.ml to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml

Not gonna lie... It scared me when they mentioned that we only have 2025-2031 to properly reduce emissions and save at least half of humanity.

Also, it was interesting how they mentioned the fossil fuel tactics that are similar to the cigarette industry on distorting data.

https://www.joboneforhumanity.org/10_climate_facts_the_fossil_fuel_cartel_never_wants_you_see

Is it true that we have so little time left?

4
1
5
1
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by deathtoreddit@lemmygrad.ml to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml

My man, are you trying to give us despair?

@Kirbywithwhip1987@lemmygrad.ml

6
1
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by SpaceDogs@lemmygrad.ml to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml

Okay this is a weird scenario but I’m going to have to go through it in a few years so thats why I’m asking. I’m hoping to study in Russia for my PhD in the future (I’m still in my undergrad so there’s quite a bit of time before then) but I don’t really want to fly over the Atlantic.

This is such a weird fear but when I go I want to bring my dogs with me, they’re a bit bigger which means they’d be forced into the luggage area, which sucks for very long flights (I’ve read too many horror stories). So I thought, hey, what if I just do a quick flight over the Bering strait into Siberia and then just take the train to Moscow? Sure, it’d be way longer but at least my dogs wouldn’t be stuck in cargo while flying over the ocean (I mean, what if we crashed? I may survive but its a death sentence for them). I’m even willing to take a boat (I have a huge fear of boats and thalassophobia) across the strait or pacific if it means I can keep my dogs close in the event of a disaster.

Unfortunately, when I looked at travel plans no passenger boats or planes are allowed over the strait, what?! I guess it may be due to governments hating each other but, damn, this really screws up my plans. Are there any other reason why we can’t travel via the strait? Will this rule ever change in the future? Also, even without the strait, every travel option wants to take me over the Atlantic/North Pole eastward and avoid going west at all costs, why is this?

Also, the only way I’d be able to take the Bering strait was if I smuggled myself and the dogs on a cargo ship, which is a hilarious image but I’m not willing to do that lol

7
1

So far, president Vladimir Putin and top-level Russian government figures have hinted at taking Kharkov, Odessa and 3 other regions. What do you think is going to be their way of solving the crisis in Ukraine, depending on the particular way the West and their fascist puppet in Kiev choose to go? Which way do you think is the most rational?

8
1
9
1
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by Skipper1402@lemmygrad.ml to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml
10
1
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by SpaceDogs@lemmygrad.ml to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml

I honestly never really heard much about it except it being mentioned in my PoliSci class very briefly and people on Twitter debating about a speech Ilhan Omar made. I’ve seen comrade on Twitter saying Somaliland is Somalia, and I’m not about to argue, I’m just confused about this whole thing. Somaliland was an Italian colony or something like that, right? What the hell is going on?

11
1

Over 100 years ago, Russia became core of USSR and the pioneer of international struggle for workers' liberation, poverty lifting, enlightenment, scientific progress and propagation of socialism and communism.

Now -- in my humble and maybe biased by liberal propaganda view -- Russia is one of the most reactionary, conservative, backward-looking, clerical country. Please excuse me posting some liberal, imperialist shit here, but seems that Kremlin officially admits going far-right: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/kremlin-finally-puts-together-ideology

Speaking locally, there seems to be evidence that Polish far-right party PiS (Law and Justice) is backed by Kremlin as well as the extremely influential priest, Tadeusz Rydzyk, founder and director of the ultra-catholic, conservative Radio Maryja station has/had ties with Polish and Russian security services before the end of People's Republic of Poland and USSR (sic!). I have some generally available videos, but in Polish, sadly.

Could you tell me how far this is true? If so, what purpose had the late communist states and today's Russia in spreading far-right propaganda? WTF went wrong?

12
1

I am having a hard time debating a family member who lived through a period of great unrest in Mexico. He was part of the house of students in the 60s that allocated plenty of marxists as well as fighting anti communist discourse. He is telling me that Fidel Castro betrayed Che Guevara and he cited a famous anti cuban propaganda outlet. Do you all have some sources that I can read about so I can educate myself?

13
1

Can't make shit like this up...

14
1
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by Skipper1402@lemmygrad.ml to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml
15
1
16
1

I tend to write here a lot, don’t I? Anyway I’m going to try to not post as frequently so I don’t clog up the timeline.

So a bit of context: I am taking a genocide history course and I will have to write a research paper for it. The paper is the biggest part of the grade and we can choose any topic as long as the professor approves of it. We have to book a “consultation” with him where we present our research topic and question, if he thinks it’s good enough we can go ahead and begin research and writing. The topic I want to write about is what was/is happening in the Donbas. I know many of us have referred to it as a genocide and I figured it’d be a good topic to write about since no one really talks about it. I could choose other issues but I’m almost certain other students will write about them, the Donbas situation is just never brought up enough for my liking.

My real question is: how do I present this to my professor?

I know I want to look into the how and why it happened, and how it’s being talked about now. If that’s makes sense. Yes it’s messy and not elegant enough, I’ll work on it, but I feel very passionate about this, especially with an event that is being hosted at my school today, it’s lit a fire in me. One that’s been there for a while but it’s just gotten hotter, it that makes sense.

I don’t want my professor to think my paper is going to be a weird defence of Putin or whatever, he seems quite set in stone on his position of the war so I’m trying to tread lightly without sacrificing my principles. All I’m asking is help in my wording as I don’t know how to say this without potentially screwing myself over. I think I low-key have to convince him that it was/is a genocide.

17
1
Good books? (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml

I find there tends to be two general categories of books; those that are exciting and interesting, so much that I want to recommend them immediately, and “slogs” that are just slow and unappealing regardless of the content. Some I get the jist of fast and a lot seems irrelevant like What is to Be Done, some like Fresh Banana Leaves the writing is just dislikable and repetitive. This is in sharp contrast to books like Half Earth Socialism or State and Revolution where I may be familiar with some of the content, but I really like the style and new information and want to recommend to people.

Do you agree with this categorization? Are there any books that you feel strongly about either way? I’m sure I’ve heard a lot of your recommendations before, but I want to know what will actually be fun to read, because some aren’t even if the content is good. I want to know which to prioritize reading.

Edit: to answer my own question: socialism or extinction is top tier

18
1

If you’ve been reading my posts about my time at university you may be familiar that I am to present a very short seminar for my Political Science class. We were all assigned an article from a book by my professor and the article I got was by John J. Mearsheimer. What I have to do for the seminar is talk about what ideology the author of thee article has (Mearsheimer is a realist) and summarize the article (which I have done), then I have to do a critical assessment discussing the strengths and weaknesses of his argument. As of now I’m a little stuck on the assessment part, I know some of what he says is accurate when comparing it to actions taken recently by nations he mentions, but others I’m not so sure. I wont share the full article but I can give you my summarization of it (this will be the script I use when presenting, though it will be edited further):

China’s Unpeaceful Rise

John J. Mearsheimer

The author of this article is John J. Mearsheimer, and he is a Realist. He starts off the piece answering his own question “will China rise peacefully?” Absolutely not. He claims his theory of international politics is the best way to explain why that is — “the mightiest states attempt to establish hegemony in their region of the world while making sure that no rival great power dominates another region.” The main antagonist to China will be the United States.

The Contest for Power

The international system has three characteristics: all states operate in anarchy, all the great powers must have destructive military capabilities, and finally you cannot trust one another because you never know what their true intentions are (current and future). Under a system like this states are constantly uncertain of each other and thus fearful which leads to the conclusion that the best way to survive under these conditions is to become as powerful as possible, hopefully the MOST powerful. Establish a hegemony. Like how the United States has a regional hegemony in the western hemisphere. When one state dominates a region they will seek to prevent others from duplicating their results in another.

The American Hegemon

Over the next 115 years since its independence, American policy makers would work incredibly hard to make it a regional hegemon. “Manifest Destiny” and many wars were fought to make this a reality. He quotes Senator Henry Cabot Lodge who says the United States had a “record of conquest, colonization, and territorial expansion unequalled by a people in the nineteenth century.” So much so that by 1898 they had effectively pushed out the European powers. By becoming a regional hegemon that meant they would have to prevent other nations from doing the same on another continent. Other “formidable foes” cropped up in which the United States worked very hard to dismantle: Imperial Germany, Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union. After their defeat in WWII American policy prevented Germany and Japan from having strong militaries, and the Cold War proved the US would never tolerate competition. With how the United States behaved towards the Soviet Union during the Cold War, this will most likely be repeated towards China in the near future. With all these talks about Cold War 2 and Taiwan I have little doubt that this isn’t the case.

Predicting China’s Future

He believes that China will attempt to establish its own hegemony unchallenged like the United States has done in the Western hemisphere, mainly going head to head with Russia and Japan. Unlike the US, China most likely will not use military power to do this, though it’s not an impossible scenario. He believes that the only way China will get Taiwan back is through regional hegemony. China will push the US out of Asia, making reference to when the US pushed Europe way back when. So China will probably come up with their own “Monroe Doctrine” like Japan did in the 30s. Like how the US appreciates a militarily weak Canada and Mexico, China will want the same for Russia and Japan. No self respecting superpower would ever allow others in its vicinity. American policy makers are enraged when foreign militaries are sent into the western hemisphere, why would China afford the US with any amount of grace? They wont, US military presence in Asia will not be tolerated. In the end China will just imitate the US.

Trouble Ahead

Based on America’s track record it is obvious what the reaction will be towards China if it tries to establish a hegemony in Asia, no “peer competitors” will be tolerated. The only hegemony that is allowed to exist is the United States, and therefore China must be contained and weakened. As said before, China will be treated as the Soviet Union was. Neighbouring nations will also join the US in preventing China’s regional rise, this includes: India, Japan, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, and Vietnam. Taiwan will be used as a pawn to better control China and gain the upper hand, which will cause further security issues between Beijing and Washington. He ends his article with this: “The picture I have painted of what is likely to happen if China continues its rise is not a pretty one. I actually find it categorically depressing and wish that I could tell a more optimistic story about the future. But the fact is that international politics is a nasty and dangerous business, and no amount of goodwill can ameliorate the intense security competition that sets in when an aspiring hege-mon appears in Eurasia. That is the tragedy of great power politics.”

I will compile this information into PowerPoint slides, obviously trimmed down, and speak for around 10 minutes. Half dedicated to summary hike the last bit has to be critical assessment: strengths and weaknesses. So far I know with rising tensions in Taiwan with the US and Canada sending ships over as provocation that fits in as a strength, the Cold War references are also a strength as many have been talking about it (are there any actions that reflect the past? As in, is what the US is doing now with China also similar to actions taken against the Soviet Union?). I have to tread lightly here, as even though I can be comfortable expressing myself to my professor I cannot do the same in front of my classmates, they are a lot more hostile and I don’t want to be yelled at or ridiculed (I’m not strong enough yet lol). One criticism I feel I could make against his article is how China will behave, he says China will be the same as the US but I’m not so sure about that. Theres also the reference to how other Asian countries will follow the US in muzzling China but I don’t believe Russia is completely interested in that considering how their trading and cooperation is going right now. Is there anything about Chinese foreign policy I could make reference to? Any little bit helps, hopefully my summary is good enough but if you need more information I can go back to the article and write some more!

19
1

cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/3401860

I semi-often hear people complain about Lemmy's moderation tools. It's happened enough that I think it's a sign that moderation tools need improvement. Some ideas I have so far:

  • Let community mods view list of who's banned from community
  • Put community edit/mod features on own page instead of stuffing it into the sidebar

I'm looking for other ideas for improvement I can do in addition to these.

20
1

Yesterday I found someone who says “question mark” after every question and has apparently forgotten how to inflect their voice to express tone. It was horrifying, but I realized I’m not that different. I immediately think “cringe” or “based” at many things. Even when I’m not terminally online everything I hear gets put on a meme template by my brain. I’m having trouble expressing tone/emotion in writing without visual indicators like emojis or “/s.” I know I’m not alone, what do we do?

21
1

Regardless of if it's practical to live that way in daily life, the world seems pretty determined. Everything happens because a vast amount of interactions between infinite factors causes it to. You can't really say you choose between things as many influences have been taken in by you and many things have affected your psychological state. Has everything been practically decided by the big bang? Now, this is not to say we can know everything or predict the future, but we know what's likely. Socialism or extinction may be inevitable, but we don't know yet. Socialism can only happen if people keep fighting, regardless. People will be convinced or principled or not. Science seems to agree with this, and only few, like the wrong Sartre would propose we have ultimate free will. So are there any arguments against determinism? I know there is a saying that you're freer when you recognize how your freedom is restricted, and that recognition may make your actions better, but isn't there ultimately no freedom?

22
1
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by Skipper1402@lemmygrad.ml to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml
23
1

Any help is much appreciated

24
1
25
1

(Sorry for any possible English mistake, I thought about this and wanted to read someone's idea on or against it but I can't find if there is a movement like it and what it would be called)

Like, we probably all agree that we are against capitalism but in order to achieve socialism (or directly communism) you must first develop the proletarian class as it is what is going to start the revolution.

So is there something like anarcho-communism, where they are opposed to having a socialist state as a way to develop communism, but that still believes in the importance of a socialist state in a utilitarian way to develop it's own group of revolutionaries ?

An idea according to which a socialist state will never achieve communism (for whatever reason, like the small difference between classes under socialism before it turns into communism that might become reactionaries and roll back change even under a dictatorship of the proletariat or something else) but there is going to be one more revolution starting from the (relative) bottom in the socialist state.

Because from my basic understanding of ML for example, the transition between socialism and communism is supposed to be smooth. But maybe I'm wrong ? Feel free to correct me on anything.

view more: next ›

Ask Lemmygrad

611 readers
1 users here now

A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS