It's for collecting phone number, network cell data etc. It's basically the most sensitive permission and usually not needed for apps to request.
If an app only needs a phone number, it can ask it with user input instead.
tiredturtle
joined 2 years ago
Interesting indeed, both countries' governments don't want truths out
Saying there's a virus in his mind about everything being woke
Some billionaires or fellow dictators whispered to Trump that there are resources to exploit there, and maybe even a cool bunker for the climate wars, so Trump blurted it out and the media easily figured out the reasons.
The claim over whether Donald Trump is officially employed by Russia misses the structural and materialist analysis of imperialism and class interests. The global capitalist class, particularly those in positions of concentrated wealth and power, does not require formal employment to align their actions or interests.
Trump’s alignment with Putin's authoritarian model and policies beneficial to Russia could easily stem from overlapping class interests, ideological affinity, or even strategic manipulation (eg., blackmail or kompromat). These dynamics are more indicative of how imperialist powers operate than any need for formal employment. To focus on whether Trump receives a paycheck from Moscow is to obfuscate the larger systemic issues: the shared objectives of reactionary elites to consolidate power and suppress working-class movements.
Framing such alliances as conspiracies diverts attention from the deeper critique of capitalism and imperialism.
Some labor abuse can probably be arranged
The alliance between Putin and Trump is a classic example of imperialist collusion, driven by their shared goal to consolidate power and weaken global resistance to their agendas. This partnership, rooted in the contradictions of capitalism, has always been about advancing the interests of oligarchs, not the people.
Putin seeks to rewrite the international order to secure Russia’s dominance, while Trump’s rhetoric about "ending the war" serves as a smokescreen for reducing U.S. costs and influence-shifting. Both pursue imperialist objectives under the guise of diplomacy, ensuring the working class in Ukraine, Russia, and the U.S. pays the price.
Marxist analysis reveals that such alliances inevitably crumble under their internal contradictions. This “summit” isn’t about peace but the division of spoils among ruling classes only perpetuating war and exploitation.
Lithuania's approach reveals a clear contradiction in the context of imperialism. Acknowledging China as undemocratic while seeking “normal” relations highlights the struggle of smaller nations under global capitalism to navigate between principle and necessity.
This reflects the subjugation of weaker states to imperialist powers. Pretending China’s authoritarianism and expansionism are irrelevant is not diplomacy but a concession to capitalist imperialism. History shows us that alliances with empires are inherently unstable and can collapse overnight.
Can Lithuania uphold revolutionary principles and expose China’s nature or succumb to normalization that strengthens global capitalist dominance?
The narrative of ‘collapse’ is a weapon of fear-mongering, used to obscure the contradictions inherent to capitalism itself. The notion that capitalism has lifted masses out of poverty ignores that this 'prosperity' is built on exploitation—both domestically and globally. China's rise is often touted as proof of capitalism's success, yet it masks the reality of wage slavery: a system where labor is commodified, and workers are bound to capital, albeit with the illusion of freedom in the form of consumer goods and a 'middle class.' The soft chains of this system do not eliminate oppression; they only disguise it. Growth without addressing systemic exploitation merely sustains inequality
Interesting thread of comments. I had joined this instance before I knew about the reputation and let it be. For the topic, the wording felt essential, then again with meme shitposts I write more terse :shrug:
Your comment reflects a tendency to prioritize appearances over structural critique, echoing the rhetoric of capitalist development. It is crucial to recognize that China’s claims of "lifting people out of poverty" and "building infrastructure" serve as ideological justifications for the contradictions inherent in its system—a system that, despite its nominal commitment to socialism, increasingly operates within the framework of global capitalism.
GDP growth, real or exaggerated, is not an end that inherently benefits the proletariat. It masks the exploitation of labor, the suppression of dissent, and the commodification of essential resources, all hallmarks of capitalist production. While infrastructure projects may symbolize "progress," they often come at the cost of dispossession, ecological destruction, and deepening inequalities—a logic that mirrors the global capitalist order.
The repression of Gao Shanwen illustrates the prioritization of state legitimacy over the dialectical process of critique and reform, which socialism should embrace. Instead of addressing the material realities of stagnating wages, housing crises, and debt spirals, China leans into controlling "expectations," reinforcing an ideology of growth as virtue while deflecting accountability for structural shortcomings.
This is not the collapse of an economy but the entrenchment of capitalist contradictions. True progress lies not in GDP metrics but in the emancipation of labor from exploitation and the alignment of development with human and ecological needs.
Their systems are slightly different so a local Luigi copycat would target someone else than an insurance CEO