This fact perfectly dismantles the idea of meritocracy, which is why the “lottery curse” lie is pushed by the wealthy. The lottery selects specifically for people who are prone to gambling and poor choices, and yet the majority do just fine with their winnings, because the truth is that wealth protects you from the consequences of your choices.

I sorta prefer the lower quality tbh. It hides some of the big tells that it was AI generated.

I started to make a long effort post detailing Putin’s rise to - and subsequent consolidation of - power, but then I came to my senses and realized it would be pointless. If I went through with it, you would just do what you’ve been doing already, dismiss all sources I provide as false and biased propaganda while engaging in ridiculous whataboutism. I decided it would be a poor use of my time, is this really how you want to be spending yours?

Putin and Xi are dictators in the same way that Trump is trying to be. They consolidated power under their office, removing term limits and checks, and manipulate the democratic process in their favor (often with blatant ballot stuffing and crushing opposition, in the case of Putin).

The US political system, as corrupt as it is, isn’t quite to that point yet, though unfortunately that might be changing soon.

You forgot to mention that it’s watered down. That’s what the emulsifier is for, to make the oils in the cheese mix well with the added water. The concept is fine - for some applications - if it were only that, but this is hyper-processed American food we’re talking about here. Gotta pad out that ingredient list:

CHEDDAR CHEESE (CULTURED MILK, SALT, ENZYMES), SKIM MILK, MILKFAT, MILK PROTEIN CONCENTRATE, WHEY, CALCIUM PHOSPHATE, SODIUM PHOSPHATE, CONTAINS LESS THAN 2% OF MODIFIED FOOD STARCH, SALT, LACTIC ACID, MILK, SORBIC ACID AS A PRESERVATIVE, OLEORESIN PAPRIKA (COLOR), ENZYMES, CHEESE CULTURE, ANNATTO (COLOR).

The above is the standard Kraft singles ingredient list, and at a glance is the shortest one I saw on their website.

Alright, I understand your position. Personally, I disagree with it because it’s unrealistic to expect perfection from everyone who fights for a cause. I feel that it’s important to have some baseline tolerance for hypocrisy because it’s counterproductive to police your allies on every small thing.

I agree that tailored suits should not be a precondition for success, and choosing not to wear them in congress is absolutely a statement to that end, but I’m not going to discount AOC as a potential ally because she chose not to fight that particular battle. In the same vein, I’m also not going to allow John Fetterman’s choice to fight that particular battle convince me that he’s a working class ally in more important ways.

When you allow yourself to get hung up on the appearance of hypocrisy you make yourself vulnerable to exactly the type of manipulation that Fetterman engages in. Look past the surface and consider the bigger picture. You don’t have to be someone who works within the system, I’m not that type of person either, but don’t write people off for choosing that path. Everyone has a part to play.

They’re supporting a system that exists to pass a bunch of money around at the top.

By… wearing a suit? You’re gonna have to go into more detail here to get your point across.

I’m glad we’re at least on the same page here.

I’d like to get there, but I’m really not sure that we are yet.

I don’t keep up with Fetterman, but isn’t he also an ally of the working class?

Fetterman ran as a progressive and presented himself as an unpretentious ally of blue-collar workers, then after getting elected he made a hard right turn starting with support for Israel’s genocide and eventually going back on every progressive stance he ever held, even claiming he never held them to begin with. He’s now just a conservative - registered Democrat. A turn-coat who claims “I didn’t leave the left, the left left me.” Many such cases these days, unfortunately.

If you’re arguing that AOC is the same, I really don’t see it. I don’t agree with everything she does, of course, but for someone working within the system she’s as radical as it gets.

Purity testing political leaders based on the way they dress is self-sabotage. If you think someone can’t be a real ally if they wear nice suits then you’ll find few allies in life. The reverse is also true, John Fetterman isn’t an ally of the working class just because he wears a hoodie to congress, for example.

Of course it isn’t just sitting around unused, it’s being reinvested to make more money. Billionaires typically put most of their net worth into assets and stocks and then live off of loans, just like the comic I posted alludes to. Just because they don’t have literal piles of cash sitting around doesn’t mean they aren’t absurdly wealthy.

And let’s be honest, if a billionaire wanted a Scrooge McDuck style gold pile they could have it arranged within a week at most.

The boomer ellipsis drives me nuts. It gives me a very ominous feeling, like something is being left unsaid that I’m supposed to extrapolate. The only time I use an ellipsis in text is when I want to indicate that the thought is incomplete.

See the top comment.

It could not possibly be more relevant in your line of work than it is right now.

An exceedingly dangerous activity indeed.

Perhaps acting as if Arab Americans are a cohesive voting bloc rather than a sea of individuals making individual decisions is a mistake. Quoting Rashida Tlaib as if she’s part of the problem is ridiculous.

The time didn’t go anywhere, we did.

Try 18 years ago, when Aaron Swartz left.

Is that the guy who was drunk and returning to his hotel room when the gravy seals mowed him down in the hallway? That video was so irredeemably fucked up that if I remember correctly the cops actually faced consequences. I don’t think I ever heard if those consequences stuck though.

But ideologically, while not communist, I don’t see how that structure can’t be considered socialist.

It’s not that it can’t be, I just personally don’t consider a state socialist unless it is a functioning democracy that enacts what is at least an approximation of the will of the workers. It becomes obvious this is not the case when a state is hostile towards workers who attempt to organize.

Only because the very concepts of ownership and the collective-individual dichotomy are necessarily vague and subjective. China considers themselves socialist because they equivocate the people with the state. If the people are collectively represented by the state and the state owns (some of) the means of production, then at least transitively the people own (some of) the means of production.

As an anarchist I don’t believe the state adequately represents the interests of the people, nor do I think it could even if it were radically democratic and egalitarian, though I would still certainly prefer that to the existing status quo. Somewhere a line must be drawn arbitrarily and I prefer to draw it on the other side of authoritarian state control.