Mr Fish

nazi invasion in 1941

Not commenting on '39-40?

everyone wanted them to collapse

This changes what exactly? Even if everyone wanted it to collapse for purely imperialistic reasons, that doesn’t actually say anything about the government being good or bad.

Don’t expect funny from jankforlife. The best you can get is “America bad therefore soviets good”

advocating for voting in genocidal right wingers

I am advocating for using your vote to reduce human cost as much as possible. What that means depends on the context.

If you’re in America, the decision right now is between one genocide, two genocides, or refusing to have an impact on that decision with how impossible the system is for third parties. One less genocide is the least bad option, unless you have a better one.

If you’re in New Zealand (where I live, so I’m more familiar with the politics here than anywhere else), there are multiple options because of MMP voting. That means I won’t be advocating for voting in genocidal right wingers.

citation needed

Labour coalitions have historically been the governments that have had the best impact on workers rights. At least far more than national coalitions.

Also, don’t think I’m saying you should vote for labour next year. Labour is shit, vote for someone better

“Very cheap” in terms of time, effort, money, and opportunity cost for each individual involved

OK maybe I read that wrong. The way I interpreted it, I read “electoralism” as using voting as a primary tool. Using that definition, I agree with that paragraph. Voting alone is nowhere near enough to produce real change.

But if the definition of “electoralism” is using voting in addition to direct action, I don’t think that paragraph gives much reasoning behind itself. It’s a good statement, but it needs more backing it up

Mate, I read the whole thing. The only claim I saw as to why voting is counter productive is that “voting convinces people that they’ve done all they need to” idea, which I think is flawed. All the other arguments are talking about voting having low impact and it can’t fundamentally change things.

Please, if there is another part that I missed, tell me what it is, whether that’s something backing up the complacency claim or another claim entirely. I’d love to be proven wrong here.

Nowhere in that does it really explain why voting is counter productive. Voting is a tool, and a very cheap one. It only costs at most an hour once every 3 years and requiring knowledge of current events and politics, which is stuff you will know about anyway if you’re involved in any kind of direct action.

The only potential argument there is the psychological one, where people are lead to think voting is enough to do their part, but I don’t think that’s a strong enough argument to pass up choosing your opposition. As shit as Labour is, National and Act are worse, and by any logic other than accellerationism (which is a terrible idea of you care about the human cost), Labour will make fighting capitalism that little bit easier.

I understand not running for office. That article gives good reasons that actually joining politics is a wasted effort. It takes a lot of time and money, and almost always ends up making people slide towards the “reasonable politician”, not the radical that they promised to be.

A stopped clock is right twice a day. America has a terrible and corrupt government, but that doesn’t mean they’re wrong about not trusting china’s government.

Ah yes, because the mayor of a city should be elected or not because of their opinions on a completely different country, not the policy in the city they’re running for. That makes a whole lot of sense.

So Russia is invading? That alone, pretty much regardless of the reason, is enough to side with Ukraine.

But that reason, even if true, is one of the stupidest reasons to invade. A softer, more propaganda focused approach would be both far more effective and far less costly, in both lives and resources. So either Russian leadership is so useless that an invasion is the best they can come up with, or they’re invading to take over Ukraine. Incompetent to the point of malice, or malice. Take your pick.

And based on what Marx said, likely due to an opioid overdose.

It’s interesting to see nazi flags as the people criticizing the “socialist” countries, when the nazi party called themselves the “national socialist” party. They were only slightly worse at doing the socialism part than China and ussr

The point is “Russia can’t do the bad things because America does all the bad things and Russia isn’t America”. Because America being evil and Russia being evil are mutually exclusive of course.

Mods should be an improvement on a good game, not a fix on a bad one

There’s also the “0.25 × 4” thing. ε is set to 0.25, and φ is set to 4. No nuance, no thought about how the economy actually works. Just make it so they can pretend they’re thinking about it how demand will change.

Ah yes, because the eastern front never happened

The issue isn’t whether or not their documented or felons, it’s that they didn’t have a trial so they didn’t have a chance to prove either way

I’m not sure ‘inching’ is the right word here. ‘Speedrunning’ might be more suitable

If you’re coming to New Zealand, you can throw a dart at a map, go there, and you’ll probably find some amazing walking track.

But if you want recommendations, my top three are lake Waikaramoana, tongariro national park, and anything in fjordland

I’ve seen a musical called Rent. It’s about people in New York who are homeless/stuck in poverty around when HIV was at its peak. Honestly I don’t know much about it, I mostly saw it because a friend of mine was performing, but it’s definitely not a typical upper middle class perspective.