You don’t beat the ratchet effect by ignoring it, you beat it by keeping the ratchet in the stationary position until you can figure out how to loose the pawl. No one on the left benefits by letting the ratchet twist right. Well, accelerations do in theory, but I reject the collateral damage of that strategy.
Uh, no. The context is very clear, he offers it himself. He’s talking about movements in other countries, where class consciousness isn’t sufficient for more direct alternatives, specifically Germany. He didn’t mention the Czar or the Duma once in this text.
You should really just read it, it’s pretty short.
Yeah and I think 1) that was 175 years ago 2) that while a brilliant thinker on the subject of structures and inevitabilities, Marx was pretty naïve when it came to implementation.
You are in duty bound to call their bourgeois-democratic and parliamentary prejudices what they are—prejudices. But at the same time you must soberly follow the actual state of the class-consciousness and preparedness of the entire class (not only of its communist vanguard), and of all the working people (not only of their advanced elements).
We’re still in the pretty heavy wake of McCarthyism, we’re not at “run our own candidates on the general ballot” yet, we’re at “vote lesser evil on the general ballot while we run our own candidates locally and try to win primaries”.
Whilst you lack the strength to do away with bourgeois parliaments and every other type of reactionary institution, you must work within them because it is there that you will still find workers who are duped by the priests and stultified by the conditions of rural life; otherwise you risk turning into nothing but windbags.
How does it do that? The winner will be red or blue. Your options are whatever fascist the red side puts up, or whatever the blue side puts up. If you vote in primaries, maybe the blue option will be good. But even if it’s a corporate shill, that’s still a better outcome than the fascist.
If withholding your vote, or voting for a third party with no chance of winning, was going to make the DNC change their approach, it would’ve worked in 2016. We got Biden in 2020, obviously that strategy isn’t working.
If you want progressives off the sideline, they need support in the primaries. Ignoring electoral strategy is so fucking stupid.
You should read more theory
Like pwnd, which is something like pünd or /pʊnd/
The typical therapist advice about focusing only on the things you can personally change does not work well on macro issues. Issues that were created by lots of people working together like climate change require a bunch of people working together to fix.
But collaborating with others to address macro problems is something you can personally do.
There are centuries of religious thought by mystics developing upon the texts inspired in part by those stories. The parts based on common ancient legends comprise a relatively small part of religious texts.
And still, if anything that’s supportive evidence. The ancient legends that pop up again and again, that survive centuries of canonical revision, probably reflect deep and spiritually apparent features of reality.
They contradict each other on many aspects.
Yes, which is why I said to compare them to see where they don’t contradict each other.
So either only is from God or none of them are.
Never said any of them were from God. They’re all from humans attempting to describe God.
The Bible, and the Quran, and the Vedas, and every other religious text are human attempts to describe God. None of them are going to get it quite right in every detail, but you can learn a lot by cross referencing them to see what they agree on.
Maybe, but it’s just an aspect of the hobby. Besides fiddling with bed leveling it is mostly ready to use, even if you buy new and assemble it yourself that’s only a couple hours. Most of the other issues I brought up really only come into play once you start trying to do something less common.
I stand by my suggestion to fiddle with one for a while. You can probably pick one up secondhand, get a feel for the hobby, and upgrade once you figure out what features and capabilities are most important to you. It’s the sort of hobby where you have to get your hands dirty a little bit just to get a good grip on what your real requirements are. Good printers can be a little pricey, and knowing what you need helps you avoid overpaying for stuff you don’t need.
It’s probably not the best, but I started with an Ender 3. I kinda like it for not being the best. While you’re dealing with bed leveling issues, and hot end issues, and extruder issues, and Gcode issues, and filament issues, and adhesion issues, you’re learning about the core aspects of the technology.
Sure, you could get something that’s basically plug-and-play from the start, but then you won’t really understand what’s going on. And eventually, you’re going to want to do something that requires you know what’s going on.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s not abusively bad or anything. It’s just simple, it doesn’t have modern creature comforts.
You can probably pick up an E3 secondhand, pre-assembled, for pretty cheap. It may be the most extensively troubleshot, documented, and modified printer ever. You can ship-of-Theseus it into basically any specification you want, and I’ve never had a problem that didn’t have dozens of solution threads.
Even if you eventually replace it, and you probably will, the lessons you learn fiddling around with it will carry on into the hobby.
Ignoring the AI part, since it doesn’t even know it’s gaslighting you.
Maybe read some Buckminster Fuller. He opined to some length about trends in real-world changes.
Isaac Asimov as well, just for a general sense of the approach.
But overall probabilities are kinda arbitrary when applied to specific events. They work fine for a whole lot of similar events (e.g. pulling colored marbles out of a bag) but they don’t really have any tangible meaning for unique events. Either you guess wrong or you guess right.
If you want to predict future events, you need to have a good grasp on current events, past events, and systemic behavior in general. There isn’t one methodology that yields results generally. You need to tailor your approach to suit each prediction.
That’s not something you can learn from one book, course, or series of exercises. It relies on broad scholarship.
Narrow the scope of policing. Have more social services and emergency mental health resources so cops aren’t expected to do all that.
“Defund the police” never meant “Remove all funding for police”, it means “Reallocate potions of police funding to more comprehensive social services”
How bout the power of flight, that do anything for ya?
I chose my wife in large part for her honesty. It’s much easier to teach a brutally honest person to be more tactful than to teach a dishonest person to be honest.
It’s spicy, salty, heavy on a particular ingredient, anything that might be off-putting to some.
Incorrect. The one form of leverage they have on the ratchet is choosing between the spinny part and the still part. Every vote for a Democrat is a vote for the still part. Every vote not cast for the still part is a willful gamble on the spinny part.
Both parts are bad, but the spinny part is worse and getting worser. Electoral leverage has a fairly narrow and unambiguous scope, and for anyone on the left who doesn’t have the luxury of RCV or competitive third parties, that leverage is best applied via BNMW.
Other forms of leverage (local elections, workplace unionization, direct action) are highly encouraged, but beyond the scope of elections. Those other forms of leverage will be more productive under the lesser evil than the greater one. Every vote cast for a Democrat (excepting districts where third parties are competitive, obviously) is a vote for the most favorable achievable conditions to effect other forms of leverage.