Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Egan_BW]

And before you know it 95% of the human population thinks it's a real place. There's a wikipedia article and everything!

[Jopax]

And then Black Panther comes out and is prefaced by "Inspired by real events"

[Frumple]

Actually, funny story about this kind of stuff. My parents (reluctantly) voted Trump. Most of my family about that age or older seem to have, actually. A lot of it was because of stories like this; these are such trivial stories intended to smear Trump further that all it does is desensitize them to the actual major problems when they get covered in the news, because they just see it as more of the same.

For what it's worth, that doesn't really track all that well. We've had the same shit for more or less every president since news went 24/7 entertainment at a minimum, and it was fairly rampant with obama in particular. Yet you didn't seem to hear much about a similar effect. It was around, but not quite so... invoked. Part of that's due to previous presidents not being quite so much of a clusterfuck even on a purely personal level, but still.

Beyond that, primary or directly consumed news isn't the only part of the media influence going on. It's not just a matter of what news they watch, but also what news they read or listen to on radio, as applicable, and what the people they interact with are influenced by. And it's fairly common for older folks in particular, even if the specific one in question isn't sucking on the right-wing media's teat, to be around/in communication with peers that are fairly embroiled in that cesspool.

... basically, it's probably either/more post-facto justification attempts (or whatever you want to call scrambling for excuses for a particular act) or secondary/non-TV sources causing the claimed outlook, rather than it actually being much of an issue.

[Loud Whispers]

Someone's offering a $300 prize to any journalist who deadpan poses a question to Trump regarding United States relations with Wakanda and catches it on video.

I hope this happens.

I don't, I'm sick of corporations getting people to do their advertising for them

[Starver]

I don't, I'm sick of corporations getting people to do their advertising for them

Think different. Just do it. Every little helps. Because you're worth it. It's the real thing. I'm lovin' it.

[Loud Whispers]

I don't, I'm sick of corporations getting people to do their advertising for them

Think different. Just do it. Every little helps. Because you're worth it. It's the real thing. I'm lovin' it.

This kills the communist

[Magistrum]

I feel a disturbance in the force, as if millions of anarcho sindicalists suddenly felt very confused, and were then alright.

[Max™]

I mean, they started out confused in the first place, anarchosocialists unite in standing alone politely amongst one's neighbors!

[Reelya]

I don't think you're really understanding what an anarchosyndicalist is. Basically it means non-hierarchical trade unions and nothing else (syndicate is just the French word for trade union). It's pretty much the exact opposite of individualist anarchism. The kinds of things that anarcho-syndicalists recommend doing are things like starting cooperatives / worker-owner corporations, and studying various types of voting systems. So, the basic difference is that individualist anarchists want to blow up the factory to score points against capitalism (or generally throw spanners in the works via hacking), whereas anarcho-syndicalists want to build their own factory then implement democratic voting instead of management.

It was the most effective of any anarcho- or liberatarian- type movement at actually getting things done (e.g. anarcho syndicalists ran the munitions factories for Republican Spain during the Spanish Civil War). They were in fact pretty effective at running things (because hey, funnily enough giving people a vote on important matters rather than barking orders at them seems to work), but that came to a quick end because Franco killed them with his borrowed Panzers, while the Soviets didn't want the competition either, so they undermined them too.

Because it was successful is why a bunch of kids who don't know anything about it started calling themselves "anarcho-syndicalists" in the first place. It's the curse of anything popular basically. Thing is good => thing becomes popular => dumb kids start talking about thing => thing gets labeled as "bad" because dumb kids like it.

And as for the legitimacy of current anarcho-syndicalists:
https://web.facebook.com/270528233152758/photos/gm.145537736068561/711285045743739/?type=3

A presentation by Vicente Ruiz (hijo), the son of Vicente Ruiz, commander of a CNT Militia during the Spanish Revolution. The presentation will tell the story of the CNT exiles in Australia. Starting with their escape from Spain to Morocco, their foundation of Movimento Libertario en Africa del Norte in Beni-Saf, their imprisonment by Vichy colonial authorities and their subsequent settlement in Australia as UNHCR registered refugees. It will follow the foundation of Grupo Cultural de Estudios Sociales de Melbourne by CNT exiles in 1965 and their involvement in the establishment of the Tenants Union of Victoria and the Fitzroy Legal Service as well as the founding of Cruz Negra Anarquista (Anarchist Black Cross) in Australia.

... That's some serious street cred right there, and it shows how anarcho-syndicalist groups around the world aren't just created and run by trendy kids, we're talking people who are the descendents of war heroes and the like who have been continuously fighting for worker's rights for a century. So no, it's a dick move to smear the names of these people, you're basically laughing at the descendants of people who got mass-murdered for standing up to Franco's fascist dictatorship, while the rest of the world turned their back on what was happening.

I mean, context matters. If a bunch of college kids make the "Anarchist Black Cross" organization, feel free to laugh your heart out. However, when exiled war veterans who fought in the trenches against Franco make "Cruz Negra Anarquista" ("Anarchist Black Cross") you don't get the right to laugh at them: those guys seen some shit. The "Black Cross" they're talking about isn't some abstract "edgy" symbol, it's the flag they literally fought under in armed combat.

[Magistrum]

Very detailed, supicious well-versed response.

Are you sure you are not a communist?

But that is really it. In leftist (Actual left, not "libertarian left") circles the joke is that there could still be hierarchy in the organization of a syndicate or between them, making the whole "freeloading class" problem again, even if much smaller.

They technically take down the corporations, but only to instate workers corporations. So... There could be branding in a anarcho-syndicalist system.

Joking aside, that system is one of the best bets to implement socialism.

[RedKing]

Meanwhile, in actual news --

1. The US government is once again, less than a week away from shutting down.

2. Robert Mueller has subpoenaed Steve Bannon. A Steve Bannon recently on the outs with The Donald, who has plenty of reason to cooperate now.

3. Shitholegate continues.

4. The Senate is one vote away from reinstating Net Neutrality via legislative means.

[Frumple]

... 4 might be interesting. I actually was hashing out some things with a net/phone provider a day or two ago, and their automated call system started off with a blurb declaring the company was dedicated to net neutrality standards. It's on folks' minds enough to be filtering into mostly-rural floridian utility companies, so...

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I suspect at least some of the Republican Party realize that taking away people's internet breadcircus is the single easiest way for them to face civil unrest. Or maybe not, this is the Screaming and Stabbing Era GOP when all is said and done.

[RedKing]

Of course, that legislative means would then have to be signed by Trump. Who might do it, because overriding other people in his own administration is a thing he does all the time. But he also might not, just because it gives the Dems a win.

[smjjames]

I suppose now is a good time to change the thread title.

Of course, that legislative means would then have to be signed by Trump. Who might do it, because overriding other people in his own administration is a thing he does all the time. But he also might not, just because it gives the Dems a win.

The article linked does give the possibility that Democrats intend it to fail by forcing a vote and putting Republicans on the spot for the vote in the midterms.