It's a common and well-understood word, you're completely correct, and really any word is a valid word, although it's pretty clear the teacher was trying to teach formal English habits (which unfortunately can be useful to know) and it ain't that.
You're not just gonna leave us hanging without a link, right? ...right?
It's a vibe, not an actual analysis of political economy.
People don't magically change their worldview because they have more money, but a person's economic relationship (e.g. owning a business, or being an employee) will guide their class interests - someone like Rowling who primarily makes money from ownership rather than work will materially benefit from conservative economic interests. And since capitalism rewards profit over social contribution, those of the business owners who don't care about other people enough to sacrifice profitability are (generally) more able to build wealth, so there are more right-wing types in mega-wealthy circles, not simply because they have wealth (this also includes those feigning left-wing ideals, like rainbow capitalism and philanthrocapitalism, to exploit real social movements for reputation and profit).
This Wikipedia page gives a quick rundown of how a person's politics and their role in the economy intertwine, although it's probably more useful to learn the concept through pamphlets or books which provide historical evidence, examples and related concepts. My recommendation - Not pointlessly academic or dated, relatively general, has nice and neat chapters for specific questions.
You also have to remember these people have a voice because we give it to them.
In some ways, sure, but these people also have a voice because owning-class mass media gives it to them. You can literally buy a figurative microphone. Pay for a platform. We don't assume people with money are worth listening too, they're simply the ones talking on every channel.
I don't know, but my guess is it might still be able to detect some cross-platform malware signs and detect malware intended for Windows on Linux machines (e.g. I can download a PDF or .docx that is harmless on my machine, but if I reupload and a Windows user downloads it, I've spread malware regardless). IIRC ClamAV is sometimes used to scan attachments on an email server, often looking for Windows exploits being sent through the server.
Spoiler in title.
Yes. There are also people who consider themselves apolitical and think excluding people for their beliefs is simply discrimination and therefore bad. There are also active neo-Nazis who pretend to criticism fascism to try and blur that line. It's a complex world.
In the history of fascist movements, being mean to them hasn’t stopped their political actions or their motivations.
That alone hasn't stopped them, but it does play a real part. Even just looking at resources alone, it detracts from their movement and its ability to operate. In my country, social ostracization has played a key role at thwarting their propaganda efforts and recruitment events, even reducing their reach in other reactionary circles.
They're talking about 'affiliating with' too. The plain truth is that people who aren't fascists themselves still enable fascism. (Yes, I know, the whole "1 fascist sitting at a table of 10 is just 10 fascists" line is a great slogan, but at the end of the day, there's no point wasting time flaming someone by calling them a fascist when they don't think they are one, it's semantics, the critical point is they're a fascist-enabler regardless and therefore responsible for and complicit in fascism)
I mean, it should be socially acceptable to punch Nazis.
Yes, it should be that way everywhere. In plenty of societies, it already is.
An international friend of mine in the UK was let off lightly by a judge for punching a Nazi, because the victim was a Nazi. Obviously judges can be a game of luck so I'm not claiming this is a low-risk action, but law isn't set in stone.
It's a dumb line anyway. There's no obligation for us to tolerate their antisocial behavior in the first place. All that line does is betray that the fascist treats liberalist ideals as a game or a weakness, only a fool would humor their insincere appeals to liberalism.
Jean-Paul Sartre, Réflexions sur la question juive (1946)
"Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past."
23
What are the benefits of federation between different site types? (e.g. Friendica, PeerTube)
(lemmy.ml)
Note: in hindsight, half of this post is answering my own questions as I explore this rarer side of federation, but there are still some remaining questions which I have highlighted.
Introduction
This post is created on lemmy.ml. The benefits of federating this post to other Lemmy instances is immediately obvious, since they can use most or all of the site features to read it as intended and interact (voting, replying, reporting, saving, cross-posting or browsing and subscribing to [email protected]).
There is also intuitive benefit in being able to federate with other link aggregators such as lotide and Prismo instances. All these sites have the same basic interface of link-posting, text-posting, voting, commenting and voting on comments. The base format is very compatible, even if extra features are not. I wouldn't be surprised if Lemmy and lotide form a dynamic similar to Mastodon and Pleroma, two microblogging services which again have an intuitive base compatibility.
But what about different types?
What are the benefits of, for example, making Lemmy federate with Mastodon, Friendica or PeerTube?
One approach to answering that is asking what cross-interaction is already possible, like some posts in !feditolemmy which were posted from Friendica. This nerdica.net post which is also replicated on !fediverse shows a conversation in replies between a few Lemmy instances and a Friendica account, and demonstrates the clear analogue of our communities and their forums, and of our votes and their likes (it's just a test ;) )
So Friendica posts federating to Lemmy makes reasonable sense. I'm not sure about the opposite. I guess their posts are analogous to our text posts or text & link posts, so it might be possible to render their forums as browsable communities here.
Question 1: Does my Lemmy account browsing and making new posts on Friendica forums make sense? Or will the federation only make sense for enabling Lemmy to aggregate Friendica posts and allowing cross-rating and cross-commenting?
Note: I found this Friendica forum on Lemmy, which was properly interpreted as a community instead of a user by Lemmy, but posts aren't replicating yet. I'm guessing it's a base for future completion to allow further cross-integration. Friendica does not appear to be able to browse Lemmy users or communities yet.
I also assume microblogging sites like Mastodon and Pleroma, along with the Prismo link aggregator, can use hashtags as an analogy for communities. While a post on those sites can belong to multiple tags, Lemmy can imitate this with crossposting in multiple communities. Is this reasonable?
PeerTube is where I get more confused, and I'm not alone. As a reply there mentioned, we can view a PeerTube user account, such as https://lemmy.ml/u/[email protected] and https://lemmy.ml/c/[email protected] , although it doesn't seem to work for framatube.org.
However the interfaces of Lemmy and PeerTube are radically different, as PeerTube is foremost a video hosting site and Lemmy is a link aggregator. I think it's fair to assert that a Lemmy post cannot be displayed on a PeerTube instance without hacks no-one wants, which leaves PeerTube->Lemmy posting, and mutual liking/commenting/reporting/etc.. A PeerTube video can be adapted as a link post in Lemmy. I'm not certain how a PeerTube upload would signal which communities it should be posted to in Lemmy, but there are reasonable options like an extra field in the upload settings, or a link in the description.
Question 2: Is there a plan to have anything more than PeerTube creating link posts in Lemmy communities with federation between comment sections?
Trying to learn the current situation in order to ask good questions has taught me a lot, I was in a mindset that we had to be able to make posts on other sites in order to usefully federate, when that isn't really our role as a link aggregator site. Media sites can usefully post to here with federated voting and comment sections.
A bit of a passionless rant about the recuperation of /r/antiwork:
I don't even consider myself an anarchist and I'm annoyed. Having visited the place a few years ago (2017?) to see what it was, the place was quite clearly as the name suggested: against the current concept of work. Not anti-labor (generally), but certainly anti-work.
Today, we're seeing posts like this gain popularity (part of a screencap posted to the sub, 700+ rating currently)
And I can understand if that's a naïve attempt at pitching or pandering to an audience not familiar with the nuance of 'work', 'job' and 'labor'. But that's not the case here.
After going through the comments, sorted by best, it takes the 7th reply to point out that the sidebar explicitly and unambigously says, at the top:
"A subreddit for those who want to end work, are curious about ending work, want to get the most out of a work-free life, want more information on anti-work ideas [...]"
and another 7 replies to find this chain with some OP replies:
and then soon this one, marked with the controversial sign:
When you get to a stage where stating the absolute basic theme of a community is considered controversial, it's a tragedy.
This is an example of recuperation. I honestly think the recuperation was more organic than forced or conspiratorial, caused due to the sudden rush in size by enthused reformists rationalizing the name rather than any intentional agenda. This has happened to other sites and subcultures too, where a sudden and largely unopposed rise in popularity dilutes the original community and its unique qualities.
A wide range of anti-capitalist subreddits seem to have come closer and closer into a homogeneous paste of (often the exact same!) twitter screencaps repeating fallacious or vapid 'gotcha' jokes and ragebaits. And I don't want to see the same happen here.
I've conquered the tabs demon (cleared on exit, anything actually important goes in a proper to-do app) and the downloads folder demon (...mostly). But will I ever conquer the Inbox imp?