User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/proposed-3 - Revision history

Reversedragon: If speech isn't offensive, you can never prove it deserves free speech protections

2026-06-07T10:26:55Z

If speech isn't offensive, you can never prove it deserves free speech protections

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:26, 7 June 2026
Line 959:		Line 959:

	{{li\|I=Z1/LR\|tradition=LR, PT\|Q=618}}Mimi and Eunice [https://mimiandeunice.com/] -> there are a lot more TERF comics on here than I remember. oh well, they do get a lot better when you swap out the third panel for one of the other comics		{{li\|I=Z1/LR\|tradition=LR, PT\|Q=618}}Mimi and Eunice [https://mimiandeunice.com/] -> there are a lot more TERF comics on here than I remember. oh well, they do get a lot better when you swap out the third panel for one of the other comics

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618}}If speech isn't offensive, you can never prove it deserves free speech protections -> it's weird how most of the time free speech discussions revolve around speech that outright offends somebody, and how when something is offensive it always seems to have a slam dunk case to prove it's okay. people who don't really like South Park suddenly got behind it when it was slamming Trump. Drawn Together got to air basically because it was offensive, while many other things that are similar to other things get hit with lawsuits, and few of them ever get an adequate defense.

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618}}TV channels with total free speech are generally safer than social platforms with total free speech -> I think this is true, at least mostly, but it's worth asking why. I feel like to some extent something that's an entire business like an animation studio or a room of TV executives has an incentive to think about what is worth creating — what actually has a point to keep putting out week after week, and what betrays the overall goal of the organization. the same isn't really true for arbitrary individual human beings, who will never have a Spanishness Office inside them that's inherently accountable to outside forces.

	{{li\|I=S2/ES\|Q=618}}If the earth was populated by immortals, capitalism would be okay -> this is a weird consequence of the way I argue about chunk competition. I've created a scenario where in conditions not very similar to reality my arguments might not hold up any more, and you could only really get through it with anarchist arguments that Domination is bad because {{em\|it just is}} {{censor\|dammit}}.		{{li\|I=S2/ES\|Q=618}}If the earth was populated by immortals, capitalism would be okay -> this is a weird consequence of the way I argue about chunk competition. I've created a scenario where in conditions not very similar to reality my arguments might not hold up any more, and you could only really get through it with anarchist arguments that Domination is bad because {{em\|it just is}} {{censor\|dammit}}.

Reversedragon: Trans people are not an ideology

2026-05-19T10:19:47Z

Trans people are not an ideology

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:19, 19 May 2026
Line 53:		Line 53:

	{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}reality-breaking anticommunism / description of Marxism so bad the author can't be right about anything else -> I think this is what propelled me to put together meta-Marxism. in general, you can genuinely judge how true to reality an ideology or model of reality is by how well it models and predicts other ideologies or models of reality. the first step for me was realizing this was true about Lacanianism. then I realized it was true between mainstream Marxism-Leninism and Trotskyism, most of all from the Trotskyist direction but also from the other direction. then I fully noticed it was true of everyone who supports Liberal-republicanism and I was depressed but also my mind was blown. it took a while for me to stop holding it against people when, you know, my realization of how doomed everyone was had separated me from basically everybody. but I think it was a necessary realization.		{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}reality-breaking anticommunism / description of Marxism so bad the author can't be right about anything else -> I think this is what propelled me to put together meta-Marxism. in general, you can genuinely judge how true to reality an ideology or model of reality is by how well it models and predicts other ideologies or models of reality. the first step for me was realizing this was true about Lacanianism. then I realized it was true between mainstream Marxism-Leninism and Trotskyism, most of all from the Trotskyist direction but also from the other direction. then I fully noticed it was true of everyone who supports Liberal-republicanism and I was depressed but also my mind was blown. it took a while for me to stop holding it against people when, you know, my realization of how doomed everyone was had separated me from basically everybody. but I think it was a necessary realization.

	{{li\|I=S2/ES/LGBT\|Q=618}}Trans people are not an ideology -> I don't think that's possible. mainly because trans people are under attack so often that they inevitably have to generate a bunch of theory about themselves to combat the misinformation. isn't queer theory an ideology? (one that accepts the existence of trans people but then takes an ideological stance around them anyway.) arguably, supporting capitalism or supporting Deng Xiaoping Thought are ideologies. so everybody has a political ideology. {{YouTube\|_GBUArD51KY}}

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/DG/A\|tradition=MX onto DG\|Q=55,16\|Q2=5516}}Moderation is a form of extremism / Because individuals vary greatly, their normal healthy states of being are in effect naturally "extreme" relative to each other, and thus any attempt to regulate an overall population's "extreme" behavior by bringing down "moderation" on every single individual one-by-one is in effect an attempt to intolerantly force a specific way of being on large numbers of people, and through the sheer quantity of that action it becomes extreme -> this sounds like something a schizoanalyst would say but at the very least it's more correct than [[E:Fukuyama's dialectic\|what Mr. Jiang says]].

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX\|Q=618}}Communist revolution restores the proletariat / Mainstream Marxism-Leninism is the only form of Communist revolution in all practical terms because no country which needs to turn into a workers' state will ever have a significant proletariat; only countries where the proletariat either hardly exists or is actively getting disbanded and eliminated are likely to form a workers' state -> I feel like Mr. Jiang needed to be told this when he was so bizarrely glued to classical Menshevism and thinks Lenin is evil because he wasn't a Menshevik (no joke). {{YouTube\|QtqfIjK1GAc}}		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX\|Q=618}}Communist revolution restores the proletariat / Mainstream Marxism-Leninism is the only form of Communist revolution in all practical terms because no country which needs to turn into a workers' state will ever have a significant proletariat; only countries where the proletariat either hardly exists or is actively getting disbanded and eliminated are likely to form a workers' state -> I feel like Mr. Jiang needed to be told this when he was so bizarrely glued to classical Menshevism and thinks Lenin is evil because he wasn't a Menshevik (no joke). {{YouTube\|QtqfIjK1GAc}}

Reversedragon: The CPC periodically audits university professors' houses every three months to demonstrate dominance

2026-05-19T07:48:00Z

The CPC periodically audits university professors' houses every three months to demonstrate dominance

Show changes

Reversedragon: anticommunist book featuring Stalin

2026-05-18T02:12:32Z

anticommunist book featuring Stalin

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:12, 18 May 2026
Line 61:		Line 61:

	{{li\|I=S2/LR\|tradition=MX onto LR\|Q=618}}Capitalism comes from the belief that mutual aid cannot bring freedom / The post-structuralist Ideal that people delivering things to each other can never be freedom without the ability to disconnect relationships for other relationships because all relationships inherently contain the potential for domination can generate capitalism and entire capitalist countries -> I think based on this there is an argument that Gramscianism is actually post-structualist and blue. it depends on how heavily people cling to perfection and being connected to the perfect people versus to actually uniting different groups of people together to try to form a solid proletarian subpopulation. I do know that the strawberry swatch has become more tightly associated with using existing forms of production to defend national borders, while the concept of kicking people out of or putting them into an amorphous mass of 'good people' is a really Liberal-republican way of thinking especially when there is no physical Lattice of proletarian allies that is understood in molecularized terms.		{{li\|I=S2/LR\|tradition=MX onto LR\|Q=618}}Capitalism comes from the belief that mutual aid cannot bring freedom / The post-structuralist Ideal that people delivering things to each other can never be freedom without the ability to disconnect relationships for other relationships because all relationships inherently contain the potential for domination can generate capitalism and entire capitalist countries -> I think based on this there is an argument that Gramscianism is actually post-structualist and blue. it depends on how heavily people cling to perfection and being connected to the perfect people versus to actually uniting different groups of people together to try to form a solid proletarian subpopulation. I do know that the strawberry swatch has become more tightly associated with using existing forms of production to defend national borders, while the concept of kicking people out of or putting them into an amorphous mass of 'good people' is a really Liberal-republican way of thinking especially when there is no physical Lattice of proletarian allies that is understood in molecularized terms.

	{{li\|I=S2/ES\|tradition=LR, ES\|Q=618}}anticommunist book featuring Stalin / anticommunist book making statement about Stalin / book with anticommunist leanings unexpectedly making statement about Stalin -> even after you exclude every book that is actually intended to be about the USSR or Stalin such as {{book\|Animal Farm}}, you'd be surprised how many of these there are.<br/>
	I was just reading an ordinary newspaper comic strip collection and guess what, that was technically an 'anticommunist book featuring Stalin'. when I saw Stalin come up by name I just, my brain had one of those windows task manager freezes for a moment, and then after it unfroze I decided it was funnier than the rest of the book and all I could visualize for the next few minutes was doing one of those edits where you take arbitrary comic strip frames and put them together or Dinosaur-Comics edits where you keep reusing the same strip and putting in new dialogue, and just make a bunch more strips of them talking about Stalin. I liked the idea of turning that into a video, starting out with a simple comic dub and then getting progressively weirder with edits of it and elaborations on it to the point it was just on entirely another plane from where the original strip had started. this is my sense of humor. one of the funniest things to me is making edits of anticommunists talking about Communism but actually getting it right or at least {{em\|kind of}} not getting it wrong; sometimes the voice clips videos give you are hard to work with to make the most accurate statements, or are easier to edit into something being said ironically than into something being said totally seriously. I do want to see if I can finish that video from yesterday of Mr. Jiang giving an actually not crazy summary of China. because like with PragerU, an actually lucid Jiang video would be much more unexpected than a crazy one.

	{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}Fukuyama's dialectic / Hegelian dialectic (Fukuyama) {{YouTube\|AEPSUC-UQ5k}} -> this is the questionable concept that Ideas evolve through destroying their opponent Ideas and then specifically integrating "the best" parts of them, which is bound to be subjective and shaped by the priorities of the [[:Category:Bauplan ontologies\|physical elements (class structures)]] that make up the winning Social-Philosophical System; it comes with the inherent connotation that whatever Idea popped out after digestion really is "the correct Idea" instead of one that is being arbitrarily adapted to a given Social-Philosophical-Material System.		{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}Fukuyama's dialectic / Hegelian dialectic (Fukuyama) {{YouTube\|AEPSUC-UQ5k}} -> this is the questionable concept that Ideas evolve through destroying their opponent Ideas and then specifically integrating "the best" parts of them, which is bound to be subjective and shaped by the priorities of the [[:Category:Bauplan ontologies\|physical elements (class structures)]] that make up the winning Social-Philosophical System; it comes with the inherent connotation that whatever Idea popped out after digestion really is "the correct Idea" instead of one that is being arbitrarily adapted to a given Social-Philosophical-Material System.

Reversedragon: It is possible to build a model of reason specifically based on the concept of people seeking Freedom from Domination (Habermas)

2026-05-14T01:37:17Z

It is possible to build a model of reason specifically based on the concept of people seeking Freedom from Domination (Habermas)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:37, 14 May 2026
Line 552:		Line 552:

	{{li\|I=S2/ES\|tradition=HM\|Q=618}}Society is made of language (Habermas) / Language is a foundational component of society, to the point a theory of language can be inserted into Marxism; it is implied this will be inserted in the context of societal systems or psychology [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Communicative_Action] -> "don't do this to me," I say to myself every time I have to read just about anything about critical theory and what critical-theorists believe.		{{li\|I=S2/ES\|tradition=HM\|Q=618}}Society is made of language (Habermas) / Language is a foundational component of society, to the point a theory of language can be inserted into Marxism; it is implied this will be inserted in the context of societal systems or psychology [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Communicative_Action] -> "don't do this to me," I say to myself every time I have to read just about anything about critical theory and what critical-theorists believe.

	{{li\|I=S2/A\|tradition=HM\|Q=618}}It is possible to build a model of reason specifically based on the concept of people seeking Freedom from Domination (Habermas) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Communicative_Action] -> this is weirdly Kantian. it's trying to be new but it feels like it's just formalizing Kant's weird concept that intuition is the same thing is logic just because we decided to apply it to morality

	{{li\|I=S2/STM\|tradition=STM / formal logic, HAS / analytic philosophy\|Q=618}}True and False are artifacts of the existence of propositions / True and False are byproducts of the existence of reason and do not originally exist in nature before there is a person or instrument to create ontological models of nature (Rorty) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty] -> this is fine. this is just an acknowledgement that systems of logic are something that have to be created and have made-up rules in order to function for interpreting the world. which is accurate. anyone who's ever seen Gödel's incompleteness theorem will realize it has to be the case on some level that logic or reasoning is made up in order to be designed for its task.

	{{li\|I=S1/ES\|tradition=\|Q=618}}postanalytic philosophy [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postanalytic_philosophy] -> a lot of Wikipedia articles on philosophy just feel like garbage — by no fault of the people writing them, it's just that the stuff they have to read and cover is garbage — but this seems like a legitimate category		{{li\|I=S1/ES\|tradition=\|Q=618}}postanalytic philosophy [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postanalytic_philosophy] -> a lot of Wikipedia articles on philosophy just feel like garbage — by no fault of the people writing them, it's just that the stuff they have to read and cover is garbage — but this seems like a legitimate category

Reversedragon: Every human activity which is not productized is violent

2026-05-11T06:00:37Z

Every human activity which is not productized is violent

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:00, 11 May 2026
Line 1,161:		Line 1,161:
	</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">People who move to the Second World have disgracefully strawberried anarchism (derived anarchist claim) -> here "strawberried" is a verb meaning "to desert a revolution to move to a place of safety underneath imperialist armies etc". I sort of get this impression from real anarchist writings but, it doesn't make logical sense to me with the idea that freedom of association and voluntary participation are core values. to a (meta-)Marxist, the notion of people compromising on their values and leaving to survive being a historical process that can happen to Marxist states and anarchist societies in different ways makes a lot of sense. but is there any way for anarchists to meaningfully construct that within their own theories?<br/>		</li><li class="field_anarchy" data-tradition="A" value="618" data-dimension="S2">People who move to the Second World have disgracefully strawberried anarchism (derived anarchist claim) -> here "strawberried" is a verb meaning "to desert a revolution to move to a place of safety underneath imperialist armies etc". I sort of get this impression from real anarchist writings but, it doesn't make logical sense to me with the idea that freedom of association and voluntary participation are core values. to a (meta-)Marxist, the notion of people compromising on their values and leaving to survive being a historical process that can happen to Marxist states and anarchist societies in different ways makes a lot of sense. but is there any way for anarchists to meaningfully construct that within their own theories?<br/>
	I guess logically they're going to somehow try to claim that if you literally side with imperialism that as an individual you are standing behind figures of "domination" and that in particular is the bad thing to do. but there my main problem is, so why don't anarchists think Trotsky siding with Liberal-republican countries was a bad thing? those are the loci of Domination. he sided with them. why isn't it logically better {{em\|within anarchism}} if Trotsky commits to staying in the Soviet Union but somehow building Trotskyism, and thus not aiding Domination? the facts are on the table. even if you hate historical materialism and seeing countries as countable objects the facts are still right there on the table that having Trotskyism-in-one-country would be less bad than trying to push for anarchism at all costs but never getting it and only actually getting Domination and death.		I guess logically they're going to somehow try to claim that if you literally side with imperialism that as an individual you are standing behind figures of "domination" and that in particular is the bad thing to do. but there my main problem is, so why don't anarchists think Trotsky siding with Liberal-republican countries was a bad thing? those are the loci of Domination. he sided with them. why isn't it logically better {{em\|within anarchism}} if Trotsky commits to staying in the Soviet Union but somehow building Trotskyism, and thus not aiding Domination? the facts are on the table. even if you hate historical materialism and seeing countries as countable objects the facts are still right there on the table that having Trotskyism-in-one-country would be less bad than trying to push for anarchism at all costs but never getting it and only actually getting Domination and death.

	</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX onto A, MX onto Fy" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Fan game development is an anarchist secret operation -> this proposition is for the purpose of discussions on whether to disallow linking to fan game project pages under the project rule that anarchist secret operations shouldn't be documented. I feel like linking YouTube videos of fan games is probably okay but I am unclear whether linking project pages or wikis or basically first-hand sources is bad.

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="MX onto LR" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Every human activity which is illegal is unspeakable -> if you think this isn't true, think about what emotion you feel when you hear something is currently illegal in a Communist country even for a temporary time and re-evaluate what you already believe "regulating" things does to them.<br/>
	this doesn't have a lot of direct applicability to most issues in the United States — homosexuality being one of the really notable exceptions. what it's actually useful for is probing larger discussions around whether Kantianism and Liberal-republicanism actually make any sense.

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="LR, PT" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Every human activity which is not productized is violent -> don't let people get away with talking about "originality" and "plagiarism" and "integrity" and "infringement" casually. hiding under all that is a really nasty claim that every act of creating art that doesn't become a business and turn the creator into a business owner must be destroying society.

	</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX onto LR" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Liberal-republicanism is an attempt to improperly carry out Deng Xiaoping processes on individuals rather than countries -> this sounds insane but follow along with me. Deng Xiaoping processes involve materially defending a populational border by filling up a population with businesses and extensive party structure as solidly as possible, so that it can't be taken over by filling it up with foreign businesses nor upset by installing individual foreign officials. escape-route Existentialism, where supposedly everyone gains Freedom from all the connections between things shifting around and changing constantly, believes that drawing a firm territory line around every individual and saying it can never be crossed is the way to peace in much the way that China becoming impregnable against outside attacks is the way to peace. there is one big problem with this: the supposed firm boundaries are terribly, horribly unstable. they can crumble at any moment, they can fail to protect individuals at any moment, chunk competition can resume at any moment. Deng Xiaoping Thought and post-structuralist Existentialism are both attempts at ending chunk competition of a very specific type — the chunk competition between nations and the chunk competition between individuals respectively — but their effectiveness at their task is wildly different. the former has been relatively successful, the latter has been a disaster.		</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX onto LR" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Liberal-republicanism is an attempt to improperly carry out Deng Xiaoping processes on individuals rather than countries -> this sounds insane but follow along with me. Deng Xiaoping processes involve materially defending a populational border by filling up a population with businesses and extensive party structure as solidly as possible, so that it can't be taken over by filling it up with foreign businesses nor upset by installing individual foreign officials. escape-route Existentialism, where supposedly everyone gains Freedom from all the connections between things shifting around and changing constantly, believes that drawing a firm territory line around every individual and saying it can never be crossed is the way to peace in much the way that China becoming impregnable against outside attacks is the way to peace. there is one big problem with this: the supposed firm boundaries are terribly, horribly unstable. they can crumble at any moment, they can fail to protect individuals at any moment, chunk competition can resume at any moment. Deng Xiaoping Thought and post-structuralist Existentialism are both attempts at ending chunk competition of a very specific type — the chunk competition between nations and the chunk competition between individuals respectively — but their effectiveness at their task is wildly different. the former has been relatively successful, the latter has been a disaster.
Line 1,179:		Line 1,172:
	</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX onto DX" value="618" data-dimension="M3">What mode of production does the People's Republic of China have? -> you know meta-Marxism is getting serious when it steps out of making up new terms to describe observations phenomenologically and actually starts using the correct words and making new claims about what they practically mean in the real world.		</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX onto DX" value="618" data-dimension="M3">What mode of production does the People's Republic of China have? -> you know meta-Marxism is getting serious when it steps out of making up new terms to describe observations phenomenologically and actually starts using the correct words and making new claims about what they practically mean in the real world.

	</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX" value="618" data-dimension="S2">A mode of production contains a particular economic base / A mode of production is wholly or partially composed of a particular economic base -> setting down some clear definitions of concepts whether the concepts themselves might be a bit vague.		</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX" value="618" data-dimension="S2">A mode of production is partly defined by how new people are integrated into a population after birth or migration -> this wasn't necessary to point out in the time of Marx, but when critical theory has taken over and tried to replace Marxism and made everything about "prejudice" while a bunch of other people are trying to stop new developments for the purpose of stopping 'prejudice' and 'greed', it's now critical to inform everybody that far from "empathy" coming naturally, one of the only factors keeping people everywhere from being wildly "prejudiced" at the drop of a hat is the ability to put people into a capitalist structure of workers or businesses. abolish capitalism naïvely and like, no women will have jobs any more and White people will start claiming that because their small, local "Commmunity" is already complete there's no space left over for Black people or Mexicans. there's a decent argument that one of the major mistakes of the Soviet Union was taking away swaths of corporate development or development into cities that people ideologically believed to be excessive and in need of regulation and bam, suddenly everything got worse for women because with little exaggeration cities were the only thing making it better.<br/>
			A mode of production contains a particular economic base + ?? = this.
	</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX" value="618" data-dimension="S2">A mode of production is partly defined by how new people are integrated into a population after birth or migration -> this wasn't necessary to point out in the time of Marx, but when critical theory has taken over and tried to replace Marxism and made everything about "prejudice" while a bunch of other people are trying to stop new developments for the purpose of stopping 'prejudice' and 'greed', it's now critical to inform everybody that far from "empathy" coming naturally, one of the only factors keeping people everywhere from being wildly "prejudiced" at the drop of a hat is the ability to put people into a capitalist structure of workers or businesses. abolish capitalism naïvely and like, no women will have jobs any more and White people will start claiming that because their small, local "Commmunity" is already complete there's no space left over for Black people or Mexicans. there's a decent argument that one of the major mistakes of the Soviet Union was taking away swaths of corporate development or development into cities that people ideologically believed to be excessive and in need of regulation and bam, suddenly everything got worse for women because with little exaggeration cities were the only thing making it better.

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="IK, ES, LR" value="618" data-dimension="S">Kantianization / Kantianizing (parallel to "Zinovievizing") -> a generalized process where a bunch of people attempting to form a countable culture all get together and form a State that they [[E:leaping State process (meta-Marxism)\|leap over]] anybody somehow captured into the same population with them. may be considered synonymous with [[E:democulture (meta-Marxism)\|democulture]], or just a subcategory of possible kinds of democulture.		</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="IK, ES, LR" value="618" data-dimension="S">Kantianization / Kantianizing (parallel to "Zinovievizing") -> a generalized process where a bunch of people attempting to form a countable culture all get together and form a State that they [[E:leaping State process (meta-Marxism)\|leap over]] anybody somehow captured into the same population with them. may be considered synonymous with [[E:democulture (meta-Marxism)\|democulture]], or just a subcategory of possible kinds of democulture.

Reversedragon: He who is not afraid of death by a thousand cuts dares to unhorse the emperor (Mao)

2026-05-11T05:39:43Z

He who is not afraid of death by a thousand cuts dares to unhorse the emperor (Mao)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:39, 11 May 2026
Line 305:		Line 305:

	{{li\|I=S1/JC\|Q=618}}North Korean news and LGBT rights -> I went on KCNAWatch and searched both "homosexual" and "gay" to try to find a source on the claim that the WPK had supported legalizing homosexuality. I expected for all the world for this article to come up that was like, Kim Il-sung and his descendants are so wonderful, they understand human rights despite what the United States says, look how the WPK legalized homosexuality and they were right there. that was absolutely the article I thought I was going to get. (and don't get me wrong, I would have been fairly satisfied with that article. I'm fine with the odd ways North Korean reporters frame things as long as they have a good stance on the issues; I understand North Korean characteristics.) but I was a little surprised to find that most recent mentions of "homosexual" have been very negative, often coming up as a generic insult hurled at officials in First World countries oppressing North Korea. [https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1451904652-719055996/us-should-apologize-for-its-anti-dprk-conspiratorial-document-kcna/] [https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-idprk/reportofthe-commissionof-inquiry-dprk] one of the only times I found that was positive was a claim that the United States was "full of discrimination" because people in the United States had complained to the FCC about a Spanish-language talk show saying prejudiced things about women and gay/lesbian people. [https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1451891869-195414965/hispanic-groups-in-us-complain-obscene-spanish-language-talk-show/] this has the form of something that was said not because the person actually believes it and supports the values themself but because it generically supports the concept that it's time to undermine or dissolve a foreign country because the people in that foreign country are dissatisfied with being connected to it. Trotskyism without content; orange anarchism; [[E:Zinovievizing\|Zinovievization]]. it is strange to me how much North Korea claims to be unaligned to any bloc of countries and then like, so many articles are quietly chock full of this subtext of "dismantle the United States". are they really actually non-aligned at that point? or are they non-aligned in the same sense [[E:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition\|Existentialists]] are non-aligned, claiming to have no formal affiliation to any larger structure but then waiting for the day when suddenly a bunch of non-aligned people or non-aligned countries suddenly come together for just one second and crush the thing they were too afraid to openly stand against that's actually their shared enemy? that seems to be the general pattern of absolutely all politics these days, from anarchist street protests to creating a Marxist state that 'ostensibly' isn't connected to a Communist international. "decentralized" factions are the most powerful, but they are powerful specifically because they are completely unaccountable to anyone including themselves and gain their power from spontaneous physical force and the ability to out-survive others, this Darwinian principle of irrational force always overcoming reason if enough individuals are there and enough force is applied. it's like Existentialism can only be defeated by anarcho-[[User:RD/9k/Q22,13\|Yaroshenkoism]].		{{li\|I=S1/JC\|Q=618}}North Korean news and LGBT rights -> I went on KCNAWatch and searched both "homosexual" and "gay" to try to find a source on the claim that the WPK had supported legalizing homosexuality. I expected for all the world for this article to come up that was like, Kim Il-sung and his descendants are so wonderful, they understand human rights despite what the United States says, look how the WPK legalized homosexuality and they were right there. that was absolutely the article I thought I was going to get. (and don't get me wrong, I would have been fairly satisfied with that article. I'm fine with the odd ways North Korean reporters frame things as long as they have a good stance on the issues; I understand North Korean characteristics.) but I was a little surprised to find that most recent mentions of "homosexual" have been very negative, often coming up as a generic insult hurled at officials in First World countries oppressing North Korea. [https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1451904652-719055996/us-should-apologize-for-its-anti-dprk-conspiratorial-document-kcna/] [https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-idprk/reportofthe-commissionof-inquiry-dprk] one of the only times I found that was positive was a claim that the United States was "full of discrimination" because people in the United States had complained to the FCC about a Spanish-language talk show saying prejudiced things about women and gay/lesbian people. [https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1451891869-195414965/hispanic-groups-in-us-complain-obscene-spanish-language-talk-show/] this has the form of something that was said not because the person actually believes it and supports the values themself but because it generically supports the concept that it's time to undermine or dissolve a foreign country because the people in that foreign country are dissatisfied with being connected to it. Trotskyism without content; orange anarchism; [[E:Zinovievizing\|Zinovievization]]. it is strange to me how much North Korea claims to be unaligned to any bloc of countries and then like, so many articles are quietly chock full of this subtext of "dismantle the United States". are they really actually non-aligned at that point? or are they non-aligned in the same sense [[E:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition\|Existentialists]] are non-aligned, claiming to have no formal affiliation to any larger structure but then waiting for the day when suddenly a bunch of non-aligned people or non-aligned countries suddenly come together for just one second and crush the thing they were too afraid to openly stand against that's actually their shared enemy? that seems to be the general pattern of absolutely all politics these days, from anarchist street protests to creating a Marxist state that 'ostensibly' isn't connected to a Communist international. "decentralized" factions are the most powerful, but they are powerful specifically because they are completely unaccountable to anyone including themselves and gain their power from spontaneous physical force and the ability to out-survive others, this Darwinian principle of irrational force always overcoming reason if enough individuals are there and enough force is applied. it's like Existentialism can only be defeated by anarcho-[[User:RD/9k/Q22,13\|Yaroshenkoism]].

	{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618}}North Korean mass media is amongst the most strictly controlled in the world [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_media_in_North_Korea] -> claim found on Wikipedia page. this is a very misleading framing. it's accurate to say that Korean state media is 'a monopoly' or there is a limited number of media producers. but this is literally [[E:Stalin became mandatory due to limited availability of education and experts\|due to the wealth of the country]]. it's an underdeveloped country that only develops slower with every sanction, thus by Liberal-republican poststructuralist [[E:separable multiplicity\|pluralized]]-wealth-equals-freedom standards becoming ""less free"".<br/>
	you start to see how disingenuous this is when you realize how common Western-Marxist rhetoric has become and how much every single political movement becomes about "moral panics in mass media" and "representing things correctly in the media". in North Korea you don't have that problem. the one good thing about the state monopoly over what mass media will be is that mass media never becomes this wild uncontrolled thing that can just go spontaneously spreading racism at the drop of a hat when nobody expects it. the Existentialist-Althusserian-Trotskyite axis basically created that problem and then proceeded to push all other issues under the rug while badly trying to solve the problem it created.

	{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618}}framing conflict over environmental protections as human versus human, cities versus rural areas, rather than as human versus animal [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/oryx/article/blaming-threatened-species-media-portrayal-of-humanwildlife-conflict/1368C6FFEEE7F944A3A3C7186C31AB03] [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9622530/]		{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618}}framing conflict over environmental protections as human versus human, cities versus rural areas, rather than as human versus animal [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/oryx/article/blaming-threatened-species-media-portrayal-of-humanwildlife-conflict/1368C6FFEEE7F944A3A3C7186C31AB03] [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9622530/]

	{{li\|I=S2/LLM\|Q=618}}The biggest bottleneck to building AI is energy use (2026) [https://www.livescience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/computing-power-is-no-longer-the-ai-bottleneck-its-energy-production]		{{li\|I=S2/LLM\|Q=618}}The biggest bottleneck to building AI is energy use (2026) [https://www.livescience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/computing-power-is-no-longer-the-ai-bottleneck-its-energy-production]

	{{li\|I=S2/MZ\|Q=618}}He who is not afraid of death by a thousand cuts dares to unhorse the emperor (Mao) -> this feels like it might be quoting a previous thing from hundreds of years ago. will have to check that later [https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/ch27.htm]

	{{li\|I=S2/JC\|Q=618}}The most powerful weapon for a party that is waging a revolution — in fact its one and only weapon — is ideology (Kim Jong-un) [https://archive.ph/imx12?url=naenara.com.kp] -> this is one of the most [[E:Fisherism (meta-Marxism onto Western Marxism)\|Western-Marxist]] things they've ever said		{{li\|I=S2/JC\|Q=618}}The most powerful weapon for a party that is waging a revolution — in fact its one and only weapon — is ideology (Kim Jong-un) [https://archive.ph/imx12?url=naenara.com.kp] -> this is one of the most [[E:Fisherism (meta-Marxism onto Western Marxism)\|Western-Marxist]] things they've ever said

Reversedragon: Anarchism opposes the imposed (Rodgers)

2026-05-08T12:22:20Z

Anarchism opposes the imposed (Rodgers)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:22, 8 May 2026
Line 184:		Line 184:
	okay, so, that's the depressing part, let's get back to the fun part. what would you do if anarchists banned Bolshevism, all the blue and strawberry and charcoal and orange and brown and pure-bright-green petty bourgeoisie in the world getting together and totally making the wrong choice, and Marxism perpetually is under the constraint it absolutely has to conform to anarchism? you have to create a Second World for the purpose of protecting Third World ethnic groups from oppressive axes of First-World ethnic groups (probably made worse by anarchists' love of Filaments) that would otherwise want to slurp up every square meter of land Third World people could use for their own further multiplication. you have to keep as many people as possible dedicated to that Second World and building it up so people are protected inside it. you need some process that takes crimson people and the structures they form and glues them together one by one to build larger and larger structures even if various individuals periodically keep deserting you and keep periodically flying off the edges. you need to basically create a formulation of Marxism with a very advanced molecularization to it where absolutely nothing is blobby or amorphous or about "masses" that aren't perfectly understood structurally down to the connections of every individual or said another way the exact shapes and structures individuals form into. you need to take Marx and Stalin's concept of society being made specifically of individuals graphed together into production structures by relations of production and elaborate on it a lot so every possible structure in society and the things it turns into are really well understood to where you truly govern the system through scientific theory practiced by every individual all predicting society as they act individually and not even through democracy.<br/>		okay, so, that's the depressing part, let's get back to the fun part. what would you do if anarchists banned Bolshevism, all the blue and strawberry and charcoal and orange and brown and pure-bright-green petty bourgeoisie in the world getting together and totally making the wrong choice, and Marxism perpetually is under the constraint it absolutely has to conform to anarchism? you have to create a Second World for the purpose of protecting Third World ethnic groups from oppressive axes of First-World ethnic groups (probably made worse by anarchists' love of Filaments) that would otherwise want to slurp up every square meter of land Third World people could use for their own further multiplication. you have to keep as many people as possible dedicated to that Second World and building it up so people are protected inside it. you need some process that takes crimson people and the structures they form and glues them together one by one to build larger and larger structures even if various individuals periodically keep deserting you and keep periodically flying off the edges. you need to basically create a formulation of Marxism with a very advanced molecularization to it where absolutely nothing is blobby or amorphous or about "masses" that aren't perfectly understood structurally down to the connections of every individual or said another way the exact shapes and structures individuals form into. you need to take Marx and Stalin's concept of society being made specifically of individuals graphed together into production structures by relations of production and elaborate on it a lot so every possible structure in society and the things it turns into are really well understood to where you truly govern the system through scientific theory practiced by every individual all predicting society as they act individually and not even through democracy.<br/>
	right.... {{em\|this}} is why I was so oddly obsessed with constructing a unique violet named Marxism in the early bad {{book\|MDem}} drafts. that would be this. that would be the Marxism you build when anarchism has been totally ruining the world and you need the most unimaginably highly advanced Marxism to be applied immediately to every individual to ever pull off saving the Second World in the middle of that. so the named Marxism I was describing early on was actually more like, fully quantized molecular ?????.		right.... {{em\|this}} is why I was so oddly obsessed with constructing a unique violet named Marxism in the early bad {{book\|MDem}} drafts. that would be this. that would be the Marxism you build when anarchism has been totally ruining the world and you need the most unimaginably highly advanced Marxism to be applied immediately to every individual to ever pull off saving the Second World in the middle of that. so the named Marxism I was describing early on was actually more like, fully quantized molecular ?????.

	{{li\|I=S1/Zv\|tradition=ES, Zv, A\|Q=618}}post-ideological anarchism / freeform movement which has taken up miscellaneous anarchist ideas and strategies as well as miscellaneous other concepts and traditions for no ulterior reason except that they consider them useful (Curran) [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morgan-rodgers-gibson-anarchism-the-state-and-the-praxis-of-contemporary-antisystemic-social-mo] -> this might be one definition of an orange anarchism.

	{{li\|I=S2/A\|tradition=A\|Q=618}}Anarchism opposes the imposed / Anarchism is that which opposes what is imposed / Anarchism is that which opposes any form of authority, coercion, or [[E:hierarchical social structure (anarchism)\|hierarchical social structure]] that when it is in contradiction with a group it impacts cannot be fully justified and consented to (Rodgers) [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morgan-rodgers-gibson-anarchism-the-state-and-the-praxis-of-contemporary-antisystemic-social-mo] / I deny what denies me (Bellegarrigue) [https://ia601803.us.archive.org/29/items/the-anarchist-library-full-list-of-pdfs-nov-2020/anselme-bellegarrigue-the-world-s-first-anarchist-manifesto.pdf] -> that sounds like an awfully strawberry ideology that's like, going to let all the peasants think they're workers and defend having things exactly the way they are and then complain about how hard the peasants exploit themselves despite how much they've shifted freedom and responsibility onto the individual and off authority figures

	{{li\|I=S1/A\|tradition=A onto ML\|Q=618}}Commune of Kronstadt, last bastion of 1917 [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/iztok-on-anarchism-in-the-ussr-1921-1979] -> this is the anarchist version of "Trotsky, who founded the CPSU"		{{li\|I=S1/A\|tradition=A onto ML\|Q=618}}Commune of Kronstadt, last bastion of 1917 [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/iztok-on-anarchism-in-the-ussr-1921-1979] -> this is the anarchist version of "Trotsky, who founded the CPSU"

	{{li\|I=S2/A\|tradition=A onto A\|Q=618}}Anarchism is often met with ridicule (Rodgers 2021) [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morgan-rodgers-gibson-anarchism-the-state-and-the-praxis-of-contemporary-antisystemic-social-mo] -> and there are definitely reasons for that.<br/>
	like, {{censor\|goddamn}}, this article will talk about "misconceptions about anarchism" like real anarchists on the ground aren't constantly trying to make everything as opaque and obscure and hard to understand as possible such that everyone will misunderstand it.

	{{li\|I=S2/Zv\|tradition=A\|Q=618}}A movement against The System is a movement that opposes the status quo / An antisystemic movement is a movement that opposes the status quo (Immanuel Wallerstein) [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/morgan-rodgers-gibson-anarchism-the-state-and-the-praxis-of-contemporary-antisystemic-social-mo] -> really orange definition.

	{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}Grecian peaches -> the motif of a product that is imported from another country and sounds really fancy when you phrase it in a way like "Grecian peaches" but is just a regular product similar to those found in the country importing it, and that may even be marginally lower than average quality because it is less of a quality product and more of a quantity product imported from other countries to cover supply gaps.<br />		{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}Grecian peaches -> the motif of a product that is imported from another country and sounds really fancy when you phrase it in a way like "Grecian peaches" but is just a regular product similar to those found in the country importing it, and that may even be marginally lower than average quality because it is less of a quality product and more of a quantity product imported from other countries to cover supply gaps.<br />

Reversedragon: A world of dragons is a world of adventure

2026-05-04T00:11:09Z

A world of dragons is a world of adventure

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:11, 4 May 2026
Line 17:		Line 17:

	{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618}}The Regime / good countries have governments; bad countries have regimes {{YouTube\|bUHjstDCshI}}		{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618}}The Regime / good countries have governments; bad countries have regimes {{YouTube\|bUHjstDCshI}}

	{{li\|I=S2/Fy\|Q=618}}A world of dragons is a world of adventure / A world of dragons is a world of battles (generic) / A world of dragons is a world full of possibility / A world of dragons is a world of unknowns / A world of dragons is a world of mystery and wonder / here be dragons (generic)

	~~{{li\|I=S2/Fy\|Q=618}}A world of dragons is a world of battles~~

	{{li\|I=S2/Fy\|Q=618}}A world of dragons is a world of morality / A world of dragons is a world of clear right and wrong -> this actually isn't true sometimes. Wings of Fire is one of the most compelling and least contrived examples

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618}}Kantianism is a scam and everything about a state being created directly from a "state of nature" is a lie -> it would be more accurate, although not quite literally true, to say that human beings are always in a State at all times, and there is no time when they aren't — whenever a human physically has the ability to pull out a gun and use it to enforce their will on another person and smash violations of that particular specific will there exists some kind of State. each local state in a warring states period is a State, because it can make laws. most business territories qualify as States. but here's the shocking part: there are times when a peasant farm or a household counts as a State. in some particular places like the US South 100 houses who are all bent on keeping Black people out of their town could be a State just by virtue of the households being there each with the capability of violence individually.<br/>		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618}}Kantianism is a scam and everything about a state being created directly from a "state of nature" is a lie -> it would be more accurate, although not quite literally true, to say that human beings are always in a State at all times, and there is no time when they aren't — whenever a human physically has the ability to pull out a gun and use it to enforce their will on another person and smash violations of that particular specific will there exists some kind of State. each local state in a warring states period is a State, because it can make laws. most business territories qualify as States. but here's the shocking part: there are times when a peasant farm or a household counts as a State. in some particular places like the US South 100 houses who are all bent on keeping Black people out of their town could be a State just by virtue of the households being there each with the capability of violence individually.<br/>

Reversedragon: Power comes from technology

2026-05-01T13:56:08Z

Power comes from technology

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:56, 1 May 2026
Line 1,206:		Line 1,206:
	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="MX onto Aa" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Lacanianism formalizes the concept of Kantianization; they are actually the same concept		</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="MX onto Aa" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Lacanianism formalizes the concept of Kantianization; they are actually the same concept
	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="MX onto Aa" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Lacanianism molecularizes the concept of Kantianization; they are different concepts because one is genuinely more elaborate		</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="MX onto Aa" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Lacanianism molecularizes the concept of Kantianization; they are different concepts because one is genuinely more elaborate

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="LR, ES" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Can we really trust companies to use their technology for good?! -> this is one of the biggest glaring contradictions in the whole of blue anarchism. that government must be used to contain """technology""", the place power supposedly comes from, but that we're really not supposed to think about government and nearly supposed to forget it exists after an election, and that society must be developed through people spontaneously creating technology with no guidance from anyone else. that feels like a ticking time bomb waiting to explode.<br/>
	"power comes from technology" "we only have society when we regulate technology" "well you have to have businesses" "businesses don't have anything to do with anything" "they're a business, they have to make a profit" ""<br/>
	honestly, like... anticommunism is one of the most dangerous technologies ever invented, because it makes your government secretly build atom bombs whether you want them. can we ban anticommunism just because it's dangerous and acts as a material process that causes the creation of corporations and institutions thus making it a technology?

	~~</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="MX onto LR" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Anticommunism is a technology~~
	</li><li class="field_gramsci" data-tradition="MX onto LR" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Anticommunism is a dangerous technology / Anticommunism is a dangerous technology that must be banned or regulated -> this is so stupid it's hilarious and yet it's one of those moments where I'm like, did I have a moment of dark genius...? would this actually work?<br/>
	I know this would be a fun B-side chapter though. {{i\|Hello, U.S. Congress. This is the Emancipation Party for statist anarchy. I may be an anarchist, but I don't believe in letting dangerous technolgies run around freely. This is why you have to regulate anticommunism as a dangerous technology...}}<br/>
	~~Anticommunism is a technology + ?? = Anticommunism is a dangerous technology~~

	</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="IV" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Noam Chomsky is a Trotskyist		</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-tradition="IV" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Noam Chomsky is a Trotskyist
Line 1,290:		Line 1,281:

	</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Never run LLM experiments using online LLMs -> there are three ways this statement can be taken: as a project policy stating that {{em\|online}} LLMs should never be used for this project (fully offline LLMs are approved for experiments as long as you never ever leave any generated text or reasoning that hasn't been checked manually on pages; use an LLM to generate a Wavebuilder combination, and if you give a really good manual reasoning not from the LLM for why that's totally the answer you won't get caught), as a statement that even outside this project online LLM experiments can never be as useful as offline LLM experiments, or as a prescriptive statement to basically never use online LLMs. all three statements seem sound to me, really.		</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Never run LLM experiments using online LLMs -> there are three ways this statement can be taken: as a project policy stating that {{em\|online}} LLMs should never be used for this project (fully offline LLMs are approved for experiments as long as you never ever leave any generated text or reasoning that hasn't been checked manually on pages; use an LLM to generate a Wavebuilder combination, and if you give a really good manual reasoning not from the LLM for why that's totally the answer you won't get caught), as a statement that even outside this project online LLM experiments can never be as useful as offline LLM experiments, or as a prescriptive statement to basically never use online LLMs. all three statements seem sound to me, really.

	</li><li class="field_exstruct" data-tradition="ES" value="618" data-dimension="F2">Power comes from technology / Power comes from material inventions and philosophical technologies, including corporate structures, government institutions, and ideological conditioning -> {{em\|no.}} now, I like the definition of technology here. that part is not really the bad part — honestly, it's pretty cool and fitting to be able to call something like Marxist historical materialism a technology. that said, this is an Idealist model of where power comes from. it doesn't look like it at first, when it appeals to material objects like spears, bomber planes, and datacenters full of LLMs, but the telling part is when it considers policies to be technologies on the same level as physical inventions. while that shouldn't be a bad thing it's definitely being done for the wrong reasons. what's being implied is that technologies are something that are deliberately created as social constructs by individuals based on what they personally want — based on individual knowledge, individual ideology, and individual will. the article says that individual actions and decisions can never fully be prevented, which is correct, but then it claims that they can be contained anyway, based on some oddly specific between-the-lines reasoning that if people decide to do something it must then be possible to tell them not to decide to do it. this is not correct. people are countably separate material objects capable of multiplying their capital and capacity for destruction before they are rational agents, so if you try to believe that Ideas and Free Will are the basis for government then you'll end up at the conclusion that [[E:government is almost impossible\|government is almost impossible]]. all you can really claw back from the harsh facts of reality is the concept that because people have the capacity for destruction that in itself means that there's the right for a nation-state to assert government over them. but nation-states are countable, so you have to decide which nation-state has the inherent right to capture which people. and if you decide it wrong, the United States will forcibly assimilate a bunch of individual Native Americans into the United States identity and culture just so they are incapable of waging a war against it. or, for a more fun example, if you decide wrong the Communist Party of the Soviet Union will forcibly assimilate a bunch of Trotskyists that would rather create their own countably separate Marxist party, and make them operate within and construct the Soviet Union even as they don't really want to. this really is not how government works or where it comes from.

	</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Government is nearly impossible -> the concept that everything that Liberal-republicanism seeks to "moderate" is something that has the inherent power to multiply itself and continuously become stronger than all it oppresses and simply destroy all that wishes to contain it.<br/>		</li><li class="field_mdem" data-tradition="MX" value="618" data-dimension="S2">Government is nearly impossible -> the concept that everything that Liberal-republicanism seeks to "moderate" is something that has the inherent power to multiply itself and continuously become stronger than all it oppresses and simply destroy all that wishes to contain it.<br/>

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:26, 7 June 2026
Line 959:		Line 959:

	{{li\|I=Z1/LR\|tradition=LR, PT\|Q=618}}Mimi and Eunice [https://mimiandeunice.com/] -> there are a lot more TERF comics on here than I remember. oh well, they do get a lot better when you swap out the third panel for one of the other comics		{{li\|I=Z1/LR\|tradition=LR, PT\|Q=618}}Mimi and Eunice [https://mimiandeunice.com/] -> there are a lot more TERF comics on here than I remember. oh well, they do get a lot better when you swap out the third panel for one of the other comics

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618}}If speech isn't offensive, you can never prove it deserves free speech protections -> it's weird how most of the time free speech discussions revolve around speech that outright offends somebody, and how when something is offensive it always seems to have a slam dunk case to prove it's okay. people who don't really like South Park suddenly got behind it when it was slamming Trump. Drawn Together got to air basically because it was offensive, while many other things that are similar to other things get hit with lawsuits, and few of them ever get an adequate defense.

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|Q=618}}TV channels with total free speech are generally safer than social platforms with total free speech -> I think this is true, at least mostly, but it's worth asking why. I feel like to some extent something that's an entire business like an animation studio or a room of TV executives has an incentive to think about what is worth creating — what actually has a point to keep putting out week after week, and what betrays the overall goal of the organization. the same isn't really true for arbitrary individual human beings, who will never have a Spanishness Office inside them that's inherently accountable to outside forces.

	{{li\|I=S2/ES\|Q=618}}If the earth was populated by immortals, capitalism would be okay -> this is a weird consequence of the way I argue about chunk competition. I've created a scenario where in conditions not very similar to reality my arguments might not hold up any more, and you could only really get through it with anarchist arguments that Domination is bad because {{em\|it just is}} {{censor\|dammit}}.		{{li\|I=S2/ES\|Q=618}}If the earth was populated by immortals, capitalism would be okay -> this is a weird consequence of the way I argue about chunk competition. I've created a scenario where in conditions not very similar to reality my arguments might not hold up any more, and you could only really get through it with anarchist arguments that Domination is bad because {{em\|it just is}} {{censor\|dammit}}.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:19, 19 May 2026
Line 53:		Line 53:

	{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}reality-breaking anticommunism / description of Marxism so bad the author can't be right about anything else -> I think this is what propelled me to put together meta-Marxism. in general, you can genuinely judge how true to reality an ideology or model of reality is by how well it models and predicts other ideologies or models of reality. the first step for me was realizing this was true about Lacanianism. then I realized it was true between mainstream Marxism-Leninism and Trotskyism, most of all from the Trotskyist direction but also from the other direction. then I fully noticed it was true of everyone who supports Liberal-republicanism and I was depressed but also my mind was blown. it took a while for me to stop holding it against people when, you know, my realization of how doomed everyone was had separated me from basically everybody. but I think it was a necessary realization.		{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}reality-breaking anticommunism / description of Marxism so bad the author can't be right about anything else -> I think this is what propelled me to put together meta-Marxism. in general, you can genuinely judge how true to reality an ideology or model of reality is by how well it models and predicts other ideologies or models of reality. the first step for me was realizing this was true about Lacanianism. then I realized it was true between mainstream Marxism-Leninism and Trotskyism, most of all from the Trotskyist direction but also from the other direction. then I fully noticed it was true of everyone who supports Liberal-republicanism and I was depressed but also my mind was blown. it took a while for me to stop holding it against people when, you know, my realization of how doomed everyone was had separated me from basically everybody. but I think it was a necessary realization.

	{{li\|I=S2/ES/LGBT\|Q=618}}Trans people are not an ideology -> I don't think that's possible. mainly because trans people are under attack so often that they inevitably have to generate a bunch of theory about themselves to combat the misinformation. isn't queer theory an ideology? (one that accepts the existence of trans people but then takes an ideological stance around them anyway.) arguably, supporting capitalism or supporting Deng Xiaoping Thought are ideologies. so everybody has a political ideology. {{YouTube\|_GBUArD51KY}}

	{{li\|I=S2/MX/DG/A\|tradition=MX onto DG\|Q=55,16\|Q2=5516}}Moderation is a form of extremism / Because individuals vary greatly, their normal healthy states of being are in effect naturally "extreme" relative to each other, and thus any attempt to regulate an overall population's "extreme" behavior by bringing down "moderation" on every single individual one-by-one is in effect an attempt to intolerantly force a specific way of being on large numbers of people, and through the sheer quantity of that action it becomes extreme -> this sounds like something a schizoanalyst would say but at the very least it's more correct than [[E:Fukuyama's dialectic\|what Mr. Jiang says]].

	{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX\|Q=618}}Communist revolution restores the proletariat / Mainstream Marxism-Leninism is the only form of Communist revolution in all practical terms because no country which needs to turn into a workers' state will ever have a significant proletariat; only countries where the proletariat either hardly exists or is actively getting disbanded and eliminated are likely to form a workers' state -> I feel like Mr. Jiang needed to be told this when he was so bizarrely glued to classical Menshevism and thinks Lenin is evil because he wasn't a Menshevik (no joke). {{YouTube\|QtqfIjK1GAc}}		{{li\|I=S2/MX\|tradition=MX\|Q=618}}Communist revolution restores the proletariat / Mainstream Marxism-Leninism is the only form of Communist revolution in all practical terms because no country which needs to turn into a workers' state will ever have a significant proletariat; only countries where the proletariat either hardly exists or is actively getting disbanded and eliminated are likely to form a workers' state -> I feel like Mr. Jiang needed to be told this when he was so bizarrely glued to classical Menshevism and thinks Lenin is evil because he wasn't a Menshevik (no joke). {{YouTube\|QtqfIjK1GAc}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:12, 18 May 2026
Line 61:		Line 61:

	{{li\|I=S2/LR\|tradition=MX onto LR\|Q=618}}Capitalism comes from the belief that mutual aid cannot bring freedom / The post-structuralist Ideal that people delivering things to each other can never be freedom without the ability to disconnect relationships for other relationships because all relationships inherently contain the potential for domination can generate capitalism and entire capitalist countries -> I think based on this there is an argument that Gramscianism is actually post-structualist and blue. it depends on how heavily people cling to perfection and being connected to the perfect people versus to actually uniting different groups of people together to try to form a solid proletarian subpopulation. I do know that the strawberry swatch has become more tightly associated with using existing forms of production to defend national borders, while the concept of kicking people out of or putting them into an amorphous mass of 'good people' is a really Liberal-republican way of thinking especially when there is no physical Lattice of proletarian allies that is understood in molecularized terms.		{{li\|I=S2/LR\|tradition=MX onto LR\|Q=618}}Capitalism comes from the belief that mutual aid cannot bring freedom / The post-structuralist Ideal that people delivering things to each other can never be freedom without the ability to disconnect relationships for other relationships because all relationships inherently contain the potential for domination can generate capitalism and entire capitalist countries -> I think based on this there is an argument that Gramscianism is actually post-structualist and blue. it depends on how heavily people cling to perfection and being connected to the perfect people versus to actually uniting different groups of people together to try to form a solid proletarian subpopulation. I do know that the strawberry swatch has become more tightly associated with using existing forms of production to defend national borders, while the concept of kicking people out of or putting them into an amorphous mass of 'good people' is a really Liberal-republican way of thinking especially when there is no physical Lattice of proletarian allies that is understood in molecularized terms.

	{{li\|I=S2/ES\|tradition=LR, ES\|Q=618}}anticommunist book featuring Stalin / anticommunist book making statement about Stalin / book with anticommunist leanings unexpectedly making statement about Stalin -> even after you exclude every book that is actually intended to be about the USSR or Stalin such as {{book\|Animal Farm}}, you'd be surprised how many of these there are.<br/>
	I was just reading an ordinary newspaper comic strip collection and guess what, that was technically an 'anticommunist book featuring Stalin'. when I saw Stalin come up by name I just, my brain had one of those windows task manager freezes for a moment, and then after it unfroze I decided it was funnier than the rest of the book and all I could visualize for the next few minutes was doing one of those edits where you take arbitrary comic strip frames and put them together or Dinosaur-Comics edits where you keep reusing the same strip and putting in new dialogue, and just make a bunch more strips of them talking about Stalin. I liked the idea of turning that into a video, starting out with a simple comic dub and then getting progressively weirder with edits of it and elaborations on it to the point it was just on entirely another plane from where the original strip had started. this is my sense of humor. one of the funniest things to me is making edits of anticommunists talking about Communism but actually getting it right or at least {{em\|kind of}} not getting it wrong; sometimes the voice clips videos give you are hard to work with to make the most accurate statements, or are easier to edit into something being said ironically than into something being said totally seriously. I do want to see if I can finish that video from yesterday of Mr. Jiang giving an actually not crazy summary of China. because like with PragerU, an actually lucid Jiang video would be much more unexpected than a crazy one.

	{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}Fukuyama's dialectic / Hegelian dialectic (Fukuyama) {{YouTube\|AEPSUC-UQ5k}} -> this is the questionable concept that Ideas evolve through destroying their opponent Ideas and then specifically integrating "the best" parts of them, which is bound to be subjective and shaped by the priorities of the [[:Category:Bauplan ontologies\|physical elements (class structures)]] that make up the winning Social-Philosophical System; it comes with the inherent connotation that whatever Idea popped out after digestion really is "the correct Idea" instead of one that is being arbitrarily adapted to a given Social-Philosophical-Material System.		{{li\|I=S1/ES\|Q=618}}Fukuyama's dialectic / Hegelian dialectic (Fukuyama) {{YouTube\|AEPSUC-UQ5k}} -> this is the questionable concept that Ideas evolve through destroying their opponent Ideas and then specifically integrating "the best" parts of them, which is bound to be subjective and shaped by the priorities of the [[:Category:Bauplan ontologies\|physical elements (class structures)]] that make up the winning Social-Philosophical System; it comes with the inherent connotation that whatever Idea popped out after digestion really is "the correct Idea" instead of one that is being arbitrarily adapted to a given Social-Philosophical-Material System.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:37, 14 May 2026
Line 552:		Line 552:

	{{li\|I=S2/ES\|tradition=HM\|Q=618}}Society is made of language (Habermas) / Language is a foundational component of society, to the point a theory of language can be inserted into Marxism; it is implied this will be inserted in the context of societal systems or psychology [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Communicative_Action] -> "don't do this to me," I say to myself every time I have to read just about anything about critical theory and what critical-theorists believe.		{{li\|I=S2/ES\|tradition=HM\|Q=618}}Society is made of language (Habermas) / Language is a foundational component of society, to the point a theory of language can be inserted into Marxism; it is implied this will be inserted in the context of societal systems or psychology [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Communicative_Action] -> "don't do this to me," I say to myself every time I have to read just about anything about critical theory and what critical-theorists believe.

	{{li\|I=S2/A\|tradition=HM\|Q=618}}It is possible to build a model of reason specifically based on the concept of people seeking Freedom from Domination (Habermas) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Communicative_Action] -> this is weirdly Kantian. it's trying to be new but it feels like it's just formalizing Kant's weird concept that intuition is the same thing is logic just because we decided to apply it to morality

	{{li\|I=S2/STM\|tradition=STM / formal logic, HAS / analytic philosophy\|Q=618}}True and False are artifacts of the existence of propositions / True and False are byproducts of the existence of reason and do not originally exist in nature before there is a person or instrument to create ontological models of nature (Rorty) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty] -> this is fine. this is just an acknowledgement that systems of logic are something that have to be created and have made-up rules in order to function for interpreting the world. which is accurate. anyone who's ever seen Gödel's incompleteness theorem will realize it has to be the case on some level that logic or reasoning is made up in order to be designed for its task.

	{{li\|I=S1/ES\|tradition=\|Q=618}}postanalytic philosophy [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postanalytic_philosophy] -> a lot of Wikipedia articles on philosophy just feel like garbage — by no fault of the people writing them, it's just that the stuff they have to read and cover is garbage — but this seems like a legitimate category		{{li\|I=S1/ES\|tradition=\|Q=618}}postanalytic philosophy [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postanalytic_philosophy] -> a lot of Wikipedia articles on philosophy just feel like garbage — by no fault of the people writing them, it's just that the stuff they have to read and cover is garbage — but this seems like a legitimate category

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:39, 11 May 2026
Line 305:		Line 305:

	{{li\|I=S1/JC\|Q=618}}North Korean news and LGBT rights -> I went on KCNAWatch and searched both "homosexual" and "gay" to try to find a source on the claim that the WPK had supported legalizing homosexuality. I expected for all the world for this article to come up that was like, Kim Il-sung and his descendants are so wonderful, they understand human rights despite what the United States says, look how the WPK legalized homosexuality and they were right there. that was absolutely the article I thought I was going to get. (and don't get me wrong, I would have been fairly satisfied with that article. I'm fine with the odd ways North Korean reporters frame things as long as they have a good stance on the issues; I understand North Korean characteristics.) but I was a little surprised to find that most recent mentions of "homosexual" have been very negative, often coming up as a generic insult hurled at officials in First World countries oppressing North Korea. [https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1451904652-719055996/us-should-apologize-for-its-anti-dprk-conspiratorial-document-kcna/] [https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-idprk/reportofthe-commissionof-inquiry-dprk] one of the only times I found that was positive was a claim that the United States was "full of discrimination" because people in the United States had complained to the FCC about a Spanish-language talk show saying prejudiced things about women and gay/lesbian people. [https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1451891869-195414965/hispanic-groups-in-us-complain-obscene-spanish-language-talk-show/] this has the form of something that was said not because the person actually believes it and supports the values themself but because it generically supports the concept that it's time to undermine or dissolve a foreign country because the people in that foreign country are dissatisfied with being connected to it. Trotskyism without content; orange anarchism; [[E:Zinovievizing\|Zinovievization]]. it is strange to me how much North Korea claims to be unaligned to any bloc of countries and then like, so many articles are quietly chock full of this subtext of "dismantle the United States". are they really actually non-aligned at that point? or are they non-aligned in the same sense [[E:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition\|Existentialists]] are non-aligned, claiming to have no formal affiliation to any larger structure but then waiting for the day when suddenly a bunch of non-aligned people or non-aligned countries suddenly come together for just one second and crush the thing they were too afraid to openly stand against that's actually their shared enemy? that seems to be the general pattern of absolutely all politics these days, from anarchist street protests to creating a Marxist state that 'ostensibly' isn't connected to a Communist international. "decentralized" factions are the most powerful, but they are powerful specifically because they are completely unaccountable to anyone including themselves and gain their power from spontaneous physical force and the ability to out-survive others, this Darwinian principle of irrational force always overcoming reason if enough individuals are there and enough force is applied. it's like Existentialism can only be defeated by anarcho-[[User:RD/9k/Q22,13\|Yaroshenkoism]].		{{li\|I=S1/JC\|Q=618}}North Korean news and LGBT rights -> I went on KCNAWatch and searched both "homosexual" and "gay" to try to find a source on the claim that the WPK had supported legalizing homosexuality. I expected for all the world for this article to come up that was like, Kim Il-sung and his descendants are so wonderful, they understand human rights despite what the United States says, look how the WPK legalized homosexuality and they were right there. that was absolutely the article I thought I was going to get. (and don't get me wrong, I would have been fairly satisfied with that article. I'm fine with the odd ways North Korean reporters frame things as long as they have a good stance on the issues; I understand North Korean characteristics.) but I was a little surprised to find that most recent mentions of "homosexual" have been very negative, often coming up as a generic insult hurled at officials in First World countries oppressing North Korea. [https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1451904652-719055996/us-should-apologize-for-its-anti-dprk-conspiratorial-document-kcna/] [https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/co-idprk/reportofthe-commissionof-inquiry-dprk] one of the only times I found that was positive was a claim that the United States was "full of discrimination" because people in the United States had complained to the FCC about a Spanish-language talk show saying prejudiced things about women and gay/lesbian people. [https://kcnawatch.org/newstream/1451891869-195414965/hispanic-groups-in-us-complain-obscene-spanish-language-talk-show/] this has the form of something that was said not because the person actually believes it and supports the values themself but because it generically supports the concept that it's time to undermine or dissolve a foreign country because the people in that foreign country are dissatisfied with being connected to it. Trotskyism without content; orange anarchism; [[E:Zinovievizing\|Zinovievization]]. it is strange to me how much North Korea claims to be unaligned to any bloc of countries and then like, so many articles are quietly chock full of this subtext of "dismantle the United States". are they really actually non-aligned at that point? or are they non-aligned in the same sense [[E:Existentialist-Structuralist tradition\|Existentialists]] are non-aligned, claiming to have no formal affiliation to any larger structure but then waiting for the day when suddenly a bunch of non-aligned people or non-aligned countries suddenly come together for just one second and crush the thing they were too afraid to openly stand against that's actually their shared enemy? that seems to be the general pattern of absolutely all politics these days, from anarchist street protests to creating a Marxist state that 'ostensibly' isn't connected to a Communist international. "decentralized" factions are the most powerful, but they are powerful specifically because they are completely unaccountable to anyone including themselves and gain their power from spontaneous physical force and the ability to out-survive others, this Darwinian principle of irrational force always overcoming reason if enough individuals are there and enough force is applied. it's like Existentialism can only be defeated by anarcho-[[User:RD/9k/Q22,13\|Yaroshenkoism]].

	{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618}}North Korean mass media is amongst the most strictly controlled in the world [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_media_in_North_Korea] -> claim found on Wikipedia page. this is a very misleading framing. it's accurate to say that Korean state media is 'a monopoly' or there is a limited number of media producers. but this is literally [[E:Stalin became mandatory due to limited availability of education and experts\|due to the wealth of the country]]. it's an underdeveloped country that only develops slower with every sanction, thus by Liberal-republican poststructuralist [[E:separable multiplicity\|pluralized]]-wealth-equals-freedom standards becoming ""less free"".<br/>
	you start to see how disingenuous this is when you realize how common Western-Marxist rhetoric has become and how much every single political movement becomes about "moral panics in mass media" and "representing things correctly in the media". in North Korea you don't have that problem. the one good thing about the state monopoly over what mass media will be is that mass media never becomes this wild uncontrolled thing that can just go spontaneously spreading racism at the drop of a hat when nobody expects it. the Existentialist-Althusserian-Trotskyite axis basically created that problem and then proceeded to push all other issues under the rug while badly trying to solve the problem it created.

	{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618}}framing conflict over environmental protections as human versus human, cities versus rural areas, rather than as human versus animal [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/oryx/article/blaming-threatened-species-media-portrayal-of-humanwildlife-conflict/1368C6FFEEE7F944A3A3C7186C31AB03] [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9622530/]		{{li\|I=S2/LR\|Q=618}}framing conflict over environmental protections as human versus human, cities versus rural areas, rather than as human versus animal [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/oryx/article/blaming-threatened-species-media-portrayal-of-humanwildlife-conflict/1368C6FFEEE7F944A3A3C7186C31AB03] [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9622530/]

	{{li\|I=S2/LLM\|Q=618}}The biggest bottleneck to building AI is energy use (2026) [https://www.livescience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/computing-power-is-no-longer-the-ai-bottleneck-its-energy-production]		{{li\|I=S2/LLM\|Q=618}}The biggest bottleneck to building AI is energy use (2026) [https://www.livescience.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/computing-power-is-no-longer-the-ai-bottleneck-its-energy-production]

	{{li\|I=S2/MZ\|Q=618}}He who is not afraid of death by a thousand cuts dares to unhorse the emperor (Mao) -> this feels like it might be quoting a previous thing from hundreds of years ago. will have to check that later [https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/works/red-book/ch27.htm]

	{{li\|I=S2/JC\|Q=618}}The most powerful weapon for a party that is waging a revolution — in fact its one and only weapon — is ideology (Kim Jong-un) [https://archive.ph/imx12?url=naenara.com.kp] -> this is one of the most [[E:Fisherism (meta-Marxism onto Western Marxism)\|Western-Marxist]] things they've ever said		{{li\|I=S2/JC\|Q=618}}The most powerful weapon for a party that is waging a revolution — in fact its one and only weapon — is ideology (Kim Jong-un) [https://archive.ph/imx12?url=naenara.com.kp] -> this is one of the most [[E:Fisherism (meta-Marxism onto Western Marxism)\|Western-Marxist]] things they've ever said