Seems more like the standard fascist approach to me. It’s probably not going to stay government owned.

1. Demonize a minority group

2. Government takes control of businesses owned by members of that minority

3. Government gives control of the business to (typically larger) businesses owned by the dominant group, allowing them to artificially produce growth (what Zucc is likely aiming for)

4. Narrow the scope of who is accepted in the dominant group, move on to the next minority, and repeat.

This is why communists often describe fascism as “capitalism in decay.” Because of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, it becomes harder and harder for companies to find new ways of producing growth, and have to find methods that aren’t involved with actually increasing productivity, which is where you get enshittification. The fascist economic solution is obviously unsustainable, it’s like eating your own arm, but corporations that are desperately focused on short term growth (the vast majority of them) will happily sign on.

Socialism, otoh, is not about finding more stuff to feed into corporations, but, upon reaching that point, transforming the economy to remove the need for endless growth through nationalization. But socialism is not synonymous with nationalization, especially when the nationalization is selectively targeted and (most likely) temporary.

Putting aside everything else, approximately when do you believe that happened?

As much as we might criticize the whole, “End of History” idea, I feel like the 90’s was the last time Americans had anything like that kind of optimism. There was a feeling that we were entering a new age of international cooperation, and although I was only a child that was something I really believed in. But we soon found new conflicts to be embroiled in a the dream has died and was proven to be foolish and naive, and now everyone across the political spectrum is highly cynical.

I’m sure that there are many cynical people in China too, but I can hardly remember the last time I saw someone who wasn’t cynical when it comes to politics. Whether or not it’s naive, it hits me on an emotional level.

China hasn’t had a war in over 40 years.

Tbh, I was shocked. Much as I’m sympathetic towards China, but I still usually look at it through a lens of realpolitik, like, “Of course they’re vying for dominance like everyone else, but at least they’re doing it through economic development instead of wars, and it’s better if there are two major powers instead of one.” Maybe that cynical perspective is more realistic, and maybe XHS users aren’t a representative sample of all Chinese people, but still, the fact that so many of the replies were so hopeful and internationalist was genuinely moving to me.

Link

Cruise ships sometimes have repositioning cruises where they go one way across an ocean to start operating in another region, and they can offer significant discounts. I’m sure there’s cheaper ways but it’s an option.

In the long term, yes. The bourgeoisie are rich and comfortable with no desire for a war that could jeopardize their position. However, they have lots of financial incentives for military spending because it’s rife with corruption. As such, they do a lot of saber-rattling to make WWIII seem like a genuine possibility, while also fighting in proxy wars around the globe.

But the problem is, they’re playing with forces beyond their control. If you have a generation raised on constant propaganda to genuinely hate other countries, then all it takes is a couple people in the wrong positions at the wrong time who aren’t in on the game. Right now, the rabid dog is on the leash of the bourgeoisie, but the gamble they’ve been making is that they can keep pumping steroids into it forever and never lose control.

Furthermore, wasting all this money on war and militarism has allowed China to emerge as a credible threat to their global hegemony. China is sitting back and focusing on domestic economic development, and they are winning the peace while the US burns itself out. What happens when the only area in which the US has an advantage is the military? Are people really going to accept becoming #2, or are they going to force a confrontation? Given that we’re talking about Americans, who are 1) Riled up on propaganda, 2) Preoccupied with being “#1,” and 3) Unused to experiencing the effects of fucking around firsthand, it seems almost inevitable. Ofc, it’s true that we somehow maintained a Cold War with the USSR for decades, but it’s different today because conditions are declining and the far-right is growing stronger every day.

Ashley Belanger May Be Embezzling Money From Ars Technica

Just a few days after writing an article on Ars Technica about the possibility of foreign users on RedNote being walled off from Chinese users, rumors began swirling on Lemmy that she may soon decide to defraud her employer by transferring company money into her personal bank account.

😝

Lmao “rumors swirl” means “we made it the fuck up.”

No, this is not the CCP directly censoring a whole worldview from its citizens, this is the CCP directly allowing its citizens to see that worldview while some random author speculates based on nothing but rumors and hearsay that they might change that policy in the future.

But who needs to read past the title if it aligns with your presumptions?

The slavery enjoyers are not happy with me, it seems. If only downvotes had the power to change historical facts.

It’s actually just a funny coincidence, though it’s funny when people freak out about it. Mao’s “little red book” is written 红宝书, while the app is 小红书, so the connection is only really there in English. Red is a reference to two institutions the creator was involved with, Stanford Business School and Bain & Company, both of which use red as their main color (I imagine the general association of red with good luck may have factored in as well). As for note vs book, I mean, a notebook is a “little book,” and note is short for notebook (e.g. Death Note).

If you actually look at the app and what gets posted there and what doesn’t, it’s pretty silly to assume it’s a reference. It was originally called “Hong Kong Shopping Guide” and was targeted towards tourists, the userbase skews female and relatively well off. It’s like Instagram, there’s lots of cat posts and the the like, lots of fashion, I’ve come across some pretty impressive furries, and it’s even got a decent sized queer community, particularly popular with lesbians.

Even if it were an intentional reference to Mao’s book, like, so what? The users are the ones putting out content and they’re just regular people. Not everything is some sinister plot.

For the record, that line is more in reference to people talking about things that allegedly happened on the fediverse, like, “I saw such and such user say X.”

Here is a detailed account of what Tibet was like with sources. If there’s a specific claim that you’d like me to clarify or back up, I’d be happy to.

Tibet emerged as one of countless warlord states in the chaos following the fall of the Qing, it never received international recognition and is recognized as part of China and claimed by the ROC (Taiwan). In the period when it was autonomous, it was ruled by a slaveowning theocracy with an average life expectancy in the 30’s. Whipping, mutilation, and amputation were common punishments and poverty and starvation were rampant, with people frequently having to sell their kids for food. The monks and lamas, meanwhile, lived on the backs of the people in extravagant mansions with thousands of servants.

“Free Tibet” is essentially just “The South Will Rise Again” with extra steps.

Isn’t it the exact opposite? The only thing China can do with my data is try to sell me stuff. Meanwhile, the authorities in my own country have the power to kick in my door and drag me away to some blacksite.

If I were Chinese, I would rather the US government have my data than the Chinese government, but since I’m American, I would rather the Chinese government have it than the US. Pretty much everyone anywhere in the world ought to regard their own government as their highest security risk.

Yeah, full support for the Trump administration to have the power to say which social media is acceptable, that’ll fix everything! /s

I don’t understand why people think in these terms, “If you approve of violence being done by your side, you must also approve of violence done against your side.” I’m not taking a principled stand in favor of violence for violence’s sake. I support that which hurts the enemy and oppose that which hurts friendlies.

Stealing from the rich? Good. Stealing from the poor? Bad. Killing exploiters? Good. Killing the exploited? Bad. There’s no contradiction here because my stance is based on self-interest and the interest of my class, not on any sort of categorical moral claim about some particular form of action.

You might be interested in GNS theory. TTRPGS try to do three things at once, be a Game, tell a Narrative, and Simulate a world. Different games will prioritize different aspects, some people want a fair challenge where they build a character according to the rules laid out to face a challenge, other people want everything to serve the story, even if it means fudging mechanics or breaking with realism, and then some people just want the simulation to be as realistic as possible.

Like many things with TTRPGs, it’s table dependent and emphasizing any of those elements over the others is totally valid as long as everyone’s having fun.