That is hilarious. I can imagine it with perfect clarity lol

I haven’t seen these posts, either. But I have to ask, are you this person?

By that logic, the NY Times should be banned as a source. They’re opinion section is chocked full of basically the pro US point of view and defending Israel (including a memo advocating genocide denial). One-sided coverage, poorly sourced, nakedly biased, it all applies to them, too.

Allowing sources from all points of view, as long as the facts are true, seems better than picking and choosing due to bias. Even these “centrist” institutions have their own biases.

That’s true lol

History is exactly why I’m skeptical.

The USA is the world’s sole superpower and this is in their area of influence. It’s always about them when they get involved (as they have in 2002, 2013, 2017, and 2019, etc.).

It’s not really democracies vs dictators, it’s countries in the US’s sphere vs countries not in the US’s sphere. It becomes more obvious and easy to see then. The OAS has been a puppet of US interests since the beginning (there’s a reason they didn’t let Cuba in). It literally started by a pledge to fight communism in the western hemisphere. Basically, it’s the US empire and it’s puppets and allies vs a rising new order of old colonized and sanctioned countries, which admittedly looks scary, but hopefully will one day lead to a multipolar world where people can deal with their own local issues without worry of western interference (which has almost always been net bad for the people of those countries in the global south Asia, Africa, and South America).

Plenty of Democratic administrations have done coups and wars all over the world. It’s just a US empire policy, no matter who is President, mostly because of capitalism. Sure, conservatives are usually worse about it, but Democrats do it, too. Biden is supporting a genocide in Israel. McKinley fought the Philippines, Teddy Roosevelt in the Spanish American, JFK invaded Cuba and tried to coup it, Truman led the war in Korea and established a US puppet dictatorship in n the south for, JFK and LBJ were also involved in Vietnam, etc.

Not in the same period of time for the same level of development. And when it did, they accomplished it mostly through colonies and 1800’s imperialism.

I know someone in the US who is adamant Biden cheated, too. That’s not really evidence.

The original use is specifically a service platform that’s made worse by the owners to get more money after first being good to everyone to collect a large user base, then by squeezing the general end users, then by squeezing the business customers to collect value for themselves.

It sounds like a really specific definition, but you’d be surprised by how often it applies. He originally thought of it to apply to Tik Tok after noticing it following a similar pattern as Facebook, Amazon, and I think Google. Then the internet realized it could keep applying his term to so many more companies, like Spotify, Uber, Lyft, Airbnb, Reddit, Microsoft, Apple, all streaming companies, and even physical product companies like car companies or John Deere, etc and it’s shot up in popularity and use since then.

Not sure of the general use case you describe, but the person who invented the term in that article I linked sounds like he doesn’t mind if it’s used in a more general case for things getting worse from greed, so feel free to go ahead and keep using it I guess lol. Although maybe we should come up with a different, more general term for that if there isn’t already one? I’ve got nothing, but if anyone has suggestions lol.

That’s true, but it’s just not enshittification because it’s not done by the platform itself. It’s a different word.

Their community came over here long before all us old Redditors and it seems like they’ve cultivated their own culture and in-jokes and such. It can get confusing to pierce all the irony and sarcasm to figure out what they’re saying sometimes.

You do, but you don’t see it as that because the millions dying are in the Middle-East where you’re getting your oil, Africa where you get your diamonds and coffee, South America where you get your minerals and oil, and Asia where they’re assembling your manufacturing. And it took wars and imperialism and installed authoritarian puppet regimes to extract the wealth from all those places. Not to mention what do you think the monarchies of World War I and fascist regimes of World War 2 did? Give out puppies?

You guys are better than the US, but only because you’re balanced by actual socialist and communist political parties and labor unions that are able to extract concessions like that universal healthcare. Looks like a few of those countries are turning fascist again, so just give it some time, and those human rights will be gone, too.

The people probably.

Sure you can bribe people, but it’s a harder when the wealth isn’t concentrated in a few people, and the companies are owned by the people instead of private interests. USSR politicians weren’t known for being rich, but compare that to modern Russian oligarchs, or even US Congressmen. A majority of the US Congressman are millionaires, not at all true for the common populace.

I’m going off statistics and surveys, not anecdotal evidence.

http://thetrumpet.com/6322-eastern-germans-feel-life-was-better-under-communism

http://pewresearch.org/short-reads/2010/04/28/hungary-better-off-under-communism/

http://reason.com/2009/11/16/the-rise-of-communist-nostalgi/

http://voxukraine.org/en/the-strong-hand-curse-why-ukrainians-do-not-like-capitalism

http://balkaninsight.com/2010/11/24/macedonians-deem-communist-past-better-than-present/

http://themoscowtimes.com/2017/12/25/majority-of-russians-regret-soviet-collapse-poll-says-a60039

http://rt.com/news/ussr-collapse-mistake-poll-585/

Don’t I have the power over my happiness in capitalism because I can work towards higher wealth extraction to achieve my own goals?.

If you’re lucky, but you can’t work your way to being billionaire without exploiting people on the way. So, chances are, no. Statistically you’re probably one of the people having wealth extracted than the other way around unless you have a supportive network, friendly investors or parents loaning you money. If not, chances are you’re making it harder for other people, either who work for you, work with you, act as a reserve army of labor, or are victims of your country’s imperialism. It requires some people to suffer as part of the system, but that’s not sustainable. There’s a reason the US has a shrinking middle class, and a growing fascism problem, and economic crises every 10 years. The UK and Canada aren’t far behind, with some groups trying to privatize their health services and such. Europe will be next, with the democratic socialist Scandinavian countries probably last. So it may seem fine where you live now, but give it some years and you’ll be right where we are, with someone trying to sell off your health services or other state assets. I’d be willing to bet.

Sounds expensive lol

Because once you reach a certain level, growth isn’t required, you just divide the resources you have to give everyone a happy life. People don’t need infinite money to be happy, but they do a need a minimum amount, studies have shown that. Capitalism denies that minimum amount to a lot of people because of its focus on accumulating and concentrating that wealth.

It had some of the same problems but not all of them. It had universal healthcare, better rights for women, faster increase of education and literacy, less homelessness, less problems with religion interfering with politics, or companies buying politicians, etc.

It also had some new problems we didn’t have like lack of focus on small commodities or suppression of religion, but that’s not fixable or required for communism, it’s just a focus they had specifically. It also had of the same problems we have just from being human, like anti-LGBTQ attitudes, racism against certain groups, bureaucrats, and wars. But communism’s implementation changes between countries, none of those problems are necessary, it’s just stuff that has to be learned from. For example, Cuba is communist but has made great strides towards fixing LGBTQ and racist attitudes, and has eased up on religion. China is communist but has a bigger focus on small manufacturing and as a result has lots of small commodities.

Imagine if we abandoned democracy the first time it “failed” in Greece thousands of years ago or the republic in Rome. I don’t doubt that you have some relatives that suffered, but by comparison, the US and it’s capitalist allies destabilized basically all of South America and Africa. While most people who were alive in the former Soviet block would prefer to go back to when it existed because it caused a huge economic disaster when they sold the countries off for parts and privatized everything for the oligarchs.

The important part is that it’s a system not focused on things like GDP, growth, or money made by corporations to determine success, but the happiness and well-being of all the humans as a collective. Just focusing on that would go a long way, no matter which implementation we used (but imo it probably has to be an implementation of socialism or communism, because capitalism can’t imagine a society without those money and growth metrics).

Hwa trying to start World War 3 to stay in power. And the US looks like they’re going to let him…