The Democrats need to drop out and let an actually serious party take over
The Democrats need to drop out and let an actually serious party take over
I have mine set to 18 hours
No, the blood is on liberals who allow the Democrats to support a genocide and get away with it without losing their votes to an anti-genocide candidate. Also on the Democrats for making their platform regressive and boring in favor of their donors so people lose interest in them and they lose.
So it’s the leftists fault for not voting hard enough between two pro-genocide candidates. What were we supposed to do to vote against the genocide, vote third party?
I use lemmyverse.net for finding communities
If supporting Kamala is your definition of a leftist echochamber you clearly haven’t browsed Lemmy much
I just don’t get how people are looking at Harris’ stance as being pro-genocide.
Blinken stated here:
In speaking with him the other day after he made his decision about not seeking re-election, what he’s intensely focused on is the work that remains over these next six months to continue the efforts, the work that we’ve been doing, particularly trying to bring peace to the Middle East, ending the war in Gaza, putting that region on a better trajectory
However, as you said earlier:
Secretary of State Antony Blinken is the one who wields the power to deny Israel’s aid.
Regarding:
There’s way more background on why Blinken has only stopped two aids and also because of classification reasons, not every stopping of aid can be published
I would like to hear more on this.
A lot of the funds that Israel is getting, is funding they secured before the Gaza invasion.
I did come across this where apparently Israel secured funding through a deal with the Obama administration.
I’m not sure what other reasons there may be that Blinken isn’t stopping the military aid which I would like to hear, but it seems to me like both the Obama and Biden administrations are the ones that pulled us into the genocide and that Blinken is playing the “we are working toward a ceasefire” card while not stopping the genocide, and figures like Harris are also playing the same card while pushing the same anti-protest rhetoric as Zionists. This article does suggest that Harris isn’t going to have Blinken as Secretary of State and that her new pick might be more critical of Israel so it seems like there’s at least some chance she might deviate from what Biden is currently doing; however, the article also suggests that she will have a similar approach to foreign policy as Biden. Aside from that, with the track record of Democrats historically supporting Israel and siding with donors against the interests of people along with their recently having dropped multiple progressive issues, I don’t think people are convinced that Harris (and many Democrats in general) is going to stop the genocide (not saying that Trump who openly supports Israel is going to be any better).
I’m trying to understand how this system works and came across this article from Al Jazeera which, if I’m reading it correctly, is saying that the US did determine gross human rights violations but the Biden administration is refusing to apply the Leahy Law. Doesn’t this mean that Biden does have the authority to stop sending military aid but isn’t, or am I misunderstanding something? Also, aside from Leahy Law why can’t he veto the military aid?
TikTok is popular because it’s addicting, not because it’s useful, so I don’t understand why anyone would use this.
Trump is targeting mostly far-right evangelicals who have a common vision on what they want the country to look like. He has a lot of energy when doing so, and because of how similar their interests are he could get away with all sorts of stuff and they would still vote for him.
Harris (and Democrats in general) is the only alternative mainstream candidate that everyone else has, and that “everyone else” consists of all sorts of people with conflicting interests: liberals, neoliberals, centrists, progressives, leftists, different religious groups or cultures, varying economic demographics, racial minorities, LGBTQ, and immigrants for instance. They’re trying to appeal to all of them at once, but because they don’t have a shared vision, nobody is happy and they get more scrutinized. To make at least some of them happy, they need to focus on certain groups and deprioritize the interests of other groups. However, once they do that then the groups they deprioritize get angry since they no longer have representation, and the groups that are still there remain skeptical because of the history of not working for their interests in the past.
The advantage that third parties like PSL have is that from the start, they’re trying to appeal to a specific group of people with a common vision like Trump is instead of trying to play both sides with conflicting groups and making nobody happy. The problem (aside from the election duopoly bought out by corporations) is that they are a very small political minority so they have no real chance of winning the election without winning over people from other groups which is a challenge, especially when there are many more unknowns when it comes to progressing than there are when it comes to reverting to a previous state so there is more fragmentation due to those sort of disagreements.
What would you call Alpine Linux?
A lot of (and probably most of) the people supporting Stein currently are Muslims whose main interest in voting is regarding the genocide, and on social issues are generally more conservative (and may not agree with her on stuff like LGBTQ) and may not align with either major political party so likely wouldn’t be voting otherwise. I’ve seen a lot of Muslims support Stein on social media and the Stein rally I went to was almost entirely Muslims which is where I’m getting this impression. This is a case where the main parties need to earn their votes, and voting for Stein does not mean voting for Trump because they might not have voted blue either way.
(And regarding Lemmy drama most of the people here are voting PSL anyways so trying to convince people here not to vote for Stein is pointless because it’s the wrong audience.)
I use git primarily via cli also, the text editor integration (with helix) highlights information such as what lines haven’t been committed and makes it easier to access other files in the repo, the fish integration tells me if there’s files that haven’t been committed or commits that haven’t been pushed without having to run git status
As much as I hate GitHub, for in-person projects involving multiple people I usually end up having no choice since they usually think GitHub is the most important programming tool ever and nothing I do is going to convince them to create an account on something that’s not GitHub.
For personal stuff I use Forgejo and disable everything except the code view, so I have a quick way to show people stuff I’m doing (for career reasons).
If I was doing a project with multiple people and actually got to chose the platform I would probably use Forgejo or Codeberg and make use of the project management features.
Pijul looks interesting but the ecosystem is very lacking and it doesn’t integrate well with Guix which I base a lot of my workflows around, so until this improves switching to pijul creates more problems than it fixes. The only other VCS and frontend I’m familiar with is GitLab which I don’t use anymore self-hosted since Forgejo is more performant and the main version randomly deleted all my repos and changed all sorts of stuff.
cgit also looks interesting, I might look into it.
I considered using pijul but everything in Nix/Guix is oriented around git as are the plugins for my text editor and CLI, and there aren’t good self-hosted web frontends that I can use to put pijul projects on my linkedin profile or whatever. I want to switch to it but the ecosystem surrounding it needs to actually exist first.
I own an M1 Air running Asahi Linux because I heard very good things about the laptop when I got it and it was a reasonable price. I don’t have a Framework to test alongside it so I don’t know how it compares with the latest x86 chips. The M1 touchpad is awesome, aesthetics are great with it being light and the material being a lot more durable than my HP Envy laptop that kept getting random dents, doesn’t have the hinge misalignment issue, screen is also good. Battery life and performance is great on macOS, not as impressive on Linux (performance is still good aside from missing hardware processing support for certain things, I do end up bottlenecking it when compiling Rust programs), lack of fan noise is nice but also bad for cooling, with Linux it tends to get warm and throttle. Asahi Linux is very impressive but still missing microphone support and doesn’t support FDE which is extremely precarious, harder to use alternative distros to Fedora Workstation. Repairability is shit, the keyboard is also shit.
The newer M* models don’t have good Asahi Linux support and look overpriced and I don’t even know if the Air line still offers 16GB RAM models which is a must have (32GB is better). At this point in time if my Macbook were to randomly die my next laptop probably won’t be a Macbook (unless I replace it with another used M1), also I wouldn’t recommend it to most people right now because of issues with Asahi Linux being under development like the two I pointed out earlier.
A ton of communities I’m interested in use Discord so I still use it. I use Armcord/Vencord on Linux and Bunny (not sure if it still exists) on Android.
A lot of people say it’s good although personally it hasn’t been a huge improvement for me, I’m guessing there’s certain hardware-software integration in macOS and software optimizations that contributes to the battery life that isn’t happening in Linux. It’s dying less quickly than my HP laptop though. I also tend to not close stuff so that may be a problem.
sudo quack
What makes a society good is being inclusive of everyone regardless of how they were born and working through cooperation to achieve goals and look out for each other. A society where people are intentionally neglected for another group’s economic gain is not a desirable society unless you’re a fascist. However, ideologies are not people and ideologies that promote an unequal society do not need to be tolerated, and people who pose a danger due to their actions to the people around them in a society that would otherwise be more fair do not need to be tolerated either.
Neither authoritarianism nor ignoring the rule of law are inherently bad. In reality, law isn’t words written on a piece of paper - it’s people with political motives that hold authority over law enforcement and the criminal justice system. The words themselves hold no authority, and they depend on the people to actually follow them, so the people can collectively choose to ignore them or change their meaning and now suddenly the law is different even though the words didn’t change one bit. The political motives the people who decide the law have generally favor a society that supports corruption and inequality, so there is nothing inherently wrong with breaking the law, especially if it makes everyone’s lives better.
Fascism is a specific type of authoritarianism that basically does the opposite to a society of what it should look like. Utilizing authority to make society better for basically everyone is not fascism. Utilizing authority to dehumanize a subset of people for the economic gain of a “superior race” is fascism.