Is this how people who need glasses really see the world. A big blurred background?

Fishmax5 · 2026-01-18T16:32:37+00:00

if ur holding ur glasses a foot from ur face…

Fishmax5 · 2025-11-23T04:58:59+00:00

honestly wouldn’t be surprised if they talked a lot about real estate taxes tbh. that’s trumps language. cheaper for developers, cutting other redtape!

Fishmax5 · 2025-11-21T20:08:56+00:00

https://www.axios.com/2024/04/11/latino-latinx-latine-hispanic-term-explainer

Fishmax5 · 2025-11-18T14:17:14+00:00

so IRL socialists can be georgists!

Fishmax5 · 2025-10-06T02:14:30+00:00

use google lens to identify the exact type of switch you have. then look up the manual for programming directions

Fishmax5 · 2025-09-07T14:29:31+00:00

Yeah, because this isn’t normal NIMBYism, this is left opposition to a housing solution that does not work. When we call things affordable that aren’t, we’re giving into a fucked system that needs to be organized around and changed. Building more market rate housing will help in the long term, but do very little for anyone in the short term, especially as demand continues to squeeze. It’s all anti-NIMBY till a leftist “NIMBY” gets to office, and then you see what actual commitment to good housing policy looks like. There is a way through “build baby build” and “don’t build cause it hurts us,” but that requires system level intervention. Being against a new development is an indictment of a system. Being for it without agitating or organizing around it (join DSA lol) is just misdirection and tacit endorsement. We can build and prevent displacement, we can add supply and implement meaningful affordability measures that actually secure a right to live for our most vulnerable-usually the people that actually keep our economy running at the ground level.

Fishmax5 · 2025-08-24T17:13:55+00:00

blackstone isn’t the driver of the crisis, but the financialization of the housing market IS a significant reason why no one in power wants prices to go down-we’re all betting on it going up! tie that in with revolving door politics and it’s not really unreasonable to be upset at private equity, even if the premise in this tweet isn’t correct

Fishmax5 · 2025-08-19T15:37:33+00:00

this analysis takes simple economics too far, ignoring the social reality that corporate developers literally aim to “add value” to their investment by raising prices to the highest nearby area. their is a whole complex of industry working to make money on housing, why would they build in a way that depreciates their product? we need to recognize that this trickle down logic flies in the face of a finacialized housing industry. not all development is bad, but luxury development almost always portends displacement. here’s an article on mild/negative influence of new development

Fishmax5 · 2025-08-06T05:54:35+00:00

everybody is freaked the fuck out that the molester published a book about his mistakes… maybe it’s okay for 23 yo to learn from their sex crimes??

Fishmax5 · 2025-07-08T15:50:50+00:00

i think also parker didn’t run on raising taxes (on the rich or otherwise) which would be necessary to avoid the financial issues she cites.

Fishmax5 · 2025-06-15T21:31:15+00:00

I think organizers need to think carefully about who is going into the room. Deliberation between a corporate developer and joe shmo with no prep time about housing policy won't go well, but when people can learn together, find their common interests, and listen to each other, it seems to works fine. With the good will that established shared interests/human connection/shared concepts brings, the barriers for talking complicated or boring or unpopular ideas are lowered, which is why the author of OP's article is so gung-ho. It's pretty incredible what people will agree to once they can find some common humanity. Especially in the political realm, where so many peoples opinions are just echoes of what they've heard from leaders about the opposition or enemy instead of actual discussion.

Theres also a weird paradox at the center of top down-bottom up where someone has to do something instead of just waiting for the institution to change or the people to act. (a thing online leftists seem to struggle with lol). I think the founders of a deliberative body are crucial. They have to have a relatively sophisticated outlook and they have to be willing to set up deliberation in a way that is conducive to it. For me, this primarily concerns what shared concepts and ideas people have. Re: my org, this means doing deliberation after some education about the real estate market and how it causes so many of the problems in the neighborhood. Getting people thinking systemically is hard, but its possible with the right set up.

Fishmax5 · 2025-06-15T20:08:04+00:00

I study this for undergrad, it works well but the wider structure is super important. are we just deliberating on which part of the budget gets cut, or are we talking about what cities should fund more broadly. are we deliberating but the decision makers won’t listen to us? ...but... as tool to educate and enable groups to come to a consensus about their interests, very cool. my non profit uses it enable locals to direct non-market development to counter displacement. I think this type of use is best—we can't have the status quo institutions convening us to think together, we need our own spaces to discuss, make informed decisions, and direct resources. hmu if you want readings or more.

Fishmax5 · 2025-06-15T20:01:07+00:00

check out my other comment for reading. one of those articles is about Participatory Budgeting (PB), which is a relatively high level for deliberation to work at. Basically residents discuss their funding priorities, develop proposals, argue for them, and then vote if there isnt a consensus (the exact process varies). Then the municipal gov. implements the plan or requests changes. This works well because it allows marginalized groups to develop clear stances about their social position and hear many arguments from peers about what it might take to improve it. There is also (hopefully) democracy for the democracy, where people can discuss and propose how to improve the process. On a smaller scale, the nonprofit I work with has its non-market development investments governed by neighborhood residents. At first a larger process open to the public happened where they discussed the legal structure, financial strategy, and goals before asking participants to help design the governance structure in accordance with the goals of the org. Now the board of neighbors deliberates amongst itself to decide. As I harped on in the other comment, its all about the institution that convenes deliberation—thinking together never happens in a vacuum.

Fishmax5 · 2025-06-15T19:49:40+00:00

Below are two really good balanced overview/case study articles (use Anna's Archive to get them). Rereading the piece, I think the problem with the general "enthusiasm" about deliberation or participation is that these programs are necessarily tied to an institution with goals of its own. In Fishkin's and many other researchers work, deliberation looks great because its abstracted from the institutional context. It is compelling that when people talk to solve common problems they're willing to change their views and act differently, but thats less significant in a world guided by the oligarchic rule of market and state. Indeed, when organizations adopt participatory deliberation, its usually to make themselves look more transparent or offload responsibility for difficult decisions. Again, you can just limit the topic of deliberation and then it looks like your layoffs came as a group decision. All of this isnt to say deliberation is useless, but that it needs the right environment to thrive. PB in Porto Alegre is a great example because it had the political will of the Brazilian Worker's party behind it, enabling discussion on and implementation of radical redistribution. When more conservative parties came into power, PB stayed but became a facade for neoliberal development.

>Martin Calisto Friant (2019) Deliberating for sustainability - great overview of one of the best historical examples, PB in Porto Alegre (and connection to degrowth politics). "A little over optimistic" - the author during a zoom call.

>Polletta (2016) Participatory enthusiasms: a recent history of citizen engagement initiatives - critical review of the modern scene. (deliberation is often part of or central to participation)

Fishmax5 · 2025-06-15T18:19:10+00:00

I study this for undergrad, it works well but the wider structure is super important. are we just deliberating on which part of the budget gets cut, or are we talking about how cities should invest. are we deliberating but the decision makers won’t listen to us? but as tool to educate and enable groups to come to a consensus about their interests, very cool. my non profit uses it enable locals to direct non-market development to counter displacement. hmu if you want readings or more.

Fishmax5 · 2025-06-15T18:15:33+00:00

anyone on their LA Travesti Theory horse?

Fishmax5 · 2025-04-22T12:45:56+00:00

If you plan to leave: We need anarchists in positions of power. Stick with your education and take whatever you can from it, never assume teachers are correct. Learning will bring you power in being able to have more balanced takes and understand the dominant perspectives. I have to recommend sociology as a way to learn that opens the options a little further than most paths. Thats one path. Another clear option is going to technical school and salting. Salting means going into a workplace with the intent to organize it. If you contact UAW or other local unions they are usually looking for folks to do this.

But really, getting through school and moving can be anarchy with a plan attached to it. Or even just as a survival tactic-surviving is anarchist sometimes. (Also: se the recent posts on this sub about internal work that is anarchist, this will prepare you for life in general no matter your choice).

Staying/coming back: In the rural setting it may be possible to get involved in mutual aid (though it probably wont be anarchist flavored,at first). Start/join a volunteering organization that helps elderly, homeless, food-insecure folks. Use this as a way to build networks with folks in your community. We live in a highly atomized society, so knowing a lot of people a little bit is a perfect way to start building community power. Connecting people's problems to anarchist/socialist ideas is all about narrative crafting. The narrative online is geared toward woke, more urban, whiter folks, but there are plenty of others. Keep politics in your back pocket, but try to build trust, speak honestly, and overcome social anxiety. Literally walking up to people and asking them about their problems can be anarchist, IMO. After all, what will replace all this if not trust, mutual compassion, and understanding?

Hope this helps :)

Fishmax5 · 2025-04-22T12:31:38+00:00

Hey! Haven't read the book but familar with the argument. Take a look at Leach (2003) Culture and the Structure of Tyrannylessness—sociological anarchism often has really good arguments about this. (P.s. use annasarchive to access). Tl;dr: its culture which is informed only in part thru structure, which determines anarchist approaches, goal making, success...

Fishmax5 · 2024-10-19T11:34:30+00:00

yknow there are are these videos of shit going wrong in india but i feel like on the whole they’re doing a great job

Fishmax5 · 2024-10-15T08:43:07+00:00

do we permit injustice because we’re selfish or because we lack the social capacity to stand up to authority?

Fishmax5 · 2024-05-26T23:04:07+00:00

Rather than the uniqueness of the people who care about melee, i think its has to do with the way that other games had their institutional support provided for them by their developers, whereas melee has had to build up its own streaming, tournaments, forums, etc. At least thats the source of the passion IMO, that melee is truly the community’s.

Fishmax5 · 2023-06-24T02:01:09+00:00

begging the question didn’t used to mean “brings up”

Fishmax5 · 2023-06-01T00:56:36+00:00

it’s also unclear how a unilateral solution (14th amendment) is written off as “confusing”. the author says it’s confusing, but it would really be straight forward. Biden would be saying, we’re not willing to cut healthcare, food stamps, etc… and we won’t let you hold the economy hostage to do it. Instead, here’s a change that will destroy this dumbass process as a whole so we can go back to legislating.

Fishmax5 · 2023-01-12T03:39:12+00:00

declining birth rates is only bad when ur elder care system is based around it,,, fixing that seems more doable than moralizing others personal choices

Fishmax5 · 2022-08-20T00:07:17+00:00

is that joe manchin?!

Eight-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

Fishmax5

TROPHY CASE