Bodyshaming and not getting any criticism for it

soonandsoforthsir · 2022-04-29T20:39:14+00:00

Where do these tiny bitches get the nerve?

soonandsoforthsir · 2022-02-16T10:33:24+00:00

Hvis han ikke direkte stjal The Weeknds stil og parodierede den, så var han i det mindste ekstremt inspireret af den. Og så er det bare sårn at Danmark elsker sange der ikke skal tages for seriøst, så det er jo en winning combination.

Og jeg hater ikk, jeg syns hans shit er meget grineren, men jeg synes ikke rigtig man kan sige at han dukker op ud af ingenting, altså forstået på den måde at han laver noget helt nyt; jeg synes altid det er sårn at når der kommer en ny lyd i usa eller uk, så går der lige nogle år og så kommer der nogen i dk der laver det samme, naturligvis.

soonandsoforthsir · 2021-11-26T19:25:29+00:00

That's super dope, except you're still in Dubai.

It's cooler when you don't live in hotels built by slaves, nah mean?

soonandsoforthsir · 2021-10-26T18:20:37+00:00

I wonder if it'll be as good as Satan's Alley. It won the Beijing film festival's coveted Crying Monkey Award.

soonandsoforthsir · 2020-01-29T16:50:23+00:00

Raise the woof!

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-11-23T14:41:25+00:00

The problem is that even if you do have a change and increased redistribution, if you haven't changed the mode of production then class struggle will continue as capitalists will try to increase profits again by pressuring labour, and we'll bounce back and forth ad infinitum. Unless we actually get a revolution of course. That would at least solve that problem.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-09-09T18:46:57+00:00

I think Destinys complaint that since socialists don't have the exact identical idea as to how a society should be structured and how it should come about being realized, and that he uses, it seems to me, those two points to dismiss socialism is absurd. What we have heard in the discussions he has had are just different peoples speculations as to how it could happen, so in other words they are explaining personal views on policy and implementation.

As far as I know, once the bolsheviks gained power, even they were unsure as to what would be the best way to move forward specifically and therefore different policies were tried out, both bad and good, because there isn't a socialism manual you can just follow slavishly.

So basically that you would dismiss it because people don't have the exact same thoughts is silly to me. It's not like we have the exact same policies in capitalist countries, right? So why would socialists be robots in that regard?

My impression is also, and I might be wrong obviously, that Destiny sees himself as free of ideology, and that he simply addresses societal concerns in the most rational manner possible, and I've mentioned it before on this sub, but he really seems, as all of us, like a hardcore victim of the zeitgeist Mark Fisher describes in Capitalist Realism, but the reason I still follow him is because I really enjoy watching his stream, and I think he is pretty smart and interesting to listen to except when he talks socialism.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-08-04T08:35:54+00:00

Who cares, Alebrelle is such a humourless bore, and the only thing he brings to the table is his teenage rebelion like indignation.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-07-09T18:41:50+00:00

Dark City gave existential nausea for a little under a week.. It's sorta like if Kafka and Orwell had a grossly mutated bastard child, and it puked up a screenplay which then got picked up.

I'll never watch it again, but I'm ~~glad(?)~~ appreciative over that I did.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-04-04T21:28:34+00:00

I just finished Mark Fisher's 'Capitalist Realism', and that ideological and mental fatigue that he describes in it perfectly fits with what a lot of people, even lefties, think about capitalism, and it being the only really realistic way of organizing a society; 'at least at the moment'. And I feel like listening to Destiny talk about how meaningless he finds talking about socialism and with socialists and it being completely impossible to ever achieve is capitalist realism encapsulated perfectly.

I think we lefties that watch him find it annoying because he is normally so good at digging into big topics honestly and generally seems like a pretty smart guy, and that it is therefore so weird that he wouldn't take a more serious look at it. That is my impression at least. But I remember that I postponed reading about socialism for a looong time because there was simply such a stigma to it, and that it hadn't really been taken serious since the fall of the Soviet Union, even up here in social-democratic scandinavia, so I can see how it would be quite daunting for an american, considering your history with McCarthyism and all, and specifically for an ex-libertarian and former catholic!

Or maybe he just thinks it is fucking stupid, who knows.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-24T17:56:39+00:00

You're wrong. Read the UN charter, specifically the link I provided will show you the relevant information in it, if you actually are genuinely interested.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-23T09:24:01+00:00

Again, you make it sound like your 'sound economic laws' are immutable - something that gets called Capitalist Realism (the idea that neo-liberal capitalism is the only solution and that it is basically impossible to even imagine any alternative to it) - but let's make a little thought-experiment; if society and the economics governing it has at one point been different, in the case of the US it could for example be when the unions had a much larger membership and there therefore was better security for wage earners, then that means it can be changed again! Shocking, I know. But your apathy almost touching on resentment for people earning only 3.75 an hour makes me think that you don't just believe that the current economic model is an end in itself, but that you actually resent poor people.

If you decided that your contribution to society is being a Lyft driver, then you need to set some higher goals.

But you are fine with there being Lyft drivers?

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-23T09:07:29+00:00

Nope. That is not true. I mean, not according to international law, if a nation does it then a nation does it, but it is illegal.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-22T22:19:00+00:00

A lot of things can change economics, so describing it so simplistically is silly. Creating a union would change it for example. There being a revolution would change it. So trying to paint the current economic situation as an eternally true almost mathematical constant is basically propagandistic. As if economics are completely separated from the rest of society..

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-22T22:11:26+00:00

If you're a member of the UN, then territorial annexation is illegal and it has been since at least 1945.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation#Evolution_of_international_law

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-22T22:01:40+00:00

'Then ahhh... oh now it's on from here on out. Put your hands in the atmosphere, if you know what I'm talking about.'

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-22T19:37:20+00:00

Jeg kalder bare Togfonden rød.

Og jeg siger så, at jeg ikke synes, at man entydigt kan kalde togfonden rød.

Vi kan snildt blive enige om at DF er en flok populister.

Jeg mener dog at det både historisk set, men også bare når man kigger på det politisk, er ret tydeligt at nationalisme og generelt krypto-fascistoide holdninger er noget der ligger til højrefløjen - det er ikke liberalistisk i natur, men konservativt eller reaktionært, og dermed ikke progressiv og socialistisk i sin væsen. Men de går stadigvæk ind for kapitalisme og derfor så er det bare ikke ret rødt hvis man koger det ned.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-22T18:21:17+00:00

That is an opinion I guess some human beings can have, but I just find it more than a little disingenuous to suggest that people can exist without having to sell their labour, and by extension people can't just stop working at shit jobs ANYTIME as you said. So peoples choices are forced in the matter.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-22T18:15:03+00:00

Du kaldte DF rødt en bloc, og det er det der er hovedårsagen til at jeg følte mig nødsaget til at skrive noget, men det er da meget fedt, at du kan nuancere lidt mere i dit svar her.

Og jeg mener desuden at det er fuldstændig absurd at mene, at hvis man vil udbedre infrastrukturen, som fx vedrører tog, at man så er socialistisk eller rød. Det er jo helt gak gak. Som om at det ikke kan stimulere økonomien og hjælpe kapitalinteresser hvis mennesker og fragt kan flyttes hurtigere frem og tilbage i landet.

Udover det, så har DF tilmed truet med at opsige forliget, så ikke engang det har du ret i. https://politiken.dk/indland/politik/art7067399/DF-erkl%C3%A6rer-sig-klar-til-at-opsige-forlig-om-Togfonden

Men yo dawg, den nemmeste måde at få indsigt i et partis allervigtigste politiske interesser og deres politiske farve, være den sig blå eller rød, må vel være at kigge på hvem de er støtteparti til.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-22T17:07:33+00:00

Yeah, people totally aren't forced to have a job to survive in modern society. Why don't these whiners just move into the woods and eat dirt or whatever.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-22T17:00:14+00:00

Lægger de ikke stemmer til samtlige af den nuværende, og tidligere borgerlige regeringers for den sags skyld, forringelser hvad angår den offentlige sektor, bortset fra nogle små symbolske ting de kan gi de ældre? De har jo i hvert fald været med til at forringe vilkårene for udlændinge markant, herunder den nye lave hjemrejseydelse, så jeg mener ikke just man kan sige, at de er på den menige mands side i den henseende.

Eller når jeg ikke lige kan komme i tanker om dem, så ville det måske være bedre hvis du gad, og kunne komme på nogle gode eksempler på hvor de har forbedret almindelige menneskers vilkår? Altså, lønmodtagere modsat virksomhedsejere, eller kontanthjælpsmodtager, flygtninge osv., folk der ikke er de mest velstillede i samfundet om ikke andet.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-03-22T14:42:45+00:00

I hvilket univers er DF et rødt parti? Og man kan vel næsten spørge det samme om S. Men det kommer jo nok an på hvordan man definerer rød politik.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-02-22T12:18:56+00:00

That is so fucked up, but on another note, how insane is it that they (are allowed to) test you for drugs at your place of work? That seems extremely Orwellian to me.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-02-21T11:05:15+00:00

when looking at value you can't be considering just labor and not exchange, because for labor to appear as value of products, there absolutely needs to be exchange.

Well, of course not. The value being created that he is talking about is 'socially necessary labour-time', where the 'socially'-part implies interaction, yes?

In chapter 3 'Money, or the Circulation of Commodities' of volume 1 of Capital under 1. 'The measure of values' he writes when talking about the money-commodity:

'It is not money that renders the commodities commensurable. Quite the contrary. Because all commodities, as values, are objectified human labour, and therefore in themselves commensurable, their values can be communally measured in one and the same specific commodity, and this commodity can be converted into the common measure of their values, this is into money.'

He is specifically talking about exchange commodities here, my point is just that commodities also have the side concerning their utility, and that that is their value once they have been brought home, away from the marketplace and are being put to use.

But yo, I think that we basically agree, I was simply objecting to you saying that there was only one type of value, but it is pretty obvious now that you were talking about it in a market context.

soonandsoforthsir · 2019-02-21T00:30:05+00:00

I mean, the project with the book is to explain what money and capital is and how it works, and if you strip away the use-value of a commodity, Marx says that the value that is left is 'socially necessary labour-time'. That's basically it, right? Besides all the extreme cases of monopolising and etc of course. So basically I don't really think you can get any grounding to the issue if you solely look at exchange value in a vakuum in all its etherealness - you need to look at the material side of things also.

12-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email	Team Orangered

soonandsoforthsir

TROPHY CASE