robinnist [he/him]

“the oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class shall represent and repress them!”

  • 0 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 22 days ago
Cake day: August 27th, 2024
  • robinnist [he/him]@hexbear.nettothe_dunk_tank@hexbear.net•This Chatbot Pulls People Away From Conspiracy TheoriesEnglish
    15·
    5 days ago

    I tried to talk to it about Tiananmen and it was awful. It just went over the average AI drivel of “there are a variety of perspectives” and “independent human rights organizations agree,” etc. It asked me for sources but in its responses it was very clear it didn’t actually have info on some of their contents for some reason and just replied with “yes this agrees with you but there are other things I can’t name specifically that disagree with you.” Also in typical AI fashion many of its sentences were plagiarized from online articles, one even coming from PBS/RFA.

  • robinnist [he/him]@hexbear.nettothe_dunk_tank@hexbear.net•Ethan Klein learns a new word and loves it.English
    10·
    6 days ago

    It’s impossible to be this stupid. He quotes Bin Laden’s letter to support his point but says that “he did quite literally hate Americans because they could vote and had freedoms,” a claim which is impossible to make after reading the letter:

    Free men do not forfeit their security, contrary to Bush’s claim that we hate freedom. If so, then let him explain to us why we don’t strike Sweden, for example.

    Nobody is running defense for Bin Laden, and Ethan is correct that he was antisemitic; but it’s him who rewrites history when he leaves out the reason of American imperialism, which is expressly stated. God what an idiot.

  • robinnist [he/him]@hexbear.nettothe_dunk_tank@hexbear.net•people don't like my bot, it's going to be against TOS to be against itEnglish
    10·
    6 days ago

    “For example, the article [‘Nazi genocide against Jewish population’] is emotionally loaded and one-sided against the [German] government due to its use of highly charged language and its singular focus on alleged atrocities committed by [the Nazis] without providing context or perspectives from the [German] side.” So on and so forth.

    Wondrous!

    Erm HRW (not a biased Western NGO) made a report (deconstructed by Norman Finkelstein) that weakly suggests this POV. No we will not include any evidence that suggests Israel is responsible, such as them bombing the cancer ward of that same hospital days earlier, an IOF spokesman cheering on the bombing as attacking Hamas, Israel misrepresenting Al Jazeera footage and their own as well, faking phone calls and video, etc. It’s clear from scale alone and the pattern of bombing hospitals that Israel was responsible, and this is where fence-sitting becomes absurd.

  • robinnist [he/him]@hexbear.nettothe_dunk_tank@hexbear.net•people don't like my bot, it's going to be against TOS to be against itEnglish
    19·
    7 days ago

    The rights of stupid users must be protected by MBFC, which clearly tells people that the CIA is trustworthy and unbiased (whereas anti-imperialist sources get seventeen Pinocchios because freedomrifle.com fact checked them and found that they contradicted sources they liked in an endless cycle and their claims supported the Bad Country^TM) so there is no confusion. This can be very helpful to stop people from seeing OBVIOUS PROPOGANDA.

    I found a particularly egregious case of MBFC lies here:

    The article they link that shows Electronic Intifada “failed a fact check” is fact checking a single person’s tweet, which references a video, and the article mentions EI only once in the main body, namely it’s linked as an article shared by the tweeter to PolitiFact in email correspondence to support his claim that the IOF killed Israeli concert goers, but this is dismissed by PF since:

    The information he sent did not include or appear to mention the video footage he shared on X.

    And the context he gave for the video footage is all that’s being ”fact checked”. The original fact checking article linked clearly says EI’s article had nothing to do with the footage he shared. But since EI’s article is included in their sources, and an idiotic reading of the title seems to say that PF is saying Israel didn’t shoot its own concert goers period and no footage shows that they did (this may be intentional), EI has been DEBUNKED. Liberal scripture!

    Oh and their rating system is completely arbitrary (cover for liberal end of history-ism).

  • robinnist [he/him]@hexbear.nettothe_dunk_tank@hexbear.net•Sad moment where the CPC rejects the theory of 'class struggle'? why?English
    5·
    7 days ago

    Revisionism in my view being ideology that leads to or allows the expansion and existence of private property.

    Private property is not eternally bad or good, and capitalism is not simply private ownership or commodity production; the “superstructure” is not just a product of the “base”, but reinforces it and shapes it onwards, as Engels said, not cause and effect but reciprocation. You cannot split the dialectic apart (although sometimes it’s necessary for explanation), as people try to do with imperialism, narrowing Lenin’s “definition” to exclude the political and falling into vulgar materialism. China has private property, but it is itself public property extended, and the state in its ideological and practical spheres has shown itself to be a state of the workers.

    If you read Anti-Dühring, Engels gives insight into the negation of the negation, that there are special conditions required for the sublation of the negation, i.e. you can negate capitalism by destructive madness, but you make it impossible to sublate this negation, and so everything resets. The negation of primitive classless society provides the groundwork for its own negation, advanced classless society (communism) by expanding production/socialization (put simply). There is no way you can get to socialism without private property, commodity production, etc., as Lenin says: “Socialism is inconceivable without large-scale capitalist engineering based on the latest discoveries of modern science” (The Tax in Kind).

    Or Marx: “even when a society has got upon the right track for the discovery of the natural laws of its movement — and it is the ultimate aim of this work, to lay bare the economic law of motion of modern society — it can neither clear by bold leaps, nor remove by legal enactments, the obstacles offered by the successive phases of its normal development. But it can shorten and lessen the birth-pangs” (Capital Vol. 1).

    Leninism, emerging out of imperialism, showed that communists could take power where imperialism was most concentrated, so mainly less developed countries, and this was the case with China. Mao himself acknowledged that private property was necessary for China’s development: “In the new-democratic republic under the leadership of the proletariat, the state enterprises will be of a socialist character and will constitute the leading force in the whole national economy, but the republic will neither confiscate capitalist private property in general nor forbid the development of such capitalist production as does not ‘dominate the livelihood of the people’, for China’s economy is still very backward” (On New Democracy].

    China and the USSR had no choice but to not only let private property exist but grow in some cases, of course while maintaining control over it, and you point to the fact that the NEP

    was very very short

    But as you say it was Stalin who ended it, not Lenin, and I think maybe that was a mistake, but maybe it wasn’t. In The Tax in Kind, Lenin talks about transitioning from a wartime economy, but it’s lucky this transition was reeled back, because later the USSR would be threatened by Hitler’s colonial invasion, and things like collective farming would play a big part in the Soviet victory against fascism.