deleted by creator

Maybe, but they aren’t nearly as authoritarian.

It definitely was, please see my other comment below somewheres

I think it was being downvoted or something, or maybe I just anticipated people not picking up the invisible /s. No clue at this point, I had some beer demons in me last night

i believe that “far-right” sentiments are a natural defense mechanism against a perceived threat.

if your tribe is in danger, you start kicking the foreigners out, you start going back culturally to what you perceive as “safe”,

Correct. In a less obvious way we can even see it at play here, in this (interesting) discussion.

So far, in the comments trying to design a culprit, I have yet to read one that doesn’t blame some ‘other’ group, be it the far-tight, the rich, the boomers, the US, Russia, and so on. Forget the names and the personal preference: each one is that ‘foreigner’, someone that is not us on which we put teh blame. The issue is among us, with all our differences and contradictions (even sometimes our hatred of one another). It’s not ‘them’ causing the issue ‘we’ are the victims of.

As long as we keep looking for someone else than us to blame, well I don’t see things getting much better anytime soon. Which is sad because if they don’t start getting better soon they will get real worse, real a fast.

Posting that from France, a country that once valued freedom so much as to make it one of its three core principle. But that was back then.

At the same time “global economic integration” and “global trade” including outsourcing of production to countries with cheaper labor were sold to the populace as a logical continuation of liberal democracies. Increasing efficiency, thus increasing the level of life. That the level of life also depends on having leverage, and moving critical production outside means reduction of leverage, nobody thought (well, the majority of population didn’t think that, bread and circuses).

While this is a system old as humanity, Chinese imperial bureaucracy and Roman one and Assyrian one and Persian one worked like this, to build hierarchical systems. Troops quelling rebellions in one province are from one in the opposite part of the empire. Troops fighting wars in a province are never local, because wars between empires always involve stimuli to change masters. Bureaucrats are too foreign, everything is foreign and not reliant on locals. Even food and drinks are sent from other provinces and tightly guarded - despite that being far more expensive then than now.

So today in a western country all the digital products are made mostly in other countries, all the electronics are made mostly in other countries, much of the food and much of the clothes and much of everything. And this is treated like the good free western way of life. The further from WWII, the less everybody feared such a situation.

While the firmer is integration, the harder it’s to leave it, and the harder it’s to leave, the less meaningful any freedom is - your vote matters only for the bosses in you part, and they have the combined power of the bosses to deceive you, to misdirect your vote, or to plainly steal it, or to go around it.

Historically integration built empires.

The USSR, a recent example of an honest attempt at autarky, which is often used as an example of who tries autarky and why, didn’t really try. It’s the other way around actually, in 20s it was rather democratic, in 30s it was basically buying foreign technologies and machinery for gold and grain for everything (that’s the Stalin’s industrialization), in 40s too (war and all), and the only parts of its history where it really was trying to do autarky significantly enough was during the Thaw and Brezhnev, and while that didn’t work so well, that’s also the most democratic period of its history.

But at the same time high autarky degree means lower level of life. I’ve been excited with Trotskyism once, despite most of time being a ancap. Because, well, it involves direct democracy and mass participation in all political activity, and no career bureaucrats and politicians, the need for that is substantiated by any limited minority of politicians or bureaucrats being possible to covertly threaten, blackmail, buy, groom, etc.

I don’t subscribe to their “democratic planning of the economy using modern means of computation” thing - I agree it’s possible if Amazon is doing just that on scale far bigger than needed for a government in one country, don’t get me wrong, and that demands fewer resources than all this “AI research around”, but there’s inherent degeneracy in such a planning system because, as a specific example, you don’t know you have to design and produce a good that would be in high demand but isn’t already produced.

I think Trotskyism in many of its parts is still very good, actual participation not only is beneficial for the system, it also gives the populace the psychological understanding that politics is not about casting your vote once or twice for the guys who frighten you less. Feeling of holding the wheel. Personal responsibility and ability to change things for good. These are important exactly to compensate worse level of life (locally worse, because good level of life combined with tyranny eventually becomes worse too) emotionally, because otherwise it’ll be impossible to institute a political system nobody wants.

I don’t know, but we just got the governmental trojan back in law. It goes back and forth…

Read again. 🙄 Read again and if you still think I’m blaming Russia in the previous comment, read again until you understand what I said.

Well, it is one big process.

Hard to trace the power which allowed for all those slow processes of subversion to happen, but a lot of it stems ultimately from the USSR’s breakup and those who managed to make profit on it.

Western countries’ MIC’s which no more had to prepare for real war, so same big funding, but less accountability. Western politicians making profit on reducing their militaries - it’s a profitable process of selling properties and scrapping tech and such. Western advisors in ex-USSR helping their new mafia elites. Western businesses who first managed to secure some agreements to do business in ex-USSR.

Then - the tech sector, via plenty of qualified labor from ex-USSR moving to USA and other western countries. Cheap fossil fuels sold by Russia to EU countries, which became a major factor in their economies in the 90s and 00s.

Politicians in this were very notably not complacent, just looking out for themselves and noticing opportunities for themselves.

Also a lot happened just due to technical progress and lack of macro-level competition. Soviet system notably had deadlocks because interested parties couldn’t agree to one countrywide system. Suppose USSR somehow managed to survive till now, with its collegial and totalitarian-bureaucratic, but not mafia-style, government. Then total surveillance being introduced in the West now and long ago in China wouldn’t be successfully implemented in the USSR, for the similar reasons EU countries want to have their own surveillance, but not US surveillance over their citizens. In USSR it would be between ministries and factions not willing to be controlled by others. So in USSR there’d likely be some status quo.

I mean, it’s purely a hypothesis, it already imploded and there’s nothing more to say about this. Just - such things as now would sometimes happen during the Cold War too, but having a big totalitarian state as a counterweight helped a lot. Like an example of what will happen if this is allowed, and like an alternative (if we are going to have totalitarianism, then let’s at least have the red workers-and-peasants kind), and like a real threat in case of weakening of western nations.

So one can imagine that USSR’s breakup did lead in many ways to what we have now. At the same time had it not happened, then maybe on my side of the screen everything would already be surveilled (or maybe it is).

Of course those countries had issues - including the USA.

But it’s Russia that interfered enough to put the far right in those countries in power. Like I said, they poured gasoline on what was already a fire

I’m in Finland. I’m also referencing the EU member countries, not just the USA. A lot of the issues here are literally due to Russia.

Edit: Trump and Republican ties to Russia are definitely also a thing.

Basically yeah. Spread and grow.

But metastasized cancer is much harder to get rid of, and that’s what Russia has ensured on happening.

And I wish people like you remembered that countries that don’t speak English existed, because I’m in Finland not USA.

You can simply go to the official tor or i2p pages and read more about details, then do follow up research from there. With i2p there’s actually a few parallel implementations actively being developed. Original is in Java, there’s a C++ one, and then another one I can’t remember. Very new implementations are being made in Rust as well

Thanks for volunteering to help the network in good faith! I think it is much easier for normal people to get an i2p router up and running and help the entire network, instead of setting up a tor node. And with the use of inbound/outbound unidirectional tunnels (which you can set up to 5 nodes each), you could theoretically have a 10 node round trip of intermediate tunnels between you and a server, as opposed to tor which uses a bidirectional tunnel.

Some gracious users set up what is known as an “outbound proxy”, which acts like tor exit node to the clearnet. Personally I would never host one of these, as I am hesitant of having anonymous entities make clearnet requests and being held liable. But as an i2p router in somebody else’s tunnels, you can just imagine yourself as a road on a map that other roads connect to. The road isn’t responsible for what people are carrying on it, or what their destination might be. That would be an unreasonable expectation to place on any road. In fact, the router doesn’t have any idea of what the exact destination is, even if it’s the last node in the tunnel - simply because during the encryption/decryption process it only knows of the next address to hit!

For example, say an i2p router hosts a git server. It could be the destination for packets, where clients are using it for version control, or it could act as a node in somebody’s tunnels to connect with other servers/clients. From the network view, I do not believe you can tell, and that is pretty neat.

In the effort of being transparent and educating you, I do believe an outstanding problem is stream isolation. You should be able to do “soft resets” that reset your identity, although I forget the exact technical i2p term for this. This concern is for clients, not just leaving a router up. So if you intend on using that router to access the network yourself, it would be a good idea to do that soft or hard reset occasionally depending on your concerns. You can do it as often or never at all.

I just wanna know if they think CEOs are really really cool or something. like what’s the bannable opinion?

pro landlord?

What are you talking about? What numbers?

Numbers are a tool. This is apples and orange drink, you can’t reduce this to numbers

This is actually as bad as citizens united. They’re trying to end free speech entirely