@ivory i write a reply to someone. while i write, they delete their post.
i can’t send the reply to a deleted post. great. my reply is in my drafts. i want to rework it to a topline post. every time i bring it up, i get a modal dialog. “Can’t reply. The post has been deleted.” I hit okay, and the draft is dismissed. There’s no way even to copy the text before it’s gone.
issues with drafts have been much biggest frustration with your otherwise excellent client. (drafts have also disappeared.)
who elected sam altman? who elected elon musk? who elected george soros? who elected charles koch? who elected robert mercer? jeff bezos? mackenzie scott? michael bloomberg? melinda gates? bill gates? dick uihlein? mark zuckerberg? peter thiel? howard schultz? who do we vote for to throw the bums out?
For learning about products, Mastodon "word of mouth" seems very definitely superior to search and reviews in the usual (far from credible) places.
Asking about travel laptop backpacks, I learned about, got feedback on the following brands that did not appear prominently when Googling (or Kagi-ing or Amazon-ing) laptop backpacks generically:
Jandd
Nomatic
Osprey
Quechua
Rickshaw
Tom Bihn
Tatonka
Also Targus, which does show up more easily. Plus, I got a kind offer of an extra!
@trochee it’s weird how instantly we’ve transitioned from Google organizing the whole world’s information to a kind of premodern only word-of-mouth can be trusted.
i'm looking for a replacement travel backpack, something big, water resistant if i get caught in the rain, can pad a 16" laptop. i'm on a budget these days.
i find i no longer trust reviews on the internet, pretty much anywhere. maybe i trust "word of mouth"? any recommendations?
a reality that socialist or progressive protestors must take into account is that disorder on the streets always works to the political advantage of fascists, who credibly promise order at all costs even while they cynically ensure protest becomes disorderly.
it’s not fair, but it is reality. in the ecstasy of genuine righteousness one may not give a fuck, but then a morning after comes.
@divya There was a lot going on, sure. And there was violence. You can make a case that a generalized sense of threat played bad cop to the ostentatious virtue of MLK's nonviolent movement. Riots sometime lead to change. But they often lead to reaction. 1/
@divya You can tell lots of stories about the 60s. But I don't think you can fairly look at the world and conclude that violent chaos frequently births leftish or liberal or just orders. You can maybe claim CRM as a counterexample, if you want to emphasize the sense of threat. But then the political aftermath of the 60s was mostly reaction. Vietnam War protests just picked off LBJ, which did not redound to the benefit of people in Indochina. /fin
@divya I haven't read Schulman's history, but I think there's no dispute the outside track played a crucial role. (I think the inside track did too.) But Act Up protest was mostly (not always) pretty targeted at powerful institutions. Act Up was not a disruptive or frightening force for bystanders going about their lives. Act Up largely substituted brilliant performance for generalized disruption as a way of attracting media attention. Outsiders could sympathize without having been messed with.
if you want to make a case that antisemitism plays an unusual role in the US discourse surrounding Israel, your best point of reference is Yemen and US support of Saudi Arabia’s conflict there, which conflict (whomever you blame for it) did lead to mass famine and death, but not to mass protest on US campuses.
@asayeed@Alon@BenRossTransit@shadihamid i think the US is likely to go for a Taiwan/Korea solution—support illiberal autocracy until it mb someday becomes secure enough to relax into liberalism. that may not succeed, but if you think ugly illiberalism is an unfortunate historical necessity, is it necessarily worse? is it a bad idea to try, given the risks to global (including obviously US/Western) stability of more freeform Islamicized illiberalism?
@asayeed@Alon@BenRossTransit "state" is the center of the controversy. Erogan's Turkey is not as liberal (or pliant) as the US might like, but it is an ordered state. to the degree it causes troubles elsewhere, they relate to where its state consolidation is weakest, ie risks of Kurdish national self-determination. i think the US is slowly realizing the form of postcolonial moralism that means every self-perceived ethnicity gets its own state is unaffordable, despite affection towards Kurds.
@asayeed@Alon@BenRossTransit states can fail and reform themselves all they want from a US perspective. the advantage of democracy is that revolution is routinized, but institutions to support that may be hard to get or keep. what the US (+ Israel) can't tolerate are the anti-Westphalian currents. Iran's "axis of resistance" is a catastrophe from the perspective of state-system legibility + management. we can't know what form Sunni pan-Islamism might take, but we'll try to impose constraints.
@asayeed@BenRossTransit i agree with @Alon that for Israel, conversion of "Palestinians" into a Westphalian state (or their naturalization into existing such states) is the only way forward. the Israeli right wants to insist upon the parenthetical by any ugly means necessary. the US and Israeli left-ish prefer the former.
@asayeed@BenRossTransit@Alon But the broader problem is to find ways of reconciling a legible global system made of states with defined borders with the aspirations and identities of the people of that region. recognizing that it is not an easy fit is not a case for abandoning the project. the risks, from the perspective of a status quo power, are far too great.
@asayeed@BenRossTransit@Alon (from the perspective of revisionist powers like China, Russia, and Iran, there's are sorcerer's apprentice problems. on the one hand, playing up the contradictions between ME aspirations & westphalian states troubles the hegemon. on the other hand, China largely does not dissent from the westphalian norm, and faces risks from assertive pan-Islamism unconstrained by them. they want to alliances and perhaps some borders, but cautiously. Russia may be less cautious.)
@asayeed@BenRossTransit@Alon (if that's the case, was it any opportunity at all? did Arab publics not do enough? i mean the US, idiotically for a status quo power, abandoned perfectly stable and in the first case very warm relationships with Mubarak and Assad on the theory of a liberatory Arab Spring. Tunisia pulled it off for a while. who has an opportunity to do more? did the US need to turn on Bahrain & Saudi, and then something good might have emerged? what was the opportunity was lost?)
