[-] [email protected] 55 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Apparently Trump caved re: Iran and uranium enrichment. We might see a deal signed after all. Who knows though. It's back to the 3% enrichment limit that initially got Iran to sit at the table, rather than the 0% they were reporting over the weekend.

The nuclear deal proposal the U.S. gave Iran on Saturday would allow limited low-level uranium enrichment on Iranian soil for a to-be-determined period of time, Axios has learned, contradicting public statements from top officials.

After signing the agreement, Iran will have to temporarily reduce its enrichment concentration to 3%. This period will be agreed upon in negotiations.

Per https://www.axios.com/2025/06/02/iran-nuclear-deal-proposal-enrich-uranium

[-] [email protected] 10 points 3 days ago

I'm not saying the American public doesn't care about the genocide. I'm saying even if 90% of the American public wanted the genocide to end it wouldn't matter because those in power won't stop supporting Israel. The United States isn't a democracy in the sense that the government listens to the will of the public.

[-] [email protected] 32 points 3 days ago

The American public's opinion re: the genocide is entirely irrelevant. There's a far better chance that consistent stochastic terror acts against Zionists convinces the US elite to stop providing support to Israel than the opinions of the public. There's no need for the USAmerican state to listen to the will of the public, and indeed they never have unless backed up with the promise of violence.

[-] [email protected] 60 points 3 days ago

These incidents aren't about strategically sound actions, they're spontaneous acts of outrage against a genocide the Western world seems to have deemed no big deal. This is the price the rulers of the West have decided as acceptable to continue supporting genocide. These acts will continue, no doubt about it, and who are we to stay they should stop? May not be strategically sound, but can you honestly say it's immoral to kill a supporter of an active genocode?

[-] [email protected] 40 points 3 days ago

Reading the Financial Times this morning I came across an op-ed by fucking Francis Fukuyama. How this motherfucker still gets writing gigs I'll never understand.

Anyway this bit about Lee Jae-myung, probably the next South Korean president, absolutely cracked me up.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 4 days ago

I work with plenty of programmers from Latin America who make a third of what American programmers are paid, speak fluent English, and work harder with better code. Can't imagine it's a trend that will slow down.

[-] [email protected] 102 points 1 month ago

Wow, I can't believe they build 10,000 new apartments just for show so they can take tourists on tours through all 10,000 empty apartments and that they 100% will not use these to house citizens, crazy that it's all just fake. Just shows you how crazy the North Korea gommunist regime is.

[-] [email protected] 108 points 4 months ago

Nothing Ever Happens meets Trump 2.0. Honestly this is beautiful stuff, Trump blowing up the Atlantic alliance because of the Mercator Projection. Gerardus Mercator, welcome to the Resistance.

[-] [email protected] 130 points 6 months ago

Just want to point out that whoever the person is that killed the healthcare CEOscum absolutely knew what they were doing. Today is the tree lighting in Rockefeller Center, so there's a fuck ton of tourists out. They knew that the best way to get around the city is on bike, which they used to flee the scene right into Central Park. You can get there way faster on bike than anything else. And they knew that in Central Park, specifically in the forested area of the Ramble, there are few cameras and many places to hide where they could change clothes and then blend back in with the massive crowds hitting the city today. Also apparently used a suppressed pistol, and knew exactly which door the CEO would be coming out of/when to be there. Impressive. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that this assassin gets away with this. Trump assassins take notes.

8
submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

RIP Ka, unsurpassed in hip hop

[-] [email protected] 112 points 1 year ago

Best part of this is that Russians have three names (a first name, surname, and a patronymic) and they love using nicknames. So the main character is Rodion (first name) Romanovitch (patronymic) Raskolnikov (surname), but can (and is) called by any of those three names. He's also got nicknames like Rodya, Rodenka, and Rodka. So this deranged individual (who decided to call Raskolnikov "Pete" I guess) is going to be hopelessly confused when somebody starts referring to Rodya, and he'll think the book is filled with like five times as many characters as it actually is.

[-] [email protected] 117 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mean the obvious answer to this nerd is that the world of Dune is distinctly not capitalist. The empire is a feudal institution, planets are personal fiefdoms, and all those in positions of power are not concerned with capital or money so much as they are prestige and power. The spice trade on Arrakis is more similar to something like the Chinese imperial salt monopoly (a state backed monopoly where most of the rents were used to fund the imperial coffers) than resource extraction under capitalism, albeit a Chinese salt monopoly that involved the Chinese colonising a distant land and using it for the sole purpose of salt extraction. The state in Dune is not concerned with capital formation or expansion, the nobles are not concerned, and while there are certainly merchants and traders (as there are in most polities) they are tangential to how the system operates and are not the ones who determine state policy. A "real universe" does not imply that capitalism exists in all places at all times, this guy is just too enmeshed in capitalist realism to understand that the kind of stuff he's saying only makes sense in a capitalist context.

[-] [email protected] 123 points 2 years ago

If this is not your opinion of Trump and every living (or dead) American president then Hexbear is not the instance for you, folks.

1
submitted 4 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

It's time to continue our Memes with Citations series with my favorite work by everybody's poster child of postmodern literary theory, Jacques Derrida. His entire shtick, in a nutshell, is a continuation of Marxist materialism into the literary sphere that he called "deconstruction." Truth, justice, fact? All hogwash—all that exists is the sign, and signs derive meaning via contrast with other signs. "There is no outside-text," and all meaning must exist in conversation with everything else. This is all great and fun, but we're here to talk about his "political turn" in the 90's, and specifically his Spectres of Marx.

He wrote the book in 1993, after the collapse of actually existing communism with the left in total disarray. It was the "end of history" as Fukuyama declared, and neoliberalism was the "one true" system left. Not so fast, wrote Derrida. As he explains (and this is the meme):

Capitalist societies can always heave a sigh of relief and say to themselves: communism is finished since the collapse of the totalitarianism of the twentieth century and not only is it finished, but it did not take place, it was only a ghost. They do no more than disavow the undeniable itself: a ghost never dies, it remains always to come and to come-back.

Through this comment, the study of hauntology was born. A ghost from the past, haunting the present with a promised future that never came. It's been applied to all sorts of things, from music (see Mark Fisher's Ghosts of My Life) to climate change (by yours truly), but the kernel of the study is that Marxism will forever haunt the West, for it can never be truly killed.

The gall that Derrida has to write this book is amazing, for it seemed all was lost for the worldwide left. Destroyed in Europe, in retreat everywhere else, it was truly the end times. And here was this literary theorist, the boogeyman of the culture wars of the 80's and 90's, writing about how communism can never truly be killed.

Want to also share the following passage, which I think is the best arguement against capitalism in the modern era ever formulated. For every chud that screams at you that "poverty has never been lower," just tell them something like the following:

For it must be cried out, at a time when some have the audacity to neo-evangelise in the name of the ideal of a liberal democracy that has finally realised itself as the ideal of human history: never have violence, inequality, exclusion, famine, and thus economic oppression affected as many human beings in the history of the earth and of humanity. Instead of singing the advent of the ideal of liberal democracy and of the capitalist market in the euphoria of the end of history, instead of celebrating the ‘end of ideologies’ and the end of the great emancipatory discourses, let us never neglect this obvious macroscopic fact, made up of innumerable singular sites of suffering: no degree of progress allows one to ignore that never before, in absolute figures, have so many men, women and children been subjugated, starved or exterminated on the earth.

0
submitted 4 years ago* (last edited 4 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Thank you person pretending to be a robot for being a robot. We need more robots here. Bring back the Volcel Police bot and give us the equivalent of the N word bot but for doing an electoralism. I want robots talking to robots powered by GPT-3. Thank you for your time and shoutout to our hardworking bots.

EDIT: Downvote me cowards, for I am only a man. Soon you too will become a bot. History will absolve us!

0
submitted 4 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

This is a truly incredible article that criticizes China's plans to build high speed rail to under-served parts of China by taking the angle that it won't make money, and therefore is stupid. Amazing that infrastructure projects that help rural Chinese gain access to a high speed rail network is criticized from the angle of profit-making when making a profit is never the point with infrastructure projects. The NYC subway system wasn't built to "make a profit," but that doesn't mean it was a bad idea. But China bad so somehow them building a crazy amount of high speed rail is bad.

view more: next ›

thethirdgracchi

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 4 years ago
MODERATOR OF