• 1 Post
  • 44 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2023

help-circle









  • I understand your point completely, it was simply not the focus of the point I was making in my comment

    however what you say bears repeating and I have nothing against that whatsoever

    edit: by analagous I was trying to refer simply to the parallels in global public condemnation, not any strict empirical comparison in defined terms

    the iraq war was a war of aggression involving a litany of further crimes against humanity

    what is happening in gaza is a genocide

    but I hope my comment can still be understood as I intended it


  • I will never forget/forgive what capital has done here

    For the generation I suspect is most represented here this must be analagous to an earlier cohort watching the iraq war trample overwhelming global public opinion in 2003

    to those who are feeling overwhelmed as I have often felt in the past year, please remember to take a step back when you need to, resilience is the name of the game in my view, self destruction in the face of disaster helps no one (when I say this I am also wrestling with myself, I don’t mean to say this is an easy thing)

    edit: please watch “No Other Land” when it becomes available to you and you feel up to it, it is about an Israeli and a Palestinian in a West Bank village called Massafer Yatta before Oct. 7 23, education is agitation & praxis








  • But isn’t so much journalism nowadays characterised by unsubstantiated speculation? (i.e. propaganda, if not simply clickbait filler pretending analysis)

    It seems to me your criticism amounts essentially to your dislike of the thesis of this piece. This can be legitimate, but not what you’ve argued here.

    Isn’t this piece an example of precisely the supposed promise of the internet, in the sense that journalism becomes democratised and anyone can publish and disseminate analysis, which can be evaluated on its merits rather than institutional validation and inertia based on opaque criteria? (I would of course argue the aggregated needs of capital, but I won’t force that in)



  • redline@lemmygrad.mltoCommunism@lemmy.mlProtestation
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    This is good analysis, but begs the question: why the government has not and does not protect workers to the extent that it could/should? Who has an interest in weak workplace protections for workers?

    If the government is bad on worker’s rights it is because it is a government run by and for capitalists. The state is consistently instrumentalised by the capitalist class to hamstring labour’s bargaining power to suppress wages to increase profits.

    Basically that is to say: these laws are not archaic, they are in fact working as intended, the intent is simply not to support working people, it is to secure and grow profits.

    edit: I just realised where this was posted, so perhaps I underestimate your familiarity with these points, but I’ll leave it up anyway in case of curious third parties