• 0 Posts
  • 111 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
rss

  • It really depends on how you define “successful.” If your measure of success is based on how closely these societies resemble Western, liberal, capitalist societies, then, yeah, you’re probably not going to see a whole lot of “success,” but that’s not what these revolutionary movements were trying to achieve. I would say that first and foremost what essentially every communist movement was striving for was just autonomy and independence, and many have been successful in that regard. Vietnam is an independent nation, instead of a French colony. China, similarly, is no longer under the thumb of the British. You may not like what these nations do with their autonomy, but that is what they were striving for and they have achieved it.





  • We had a 22 percent increase in domestic investment.

    That’s good, it really is, but that in and of itself doesn’t mean much. Industrial production left the US for a reason. What’s changed? The cost of living has only gone up, especially housing, which means the cost of domestic labor is still going to be much higher than many other countries, so how do these US producers plan to turn this new capital investment into a profitable enterprise? How are they going to profitably produce quality goods that Americans can actually afford? Are they only going to make luxury goods for the highest income Americans? If so, who’s going to serve the middle and the bottom income levels?




  • If you want to (legally) play Nintendo games, obviously buy a Switch 2. You don’t have any other option. If Nintendo games aren’t that important to you, and/or if you already have a large Steam library, a Steam Deck is a great option.

    Personally, I love my Steam Deck, but I’m looking forward to a Steam Deck 2, or maybe a third party handheld, running SteamOS, that has a nice, big, 1080p screen, better controls, and better battery life. More power would be nice, but not if it comes with a louder fan and poor battery life. Honestly, I’d even be ok if the device was focused on local streaming, from my PC.



  • The US and allies control WTO, and China was only allowed trade on WTO terms after they accepted to follow the WTO standards, basically designed by USA

    That means nothing, anymore. Those standards are meaningless, China holds most of cards, now. Any attempts to reign in China have been half hearted at best, and often undermined by the US itself. As tough as people have tried to sound in their rhetoric about China, the fact is American corporations and consumers continue to do business with them because it’s just too good of a deal for them.

    and American politicians have openly stated how they need to prevent China from expanding their influence.

    Well, they have failed, spectacularly, and that was true LONG before even Trump’s first term, let alone these tariffs.


  • This is the stupidest article I’ve read about the tariffs, and that’s saying something because I’ve read some doozies.

    The author makes it sound like the US and the rest of the world were building a coalition to take on Chinese control of the global economy, before Trump’s tariffs came along and ruined everything. That’s horse shit.

    The article even mentions Vietnam specifically. Do they not know that Vietnam is also a Marxist-Leninist state? Vietnam has taken many cues from China. Vietnam is trying to become a manufacturing hub, similar to China, and the relationship that Vietnam has been building with the US is one of trade that is similar the relationship the US has with China: they (China/Vietnam) make the stuff, we (the US) buy the stuff.









  • We are all the addict, because we all want the relative luxuries, conveniences, and comforts of a “middle class,” or higher, modern life. I’m no exception. But, the relative good life that is afforded to many in the modern world is heavily connected to fossil fuels.

    As living standards have increased over the past few centuries, so has fossil fuel use. And the connection between the two is not arbitrary. The relatively high living standards of a modern, middle class lifestyle require a relatively high amount of energy. Fossil fuels are very energy dense. We need energy, fossil fuels contain a lot of energy, it’s not terribly complicated.

    A lot of people posit that a modern middle class lifestyle is possible without getting any energy from fossil fuels. That would be great if true, but it is a yet unproven hypothesis. It’s entirely possible that an end to fossil fuel use also means an end to at least some of the luxuries of modern living, especially at the very upper end.

    But, honestly this might all be a moot point, because modern life also seems to be dependent on an infinite growth paradigm and infinite growth isn’t possible, regardless of the energy source. It’s possible that humans just aren’t capable of living sustainably at these scales and at these levels of advancement. Sustainability requires that there be such a thing as “enough,” but is there such a thing as enough for most people? I don’t know.