Interstate Highways and similar systems are “successful” socialism, as far as I understand socialism
I must be blunt here: socialism is not about taxation. At all. Socialist communes don’t even require taxes or money to exist.
Socialism is about workers’ relationship with work.
I acknowledge that ‘socialism’ is a vague term with dozens of definitions, but this strange strictly-American idea that publicly-funded infrastructure is socialist isn’t a useful definition, nor a common one. It will really just confuse people.
Historically and presently, socialism is a labour movement which, despite all the variations, had the common goal of the workers controlling their means of production, rather than the owning class. Almost every political dictionary and socialist will back that up, and also Wikipedia (for something we can check right now). It’s not about whether something is private or public.
Paying taxes and voting in a (systematically broken, throroughly corrupted) government representative democracy isn’t really accomplishing this. We are arill beholden to the owning capitalist class. How I spend my working hours is still governed by a bourgeois board of directors, I don’t own the tools I use, I don’t have meaningful power to make democratic decisions about my work or my society governance.
You are correct that socialism exists (present tense! see: Zapatistas) without planned economies. But if you want to see what socialist modes of organisation look like within capitalism, it would be a workers cooperative.
Anti-car movements are not socialist nor socialism. They are good and pro-society, but are completely incidental to the socialist movement.
Collectively-funded operations like roads, police and our military airstriking hospitals aren’t socialist nor socialism. We have no control over the use of our money and labour; even if voting was democratic power in practice, a campaigning platform isn’t a guarantee of policy, they can completely ignore that once elected. And also, no matter who you vote for, your tax money will still go towards anti-socialism!
As for the parts about communism, well, no. The definition you’ve invented wildly conflicts with both theory and historical events. You’re gonna have to start from scratch on that one, even just looking at the Wiki article will provide a much better base. Very popular ideologies like anarcho-communism just completely contradict all that.
A different response, which comes from a different angle to those pointing out that Marxism-Leninism is not fascist:
The word ‘fascism’ is used so fast and loosely outside of a technical context that I wouldn’t say one interpretation is necessarily right or wrong. It depends on context. (Incidentally, same for ‘socialism’, even principled well-read communists can’t agree on a definition.)
For example, if we’re talking about the actual Fascist ideology (think of Mussolini and associates) then I would even hesitate to include Nazism due to the very different roots: they’re both nationalist anti-liberal anti-democratic, anti-socialist ‘third way’ ideologies and they did ally in the war, sure, but to group them both as ‘fascism’ trivializes core differences in how they formed, why they successfully formed, how they appealed to their followers (fascism actually recruited many self-identifying socialists in Italy and its important to recognise why to prevent it), and why they were ultimately antisocial and unsuccessful in their goals.
This isn’t just some academic masturbation nitpicking or anything: I believe that the ignorance of Classical Fascism by lumping it in with the far more obvious and baseless idiocy of Nazism makes it harder to recognize and counter, especially when neo-Nazis are such ridiculous cartoonish farces. Fascism stemmed from National Syndicalism and has core economic ideas like corporatism (from ‘corpus’) that could fool people, and sounds much less stupid that Hitler’s bizzare esoteric fantasies about Aryan racial supremacy: even Mussolini considered Hitler crazy.
The point of me making this distinction is that the dictionary definition you gave isn’t even wrong in describing fascist ideologies, but, I don’t think that list of common traits should be mistaken for a definition. Those traits are the results, not the foundation of the ideology, and a neo-liberal state like the USA can easily match many of those traits despite being a very distinct ideology. Any you will absolutely see people saying ‘USA is fascist’ as a shorthand for nationalist, racist, imperialist, oppressive, blah blah blah, but it’s definitely not post-National-Syndicalist faux-socialist corporatist collectivism. We should obviously fight both but they are not the same and manifest differently.
If your criteria requires the amount if music, movies and content that comes with being the most rich and popular video host in the world, then I don’t think there is a competitor. You’ll need at least two different tools to get the content of YouTube, or the ability to host videos outside of YouTube.
If it’s free music and movies you want, I sincerely recommend just torrenting it or finding reputable download sources.
It’s alright, and just to be clear, I do use and support F-Droid because I personally think it is better and suits my privacy goals. I didn’t mean to sound as if I wasn’t supporting it, just that it’s a bit more nuanced when talking about the security side: like almost everything in security, it’s more complex than one took being universally better than another.
I did make up my mind, and both I and the article both explicitly emphasise people to apply the facts it presents to their own circumstances. What you just wrote is very condescending and insulting.
OpenVoiceOS (OVOS) or NeonAI software (both continuations of the former Mycroft voice assistant) could be useful tools for doing a lot of the Voice Assistant tasks if you want more than just playing music. I’m not an expert on this but if you don’t get another response then those are the projects I would dig into.
This is a bit of a fallacious point in this context - it suggests:
apps will be investigated by its users (not guaranteed, nor even likely for unpopular apps)
an app will even have users capable of detecting malware (I don’t know squat about phone malware patterns, so I wouldn’t be effective at it even if I did scan through thousands of lines of code)
I use F-Droid as my main app store, and while I trust most of the apps on there and haven’t found any asking for permissions they don’t need, I wouldn’t claim any Android app store is more secure than the Play Store. This post goes into technical detail comparing the two: https://privsec.dev/posts/android/f-droid-security-issues/ - Note: emphasis in the conclusion mentioning that these criticisms may or may not really matter, depending on your threat model. (as an aside - if anyone here doesn’t know what a threat model is, determine yours before participating in any privacy community or you’ll just end up with useless paranoia)
That said, I would guess that Play Store may have a higher risk of malicious apps only due to the fact that there are far, far, far, far more potential victims, and being the default app store, victims less likely to be technically experienced enough to notice false apps. So, almost all attackers will probably aim for the most targets and only bother targeting the Play Store, despite the extra challenges.
A lot of the utility is it having apps with similar capabilities but without the same kind of privacy invasions, and with better description of what anti-features an app has. So as far as ‘the average user’, I’d just say alternative apps (or even the same ones, if you’re already using FOSS apps) to the same ones they’d use on Play Store, and a few of the games.
See, the thing with “puta/puto” is that it literally means “whore”, but it’s used to empathize cursings just like “fucking” is used in english. We’re even misusing it by putting it before verbs, imitating it’s use in english.
I think the Polish word ‘kurwa’ is coincidentally similar.
2·1 year ago
53·1 year ago
2·1 year ago
I don’t know, I was just making a joke