HN user
Reddit management is in the process of learning from what had seemed the boon of unpaid labor, that the struggle of management and ownership against the unpaid moderator workers is over control of the means of production and the relations of production.
every normal weather event
San Francisco and the PNW being covered by smoke every summer is not a normal weather event, and now it is starting on the East coast. The east and southeast is also being hit harder by hurricanes, and they are not stopping at the Gulf of Mexico any more. These are just the events people have been able to see in the US in past years and they're not normal and with ever-increasing carbon output it is undoubtedly going to get worse.
I'll take the entire northeast being covered in smoke as an "over the top" claim that just came true.
It's bizarre how the US attempted to block Cuba from getting the Internet, and still blocks Cuban Internet through many means ( https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/other-site-policies/g... ), but the presentation is that the suppression of content is of Cuban origin.
It reminds me of when the US said Cubans were not allowed to leave Cuba, and the mental hospitals and prisons were filled with political prisoners. Castro announced anyone who wanted to leave Cuba, even those prisoners or mental patients, could go to Mariel harbor and leave if they wished. Suddenly the US did a turnabout and began demanding Castro stop letting Cubans leave Cuba, and too many were prisoners and mental patients, when the US suddenly discovered those were the inhabitants of Cuba's prisons and mental hospitals.
Regarding MKUltra - the only reason we know what we know about it, after the CIA director directed in 1973 that all documents on it be destroyed, is that some of the MKUltra documents were mislabeled and not destroyed. They were discovered in a 1977 FOIA request.
Aha, so during the Opium Wars, in this battle, the US invaded China, killing hundreds of Chinese soldiers and capturing four forts, but you have some definition in your mind where "the opium wars didn't involve the US". The Chinese have a different opinion.
Also, "the US invaded the country to protect Americans there" is one of the oldest excuses for an invasion in the book. Just thinking of the Caribbean in the span of a few years, it was the stated reason for the US invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965, and then Grenada in 1983 (the latter following days after the US invasion of Lebanon).
Also this was just one battle in the Opium Wars. The US fought alongside the English in the Battle of Taku Forts, as well as other skirmishes.
face a Jury of your peers
Like the Arab nationalists being waterboarded in Guantanamo Bay?
Although some of them the US realized it picked up the wrong guy and released them.
Incidentally, Guaantanamo Bay is occupied by the US military against the wishes of Cuba.
Or go to Middle East and call out their leadership and see what happen
The US and Europe have spent over a century backing despots in the Middle East and putting down or helping put down popular movements by force. The US doesn't even seem to mind if they dismember Washington Post reporters in their embassies. The US sends billions to Netanyahu every year to put down the Palestinian mass movement.
Funny how the US props up these despots, then points to them as a point of supposedly flattering comparison.
So who was fighting the Chinese during the Battle of the Barrier Forts?
the price paid by their own children
If French workers allow Macron to jack the retirement age up, the price surely will be felt by their own children.
Income does not corollate exactly to relations of production, but it is a decent enough independent variable.
CNN 2020 exit poll - income over or under $100,000. The majority above voted Trump, majority below voted Biden.
https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/natio...
With regards to liberals abandoning the working class - this did not happen because liberals were never for the working class. Nor were conservatives.
I was amazed when living in SF how many of the homeless are not locals. Not even Californians!
I visited the Bay Area a number of times and only met one person who was born locally. "Not even Americans!" in many cases.
The US backed radical Islamic jihadists to overthrow the secular government running Afghanistan. The US president invited them to the White House, then armed and funded them https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Reagan_s... .
Trying to split hairs saying there was infighting and not all of them joined the Taliban does not change that.
Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda also came out of all that.
Now I'll go back to reading the mainstream media's encomiums to the Azov batallion in the Ukraine.
Japan was invading Asia and Germany was invading Europe. Many of the things that exacerbated the Bengal famine were due to defensive measures designed to avoid even worse deaths if those invasions were successful.
You're talking as if England had not invaded and subjugated India. Gandhi was in prison during World War II due to noncooperatiom with the English invaders, and Nehru and the then big tent Congress party had the same policy. Bose actually went to Japan as he wanted the Japanese to come into India and drive out the English invaders.
What was the Dust Bowl famine in the US at the same time but policies of "agriculture for ideological reasons"?
A left wing pressure group identifies the article publisher as a right wing pressure group.
If we look at the author section of the website, it lists former members of Mitt Romney's presidential campaign, members of the American Enterprise Institute etc.
Also the "left wing pressure group" says IRS filings show the Koch brothers fund the CPC.
The reader can look at the facts, some on their own web site, and decide if they are a right wing pressure group or not.
The act is the act of suppression, which they were involved in. They did not participate in the delay portion of the suppression, nor does it say they did.
The first sentence blames the delay on the dictator of Guatemala, quite explicitly. Then in the next sentence it says the CIA aided in the suppression of the novel, which it did.
The text never days the CIA delayed the novel, it says the CIA aided in suppressing the novel. The CCF didn't even exist until the 1950s.
You would think if it was inaccurate, the inaccuracy could be quoted from and pointed to. You do not do so.
I see claims there is an inaccuracy there.
I see people doing paraphrases and inventing conditionals and saying they are inaccurate. Which they are. But they're not the original text.
It's pretty simple, quote some text and say why it is inaccurate.
As there are no inaccuracies of the type mentioned, this does not happen because it cannot happen.
The claim specifically made in the article that the delay in publication from 1936 to 1946 was due to CIA action through a front group.
It doesn't say that anywhere in the article. You've created a conditional in your head that is found nowhere in the article.
Since the CIA did not, in fact, exist, any claims of what the CIA tried to do are self-evidently false, and need no more rebuttal than the date the CIA came into being.
The CIA did not exist prior to its establishment in 1947, to use your nomenclature. So what is false? Everything it says the CIA did from 1947 to the 1960s is true.
1946 the book was published, 1947 the CIA was created.
Right. So what is inaccurate in the piece? I don't see anything that contradicts this.
And this produce what is objectively an historical howler right at the start.
What howler? You quote it ascribing actions to the Guatemalan dictatorship in the 1930s which is accurate. Then you claim the piece says the CIA was active in the 1930s, which it does not say anywhere.
It didn't. Nor do the sentences you quote say that.
This piece covers a period of time from the 1930s into the 1960s.
What is actually inaccurate? The CIA was doing the things the piece mentions from its inception onward.
Do you mean the entrepreneur who killed the angel investor, or the fire chief who sprayed a homeless man (the last in a series) and the homeless man fought back in self-defense?
It was a symbol of fear and oppression
The Russians, invaded twice by Germany in the 20th century, sought to withdraw completely from Germany, if it became a neutral country like Switzerland or Austria. The West Germans continually refused this. By 1961 they through in the towel and the west Berlin enclave was sealed off. After the USSR broke up, Russian and German (and western) documents on this were released, which verified what happened at the time.
When Germany sought to reunite, the Prime Minister of the UK, Thatcher, sought behind closed doors to stop German reunification. So it was Gorbachev removing impediments to reunification and Thatcher seeking to create them.
look at what happened to Hong Kong as an example
You mean the violent breaking off of it from China by the imperial "enlightened" United Kingdom? Its massacre of Chinese protesting UK imperialism in the 1960s?
What a hilarious joke it is to see the westerners finally kicked out of their imperial colony taking some self-righteous posture of supposed concern about the Chinese there. What a laugh.
Sandwiched between posts complaining about African "vagrants" begging for food in San Francisco.
nor do I believe in the kleptocratic crony carnival that is Russia.
The rush to privatize everything in Russia came from the West - particularly the US. The US encouraged Yeltsin (who Putin was a protege of) to use tanks to shell Russia's parliament - which was celebrated on US news shows, in government etc.
You're upholding the beacon of the US to militantly right what it had a hand in creating in the first place.
our economy which has gotten more and more efficient, and reward a few hundred thousands (or millions) of people who happen to be able to produce disproportionately more things
And where do the heirs expropriating surplus labor time from those of us who work fit into this constellation of efficient people able to produce more? Where does the aristocracy of the Rockefeller/Vanderbilt/Hearst/Mellon dynasties come into this inequality picture?
The massive incarceration rates in the US don't seem to be solving anything, although you don't think they're enough. The US has the highest incarceration rate in the industrialized world yet in your view it is barely incarcerating at all.
If China is too different, look at western Europe. England's incarceration rate is less than one third of the US's. Canada is on sixth of the US's. These countries have lower incarceration rates but less crime.
Well don't trust China's numbers, and compare the US incarceration rate to those of any industrialized country's numbers that you do trust.