As a maths person, I have scored high on IQ tests for years. There are plenty of topics I am not great at, but IQ tests typically focus maths topics like pattern recognition.

I like the acknowledgement of racism in IQ tests. There is a bias in the test for western maths education. Sadly, the results could be used for eugenics. Many great mathematicians I have met are neurodivergent, LGBTIA+, cis-women or other groups the eugenics crowd want culled.

My current politicical perpspective frames this as enforcement of heirarchy, legitimized “scientifically” by the IQ test. There are plenty of high IQ people, such as those in maths, that do not fit the eugenic vision. The heirarchy becomes self-fulfilling and “natural” by culling the non-comforming people. The “top” of the heirarchy must legitimize their position, so the bottom doesn’t resist doing all the work for little personal benefit.

IQ tests measure something. Don’t use that measurement to justify heirarchy. Eugenics is bad. A better future, built from the bottom, is possible. All power to all people.

Nice to see nerdcore on Lemmy. There’s so much out there, but here’s some variety from the subgenre hackercore.

https://amplitudeproblem.bandcamp.com/track/enter-my-world-ft-ytcracker

https://bashexplode.bandcamp.com/track/lfh-ft-ohm-i-2

I hope Marx’s prophecy is true. It would be nice to have stages toward communism like some sort of continuum. For the Yankees, they get fascism. Spain, Germany and Italy didn’t do a socialism after their fascism. The USSR went “socialism” to fascism. China is a successful capitalist state under Deng Xiaoping. Let’s keep betting that we’ll progress to communism by proping up the right heirarchies.

The current reality for the USA is the concentration and merger of economic and political power. More public lands are becoming private. Labor has been told it will be made competitive again which can be assumed to mean a reduction in wages. Capital might be on-shored again? The current major lie is other countries will pay a tarrif. Workers will suffer for gains of the state. We can likely agree the state serves the capitalist under capitalism.

Won’t someone think of the poor Yankees? Luigi does some propaganda of the deed and terrorises those in power. Propaganda of the deed is ineffective long term, but shakes the heirarchies tree short term. I would argue it is too loud. Instead, we should focus on building horizontal power.

Collectivism requires people coming together to create horizontal power. Building horizontal power is in spite of any existing vertical power. Normal economic requirements like land, labor and capital need to be acquired for the benefit of the collective.

The point is there are no stages to communism. The prophecy will not save us from heirarchical power. Extraordinary claims, like those of Smith, Marx or Lenin, require extraordinary evidence. Instead of relying on a heirarchy, which continues to fail due to centralized power, we must build communism collectively with shared hands.

Liberals of all political persuasions tend to believe in monopolies created by the state through private property rights. Owners of private property maintain a monopoly on the use of the property. There are progressive liberal arguments proposing the state can keep monopolies in check.

Elections worldwide have been pushing right. I argue monopolies have consolidated power and are better equipped to misinform and buy elections. Liberals see this system of monopoly as justified (right) or controllable (left).

Leftist propose different economic and representation systems. One such system is anarchism. As an anarchist, I favor horizontal power structures with property not directly worked by a person held in common. Elections should give way to consensus building. Heirarchies, though sometimes necessary, should be answerable to the represented people. The tools of violence should be democratized to prevent the formation of unnecessary heirarchies that would create monopolies on violence.

There are alternatives to anarchism that could be considered leftist. The Marxist-Leninist propose other economic and representation systems. I will not represent them. There is definitely infighting amongst leftist.

Weird flex. Meeting material needs can be accomplished under different economic systems. I would say as a Liberal Capitalist you believe in a private property system where owners can take the work of others for their own benefit. I would respond, “If you don’t work, you don’t eat”, but that applies to the capitalist owners in the same way as their workers.

I know we are engaged in other conversation. I will read the other comment when I have time to kill.

I need to respond to the continuum idea of politics namely: capitalism -> socialism -> communism. The continuum is a creation of Lenin in State and Revolution. A similar anachronism is suggesting there is a continuum to evolution. Continuum’s are silly for evolution and politics.

Politics is group decision making. Religion is humanities relation to the supernatural. Drama, in context, seems to be a flaring of emotions.

Politics is unavoidable. Working with others requires decision making. She is telling you how she goes about making decisions i.e. deferring to authority.

Religion is also unavoidable since it informs politics. Many people believe God-King Jesus will come fix all the world’s problems. Thereby they are primed for deferring to authority.

Drama is a result of the multiplayer game of conversation. You can control your inputs and responses. You can control your internal state. There is no shame leaving a game instead of grinding to “git gud”. Not every game is for everyone. I enjoy the grind.

How is this not equivalent to “don’t use shovels, dig with your hands”? Gatekeeping technology… so anarchist. /s

Absolutely. Power is the difference. Vertical power structures all look the same. Call it communism, but those at the bottom are still ruled by those at the top. Instead give me some of that horizontal, bottom up power. No gods, no masters.

Markdown is expressive enough with better syntax.

Agreed. He is deplorable as an individual.

When did this become rapist or not? The choice was between neloiberalism and populist reactionary conservativism.

I understand not making a choice let populist reactionary conservativism win. The established electoral system makes that the accepted narrative. I propose an equally valid choice is rejection of both political groups and the electoral system creating the duopoly of power.

Banning ownership becomes a game of catch. Use whatever you have: 7.62x51mm, arrows, rocks, ect.

Wanting an end to needless slaughter, healthcare and working equipment sounds reasonable. I am glad there are reasonable voices on Lemmy.

I am probably missing a lot of information on Israel, but continued learning is important. I recently learned about the USS Liberty incident in 1967. I am not sure how Israeli’s could mess up that bad. There are still individuals maintaining the incident was deliberate. Who knows? Troubling history abounds.

People have different reasons for being on Lemmy. Examples are looking to feel validated or to pick a fight. I think these folk also existed in ye olde times. Maybe the attention economy is amplifying specific behaviors that would not have been amplified in the olde times.

Being fair, I usually come to Lemmy to argue. I am probably part of the problem.

The vote is worthless outside of swing states. May as well vote your conscience when fptp and Electoral College enshrine disenfranchisement.

Informative. Well written. Seems like the short version of my Intro to American Politics class at Uni. I classified myself as a social democrat back then. I was told I would get more conservative when I was older. Now I classify myself as an anarchist. Not sure what went wrong.

I am grateful local debates are posted online. Instead of listening to music at work I listened to the debates. Living in a one party state is unfortunate. The opposition tends to have similar political convictions to the incumbent.

Agreed. Voting shouldn’t be the only activism we are involved in. My comment was about solidarity against the oligarchs that can decide to make life harder for people they deem icky.

Republicans and Democrats were unable to stop legislation from the Judiciary with Roe v. Wade and later Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Super PAC’s donate multiple lifetimes of dollars to Presidential candidates in a quid pro quo system protected by the first amendment under Citizens United v. FEC. Americans outside the oligarchy will never exhibit their influence.

If oligarchs find your existence icky, they have the power to remove your “right” to exist. You lack the power to prevent it. Instead of thanking anyone, I suggest we take the power back. Punch up.

Woody Gutherie, Utah Phillips… I guess I am asking what divides county from folk.

I have a lot to learn. I appreciate the insight. I listen to Aesop Rock. I remember his work being with Rhymesayers.