Posting something on a private platform is actually not public. It is the private property of the platform owner and they can make it public or private any time they want or find ways to commodity it in their terms of service when you sign up.

I say this to back up what you say about the myth of the digital commons. Most online networks are not a commons at all, they are the exact opposite, they are an enclosure to extract profit from what would otherwise be a commons, usually built by finance capital to have appealing features at first, generated at a loss, and then once profit needs to be taken the alleged “commons” is increasingly closed and monetized. Journalista don’t really understand this, sure, but neither do most people. They expect, correctly, that social interactions should be analogous to chatting with someone on the street or at a public square, and social networks try to give that illusion.

Regarding individual choice, well a person is surrounded by the exact opposite of what we are saying and all their friends are on their addiction habit social networks so what would you expect them to do. These things don’t just happen on their own, people must work to organize and educate on the way capitalism turns their social lives into profit.

lol why are you so afraid to just address what I said. Next pointless ramble and I’m out bud

The topic being what Dengism is and why those you label with it might reject your use of the label. I explained this in the previous comment, you can choose whether to engage with it or not but I don’t feel any urge to immediately respond to your various diversions.

I’ll be happy to discuss that after the topic at hand, though it seems you’re trying to avoid it.

It’s an insult to the Filipino Maoists to compare them to the ACP.

ACP are rejected by all communists. They are Strasseritr, reactionary, and a formation deviating even from the revisionist CPUSA. They’re basically right wing grifters and Lemmy liberals are falling for the grift, lacking political education and media literacy.

By use, a tankie is anyone vaguely on the left that doesn’t fall for every US state department criticism of other countries.

Historically it was a left com / Trotskyist dismissive term referring to communists that justified the intervention in Hungary, with tanks, in 1956. But liberals don’t understand history or politics, nor are curious about them, and the only real content is to imply that the target is bad and not to be believed.

The “Darwinist” example is a good one because that’s generally not the term used in biology for what Young Earth Creationists think they’re doing by using the term dismissively. Evolutionary theory is much richer than Darwinism alone and within it there are disagreements among people, some calling certain views “Darwinist” in a way that is critical, seeing adaptation everywhere in evolutionary history even when it’s unjustified. Creationists just use it as a way to act like it’s a religious dogma, a camp, and therefore on equal footing with Young Earth Creationism rhetorically, and below it to their audience (who believe in creationism already). They typically don’t even know what the term means and can’t discuss the topics involved.

Pretty similar to this thread where terms are thrown around as insults, no understanding is evident, and simply inventing associations and alleged dogmas gets a free pass from those who have never investigated the topics whatsoever.

But “Dengism” isn’t even a thing among the left, there’s very little to it, it’s just reforms in the 80s and people argue over whether they were good or bad and how much. There are no socialist parties that organize themselves around “Dengism”, that’s like having an entire party centered on No Child Left Behind or something. Oh you’re a CLBer!?

Because Dengism isn’t anything other than a dismissive left com term for anyone on the left that doesn’t wholeheartedly dismiss the reforms under Deng.

Liberals have no idea what any of these words mean they just get the “and they’re bad” vibe from context. Like children playing with toys.

Name a “tankie” you’ve interacted with that supports ACP.

It trivializes genocide to compare actual genocide to war or really just other things that are far less.

This is not a difficult concept.

You won’t be able to find a single ACP supporter here. Go read more.

This article was designed specifically to show how gullible Lemmy libs are lmao. Imagine thinking the ACP is even on the left.

Just baby level ad hominem

You would probably appreciate developing direct personal connections. Could be irl or on the internet, just not super anonymous text based stuff like Lemmy.

Humans are a product of their circumstances, they can change over time, there is diversity within a community. Overly broad brushing can lead to a despair like you’re describing and it’s good to remember it’s not accurate. At the same time it is good to be aware of tendencies and patterns because the risks you mention are real in various pockets and subsets of society. The best protection against them is relationships with everyone else, and particularly those who are opposed to and organize against, for example, fascists.

Straight into the trash

The narrative you’re promoting right now that individuals are blameless

I’m gonna write this out a third time and bold something. Let’s see if you can pick up on it this time.

1. Industry that produces commodities for sale in rich Western countries.
2. Industry, military, and direct individual consumption in rich Western countries.

This was literally the first thing I wrote to you by the way.

because it’s all the government/industry/capitalism’s fault

Actually capitalism is the social system that ties it all together and is inherently part of industrialization, i.e. the production of virtually all excess GHGs we are talking about, and I’ve explained all of this to a decent degree but you have refused to engage with it even once. Pretending like it isn’t the elephant in the room is foolish.

is not helpful

Correctly identifying primary root causes is actually the most helpful thing to start with. Then we can talk action.

You’re concerned that I’m focusing too much on capitalism in the global GHG discussion where you asked lazy questions to point fingers at consumers? lmao.

I’m not the reason you’re not engaging in good faith in this conversation. Gotta get over this habit of blaming others for your personal disinterest.

Shell manufactures to produce a profit it doesn’t care who buys unless it is perceived as maximizing profit. Downstream costumers are companies, militaries, and individuals.

Shell doesn’t care whether fuel is considered excess by a military. If excess fuel is used by the military to destroy something Shell manufactured it to do that. I think you’re missing the point.

Shell does manufacture excess fuel and oil. Where else does it come from?

Shell does store fuel and oil including for the US military.

Shell isn’t blowing up the “leftover” US military materials sure. Why does that matter here?