With $20 trillion between them, Blackrock and Vanguard could own almost everything by 2028 [1]
In 2014, sociologists observed that the American population exerts ZERO influence over public policy, while the most affluent dictated ALL policy, making the United States an oligarchy, by definition. [2]
For most U.S. workers, real wages have barely budged in decades [3]
The FBI and Occupy: The Surveillance and Suppression of Occupy Wall Street [4]
Google, Facebook, and Other Tech Giants Are Quietly Buying Up the Most Important Part of the Internet [5]
MSU scholars find $21 trillion in unauthorized government spending; Defense Department to conduct first-ever audit [6]
News Channels All Saying the Same Thing [7]
WEF takeover of UN strongly condemned [8]
Cooperation or Resistance?: The Role of Tech Companies in Government Surveillance [9]
"And perhaps as the next race approaches, a voice within tells you that you don’t want to have to go through all the misery of raising all that money in small increments all over again. You realize that you no longer have the cachet you did as the upstart, the fresh face; you haven’t changed Washington, and you’ve made a lot of people unhappy with difficult votes. The path of least resistance—of fund-raisers organized by the special interests, the corporate PACs, and the top lobbying shops—starts to look awfully tempting, and if the opinions of these insiders don’t quite jibe with those you once held, you learn to rationalize the changes as a matter of realism, of compromise, of learning the ropes. The problems of ordinary people, the voices of the Rust Belt town or the dwindling heartland, become a distan
... keep reading on reddit ➡
...For fascist and imperialist scum
Right now the top post is talking about the socialist party rep who went on fox news as a juxtaposition on what a good defence of left wing ideas in an interview looks like.
Let's make one thing very clear:
If you are not trained by a union or party to do so under precise circumstances: do not EVER talk to the bourgeois media about socialism.
The enemy controls the mic, the discussion and what happens to the footage afterwards. Fox interviewers forms of arguing are not in good-faith and their goal is solely to make you look bad without much concern of how they look. A huge amount of interviews they record never make it to air because it makes them look bad. Look at the leaked Tucker Carlsen interviews if you'd like evidence of this.
Only in very precise circumstances can these platforms be subversively used to benefit our movement, and you should trust these decisions to organizations which can pick the best trained presenters.
If you are not trained by a union or party to do so, NEVER EVER take an interview about Socialism. These people make a living by making radical workers out to be fools; you are not special and if you have no experience stepping into that ring you will be knocked out.
A Changing Global Landscape China is very rapidly approaching economic parity with the United States, which may lead to significant global shifts in power. Hegemonic stability theory suggests th.
This is just in, showing the semis war with China escalated. I cannot see China approves the merger. At best asking for a new application, standard way they have delayed most deals.
"TSMC, the world's largest contract chipmaker, said on Friday that it would hand over data requested by the US by November 8, according to local Taiwan media reports.
The chipmaker's statement came just one day after a US official hinted at compulsory measures aimed at obtaining sensitive information from uncooperative companies. "Whether or not we have to use compulsory measures depends on how many companies engage and the quality of the data shared," a spokesperson for the US Commerce Department was quoted as saying according to Reuters."
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202110/1237168.shtml
Lisa Su could announce the request for a new application saying both companies working together to find the best way forward. Not announcing a partnership immediately, as it'll be shocking. Latter the reason would be a new application processing will be way too late past latest April 2022 closing date, and both companies agree to a partnership instead, dropping the merger. Since both companies drop the merger and no Chinese rejection, no $1B fee paid per the agreement.
The partnership will be way tighter than any other including Samsung, and details will allow integration of both companies circuits IP into future EPYC Genoa chiplets ecosystem solutions.
That's my view. Read this article please don't ignore macro developments. Let's see tomorrow!
I wanted to try out the hegemon start and on paper it sounds great:
Kicking out one member on day 1, declaring war on the end of the truce (year 10), starting with 2 capitals of two different races.
I refrained myself from repeating the same with my second member to keep the federation. With my next target in sight I planned claims and a war strat, but ... no chance. With only lvl 1 or 2 I am stuck on low centralisation and can therefore only declare war "Majority Vote" - meaning my member can simply veto any attempt to go to war.
My suspicion is, that he is not willing to go to war against a superior enemy. Do I have any way to influence his willingness? Or do I have to wait for a lvl 3 federation -> medium centralisation -> Vote Weight based of diplomatic weight?
Asking for a friend
It's interesting that many people praise Churchill and the British leadership for standing alone against the hegemonic power in 1940 and refusing to give up after many defeats. This perseverance in the face of adversity has even become a part of the national myth in the UK.
Yet this seems more common in history than its opposite. The British themselves did it against Napoleon by staying at war for 20 years and refusing to give up. The Romans became famous for their staying ability in the Punic wars no matter how many defeats they were dealt by Carthage. France waged war for 30 years on Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire to destroy the Habsburg hegemony despite losing many of these wars. Frankly, I find it harder to come up with examples of a country giving up and conceding to the hegemon than the opposite (unless the country was fully defeated and occupied by the hegemon, like Germany after WW2).
It appears to me that this has less to do with national character and more with objective circumstances. As long as a country views its core national interests as threatened by the hegemon and retains even a minimum amount of resources to challenge it, it will maintain its opposition and stay in the conflict.
This is undoubtedly a very loaded and problematic question, but what can be said in response to it?
I did intend to present Shang China and the polis makeup of classical Greece as arbitrary, referential contrasts, though not necessarily opposites or antitheses of each other.
I am haunted by a post I saw shortly before I left Facebook, in a parenting group I was in. Honestly lots of posts from that group haunt me but this one in particular. It was from a white mom who is passionate about anti-racism. Her son, who was like 8 or 9 at the time, complained about being in discomfort wearing a mask all day at school when it was hot and stuffy, and the mask made it worse. She posted about how she 'called him out' for complaining about his discomfort in the context that as a white cis [her words obviously] male, the 'least he could do' is wear a mask to protect vulnerable people, etc.
I fucking majored in critical theory at a liberal arts college in the 2000s and spent those four years deeply immersed in privilege and oppression theory, post structural feminist thought on intersectionality, etc. Because I was lucky to receive a truly excellent education, I ALSO learned during those years to think critically about how any discourse is mobilized and used - to always ask, what does power gain from this particular way of thinking or talking or categorizing or understanding the world?
That last component seems horrifically absent from most applications of privilege/oppression language, especially now, and fuuuuuuck, it makes me so insane. IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO MAKE YOUR CHILD FEEL BAD FOR EXPRESSING PHYSICAL DISCOMFORT AND HIS RACE AND GENDER DOESNT CHANGE THAT, jesus FUCKING christ, how is this even remotely not obvious????
I now would rather be among the people I used to categorically hate - republicans, fundamentalist Christians, libertarians - than listen to another anti-racist PMC mom sprout off about how racist/white supremacist/problematic it is to not want to wear a mask all the day.
The native Mississippian cultures flourished at a time roughly contemporary to the European Middle Ages.
While looking at maps of Mississippian cultural blocs, I couldn't help but fantasize about a unified cultural hegemony arising from among themselves, in a manner at least reminiscent of how indigenous Chinese farming societies and tribes centralized and expanded over time beyond the lower Yellow River, from the Longshan periods onward.
Of course, this question is predicated on the scenario that contact with Europeans in general is delayed or even nonexistent for ALL the Americas (this gives room for further alt hist development of native trade networks and interstate relations in the context of ever-developing native societies). (I hear native trade networks were already widespread from North to South America, mostly by way of middlemen.)
At its greatest extent, this hypothetical Mississippian kingdom/state/empire could stretch from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico, and from the Great Plains to the Atlantic Ocean, or at least the Piedmont, while centered on a major ritual site (it could be Cahokia, but not necessarily). Some superficial parallels I can list at the moment are:
-major river for agriculture and transport = Mississippi River (which the Mississippians were already farming along) + tributaries (probably not its entire watershed) / this reminds me of the importance of China's Yellow River towards the rise of Chinese civilization
-cultural, sedentary identity partly defined through warfare against western Plains "barbarians" Indians / like how ancient China sort of defined itself through warfare against northern pastorals and nomads which it viewed as barbarians in need of Sinicization
-a nascent political (or at least ceremonial) center at Cahokia from which cultural influence radiated (along with other centers over time as Cahokia declined, such as Etowah) / this could be like China's Erlitou and Erligang, as well as the overall Sinocentric conception of tianxia)
-a relatively uniform ritual architecture style(s): Mississippians built mounds with buildings on top all over the areas shown in the linked maps / China also had highly ritualized architecture ba
... keep reading on reddit ➡
A Changing Global Landscape China is very rapidly approaching economic parity with the United States, which may lead to significant global shifts in power. Hegemonic stability theory suggests th.
