Farmer_Heck

That is unironically evil.

They probably think it's the funniest shit ever, but it's just heartless behaviour. The kind of shit a cartoon villain would do.

Everyone gets at least a little bit of nerves.

Try to remember that you're surrounded by people who will render help if something happens, and any injuries sustained will heal in time.

There's not really "good" advice to give, because everyone's different. Take some time to find something that works for you whether that's a pre-protest warmup, meditation before or after, breathing exercises, ideological or philosophical motivation, etc. Something is going to help you slow your heart rate and keep your head about you.

I swear to god that this channel and all of the ones like it are a fuckin psyop.

Every time I see one of these videos pop into my feed, it's always the most brain-dead filth. It just feels like the US's propaganda wing.

"Russia's new alliance is dumb actually, and we're going to use language that subconsciously makes you believe that it's evil too." "Russia and China hate each other actually, and will go to war because we want to believe that they will", so on, so forth.

Not a lot on a large scale, our news publications will always demonize the enemies of the state.

But, you can talk to the people around you and try to convince them that China's not at all what Western propagandists tell us about. Some people will be receptive, but others will cut contact with you for so much as implying that China isn't an evil dictatorship that steals organs and imprisons Muslims.

So play it by ear, if it seems like a person might listen about certain things, they might be convincible. But the people who'll argue and fight with everything you say (or even just start to say) are not going to come around on anything, so conserve your energy with those sort. Your mental health will thank you.

This advice stretches to anything else we're propagandized about. Most people will prefer to believe what's widely available to them, simply because that's what we're supposed to conform with. But some will be willing to learn more.

all of the people who were part of Anonymous who were worth a damn at hacking back in the day work for the state department now. The movement could very likely have been a psyop, given how many high-level hackers from that era there are on government payroll.

I stand in solidarity with the gay furry hackers.

your quotation is wrong. I said "legitimate", not rightful.

"Legitimate", as in they're the dominant governing body within the country and have been accepted by nearly every country as the genuine government of Afghanistan.

And it is fear-mongering. I was in kindergarten when 9/11 happened, I grew up seeing the US villainize Islam and Arabs in real time. In my youth, we were told that the Taliban were the greatest evil to ever walk the planet. There is a lot to criticise about the Taliban, they're not leftist and their interpretation of Islam is heretical. But they're not the human embodiment of the devil Americans so desperately want to believe they are.

In the instance of this headline, western news publications want people to think "Taliban = hate", then think "if Putin works with the Taliban, that means he endorses them". Thus stoking anti-Russia sentiments by using the decades of anti-Muslim fear-mongering they've been giving us since the 1990s.

Loathesome Dongeater mentioned it, but it's important to realize that the Taliban existed as they did for 20 years to fight against American (and western) Imperialism in Afghanistan, and when the US pulled out of their country they became the dominant political force.

Though the Taliban isn't a group MLs should be rooting for, they are the legitimate government of Afghanistan, and they have been committed to fighting ISIS - a US-grown insurgency in the Middle East & Northern Africa.

Western publications benefit more from just putting "the Taliban" into their headlines than they do from posting "the Afghani government". The fear-mongering associated with two decades of imperialist war in Afghanistan helps their arguments monumentally.

Apparently, it was first reported that the F-16 was shot down. Then the story was pulled and replaced with one about it crashing on its own accord.

If the guy who is being reported as "the best pilot in Ukraine" crashed an F-16 during a mission, that says much worse things about the Ukrainian Air Force.

Mind you, Russia has sophisticated anti-air capabilities and can easily dominate Ukrainian airspace if they need to. But, sure, that billion-dollar high-tech jet fighter crashed itself.

losers want to say that it's pay to win, and that's the main criticism that you'll see when you look into the game. The second criticism you'll find is people being sinophobic about the game's developers being Chinese.

I haven't put a single cent into the game, but that hasn't put me at a disadvantage against the players who do buy currency. If you understand tactics and make smart choices, the gear tier of your enemies never actually matters. It's not pay to win, because you'd have to actually win as a result of putting money in.

is anybody else playing Arena Breakout Infinite?

I've been playing it since it was released to EA and I'm loving it.

moving to a reply for a similar story (really it's a rant) of my own.

My party had a few anarchists in it, they made up something like 10% of the party at a point. A small enough percentage that you can simply ignore them during votes or party motions, but a big enough number that you couldn't ignore them during discussions.

There was one Anarchist who would volunteer themself to speak on behalf of all Anarchists at every discussion, taking personal issue with anything that could possibly upset an Anarchist. A member of the party might want to simply talk about the great technological innovations that happened in the USSR, and that Anarchist would find a way to steer the discussion towards "USSR bad". A member might want to discuss the guerrilla fighting in the Cuban revolution, the Anarchist would go on and on about how Cuba is "an authoritarian dictatorship". This goes so on, and so forth. And every time we tried to bring up the issues that were created by them doing that, the 29 other Anarchists would stand up with them and claim we were trying to make them leave.

Leadership thought it would be a good idea to make them their own wing within the party, so they could be autonomous and have their own discussions apart from the main party discussions. They treated it like we were moving them to the "kiddie's table" and threatened to start disrupting other party functions. A few members of leadership decided, without consulting all of leadership, to appoint that very vocal Anarchist to a seat within leadership to keep them from complaining as much.

Nobody abused the power of leadership in our party like they did. They would make unilateral decisions without asking anyone else.

Later on, we would find out that the whole thing was an ego trip for them. They liked feeling like they were at odds against any authority, so they'd put themself into positions to be at odds with party leadership. When they were put into leadership, they had no idea how difficult the position actually was, so they simply refused to act within the guidelines.

Reading this made me remember how much I do not miss being a party leader.

There are two good ways to can try to handle this situation, and both may look like hostility if egos are at play.

The first is to simply talk to the Trot directly in private and try to direct them towards better historians and convince them to read ML theory. If they're receptive, they might shift their ideological position and stop being a nuisance. If it fails, they could claim that you're trying to "bully" them into being a "Stalinist".

The second is to talk to either party leadership or fellow party members and try to get them to agree on more rigid party lines. If successful, it'll become easier to keep conversations on track and productive, as most of your party members will agree that tirades against the USSR aren't helpful. You can pair this with readings or studies of the USSR to help the less informed members of the party come to a mutual understanding. If it fails, they could accuse you of trying to co-opt the party and get you kicked out.

These are the kinds of murky waters I had to try to navigate daily within my party when it existed, inner-party politics is a hard game to play, and it usually results in battles of egos.