Chronicon
social democracy isn't a great goal, and while it'd certainly be a huge improvement that I'd support, that doesn't mean I'm going to use its more unsavory rhetoric.
ah d'oh, misread ig
Societal beauty standards are a real thing... They aren't completely organic, set in stone, or inherently good or valid or anything like that but they do exist
it's (among other things) a way to keep discussion of people's own preferences from derailing an unrelated conversation
money is fake (for the government anyhow). We don't need to do "fiscal responsibility" rhetoric, it only works against us, and emphasizing "taxpayer" delegitimizes the contributions of the disabled, destitute, and those doing unpaid but societally necessary labor
wasting more tax payer money.
don't give a shit
"taxpayers" is social fascist rhetoric that we should excise
He's more addressing the failures of left wing movements that he sees as arising from a tendency to seek out The One True and Perfect Ideology and assume that when that is reached suddenly everyone will be on board and revolution will happen, when in reality people will always have disagreements, and a perfectly unified movement is a dead movement that has stopped evolving (I'm doing a lot of interpreting tbh, he doesn't phrase it that way, but that's what I got out of it)
I think his point is that yes obviously you need to be aligned enough to have common goals and work towards them in a relatively unified way, but you can't expect to get everyone on the exact same page about your entire body of thought. Dividing lines should be drawn on practical lines, not on lines of ideological purity, because if you cut out everyone who has a disagreement, you will end up with a group too small to be a meaningful political actor (but obviously, some people will never join you or will work with you in bad faith and undermine your goals, sometimes the question is existential and a split or purge is unavoidable, but usually it isn't)
Some anarchists kind of have this tendency as well though it expresses differently. where there's this feeling that you can reach a consensus on everything, when you just can't, and it isn't required to take action.
I'm never all that impressed with this guy's presentation, or ability to make concepts accessible, but he do be making me think.
Rider-Lewis Motor Vehicle Co
1911 is too early for a piezoelectric butane lighter
the little squiggly wire element seems like it might be pretty unique but no dice with patent drawings
Edit: found this vaguely similar marlboro "storm lighter" that had the same squiggly element: https://redlib.northboot.xyz/r/chemistry/comments/16f4tfu/what_metal_is_the_wire_in_my_storm_lighter_made_of/
Edit 2: it's not this but I thought it was funny (cw: penis): https://www.aliexpress.com/i/2255800781615393.html
here's one on ebay: https://www.ebay.ph/itm/362913900515
and another https://www.mercari.com/us/item/m24648551057
brief look didn't turn up any solid info but patents on piezoelectric ignition in lighters go back to at least the 1960s so it could be pretty old.
since it's a little butane jet not a regular flame it probably was literally just marketed to motorcyclists. I wonder if "riders" is even the brand