adorno_h8s_ur_jazz_meme

I agree, also, do you have an android? if so, you should think about a different OS than stock. I use graphene, and it is designed for this type of shit. It does not send out any bluetooth or internet checks when turned off, does not come with any google, uses their own proxy servers for internet and location, randomizes telemetry as much as possible etc. If I was worried I would take out my sim card just in case, although if it is airplane mode it should be ok. Comes stock with barebones free, open source programs. So no tracking. You can still install play store if you want, and they have done a lot of work to have it run sandboxed really well. So it accesses what you give it permission to, rather than everything on stock android. I still would not have it installed for your use case, or would at least have it on a separate user profile I wasnt using. Comes with vinadium, a degoogled chrome fork. I use ironfox and brave personally. Also I use Mullvad VPN, which Graphene is designed to work well with and is super reputable.

I also use neostore. It is a storefront for a bunch of different open source software repositories. Tells you very clearly specific privacy concerns for all software. Great app.

There is also I think Organic maps? A functional foss alternative to google maps. I can't really get it to run well myself, but others say its great. So you can use google maps with Graphene Proxy servers, but the location will still be sent to google, ip address etc. You can deny it network access, but it is still sketchy. I personally use Magic Earth, which is not foss, but more overtly privacy focused than google by a mile. No account needed, no ligs etc(the rub is it is private so we don't absolutely know). It has pretty robust transparency and can be used without connecting to the internet. No logs, no data collected by default. GPS is calculated by recieving, not transmitring a signal, ao this can be done completely privately if you turn the internet and bt off. Magic Earth is my compromise choice of privacy and ease of use.

There is also something called the guardian project by the tor browser people. besides tor itself(more secure but quite slow for video and such), they have a suite of apps you might like. Designed for journalists and such. One for scrubbing data from pictures, another one you can set to scrub your entire phone or specific apps as a panic button(Graphene natively has a panic code you can type in if cops are trying to unlock your phone thatll wipe it as well, but I dont think it can be tailored). another app lets you set your phone as a motion sensor camera, another will send a premade message to emergency contacts when enacted etc. Super good shit.

Sorry, I ramble a lot. On a final note, getting into all this shit made me realize how much big tech fucking hates us now. How they see design as a distant secondary concern to extracting data. Like, these are apps people make just because, and a lot of them are far better to use because they're not bloated spyware fronting as a camera app.

Lastly, it comes with a hardened fork of signal I use. works perfectly, but still uses their servers(encrypted, but they know who sent it). If you want other anonymity tools there are p2p messaging apps like Briar, ones you can set up your own server to host messages, freenet lets you upload pictures and such anonymously.

All to say, there is a whole ecosystem for the shit you're talking about. If you have an apple phone, don't trust a goddamn word apple says. It is marketing. Capital will always side with fascists when their interests align and sell you out in a heartbeat(they already have to others). And Apple of course allows no 3rd party OS or foss. Fuck Apple. Also their design isn't elegant imho, it is just childish. They make doing anything not explicitly designed for impossible. Incredibly frustrating. I have to use Apple for work and almost broke the fucking computer when I realized their native pdf viewer is made by someone that hates you and doesnt have night mode. If you want anything approaching anonymity the first step is not being in ecosystems built by big tech, otherwise anything you do is comically futile. You are at all times holding a massive neon sign with all your info on it. Of course, I am just a guy on the internet that is a newbie himself to most of this, also a fucking moron lol. Do your own due diligence, but I have not regretted switching for a second. Also it is super easy and takes a youtube video and 15 minutes. Try it with an old phone first if youre hesitant. Best of luck

I think this is correct. Racism didn't start, nor was it exclusive to, the South. The South was a largely fascist style totalitarianism for black people until the 1960's, but this was one instantiation of a worldwixe view. Racialized capitalism has remained with cosmetic facelifts. The South was part of a much wider shift in European thought in the 15th and 16th centuries towards a racial world. Modern conceptions of race arose to justify exploitation, taken from things like "Purity of the Blood" to differentiate Christian converts post Reconquista from older Christians. So they could continue discriminating. When conquering the Americas and enslaving Africans they ran into the same issue. Justifying war and brutality along Christian lines becomes quite muddled after their children grow up having been born and raised Christian. So the idea was that they carried heathenism in their blood. Easy, now perpetual, hereditary bondage has a justification. Capitalism arose concurrently with Imperialism and the Enlightenment. So this racialized worldview, with massive economic incentive, became standardized, secularized, "rationalized", eventually becoming eugenics and Nazi race science.

During this same time, there was mass exploitation and genocide on a global scale. It was not the Confederacy that eradicated entire tribes, forced assimilation, occupied Haiti, opportunistically betrayed the Phillipines by annexing it and brutally putting down the same freedom movement they had fought alongside the year prior- and promised independence. Nor was it the Confederacy nor Jim Crow that annexed Hawaii by force, in the name of fruit companies. The list goes on.

It is very easy to imagine the north as this mercantile utopia of small businessmen, fishing and trading and fiercely defending liberty. There was certainly a real strand of Enlightenment thought througb the Am. Rev. that was actually emancipatory, anti slavery, property, and capital. The Constitution was very much a reactionary document, meant to centralize and consolidate power in the hands of the new elite, North and South. Bourgeois rights to trade and property became instilled as the preeminent rights, any thought of social tranformation died in Shay's Rebellion.

Telling is the fact that Whigs opposed the Bill of Rights out of fear they would be read as exhaustive, and used to delimit the barebones conception of liberty by excluding everything not written. Hell, they even threw in an amendment explicitly stating "dipshits, these aren't the only rights, they are examples". And now those who claim to be defending the original text and intent betray the explicit intent by deferring to state power whenever they possibly can. The only amendment that gets completely written off is the inconvenient one that says the BOR should be a starting point. They call it too vague, funny because that was the entire point. To say "hey, use your judgement to protect liberty, think expansively, we are literally just some guys, we don't even have The Simpsons".

Anyways, the Northern business interests did not particularly care one fuck about slavery, and they brutalized every wave of immigrant labor they could to turn Southern cotton into fabric(so did England, without the massive financial returns of Southern cotton the Industrial Revolution would've been dead in the water).

But the abolitionist movement began to turn the population against the evils of slavery. The progressive middle class and freedmen eventually turned the North to abolition. Now there is an idea that Republicans and Democrats magically "switched positions" after the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Well yes and no. The Republicans were always the party of the wealthy. They gained the support of Northern industrialists that saw slavery as inefficient when compared to treating labor like a market- also catastrophically exploitative. The North has been profoundly racist as well, if not so overtly.

Very telling is how immigrants were categorized racially. When they were an oppressed working class, they were segregated and painted as racially inferior. The Irish largely treated like the Jim Crow South. Papist, non Germanic, Celtic, swine. As the Irish gained voting power and moved into the middle class, and the Nativists needed their support to exploit the New Immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe.. congrats Paddys! You're white now! Now lets oppress the Mongoloid Italians and Russians and of course Jews.

What this demonstrates is racism was not an independent force of spite. It was, and still is, an economic weapon.

When thinking about race in the North, keep in mind they had a muuuch smaller black population than Louisiana. If they so had majority black populations in mist areas I imagine it would've looked largely similar to Jim Crow. During the Great Migration blacks were forced into shitty neighborhoods, could only work specific jobs, and were still subjected to mass violence. The Black Panthers started in Oakland and soread largely to Northern cities. Huey Newton was assassinated by the FBI and Chicago PD. This is the heart of your question, and I think the answer. Imagining capitalism as a non racial system would mean it would be radically different everywhere. As long as wealth is consolidated, exploitation need occur. Where exploitation occurs, the best way to get people to support their own exploitation is through manufactured markers if difference. "What about Nordic countries and Belgium". Well, European countries were largely able to posture Liberty Equality Fraternity because the exploitation was exported, and even then there was still brutal class conflict and if course persecuted minorities(Norway has an indigenous population thst was nearly wiped out).

As the threat of class conflict rise, Russia fell to communism, and the fear of Bolshevism spread reactionary forces of capital allied themselves with their own mutant offspring and used all the technologies of domination, ideological, financial and material, to turn their racialized, imperial domination inward. The violence of fascism would not look a freak occurance to someone from the Belgian Congo, or Jim Crow South, or Vietnam or South Africa.

Fascism is an offspring of the global economic system of domination. No place or people is immune. As the parent comment said, they'd find a new outgroup. Capital needs ideological justification for its theft and domination. Describe the American privatized prisons to someone and ask them what nation is being described.

A final note, as Adorno(see username) points out, this is not opposite the forces of Enlightenment and Progressivism. It is embedded in the logic of Enlightenment. Categorization, quantification, implies grester and lesser values. All morality is reduced to market exchange. Tell people in the "backward" Middle Ages that starvation was needed as an explicit threat to keep people working(something argued in 17th cent England with the Poor's Act and literally echoed today by Neoliberals), and they wouldsay that is the height of barbarity. But human worth is production and consumption, we are in a dog eat dog social world built to consolidate wealth and power. One that was wholly alien to all societies prior to the 15th century. God sorry this got so long. All to say, race is an invented means of differentiation, something else wouldve arisen to replace it had everyone been white.

Lol I literally had a strict rule where I downvoted every comment that started with "this", no matter what else was written. Fuck that noise.

I did quite enjoy that article, although I would disagree with his conclusion. As can be guessed from my user name, I think the nature of capitalism is to blame, not personal habit. It seems tenuous to claim that a phenomena that has affected humans by the billions can be remedied by personal choice. A critic may say that is exactly buying into the illusion of capital. What is a systemic issue of production and distribution being reduced to one of personal agency, moral failing, and consumer preference.

One of the best books I've read in a long time is about precisely this. Immediacy, or the Cultural Style of Too Late Capitalism by Anna Kornbluh. It is a spiritual successor the Frederic Jameson and Postmodernism: The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, as well as Debord and others.

Her argument is mainly that as markets have come to dominate every aspect of our existence, market logic has come to dominate culture. The current logic she names Immediacy. The idea being that in all aspects, including academia, culture is dominated by personal, immediate experience. It is nominalism, the idea that mediation of experience through abstraction, whether philosophical concepts or difficult art, is pretentious, impersonal, boring, amd tedious. We demand immediate response from that we engage with. Whether it be social media, music, novels, or movies, they are required to be immediately relatable, translatable, and consumable.

This is why shows like Rings of Power feel vapid and lacking. They are not mythical people in which we can posit ourselves, in which we can aspire and dream of greatness, of justice, of friendship and loyalty. The show feels like it is sneering and rolling its eyes at these. No one is really like Aragorn, come the fuck on. Hokie ass garbage.

Instead it offers us... ourselves in a fantasy setting. Symbolism and themes are hard and boring and pretentious, so they will pursue their own petty interests as we would and squabble and pout. Shows like this just feel like our world in a new setting. The orcs are "complicated", under the auspices of moral complexity but really just to denude morality from the world altogether. No grand messages. That shit is lame. And so we are more invested in Aragorn the moment his face changes to tenderness,as he looks down at Sam, willing to defend his his master against this 6' tall man with a longsword wielding a candlestick, and shows a deep moral complexity. This is using something rare in our world, a powerful man, a Numenorian, admiring the courage of a hobbit gardnerer with a candlestick. Admiring his bravery and loyalty. And as a mysterious, threatening, hardened traveller showing compassion and vulnerability.

It is striking in its contradiction, actual subversion, difficulty, and seeming otherwordly goodness. Not that shows have to portray traditional morals to be compelling. They need to portray something that is not immediatelt accessible to us. But that goes directly against the market logic. The same logic that creates fetishized commodities that seemingly appear at our door. That turns the complexities of climate disaster, exploitation, global supply chains into little entertainment boxes that exist simply because we desire it to.

The gig economy, where employment is mercurial, "nomadic", precarious, is celebrated as freedom. The destruction of new possibility is celebrated as authenticity. Live your truth. I heard an ad for lawyers that offered to help on "your divorce journey".

And as this world offers us constant ennui and anomie by fuflilling desires it convinces us we have, it also implores us to act now! The environment is collapsing, recycle your cans for Christ sake! Buy products in brown packaging you fucking monster! So it feels almost irresponsible to dream, foolish to hope, impossible to imagine. The actual message of Marvel movies, novels that are part confessional diary, green marketing, is that "this is the only world. Even in space. Even with superheroes. Even in Middle Earth. The only arrangment. Even your wildest fantasy cannot escape this reality. There is no world outside of capitalism. All is exchange and consumption and endless banality", As Mark Fischer put it "It is easier to imagine the end if world than the end of capitalism".

So I, and Kornbluh, do actually agree the solution is a moral imperative. But not to engage with the machine in a moderate way. Trying to curate an eddy in a flood. But to make difficult art. Art that is mediated. Art that requires investment and separation and abstraction. Just now, when the world is on the brink of endless catastrophe, is it most appropriate to dream of different possibilities. To read Lord of the Rings and look at Aragorn not as sentimental and trite, but as aspirational.

Lastly, if you have interacted with teenagers there is a deep, bedrock cynicism that eclsipses irony and sarcasm. Those things imply a hope thst was betrayed. They largely have never hoped, have never stayed up breathelessly reading a challenging book, or listened to an album on repeat that fundamentally changes them, that they feel beyond their bones. Which is full tragedy. Adolescence should be when dreaming through new and exciting media elavates you, opens new horizons. There is overwhelmingly apathy, amusement, boredom. Little curiosity or imagination. Their entire worlds have been robbed of them. They can sense it. They don't tend to love or even like social media. But their horizons are closed. Nothing left even to dream of. They don't have the faculties to even sense what it is they are missing, they just know it is.

Very sorry for the length. I just really love the book, and thanks for the article. It was a good productive read.

I largely agree, and have been saying for years that people are drastically underestimating what a second Trump term will look like. The only counter I would say is that, while Trump is immensely powerful, and the opposition complete chickenshit, Germany and Italy are not the norm. There were unique historical conditions that made the fascist conquest of those countries so complete so quickly. Generally the country falls into some inbetween.

There are a lot of different interests at play in the US, a lot of institutional inertia, a lot of capital that does not support Trump yet(although capital will follow fascists if they think it the best way to crush workers).

Trump does have a genius at understanding postmodern media, and is himself sorta the incarnation of postmodern, which means an ability to feed desire and fear in his followers. But he looks woefully incompetent at the present moment, which is not inspiring for people to commit a fascist coup. He is also incredibly ill disciplined and fickle. The Nazis at least felt the need to deliver some material returns for workers with vacations to Spain and such. Doing everything you can to tank the economy and put yourself in an incredibly weak bargaining position with foreign nations as your economy collapses is the opposite of inevitable, indomitable strength.

Trump wants to mimic Hitler by sacrificing the longterm stability of the economy for shorterm growth(it's what every Republican does), but he has perhaps irreperably annihilated his greatest assett, faith in US credit, finance, and the petro dollar. He was in a situation unprecedented outside the modern US, being able to print huge amounts of money without the risk of hyperinflation. Hitler instituted huge deficit spending(and wealth robbed from those persecuted), to fund a boom in industrial production that lowered the unemployment rate. It was like a sugar rush, to continue required the use of massive pools of slave labor and the constant influx of stolen wealth.

The reason he paused tarriffs when the bind market became unstable is because the bomd market generally improves when stocks are unstable. People move their money into seemingly bedrock stable assets, US bonds. Those slipping, and the risk of foreign holders offloading huge amounts, would cause rates the US can borrow at to increase. With the tarriffs, this could further erode faith in US debt, which could enter a doom loop of rising interest rates requiring more borrowing to print money leading to further erosion into absolute armageddon until the US can no longer basically print money for nearly free.

The situation Trump is leading us to is closer to Weimar hyperinflation than Nazi sugar rush. Add onto this, if he actually tries to remove Powell for a loyalist, it could destroy 50 years of built trust.

This made seem ancillary, but it is vital to an overt authoritarian move. If doomsday pops off, he will try and use the military to put down unrest. The sheer breadth and lack of accountability of emergency presidential powers should be the front page story of every newspaper right now.

It is worth noting that Hitler never abolished the Weimar Republic. He trotted the Reichstag out every 4 years to reaffirm his Ennabling Act mandate. He never broke the law. He totalized his control of the branches of government, industry, and academia and used his mandate as a permission structure for the middle management to continue serving the Nazis. Trump is currently attempting the same thing, threats of investigation of congress, gutting the deparments, and arresting a judge while not ruling out arresting Supreme Court Justices being the most notable examples.

Trump could use the instability he causes to consolidate control, but I think it would be unlikely. Declare sedition and a national emergency, take control of media, set up road blocks, mass arrests, freezing opposition finances, occupying blue states. But a strongman needs to be seen as the only viable solution to a crisis, not the cause. He has a cult of personality built for around 30-40% of the population. Hitler had institutional backing, from the army, capital(night of the Long Knives was explicitly to gain these), and from the middle class. He lowered unemployment from 30 to 5%.

All to say, the worst thing for an aspiring strongman is to give an order that is disobeyed en masse. And with a tanking economy, instability, chaos, the people opposing Trump will come from a large crosssection of the population. Soldiers will not see a threat to the country in the protestors, they will see their moms, brothers, friends, and sisters. And in the Russian and French Revolutions, soldiers refusing orders against protestors proved pivotal inflection points.

Miller has suggested building a core military group of extreme loyalists from across the government. Terrifying, but America is massive, and during mass protests would be barely noticable outside all but the largest cities.

Masse defections, coupled with chaotic leadership(Trump is incapable of any other kind), a tanking economy, and mass protests would force the institutions Trump had almost cowed to grow a spine. To avert complete chaos they would have to reassume powers they have for decades handed over to the President.

So where does this leave us? Well, probably somewhere inbetween, further erosion and institutional rot, further corruption and capitalist capture. An escalation of the creeping illiberalism without a complete fascistic collapse.

Formerly when the US has reached crisis points caused by capital's evisceration of all life to market forces, waves of reform stabilized the boat. If Bernie would nit snuffed out by Dems, he could've transformed the coalitions, won the working class back, brought back a barely tolerable equilibrium, and removed the material conditions responsible for fascism(capitalism's domination over the government and working class, and thus its complete commodification of land, money and labor- side note, everyone should read The Great Transformation to get a handle on what is happening). But he lost, and we went down the rabbit hole we have avoided prior. But this also dialectically creates the conditions for its own antithesis. Trump will likely cause catastrophy without taking us a the way. The persecutions, deportations, stifling of speech, corruption, destruction of the common good, will open possibilities for radical reform formerly thought impossible. Already there is strong majority support for removing the Dem neoliberal old guard. Schumer would likely get wrecked by AOC. Talk of mass organizing and mutual aid, mainstream democrats calling for general strikes and mass disruption. This could give us a completely transformed democratic party that looks to Blair Mountain rather than the G8 and technocratic finance bros for its inspiration. If the Democrats actually ran on real change to oppose this they could create a generational New New Deal coalition of white and blue collar workers. The Dems held the house with one interruption from '31 to '95. Universal preK, college, healthcare, worker protections, and a litany of other things that could push back the markets from social life.

We could also be looking at the Marius or Sulla to some current 23 year old Caesar. But I think there is a strong argument that Trump would need to radically rethink giving the working class literally nothing besides spectacle and theft in order to consolidate power. Sorry for the length

I'm a little lost. I dig it. There are some very real and good ideas in here, but several arguments that seem disconnected with only a theme. Also, who is saying this? In order to engage with ideas one needs to know their broader contexts. Some say, the conclusion is drawn by anonymous people, can be a frustrating read. I don't take it maliciously or think it purposeful, but this is rhetorical trick generally used to create a monolithic strawman out of a group of diverse thought.

Nietzsche says God is Dead, but Nietzsche isn't claiming God ever existed, he is claiming the social conditions that supported the belief and perpetuation of a religious ontology had collapsed. Meaning the existing rationale for traditional ethics also dies. Who has unchained the earth from the sun? But he is mainly attacking atheists here, believe it or not. Check out the Madman in the Market. The crowd is atheists that do not know the profundity of God's death.Pointing out a lot of the loss of meaning that concerns you, and that humanism was basically trying to have your cake and eat it, sticking to Christian principles without God. I would argue the anomie, ennui, nihilism of capitalism is here. He foresaw this as the Last Man.

Marx says famously religion is false consciousness, the existentialists break with religion, Camus' absurdism, the list is a mile long, a lot of Critical Theory saying what you are suggesting about modern society. But the list of people promoting actual meaninglessness is rather short in my reckoning. It is not "God is dead, so this is all pointless", for most it is some iteration of "God is dead, so we must construct on his ashes, or rebel against systems of control, or create new values and overcome".

Also, most philosophers aren't so neatly bifurcated on religion. They draw heavily on religious thinkers, look at the Existentialists and Wittgenstein's use of Kierkegaard. The widespread admiration of Simone Weil. Deleuze uses Augustine's conception of a priori time as becoming and pulls its grounding in God. Philosophers tend to deal in concepts, and honestly the topline question of whether God exists is the least interesting a lot of times. They care about how the concepts produce insights. I have a Kierkegaard tattoo, and I am an atheist. His struggle and engagement with truth as experience, irony, humor, dialectics, philosophy as personal struggle all still are immensely influential for me.

When you mention The Matrix, are you discussing the Wachowski sisters or Andrew Tate, cause there is a big difference lol? The former are actually pulling the Matrix pretty explicitly from Baudrillard, I would argue as an overt metaphor. The book Neo pulls the floppy disk from is by B. Desert of the Real is his term. Their Matrix is loosely the Simulacra of Baudrillard's capitalism(not the only interpretation of course). His concern is not so much God as how the markets have created their mirror in culture to such a profound degree that what we engage with as reality is largely copies without originals. We watch kitsch retellings of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliette, but they live happily ever after in this one, because the popular conception is that it's a love story, so it is pulling from that, not the original, it is more Shakespeare than Shakespeare. Then we go eat at Outback, built by guys whose conception of Australia is other commodities-so never referencing an actual place- as we look at streamers on our phone simulating friendships more earnestly than real ones. This is the hyper real. More reality than reality. Also meaninglessness. Trump is basically if market psychosis was a person. His amnesia, id, spite, will to dominate and humiliate, interest in exclusively people as means, all pure postmodern capitalism. This also goes for capitalist religion. Look at how mutilated fundamentalist Christianity has become. It is echoing and forging not the desires of Christ, but those of the market. God as exchange. Christ is a figure of material prosperity, competition, domination, consumption, and disposable spectacle as revelation. A Christian rock band sets up in a 20,000 seat arena to sell a mystical experience and send money to help Israel colonize Palestine. You can watch it on your phone. The world of phantoms for the Matrix analogy is markets, God as commodity. This is the domination of false desires the Matrix is concerned with. Andrew Tate is, like all Right wing grifters, a parasitic creation of the market. Preying on the very alienation the system creates, using its dissatisfaction to preemptively quell any actual dissent. His cure for alienation from capitalism.... post memes of him 12 hours a day, become a hedonist, start an MLM, become one of those whose benefits from the system...

All to say, I feel the description of these thinkers as bleak nihilists is misplaced. Nieztsche is explicitly trying to prevent mass nihilism, Camus, one of my faves, says the fight against the absurd is the ontological grounding for human dignity. We gain meaning in our rebellion against domination and cruelty, we become the absurd when we collapse into systems of control. I think you would find The Rebel really interesting.

I also choose this guy's comment!

Now make people restating it 800 times half the thread. Switched a few weeks ago, and honestly the fact I have yet to see the words heckin or wholesome, nor the annoying as fuck story style of banal metaphor they think is relatable and super clever, sounding like a chimichanga doused in tabasco making its emergency 3AM exit be known, has all sold me. Reddit seems to be a bunch of people who think they're super unique and progressive as they salivate over Marvel movies and rehash the same 9 political talking points, 50 posts, and 4 philosophy quotes they don't understand ad infinitum. It is reddit without redditors, and doesn't feel like it is curated by the DNC's PR department. What's not to love?

I think lemmy'd be ideal if it was double our triple its current size. Maybe just large enough to convince r/askhistorians to jump ship.

No, also some banking apps won't work. Those are easy enough circumvented by just making the bank browser page an icon. They require some strict certification that is basically exclusive to being android even though Graphene is designed to be more secure.

Google pay apparently just requires too much access, so including it would undermine the entire purpose.

I am a massive fan, and the drawbacks are few but very real if you value the things it cannot do. Definitely worth looking into its deficiencies before switching of course.

After using Graphene for a year it would be unthinkable to go back. Wild how good a product can be when it is designed with the interests of the user in mind, rather than viewing them as a resource to be harvested.

What are you saying exactly? I imagine they are downvoted because the implication is that tankies are correct that leftists who raise concerns over human rights are CIA plants. I can't imagine anyone thinks this earnest.