My shirt that says “Don’t investigate my paedophilia because what’s going on with my “boys” and, in some cases, “gals?” They’re all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We’re on one Team, MAGA, and I don’t like what’s happening. We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and “selfish people” are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein. For years, it’s Epstein, over and over again. Why are we giving publicity to Files written by Obama, Crooked Hillary, Comey, Brennan, and the Losers and Criminals of the Biden Administration, who conned the World with the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, 51 “Intelligence” Agents, “THE LAPTOP FROM HELL,” and more? They created the Epstein Files, just like they created the FAKE Hillary Clinton/Christopher Steele Dossier that they used on me, and now my so-called “friends” are playing right into their hands. Why didn’t these Radical Left Lunatics release the Epstein Files? If there was ANYTHING in there that could have hurt the MAGA Movement, why didn’t they use it? They haven’t even given up on the John F. Kennedy or Martin Luther King, Jr. Files. No matter how much success we have had, securing the Border, deporting Criminals, fixing the Economy, Energy Dominance, a Safer World where Iran will not have Nuclear Weapons, it’s never enough for some people. We are about to achieve more in 6 months than any other Administration has achieved in over 100 years, and we have so much more to do. We are saving our Country and, MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, which will continue to be our complete PRIORITY. The Left is imploding! Kash Patel, and the FBI, must be focused on investigating Voter Fraud, Political Corruption, ActBlue, The Rigged and Stolen Election of 2020, and arresting Thugs and Criminals, instead of spending month after month looking at nothing but the same old, Radical Left inspired Documents on Jeffrey Epstein. LET PAM BONDI DO HER JOB — SHE’S GREAT! The 2020 Election was Rigged and Stolen, and they tried to do the same thing in 2024 — That’s what she is looking into as AG, and much more. One year ago our Country was DEAD, now it’s the “HOTTEST” Country anywhere in the World. Let’s keep it that way, and not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about. Thank you for your attention to this matter!” has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my shirt.

They’re heaven babies. Semi-wild does are some of the most gentle animals I’ve ever encountered.

Unfortunately no smell whatsoever. I usually like planting things that have a sensuous benefit along with an ecological one, but this is just a generalist calorie machine.

Danger 5 is probably the most accurate WW2 documentary I’ve seen. It’s so rare to have quality colour footage from that era and they collected a lot that I haven’t seen elsewhere.

Super Furry Animals - Love Kraft: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0TLxJyY7-w&list=PLIB8rikvk8oiSfMll59UvVNs2SWDhxvHG

It’s a really dynamic neopsychedelia album which has good highs/lows/mixing. With surround sound the violin is intense.

Debord is essential reading along with Baudrillard. The 20th century saw the rise of mass psychology, marketing and propaganda, and mass media. These three things dictate the social relationship you have with power structures. It’s imperative that we understand how we’re tricked into supporting our own oppression. Because the city is a collection of these narratives by concentrated power structures, understanding psychogeography is essential for urbanist theory. The city’s landscape creates the mindsets of its residents and the main task of critical geography is understanding where those development choices lead people to more or less toxic ways of interacting with the world.

Baudrillard is less of a Marxist than Debord, who I think is firmly rooted in Marxist theory, but Simulacra and Simulation is a brilliant book for understanding the actual processes behind Debord’s Society of the Spectacle. Language and imagery are the tools power structures use to communicate to you. The more abstract they are, the more they can be distorted and used against you. With that book you gain a formal process for being able to look at an image and see how it’s corrupted from its original meaning to reinforce existing power structures.

I will say that if you decide to read Society of the Spectacle it’s written in a really weird way where it’s like 200+ aphorisms that elaborate on the central idea of spectacle. It isn’t easy to follow and I really recommend using supplemental podcasts like this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3bZOd5-6qE

The moment I saw Coeur D’Alene I knew he was a Nazi. That was one of the areas I used to service when I did tech support for an ISP. Nowhere else in that service area- pretty much the entire middle of the US- had as many right-wingers squealing at me because they couldn’t access Fox News or some other hog website. When I saw the town pop up on my screen there was a solid 50/50 chance they were going to casually say the most racist thing I heard all day. His parents should join him for the crime of creating him.

and six others injured, most of them in “serious” condition.

Thoughts and prayers for their cum

By and large it’s a good overview. The only thing I don’t like is at 26 minutes in when he describes Engels’ work as creating deterministic laws. Young Marx in the Communist Manifesto era could be described as such, but by the point of his death I don’t think Marxism could be called deterministic in good faith. Dialectical materialism is a mode of analysis. It can show you how two things are interdependent and where the contradictions are between them. Human agency, in the form of theory and praxis, is what actually changes things. The material/social conditions you identify constrain possibility without pointing to a specific path for the rupture of those relationships. Once we identify what exists and in what context we can change it, but that change doesn’t come from the inevitable rupture of those relationships under the weight of their contradictions. The Soviet Union and People’s Republic of China only won their revolutions from humans acting in the moment using a strong theoretical basis to understand the world around them.

Those dialectical laws set by Engels are just an ontological framework. Quality into quantity, the interpenetration of opposites, and the negation of the negation are all plainly observable but don’t tell you what will happen or when.

I like the term polycrisis. Climate change is such a broad socioecological thing that it can’t be challenged without a really intersectional effort. It’s as much a feminist and anticolonial struggle as it is anticapitalist and environmentalist.

Unlimited Stalin on Poland.

She has had one hell of a life.

I’m not a POC so my experience is tainted by the privilege of not being harassed by pigs too much. However, I will say that aimless travel was the best thing I ever did to understand who I am and who I’m not. It teaches interdependence, humility, new skills, and the ability to adapt/endure. The simple kindnesses of strangers stick with me over a decade later and condition my approach to other strangers. They met my needs and I try to meet the needs of others as a result of really internalising how important that is. The ability to embrace the suck is something I refined in low-stress situations and now it’s invaluable in high-stress ones. I learned how strong I am from hard manual labour that I fell into by chance while travelling, as well as the personality traits which complement or contradict that individualism. I learned absurdity and the lived conditions of others in a way that I wouldn’t be able to from remaining in one place. My anti-imperialism mostly stems from seeing the impacts of empire on the people outside of it. My biocentrism comes largely from seeing how we degrade various environments that I wasn’t exposed to as a child, along with seeing actual productive ecosystems. I challenged every ingrained cultural belief about other people after meeting them and relying on them.

Doing this would entail a lot of risk and much more than I faced demographically. It wasn’t safe for me and I don’t know how it could be as safe for you. It was however the most important thing I’ve done to define myself and understand what I can contribute to the world. If you can ensure your safety through extensive planning, you’ll embrace the fire that refines you. That’s a centrally important task for any leftist, not exclusively achieved through travel but really helped by it. Especially if you’re old enough to really appreciate the experience- I started at 17 and wasn’t- it’s a chance to reinvent yourself and understand where you can fit in.

edit: And if you make your way to Colorado, you’re totally welcome to come hiking. An alternative to aimless travel is delving hard into naturalism which taught me a lot of the same lessons in different ways.

If we aren’t supposed to feel happy about five zionists dying, fine. I’ll be happy when they’re all dead.

Deep ecology is the big one that I run into a lot. There’s a 150+ year history of Marxist ecology which inherently understands those ideas in an intersectional framework. I can go back to Engels and describe climate change from a humanistic perspective even if he predated the science. Deep ecology tried to reinvent the wheel without the overt political analysis of Marxism, still using that intersectional framework but in a defanged liberal way. The result is a very messy paraphrasing of Marxist ideas without being able to name them directly or reference them across that 150+ year body of literature. It’s much more easily recuperated and made into a passive academic subject for fancy lads to ponder without a coherent sense of ontology. That comes at the expense of Marxist ecology not being able to get a real foothold in modern academia.

Then there’s hippie shit and other forms of reactionary traditionalism. They take the same core ideas but don’t even have the academic pretense of the deep ecologists to help define or organise those into something actionable, scientifically or politically. A hippie can say something I agree with but derive the opposite conclusion from it because they don’t have actual theory or a sense of organised praxis. A reactionary can say they want to go back to the specific time period Marx is describing in his ideas of the antithesis between town and country, but they aren’t doing so from a post-enlightenment or historical materialist standpoint. They want a literal reinvention of the 17th century where they’re the guy enclosing the commons while Marx wants to apply 19th century ideas to solve specific contradictions that came from those 17th century conditions.

Marxism is the next stage of philosophical and scientific inquiry beyond the enlightenment. Rejecting it just reinvents the same things it’s saying or reinforces some kind of reactionary movement toward feudalism.

I have often remarked on the fact that an “anti-Marxist” argument is only the apparent rejuvenation of a pre-Marxist idea. A so-called “going beyond” Marxism will be at worst only a return to pre-Marxism; at best, only the rediscovery of a thought already contained in the philosophy which one believes he has gone beyond.

Quality into Quantity Time