And just like colonialists in Africa, they aren’t building a railroad to help people get around their country or make their lives any easier, they’re building a railroad from the mines to the port. Investment in infrastructure is not fungible; building new power plants and lines to service data centers does little (not nothing) to help the average person and if anything resources that would have been put into maintaining and expanding civilian service are being reallocated.

The modern dictionary definition of “Terrorism” is divorced from the historical usage, which is also the common, vulgar understanding of the word.

The term “Terrorism” was invented to describe the tactics of French radicals during and after the Revolution. Essentially, it described asymmetric warfare - wars being fought not between armies in the field but between a traditional army and some sort of guerilla force.

So the Gunpowder Plot is an archetypical example of terrorism - English Catholics weren’t (at that time) organized to fight the Protestants in the open field, so they resorted to asymmetric warfare - bombings, assassinations, etc. - instead. For Marxists, you could study the Terrorism of the Social-Revolutionaries in Russia.

Terrorism by it’s common, vulgar definition requires the terrorist to be to some extent an underdog, and does not truly require nor is implied by the instigation of Terror.

Modern dictionaries need to redefine Terrorism because, if they defined it according to the common definition, people may begin to sympathize more with Terrorists. When the term was coined, its audience was largely Bourgeois and did not sympathize with Terrorists the way the working class may. The disjunction between the common and dictionary definitions allows for the implication that only the underdogs ever engage in the application of Terror, when this is clearly not the case.

I remember reading an article a while back on how the vast majority of pedestrian deaths - even before accounting for population density - are on rural arterials during the evening and night. Something like 75% or thereabouts.

And to be clear, “rural arterial” doesn’t necessarily mean it’s outside of city limits, it’s a category of road that has no sidewalks, often no streetlights, high throughput, but still has auto-oriented businesses or homes fronting it. A road that was never meant for pedestrians but sometimes people need to walk alongside regardless.

I vote PSL where I can, but I live in a relatively “Small-Town” area and so I’m not necessarily opposed to voting for good local Dems for city, county etc. elections.

I think a lot of Internet MLs use ideology as a way to justify not being politically literate wrt local politics because “they’re all just the same”. That’s largely true at the Congressional level, sure, but chances are there are good people running as Democrats (or Independents) in your locality who probably won’t be truly revolutionary but don’t really need to be.

The city council of Yuriev-Polsky didn’t need to be full of Bolsheviks for the Russian Revolution to succeed. I think at the local level it’s most important to fight corruption and outright Bourgeois power-grabbing and to elect representatives who roughly represent the people they govern (to do otherwise would be a form of Ultra-Leftism).

I was born and raised in Akron, Ohio. There are some Democrats - Mayor Malik, Congresswoman Emilia Sykes, Fiscal Officer Kristen Scalise, etc. - who are corrupt, Zionist pieces of shit who I will never vote for. There are other Democrats, like Donofrio and Shmidt on the county council, or Fran Wilson on the city council, who I quite like and would vote for easily.

A lot of people will speculate and exaggerate and blow little things out of proportion. I don’t like Lemmy.world because they are Anticommunist as a policy. That’s about it.

They’re (albeit Liberal) Zionists, they prosecute stuff like “Uyghur genocide denial” that is like 5-year-old propaganda that should be able to be dismissed with the benefit of hindsight.

Leftist instances have the forthrightness to just say “If you’re a reactionary we’ll ban you”, but Liberals - like the Lemmy.world admins and moderators - have to hide behind a smokescreen of Socialists breaking technical rules - when, say, a Zionist denying the Palestinian genocide wouldn’t get the same reaction.

I always leave all my doors open. I have a cat and she likes to walk around. Also if I leave the blinds open on the front windows there’s technically a direct line of sight from the front walkway to my bathroom toilet through like two open doors so if someone really wanted to they could watch me poop

The Beach Boys

150-or-so years ago, Karl Marx developed a scientific method for understanding socio-economics and translating common political goals towards collective action. Most of the conclusions he came to through this scientific method have borne out in the decades since, a few have not, but the method itself is, I believe, concrete.

As the years went on, additional theoreticians - especially Lenin and Mao - have further developed his theories.

But I think the key is to never be dogmatic - that different times call for different approaches, that sometimes you need forced collectivization, but sometimes you need the New Economic Policy. Sometimes you wage a protracted peasants’ war, sometimes you elect Sewer Socialists.

A lot of people can get too caught up in the tendencies and sub-tendencies. I believe that all Marxists should be part of a single Socialist political party where disagreements are handled internally by rigorous debate and elections among Communists.

I’ve been told the key is to just not pay the last months rent and let them take it out of the deposit

Not the captain, the political commissar.

“When is the last time you hit your wife?” ass question