When things get bad enough, people will revolt to build a better system.

An optimist, I see!

Not quite as simple as checkboxes, but the ability is there to some degree!

I think he still is!

Oh wait, I just realized that you probably mean the “Environmental Protection Agency.”

Here I was thinking you meant the “Eager for Punani Association.”

Call yourself whatever you want, at the end of the day we’re all utopianists who’re overly self-assured that our favorite pet-theory-system will eventually remove all suffering.

“If my vision for society were adopted, the world would be perfect!”

Keep dreaming. We’re fucked.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKGb8KFY5F8

https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-afd-on-tiktok-the-political-battle-for-the-youth/a-68690661

Sorry for my delay in response. I try to limit the amount of time I spend on social media as it can be harmful to my mental health.

As for good game theory resources, it’s going to somewhat depend on your existing math literacy. I’m going to paste a list (below) that I’d found on reddit when I was first exploring game theory about 10 years ago. I haven’t read all of the suggestions.

The following are three foundational works in the development of game theory:

• Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Oskar Morgenstern and John Von Neumann (THE seminal text)

• A Theory of Justice, John Rawls (an early political application of game theory)

• Convention, David Lewis (a philosophy-heavy investigation of rationality and sociality)

These are four widely-respected contemporary surveys of the subject, listed in descending order of complexity:

• Game Theory and the Social Contract, Ken Binmore (anything by Ken Binmore is worthwhile).

• Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction, Colin Camerer (perhaps the definitive work on behavior economics)

• Predictably Irrational, Dan Ariely (introductory)

• Game Theory: A Nontechnical Introduction, Morton Davis (introductory)

I also recommend checking out MIT’s OpenCourseWare game theory polisci course. I found it quite interesting.

Will do. This honestly means the world because I don’t have a lot of players in my court.

I do mean it. I’m not always fast to reply, but I’m around if you ever want to have a chat about anything! The grad student path seems like a worthwhile pursuit and I wish you all the best with it! As for the social aspect, I can relate, certainly. I was pretty unsure that things would work out when I set out to try alternative living systems in my early 20s. Being around like-minded people ended up being extremely valuable for my social skills, in the end.

Maybe when you’re done with your coursework you can investigate the opportunities available. I lived for a while in a co-op house in upstate New York that would have been perfect for a young professional. Private rooms with common spaces and a nightly shared meal. Communal chores to be done, but income was not shared. Members had to have their own incomes.

There was a good discussion of this on Reddit recently. Sorry to link to Reddit, but it’s a good, topical post worth perusal.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Agriculture/comments/1dv7fw9/how_much_good_land_is_used_to_grow_food_for/

ETA:

We recommend four widely applicable high-impact (i.e. low emissions) actions with the potential to contribute to systemic change and substantially reduce annual personal emissions: having one fewer child (an average for developed countries of 58.6 tonnes CO2-equivalent (tCO2e) emission reductions per year), living car-free (2.4 tCO2e saved per year), avoiding airplane travel (1.6 tCO2e saved per roundtrip transatlantic flight) and eating a plant-based diet (0.8 tCO2e saved per year). These actions have much greater potential to reduce emissions than commonly promoted strategies like comprehensive recycling (four times less effective than a plant-based diet) or changing household lightbulbs (eight times less).

^{https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541/pdf}

I didn’t ask for your answer, I asked for your opinion. I already knew that you didn’t have the answer. Nether do I.

I was young, idealistic, autistic, and naive myself, once, long ago. Still autistic, but less young, idealistic, and naive these days. I tripped over my ideals and ethics for a long time before figuring out how to survive in this capitalist hellscape. I’m still not very good at it, and my path needn’t be yours. I won’t shove it down your throat.

I wasn’t sharing that song with the intent to be adversarial. I shared it because Bad Religion has been a very helpful band for me throughout my young-adulthood, and their lyrics continue to help me to this day. No offense intended. My opinion of what this song meant, for example, when I was young, was vastly different to the meaning I take from it now.

I’m very familiar with anarchist theory and the praxis thereof. I read all of the links you provided and I don’t wholly disagree with the bulk of it. Please don’t get me wrong.

BUT. Refusing to vote against fascists because of ideological distaste is indeed moral superiority, whether you want to admit that or not. People can die.

I have no love for Democrats, and I don’t in any way identify as one. I do, however, have a great love for game theory, and game theory tells me that there’s only one correct decision to make where voting in the USA in 2024 is concerned. I will continue to take direct action to further my own personal beliefs and ideologies, but I won’t let that stand in the way of doing things that I find morally distasteful (such as voting for a Democrat) to keep fascists out of power.

I hope this doesn’t come across as condescending. I don’t mean it that way but people often tell me I’m being condescending. I wish you all the best in life. Please let me know if there’s anything I can do to help you in any way, and don’t hesitate to reach out if you want a conversational partner or a sympathetic ear. I’m always open to discussing the world with intelligent people.

If you’re interested in communal living or alternative lifestyles (at it pertains to anarchist communities), I’m happy to help there, as well. I think I still have some friends that know folx at Emma Goldman Finishing School in Seattle. Admittedly, I don’t know if they’re looking for any new members right now, but I’d be happy to put a word in for you.

When fascists take power it’s not unheard of for them to line up commies and anarchists against a wall and shoot them. I’m all for ideological utopianism, I’ve lived on intentional communities in the country and anarchist collectives in the city, but preserving your moral superiority is little comfort when you and your family are staring down the barrel of a fascist’s gun.

The Answer.

Voting in the general election does nothing to brake the train. Not near zero, zero.

I fear that you’re mistaking your own pessimism for absolute truth, but I’m willing to be convinced otherwise.

Voting is orthogonal to what needs to be done.

What, in your view, needs to be done?

The main difference is who owns the means of production. In communism, the government does. In socialism, the people do.

What would we call a hybrid system in which the government is made up of the people and owns the means of production? Direct Democratic Communism?

Edit to add:

A federation (also called a federal state) is an entity characterized by a union of partially self-governing provinces, states, or other regions under a federal government (federalism). In a federation, the self-governing status of the component states, as well as the division of power between them and the central government, is constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision, neither by the component states nor the federal political body without constitutional amendment.

Seems relevant considering “The Federation”.

Reposting from an earlier comment I made:

---

Best we have right now, far as I can find:

My favorite tinfoil hat theory is that one of the secret service members had a razor palmed, which they then used to slice his ear when they took him to ground. I’m not saying I believe that, of course, but it seems the most plausible to me.

Edit to add: Armchair analysis. Maybe it sorta looks like some of the helix (both tubercle and crus sides) flesh is missing from a graze, here?

Anomie is a real word and it is fascinating to read about, if you’re into sociology.

You’re not wrong at all. I also don’t think your analysis is incompatible with what I said above, either. Unless, that is, that you’re saying that no one should have a right to complain unless they have it worse than everyone else.

American hegemony as practiced by US liberal politicians, in service of capital, is one of the primary drivers of the issue you’re describing.

As Voltaire said: “The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor.”

The idea broadly underpins modern capitalism, and it sums up why liberal politicians (whether left or right wing) do nearly everything they do. Democratic liberals want to keep the lower classes at least somewhat happy by throwing them scraps from time to time, while Republican liberals will only ever do just enough to keep the lower classes pacified.

We’ll have to agree to disagree. I prefer nuance to oversimplification.

Did anyone actually read the whole article? These comments sorta read like the answer is no.

The researchers say that their findings prove no active collaboration between TikTok and far-right parties like the AfD but that the platform’s structure gives bad actors an opportunity to flourish. “TikTok’s built-in features such as the ‘Others Searched For’ suggestions provides a poorly moderated space where the far-right, especially the AfD, is able to take advantage,” Miazia Schüler, a researcher with AI Forensics, tells WIRED.

A better headline might have been “TikTok algorithm gamed by far-right AfD party in Germany”, but I doubt that would drive as many clicks.

For more info, check out this article: Germany’s AfD on TikTok: The political battle for the youth

Best we have right now, far as I can find:

They should call TechMoan or CathodeRayDude! One of them probably has the right player just sort of… lying around!

The state government’s own prosecutor, and perhaps even law enforcement, have intentionally withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense. How do you perceive that the right move is to give them another chance to frame the defendant? Why would they want to hide evidence if they had a solid case? We’re literally talking about a conspiracy here, one tied to law enforcement and the state government. How do you figure that a fair trial can be held at this point?

The prosecutor may very well be disbarred, here, and I would not be at all surprised if this withholding of evidence causes the armorer’s case to be overturned, as the evidence was relevant to (and withheld from) that case, while it was actively being tried. There will likely be civil lawsuits brought against the state over this.

I am not a lawyer, and neither are you from what I can tell, so maybe it would be best to read what actual lawyers have to say about the matter before sharing your opinions. That’s what I did. Highly recommend.