There is a phenomenon going on right now where tiny sites are getting knocked offline due to sudden traffic, basically DDOSing them. It has been found that the automation of these bot farms sends out scrapers to find new places where you can post on the site. Like anything, anything hat allows you to post anything on the site. So it will find some tiny store’s webfront, see it has a place for customer reviews, and then tell the bot farm it has found new land. The place then gets swarmed with bot traffic.

So literally everywhere you can post anything is getting bot traffic right now.

Since they were the first they used to be the biggest, however they are declining.

Nope

The IDF loves recording themselves committing war crimes, and posting them on telegram.

Oh silencing Naomi Wu because, while her social media wasn’t about anything that China would ban, engineering and making, she is gay, and her lesbian partner is Uighur. Complaining about the rapidly rising costs of housing, and the comparative stagnancy in pay, will get your social media shut down. Oh if you put a small image making fun of Xi, buried in the background of a densely textured scene, well we will threaten trade with your government to force them to stop the distribution of your game.

And remember Troll 1 where a dorky, bespectacled, young boy, with messy brown hair, is thrown into a parallel world of magic, who happens to be named Harry Potter

I was in my last year working as a loan underwriter. I was otherwise living in a way that excited me, and played into my antisocial tendencies. It was a fun time.

I didn’t say I suspected bad faith for disagreeing.

Revolutions are different than the governments they produces decades later. The Bolshevik revolution, for example, did not come anywhere close to overwhelming support when it was happening.

Right there I have said they have had THEIR EFFORTS mocked. Are you able to distinguish mocking an organization vs mocking the things they do without thought to organization, simply actions that are not agreed with, and how that can be said to be mocking the efforts of organizations that do them? It happens all the time. You also have not posted sources for you claims that revolutions have massive support.

Yeah, I think you are right here. Especially since you are still misreading one of the first things I said to you, I honestly do not think you operating completely in good faith because of this.

I never said they hate those organizations. I have even reiterated what I meant about this, more than once. I said there are a lot of people on lemmy, and other leftist online spaces, that will shit on people bring up things like running candidates, or believing we can/need to win over the the populous, before revolt starts, which are core actions of those groups. Do you understand this? Also I feel this is a pot calling the kettle black scenario.

Historically revolutions have not had mass support.

And I am being forced to conclude you are ignorant to how many people online are demanding action now. Not campaigns to get the working class on your side. I also think you may have allowed yourself to get caught up in the jargon of your position to the point where you might not understand that “adventurist coup” is an unplanned revolution, but that is messy, so this lingo is simply an attempt to divert negative stigmas to revolt by doing this, and most people do not care about that rehabilitative rebranding. You also seem to take things I see other people doing, as what I am doing, or thinking. Hence you thinking I conflate a minority coup style revolution, with one with mass support. Even though I have say, a number of times in this discussion, that things like growing the popularity of your position, planning, and organizing are what I want.

Historically the great majority of people in a revolutionary state do not support it. With about 80% not supporting, 20% claiming some level of support, and only 3-4% (over 3.5% being so rare there are like 5 known instances of it), of the population actually doing anything to revolt, that includes literally anything other than saying “sure I support it”. There are currently lots of people who feel the 3.5% need to just act, not create campaigns to get most people on board with your ideas, but instead a take over, and create democracy free forced conformation to their socialist ideas. They preach that the time for popular revolution died sometime in the past, if it ever existed in the first place. They leverage extinction to justify their beliefs.

I think you may be assuming what you want, and feel is reasonable, is the only thing that is popular. That, or what you see people do in real life translates to online. I see otherwise daily. You keep telling me this isn’t happening, and I keep seeing it. Do you know how many times I have seen arguments that the west is so entrenched in capitalism the only thing that will cause change is for people to be forced to? Day dreaming about China destroying the US, and rebuilding it as some socialist utopia? I mean, you don’t seem to believe this happening, so I guess no. I also do not know how you do not see this. It honestly makes me wonder if you are seeing things, but interpreting them in a way that fits into what you are saying. Like how you see people in the US listen to Trump, the GOP, and other people in their movement, say explicitly bigoted things, call for political violence, and give direct explanations of what they plan to do, then say “Nah, that isn’t what anyone is saying, or doing”, “He didn’t mean that by saying that”, etc. I am not trying to be insulting here. I am genuinely wondering how you just miss something I see every day. These spaces aren’t that large.

I think you are confusing, and/or blending, things I am saying, maybe. There are people calling for the violence part of revolution, and they tend to do so on posts that discuss, other, non-violent aspects of it. They can’t out-right say these things, as direct calls for violence will get you censored, but what they say has no other logical conclusion. Such as you can’t get what was taken by force, without force. Whether you call it adventurism, or revolution, matters not, as this is what the people I am seeing are claiming it to be. Whether they are correct, or not, is not the point here.

I am saying we need organization, and planning, first, however we are at the point, at least in the US, where I truly doubt peaceful revolution is possible. You need a plan when you are enacting revolution otherwise you either get nowhere, or you decapitate the state you are against, and leave a vacuum of power to fill, and descend into chaos. I hard disagree that you don’t actively plan for revolutionary action. Historically there has always been some level of planning, the level of planning tends to be a major determining factor on the cohesion of the end result.

My underlying point is that the people I see calling for “force to take back what was taken by force now”, or whatever euphemisms, or vagueries, they may be using to say “we need hot conflict to resolve this, and that means violence”, have never really dealt with any of the type of violence that goes into a society changing revolt. Often they will also blame people not “taking up arms”, so to speak, as the problem, while they, themselves, do not do this either. This is my problem with it.

Also, let me make something else more clear, I am pro-action in this direction. I am against people online who demand violence, but do nothing but call people shit-libs online, when something else is being discussed. It is the hypocrisy that bother me. My choices have made my life violent, and now I am older, and that has made my already shitty body worse. These people have never started a structure fire, let alone fired on human beings.

The difference is how someone acts at home, vs how they act elsewhere, I never said I see this stuff on .ml, etc. I said I see people with those those home addresses doing it, yes it is different than hanging out in their own proverbial club house. In the thread I posted a screen cap of there are plenty of people arguing we are past the point of anything but violence, go ahead and ask them what violent things they are doing. They are keyboard warmongering, without any reason to believe they have done anything actually radical, and even reason to specifically doubt it. Bunch of people who have never thrown a molotov at police, so to speak, before demanding violence of others.

You seem to think I am discussing my own thoughts on the subject. We are discussing things I see other people do, remember? These are things I see people say, with frequency. I also told you exactly what I was told by the Chicago branch, which was not “change” it is because their experience is that if everything they say is immaterial, or not even heard, then they aren’t winning over the majority, so they do this.

I see people do this on the regular, so I don’t know what to tell you. You are telling me I am not experiencing what I am experiencing.

I have been saying they don’t think it is THE solution, and then I give the reasons why they think it is important. You seem to think they don’t see it as important though, or not THAT important, which they do, like other than organizing protest/aid, this is what they do. They put a lot of resources into this, you don’t spend so many resources on something that is a nice side benefit, and not particularly important.

The problem is that they don’t have specific plans beyond this. When talked about, or even when looking for things online, there is a lot of talk about how “the material conditions are not yet ready for revolution”, and other vague reasons behind not actually, really, truly, planning to execute a revolution. The other common response is that if they did that they would be destroyed like other radical groups. So, to those who see no other choice than revolution NOW, they are revolutionary in name only.

This doesn’t surprise me. I doubt you would hang around places where people are likely to be hostile towards you.

As have I, and I have been told that the number one way to make people understand that something is good is by providing it, or aspects of it, to people. This can be affected at the local level by changing local implementations of things, providing socialist methods of doing things in place where city/county law controls. We actually worked worked with an out of state organization from Chicago, which has a lot more resources than this dying, rust belt, city, to get free public transportation in this city, a government subsidized “supermarket” that adds value on top of things like SNAP, based on need, and removed a number of long standing laws that allowed for the purchase of public land for private development. This is, of course, only some things being worked towards. They believe that being able to slap their name on these things is a better tool for convincing people to, at least, give them a chance than anything else. Also, they get to have people aligned with their movement in things like town hall discussions, televised local debates, etc. They think it is very important, because without some sort of material quality to their ideas people will not be willing to listen to them. For instance several major public hearings in our city had Ana Santoyo, and Vijay Prashad, speak after the success of the push for free public transportation, as move that actually improved the economy of the city, rather than just cost them more money.

I am not the one deciding these things, I am repeating what I see, I guess I didn’t make it clear

It’s view on electoralism is not why people have started to assert this. It is a collection of expressed beliefs, and practices, largely by the mods.