If you're on your deathbed, and looking back, you haven't been on at least one watch list, will you be able to say you have truly lived at all?
I'm left leaning, aka a "lib" and I'm a fan of things that are anti-capitalist.
I think capitalism has outlived it's usefulness, just like religion did when we created modern criminal forensics.
At this point, we have so much in excess that if we did things in a reasonable and logical way, nobody would be homeless, nobody would go hungry.
The people with the power (money) don't want things to change, because they get to stay in power that way. The only way to oust them is to overthrow the system.
Speaking of getting on lists!
They forgot the small amount of gravel.
Hint of styrofoam for added spice.
LOL
On a totally unrelated note, TM 31-201-1 page 78-82
Generic antiestablishmentarism isn't going to put you on a watchlist, this isn't the 1950s. Glowies have better tech nowadays.
If you wanna be on a list, start collecting old army field manuals. It's one thing to say "we should start fire bombing McDonald's," it's another thing to say "we should start fire bombing mcdonald's, and here's instructions on how to do it"
Not that we should be firebombong McDonald's lol I would never recommend that
But I would recommend reading TM 31-201-1, especially pages 78-82
Want to know how Luigi found what hotel Brian Thompson stayed at? It's right in his "manifesto." He used social engineering.
Social engineering is when you just take advantage of people's natural predilictions to give you info or access that you shouldn't have. For example, if he were to just call up UHC and ask them where the CEO was staying, they would likely just have called the police. Instead, he had to think of some plausible reason that someone might need that info through unofficial channels. I have no idea how he actually did it, but for example, Thompson was a famous womanizer who cheated on his wife. He was your standard sleazy executive scumbag. That can be exploited.
*Hi, CEO's office? I'm John Doe, an underling over at the CFO's office. My boss wants to give Brian a special surprise at this year's company meeting. We're thinking of hiring a few girls to come over and keep him company one evening. I need to know where to have them sent. I would send an email or look up the info in our records system, but, as you can understand, it's best if there's no paper trail. Can you let me know what hotel he's staying at?"
These social engineering methods are the same tools scammers use, but they work just as well for assassins.
I don't get lib as an insult. Seems like pretty much everyone on Lemmy is on liberal side of center. I've seen some hexbear users use it to refer to anyone who isn't as tankie as they are, but I don't get it.
This is the american bastardised version of the word, a liberal has more context then centrist.
The US uses lib to mean socially liberal, in opposition to the cons. The rest of the world uses it to mean fiscally liberal, as in support of not regulating capitalist markets, which is an anti worker position.
People often get pissy that a word can have more than one definition.
I'm an anarchist socialist. We hate tankies, we hate libs. Libs are capitalists. Tankies are authoritarian. We hate both of those. Eh not hate but you know what I mean. Not ideologically compatible, therefore not allowed in the commune and you aren't allowed to hurt others, and if I hear a lib say how they're going to employ someone or a tankie talk about a vanguard state I'm gonna be upset
Tangent topic, but how does an anarchist system prevent popular leaders from gaining authority? Also, how does it defend against an aggressive authoritarian neighbour that wants to annex territory?
I like the idea of anarchism in theory, but I just don't see how it could be possible to get there from here where every existing power would see it as an ideological threat to their own power (similar to how capitalist powers reacted to communism), or how it would maintain stability if it was realized.
And as much as I don't like the monopoly on violence system because it seems to encourage corruption on the side with more access to violence, I can't help but think it would eventually devolve into a lot of in-fighting.
Like power constantly rises from nothing more than physical strength, charisma, or good strategic thinking in groups of humans. Some primates other than humans go to war with their neighbouring groups. Egypt became a kingdom when one tribe conquered the rest, and that one wasn't the first to try. Countless empires have risen and fallen, most of the time despite violent resistance of those who would rather be neighbours than subjects. The Vikings sailed around raiding for their own benefit and then later conquered regions like in France, Britain, Sicily, and Kiev. The Mongols did the same except using horses instead of boats. Then European powers did it. Then America started pretty much puppeting anyone who went against corporate interests while a cultural movement in Russia and China started out trying to move power out of the hands of their ruling class only to see even more authoritarian powers take over.
History is full of cases of "I don't care what you want, this is what I want and I'll just kill you if you don't go along with it." How could that change?
The great irony there is that the Tankies love anarchists. They want the west to burn themselves down.
It's honestly hard for me to believe there are more than a handful real Anarchists on the fediverse and not just a bunch of masquerading Tankies, because at the end of the day Anarchy will just bring any currently existing state one step closer to an Authoritarian taking complete control.
The real nail in the coffin is that there is a political party in the USA, in Canada, in Australia, and in the UK who would absolute regulate government and industry, keep courts clean, and protect and expand the rights of citizens: but anarchists more often side with the deregulating authoritarians.
Sure, I'd just only heard lib as an insult by them before.
That face...
"I'm a fucking child, why am I here saying shit you irresponsible fuckers should already know!?"
If you aren't being watched by at least 9 letters worth of government agencies, you're boring
If you’re not on several watchlists in 2024 you’re one of the bad guys.
it's called mutual aid and we start by fire bombing parliament ...
I’m surely safe to respond to this because as an American we all know parliaments are for commies.
Right Mr fbi agent?
Layla Moran on the left is a member of their Liberal Democrats and someone who police were called out to when they allegedly beat their partner over an IT issue.
Ed Milliband in the middle is a minister and former leader of the Labour party. Maybe not the biggest leftie but enabled members to vote for their leader which paved the way for Jeremy Corbyn to win.
Based on the above two points, this feels to be quite badly labeled if you know who they are.
Was curious if the background! What's with Greta's wide eye face?
Rolf Harris just been announced as a special guest.
Was the problem that her partners work VPN is somehow fucking terrible and is too slow for the kind of work they do but they still kept calling her to reset the router even though the problem was coming from 2000 miles away?
Brother, you need some friends to complain to. We are not a sufficient replacement for a genuine social life I promise you.
NEEED MOArr LUIGI MEMES!!!! NOW PLLLLEEEEEZZZEEEE
I clicked on this image you posted and then men in black fell through my ceiling.
at least you have nice braids
followed
You won't.
Was it intentional that your next post was about Krampus?
I watched a holiday movie recently that said he wanted to misuse the watch list, I mean naughty list or whatever Nick used these days lol. Think it was Red One. Had a depthy cast, not that usually makes good movies, but it wasn't bad
Why isn't the lib politician tagged as lib? It's so weird
Greta Thunberg probably isn't on your side, lol.
Hard to say. Her public attitude towards a lot of issues is fantastic but she comes from money. She wouldn't be able to pursue her personal interests and campaigns without the wealth she has.
