If enough public toilets were actually provided, this would not be a problem that needs solving.

This seems like a CLM situation. Those comments should be restored. There was no misandry here.

“It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” Krishnamurti

I quite like this summary from https://www.skeptic.ca/Anarchism_Introduction.htm because it points out a few key differences.

The basic tenet of anarchism is that hierarchical authority – be it state, church, patriarchy or economic elite – is not only unnecessary, but is inherently detrimental to the maximization of human potential. Anarchists generally believe that human beings are capable of managing their own affairs on the basis of creativity, cooperation, and mutual respect. It is believed that power is inherently corruptive, and that authorities are inevitably more concerned with self-perpetuation and increasing their own power than they are with doing what is best for their constituents. This is equally true in Totalitarian and Communist states as it is in Democracies. Anarchists generally maintain that ethics are a personal matter and by definition must be based on concern for others and the well being of society as a whole, rather than upon laws imposed by a secular or religious authority (including revered laws such as the U.S. Constitution). Not unlike existentialist philosophers such as Jean Paul Sartre, most anarchist philosophies hold that individuals are responsible for their own behavior, life goals and ultimate purposes in life. The anarchist needs no one to tell him what he ought to do and how to create a meaningful life. Paternalistic authorities foster a dehumanized mindset in which people expect elites to make decisions for them and meet their needs, rather than thinking and acting for themselves. When an authority arrogates to itself the right to overrule the most fundamental personal moral decisions, such as what is worth killing or dying for (as in military conscription or abortion), human freedom is immeasurably diminished.

Anarchists acknowledge the connection between various forms of oppression – including sexism, racism, heterosexism, classism, and national chauvinism – and recognize the futility of focusing opposition on one form of injustice while others continue to exist. Anarchists believe that the means one uses to transform the world must be in accord with the ends that one hopes to achieve. While anarchists disagree about strategies and tactics, including the need for formal organizations and the use of violent action to overthrow existing oppressive institutions and injustice, most agree that the focus must not be on merely destroying the current order, but on fashioning new, more humane and more rational alternatives to take its place.

While many anarchists value cooperation, communalism and collectivism, anarchists reject both the plutocracies of capitalist states based exclusively on greed and envy and the totalitarianism of the existing and recently fallen communist, or more accurately Marxist-Leninist, states. The rift between anarchists and Marxists developed as early as the 1870s as anarchists perceived that the Marxists were perpetuating authoritarianism under a different name. Marxist-leninists groups have traditionally emphasized the need for a vanguard party and the dictatorship of the proletariat, ideas which are fundamentally opposed to the anarchist focus on anti-authoritarianism and maximum individual freedom. Although orthodox Marxism predicts that the state will “wither away” with time, we have repeatedly seen in communist regimes a consolidation of state power and its attendant repression and insistence on conformity. The same oppressive authoritarianism has emerged in capitalist democracies.

I just re-read your question btw, and realized I kind of answered the wrong question here, because the quotes focus on the differences in the means rather than in the end goal. But it’s still good context, because communism has so far never been able to move beyond the authoritarian stage, so you could reasonably argue that the actual end state of communism is an authoritarian state with a socialist economy, especially if they have to co-exist in competition and conflict with capitalist states. So the end goal of the state “withering away” is more or less impossible to achieve via communism while western hegemony exists.

It’s nice to read a good news story for a change :)

tldr - price

So the argument is that identity politics has effectively supplanted class politics? I think it’s perhaps a factor if not the whole story. But I don’t think they are mutually exclusive. It’s just that the Dems decided to focus on one and not the other.

Gotta say, this article really pissed me off. Fuck corporate social media. Anyone who wants to open a pro-choice community on our instance with helpful guidance is more than welcome.

Seems like a bad call to me too, PTB. I’ll reverse the ban.

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/26473218

Supplied by USA?
Manufacturer : Kaiser Aluminum, FMC Corporation, BAE Systems, Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, General Motors

We usually post to ask our users to nominate themselves and then the existing admins review the applications to make a selection. But we could bring in a confirmation vote after the selection of a new admin, just to make sure the instance is ok with it? Or do you have any other ideas?

It’s because Goat and PugJesus are continually talking out of their arses about our instance, and completely misrepresenting or just straight up lying about what we say. PugJesus even somehow managed to arrive at the conclusion I am a “genocide denier” after I posted the comment below and banned my account from all his communities. He’s been malding for weeks over his 1 week temp ban on db0. He’ll never be over it, apparently. And despite us peacably coexisting with him for years, suddenly we’re all “tankies” just because we called out his toxic bullying towards one of our users. Those two have been flaming all over lemmy about our instance for weeks now. PugJesus even set up not one, but two, personal grudge communities to whine about being moderated, in addition to dozens and dozens of invective-filled bad-faith posts. It’s funny how none of them had a problem with dbzer0 until PJ had a meltdown, right?

To be clear, if I haven’t been already, I 100% condemn China’s actions towards the Uyghurs. Is it technically a genocide? Depends what definition you’re working with, but to my mind it meets the definition.

Apparently the above statement wasn’t clear enough, so I’ll reiterate. Yes, China imo has been committing a cultural/religious genocide against the Uyghur’s, as they have done with Tibet and will likely do to Taiwan at some point. That sucks. And yes, all genocide is bad. But as the libs love to say when they are talking about the Republicans, you gotta consider which is the worse partygenocide and where to focus your efforts.

The Chinese aren’t dropping grenades from drones onto groups of innocent Uyghur civilians, shooting teenage boys in their genitals, or bombing their hospitals. It’s more like an authoritarian version of cultural assimilation. And no PugJesus, that doesn’t mean I’m denying or even minimizing what’s happening there. But to say the nature of the two genocides is the same just because they share the same label is a brain-dead take. It’s like saying the Falklands War was the same as WWII. I mean, in one sense that’s true, because they were both wars, but in a very obvious sense the scale and level of harm was much higher in one compared to the other.

That’s the point I was making about Gaza. Yet repeatedly, whenever the Democratic party’s material support for the genocide in Gaza is brought up, all the turbolibs can say is “what about the Uyghurs?” as though that’s some sort of gotcha. But on this particular topic, the Democrats are not the lesser evil. Biden had every opportunity to stop this genocide and chose not to.

And see the following link for evidence of more recent Democrat complicity in Israel’s genocide https://anarchist.nexus/post/538. The Dems will never stop supplying arms to Israel unless all the existing party leadership is kicked out.

You can’t polish a turd—as the saying goes—but you can sprinkle glitter on it.

Father?

Well that was an uninspiring read.

At several sessions, a leader of the donation portal ActBlue shared a “fight song” that the party could adopt, putting its lyrics on screens so that the crowds could sing along.

D-E-M-S, we rise!
Stronger together — blue skies!
Lift your voice, we’re bold and true,
Onward, Democrats — We shine blue!

So what I’m taking away from that is they stand for aviation? and being loud, shiny and blue? Checks out.

Thank you for your service.