Less than nothing, it made the world a worse place.

Yeah. Wealth generates wealth. Wealth is power. You got born into a world owned mostly by the super rich, and therefore don’t have equal opportunities.

No amount of redistribution will prevent this state from re-emerging until wealth accumulation is made impossible.

It’s pure luck: even if the playing field gets completely leveled once, without systemic changed some people will luck out, get wealthy again, buy newspapers and apartment complexes and therefore monopolizes public expression of opinion and profit from living space.

Capitalist anarchism doesn’t exist. Capitalism is a form of unjust hierarchy (or if you want to stick to the literal meaning of “anarchism”: capitalism is a way to create rulers)

There are capitalist anti-statists, bit being against states isn’t sufficient to make you an anarchist for above reasons.

It’s licensing bullshit. They refuse to pay the codec license mafia (idk how the organization is called)

Yup, it’s a gene.

The most polluting thing to do is to allow capitalism to exist, yet I don’t see you on the streets.

You know what, I completely agree.

Not if there is a clear trend. If most movie posters are blue, three average will be blue.

But i agree, it is useless if there is no clear trend.

The average of 0° and 359° is obviously 359.5°.

it’s a radial scale.

What kind of dumb instructions are that?

Stirring exactly once is enough in most cases.

I had a female boss.

Adjective is fine, using it as noun is icky

Wow you’re insane. “I know, I’ll discredit the woman who just pointed out that it’s hard to get credit in her field as a woman ”

Big difference between the pro and consumer versions though. Which ones are you referring to?

It’s not perfect, but it’s good introductory material for people who fell for the right-wing propaganda of “everybody’s called a fascist now, there isn’t even a definition”.

Yes, suckers, there are people with an understanding of what fascism is, and they agree for a reason about the dangers of things like calling people vermin, casting doubt on election integrity, and strong man rhetoric.

Almost as if he is one and the definitions agree for a reason.

Source?

Yeah, the Nazis weren’t really subtle. If you instead maintain a civil front inward for public support, you can wreak havoc more effectively.

That’s why fascism is a different kind of danger. It wouldn’t leech off of other places for centuries, it would explosively and directly attack internal and external enemies.

Neither of these things can be risked.

Yes, that’s why I wrote the part after “I see what you’re getting at”

Not even slightly hidden

Fascism is a pretty specific ideology. If you want to learn more, Umberto Eco made a list.

I get where you’re getting at: the role of past and ongoing colonialism is still being downplayed. But you’re wrong. There are very good reasons why we should fear fascism in particular.