How can the left not link immigration with the reserve army of labor?
The right thinks that limiting immigration removes the surplus. The left knows that there will always be a surplus but they attack the right on refusing immigration instead of first explaining the reason for the surplus.
Because we’ve already explained to them that the king has the overwhelming majority of surplus and they’re pretending to be too stupid to understand, as an attempt at plausible deniability for racist motives.
You told them or you explained and developed a plan? This is all hypothetical, because immigration also creates jobs, but to somebody threatened with losing their job, it doesn’t help that they know that the king is to be blamed.
My assumption is that they believe that a unified society can change the decisions of the king. How do you convince them that the immigrants are on their side?
BTW, it doesn’t matter that the king has the majority of surplus. The problem is that he doesn’t use it to employ everybody.
The creation of jobs is just the tip of the iceberg; fascists are completely delusional. These aren’t smart people who were reasoned into their position. The only way to change their minds is to redirect the social pressure that brought them there.
Of course, changing the mind of a non-dillusional person is already hard enough.
The creation of jobs is everything. If your life stops being a competition for survival, people outside your social ingroup stop being existential threats.
Nonsensical accusations can not be elaborated. When real totalitarianism will arrive nobody will listen to their cries of help because they’ve been screaming for decades.
sorry youre right. i forgot about this concept, please mention it in every single discussion you advocate censorship (because the other side is just SO crazy)
You’re right, but this is the sort of thing that gets blown up by the media and used to shut down privacy-friendly platforms.
Maybe it’s a slippery slope fallacy on my part, but it’s not unimaginable to consider the idea that legislators could try to take down an enitre platform based on something like this. Just look at some of the proposed privacy-antagonistic legislation that’s been introduced recently to see what I mean.
I don’t have a link, but the lemmy creators (and maintainers of join-lemmy) answered this in a AMA about a month ago. They said they’d prefer the horrible people concentrate in their own instances so we can block them easily rather than have them in our instances. The join lemmy list does not serve as an endorsement, but a catalog of all available instances.
They said they’d prefer the horrible people concentrate in their own instances so we can block them easily
Then they need to stop stonewalling and add user controllable instance blocking. I know that some clients have it but they’ve been rejecting calls to add it to the main lemmy codebase for a long time.
Seems like the kinda thing that comes down to “because it hasn’t been explicitly told not to yet”. It’s a computer grabbing from an ever changing pool of instances based on parameters, not a person hand picking what they like. Computers aren’t usually aware of social ques or laws…
sh.itjust.works
Oldest