Hey mate, I know what it’s like having reactionary family, it’s hard, heartbreaking, and disappointing. There’s no guarantee that you can change them, and at the end of the day it’s their decision and opinion, all you can do is show them your evidence, and whether they take it or not it’s entirely up to them.

That being said, there’s something of a mismatch in your brother’s supposed viewing habits that I think you can use as a starting point. Badempanada actually did a very good piece on GDF, and how his content is deliberately presented to misrepresent the relationship between Israel, Judaism, and the US Empire in order to fuel his largely anti-Semitic audience. You could perhaps use that as a starting point to talk about the many contradictions in your brother’s logic and help him understand where he’s being misled.

I’ll link them here

https://youtu.be/z-LxT7UDF6I

https://youtu.be/EXOwPbQRYNE

Damn shame about the fucking Carrefour sponsorship. Ruines the shot.

I’m wondering if it merits a megathread, but honestly, I think the old saying should be applied here:

The opposite of love is indifference

Yeah, exactly how I felt. I was thinking “damn, Israel just bombed Qatar, I’d like to see what Lemmygrad thinks”, and it’s the same meme 50 times over.

I don’t even think the Luigi incident got this much when it happened, and imo that was actually more worthy of being memed since it was in a way actually useful as agitprop.

I know we have a lot of Statseian comrades on here, especially now after the deprogram sub ban, and this might be controversial to say, considering the state of the place over the past day or so, but I really don’t care about Charlie Kirk enough to see how it warrants this much meme posting when there is so much other concerning shit going on at the moment.

It makes me wonder if there is a concentrated effort by the powers that be to latch onto this story and push it to the forefront of western discussion to distract from something actually important, like Poland potentially triggering war with Russia, or the fact that the civilian aid flotilla to Gaza has been getting relentlessly firebombed, or that theres a color revolution in Nepal underway right this moment.

I was hoping to find some discussions on these things from a socialist standpoint, but it’s wall to wall kirkposting so far. idk, seems fishy.

Trump just truthed that he’s passed, Rip.

Every Dutch person seems to go through this at some point, lol.

Consequences for which have been disastrous on history.

I’ll never get over how the east-west Europe framing got changed after the 90s, and how nowadays poles, Czechs, Slovaks etc are so desperate to be “in the club” that the concept of “central Europe” suddenly became so important to them, to the point that they will get triggered by any implication that they’re eastern European, despite their long history of literally being slavs.

Been gone a while because I’ve been dealing with royal pain in the ass government and health insurance burocracy, the stress makes it hard to find time to think about anything else. I can’t imagine what it’s like in the US where the same sort of matters could put you in debt for life, jfc.

What does it matter? I was referring specifically to the usefulness of robotic infantry in modern warfare. Battles are won with air power, missiles and intelligence warfare, things you don’t really need humanoid autonomous robots to do.

I don’t see the purpose, in a world where every major power has missiles and nuclear warheads. Even without that, armoured vehicles and air superiority are the next most significant in modern war, and infantry comes a distant third. I think we are long past the point that robotic infantry would serve any use.

I don’t know if this is true or not, just an anecdote I’ve heard from Dutch friends in the past, but it’s it true that there was some sort of archaic rule that only very recently stopped being enforced, where buildings could not be built taller than the church spire of their town?

The UK Parliament is literally part of the UK government… They participate, put up candidates for elections, and vote on laws.

To compare: the Sinn Fein party, another “separatist” party, from Ireland, does not send representatives to Westminster. They do not take part directly in the government that they’re aiming to becoming independent from, which is a more serious way of going about things than the SNP.

The Scottish Nationalist Party has a lot of members in the UK parliament, for example.

Kneecap is genuinely a fantastic time, I’ve got the feeling that their and Bob Vylans acts at Glastonbury are likely going down in history as one of the most important sets in punk music.

You are Turk, Dominican, and a dear American? Is it true that you need to fill out your “race” on various forms over there? If so what do you say yours is when they ask?

Damn, you are a Turk, as well a dear American? Hasan?

And Al-Jazeera pretends to be pro Palestine while they’re just a state propaganda mouthpiece who’s main goal is to get Sunni Muslims to believe everything they say about regimes that “Oppress the true faith”.

As much as I would like to see it, I don’t report posts from them that don’t add “Sectarian Reactionary News Media” added in the title. Because unlike the new york times, there are a lot of outlets who, due to their coverage of the genocide, have lulled many people into thinking they are upstanding and should be listened to. Another example for this is just recently we saw middle east spectator reveal themselves to be Anti-LGBT when they commented on Zohran Mamdani’s position on pride. Do we now ignore, report, and block every single thing they report on?

It’s not the fault of the user who posts it, neither does it break a rule. I take no issue with your discomfort at CPGB being reactionary, I believe so too.

However it is not against the rules (as they are currently, I do think they could be improved) to post something they say, as long as it is not directly endorsing the party or it’s reactionary views. I don’t see that here.

I could say all those things about the BBC, the Guardian, etc

That is the point, you definitely can, and if we followed the rules the way you did, we’d be reporting every post made out of one of their pieces, that’s my point. We do not post anything with the assumption that we are uncritically endorsing everything that has ever been said by the source. And if we do so for some and not others, we give legitimacy to the ones we don’t try and ban from our discussions. If this is the intended way we follow these rules, I am much more uncomfortable with Al-Jazeera, Middle East eye, New York times and their ilk being seen as totally fair and productive to post articles from than whoever this small UK party member is.

I’m not sure why you want to report Al Jazeera, there is no rule against posting from mainstream media.

They are a sectarian, anti China, anti Shia propaganda rag that manufactured consent for the destruction of Syria and Libya, yet I see plenty of posts of their articles here, particularly about Palestine, and yet I tolerate it and don’t report people for making such posts, because I don’t automatically assume the people posting are trying to promote sectarian, anti China views.

Also how do you interpret the rule, do you take it as meaning “We don’t want people with such views to be a part of this community and spread their views” or “We don’t want people with such views to even be mentioned in this community regardless of why”?