LeGrognardOfLove

The masses have been divided in the west.

Family links are next to none existant and people are seen as tools to an end.

Individualism made it very easy to make the whole of idea of "organizing" something fringe or hard.

People simply forgot we used to work collaboratively for our own good and welfare and see organizations as a feodal like link, because that's mostly the reality of the westerner.

Wealth inequality is high-ish in norway, with a lot of the country being owned by less than 10% of the population. It's also a petro-state, making a real green transition for the whole world harder.

It has a low population, making it easy to have these services with the amount of wealth the country produce by being a petro-state.

It relies on immigration for it's population replacement which will likely cause the kind of crisis we see in other so called developed countries.

I think Norway is in a petro-dollat fuelled bubble, and when it will burst, which is innevitable, will see a decline in its standard of living like in other so called developed countries as it did not invest in itself fully.

I hope i'm wrong but most petro-state happens to follow fhe same pattern actually.

For sure, the republicans are worst.

But the dems are still not good.

Americans have no representation at all.

Barilla is homophobic or just italian? I mean they elected homophobia as a president...

I really wonder how it would work in a country that big in empty spaces and populations with so much authoritarian actors.

Each county has a well armed police force. Nearly each state has an armed force millitia. The country has a national guard. It also has several armed agencies. It has the three biggest armies on earth if you separate each corp and only count active soldiers. It has so much millitary equipment the overflow gets sold to polices.

Those armed millitia are all in different counties, are smaller than the local police forces, with less weapon and next to no organizational know how... They would never be able to have any other impact than get outgunned in a remote place by cops or the national guard...

Unless they all start to cause chaos at the same time, which would maybe lead to a semi destabilization of some part of the USA, I don't see these people with guns achieve anything.

Also most people who wants guns are scared/anxious persons and will talk loud about using them but won't act when it's time, because their real motivation is hiding a percived weaknesses with a weapon.

That's why in all the years of abuse by the insurance system in America, there was only one Luidgi.

Thanks for your work!

In canada they banned competition for no reason... It has to come from the imperial core and vassal states or it's illegal

Yes! I also is interested in that because I can't find anything about that anywhere!

You say that informal censorship is always dictated by class relations ?

That's an interesting take.

I always saw echo chambers (what you call informal censorship) as inability to cope with a cognitive dissonance. It's a way to emotionally protect one self from others beliefs.

In more than a way, a semi closed environment like lemmygrad is that, I think.

I don't see it as censorship but more like a way to have constructive conversations about some subjects.

That's an interesting take none the less!

Oh, what you are describing is called an echo chamber. It's mostly an opt in mechanism?

I wouldn't call that censorship at all! But I get your point.

The only thing you said I think is wrong is that de facto censorship always exist.

Censorship is created by a social entity hidding or faking data. Any advanced mind can take these incomplete or faked conclusions and from there find out that the data has been messed with.

Any "trust me bro" arguments can be rejected from the get go. Any information without it's reproduction steps has no meaning, only an agenda.

People are pretty bright animals on the individual level, but where they fail is that they are social animals which will take cue from other social animals and social entitiesml.

What you see as de facto censorship is only a natural consequence of this mechanism.

But this can be countered with proper education of both the social animals and the social entities.

Fatalism is not needed here because we know that we can build social constructs that can change both how the social animal and the social entity comport themselves.

All in all , a censorship attempt, for a social animal that reject social cues from it's peers, is at best an attack on it's agency and intelligence, as worst a proof that the social entity has a hidden agenda and whishes a bad outcome to the censored.

And this attempt will by itself, because the social animal has an advanced mind, create an interest in what the other entity is trying to hide.

We can see this in action with antivaxxer, flat-earthers and so on, in which de facto censorship does not exist.

These examples are not the best, because they also get influenced by bad messaging -a sort of propaganda created by bad actors be it animal or entities - but they examplify the mechanism I am talking about.

Sorry, my English is quite poor this morning as I am very tired from bullshit events in my life.

So if im not very clear, I'm sorry again.

I don't think censorship is the way. I feel it's a fear driven approach and paternalistic.

It's easy to see with your own eyes the decay of western society, because the supposed material gain is rooted in elitism and barely hidden exploitation.

The only way to convert the liberals is to show them what is really going on in the material world of western society. Keeping it censored will allow liberalism to fester and grow unchecked in china as these people will have their ideas reinforced by not being in contact with what liberalism really cause.