• 0 Posts
  • 314 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2023

help-circle


  • The events that are the least emphasized are those that were carried out by dominant powers, particularly when they are still around today writing the history and propaganda books. The way events are handled is seemingly subtle, and the most powerful way they avoid emphasis is to simply never frame the violence they did in terms of its most wide impacts.

    For example, you mentioned that you are from India. The greatest violences done to India in the last few hundred years were from the Raj, so the British. And those greatest violences were not the actual acts of ships and soldiers, but in things like this:

    • Dismantling of industry and craftmanship in the subcontinent, converting production to the schemes of empire. Namely, producing crops like cotton to supply a British industrialized textile monopoly. This directly created poverty where before there was immense high-value production.

    • Famines caused by extreme poverty and the imposition of imbalanced production where farmers had to farm export crops and even export food crops when there were famine risks. The British also did this to Ireland and other colonies.

    • The less-talked-about but still incredible violence of poverty in general. Placing a hold on industrialization also meant no balanced infrastructure for the greater public (only what served export and British control), limited hospitals, poor education, more frequent death of one’s children, and so on.

    • The tweaking of caste to be more racist and classist (per English tastes), creating internal strife and misery.

    • Emphasizing other ethnic divides to use marginalization as a scapegoat for suffering and exploitation. The British created or escalated many of the ethnic rifts in the subcontinent, making issues like exodis from and neocolonialism in Kashmir or the partition more likely and more dramatic.

    People that attempt to tally these things lay hundreds of millions of deaths at the feet of the British Raj. Yet such numbers are not well-known!

    In fact, the liberal economist Amartya Sen even applied this kind of logic to modern India and suggested that capitalism in India killed around 100 million people from 1947 to 1979. But how often do you hear Westerners talk about the mass death campaign of ongoing capitalism, citing millions every decade? Very few, because this is treated as “normal” and “natural” and not something imposed by the dominant system all around us.

    A similar example is looking at the published numbers about deaths in Gaza. What we hear is an outdated number of people confirmed dead. It has almost halted for months. Is this because Israel stopped bombing children, hospitals, schools, refugee camps? No, it is because they explicitly targeted and disruoted the entire system responsible for doing these counts, the healthcare system. But even then, let us say the counts continued. Is this everyone killed by Israel’s genocide there? No! These numbers do not include the people dying from poor sanitation (Israel cut off water and electricity), of diseases, of malnutrition, of any kind of malady that could have been treated by the medical system the Israelis destroyed. The numbers of civilians killed by deprivation is usually larger than those directly killed in war. It is rarely reported as the death count of a given war, or in this case genocidal occupation.

    So, the greatest missed events are those hidden from us without our knowledge. By controlling the definitions of terms like “killed in war” or “died under colonialism” or “excess deaths”. The events hidden by our thought patterns ingrained into us since we were young, taught to us by teachers and books and journalists and entertainment media. They weren’t all in on some grand conspiracy, either. At least, not most of them. They were also miseducated in the same way. It is a reflection of the ruling class, filtering down in myriad ways until it dictates our very thoughts.



  • Neither of those are exactly quality organizations whose claims should be taken at face value, though Amnesty International has made no claims about slave labor and HRW doesn’t itself have any statements about that so far as I can tell.

    Though this is beside the point as, again, we are talking about EV manufacturing. Please do your best to not support the orientalist implications throughout this thread. If you would like to make a specific claim, go ahead and do so, but be ready to explain it with more than NGO or State Department name dropping.


  • I’m sorry you’ve had to experience that transphobia on Lemmy. It is unfortunately common. And sometimes it even lurks as internalized transphobia in people that do not think of themselves as transphobjc. For example, there are Lemmy instances that actually promote chasers.

    I believe all instances if transphobia should be called out and obvious examples should result in bans. Sometimes it is good to let people have a chance to accept criticism and retract but I am biased towards more often banning. Comments that are transphobic should also be removed.



  • Media criticism is a journey! It’s good that you wanted to question sources and spent some time doing so. The annoying thing about media criticism is that there are a lot of tropes and think tanks and journalistic malpractices. And often no alternative information, so to understand a given news piece you might have to use a biased source with a poor track record (e.g. New York Times), look into the author, review all of the sources, try to see what might be accurate vs. what is PR BS, and still end up (correctly) thinking, “it’s only 50:50 that the main claim us even true”. After a while it gets easier because you know the think tanks, or already know enough about the subject matter to spot BS, or immediately notice that a given article is full of unsourced editorialization masquerading as journalism.

    If you like podcasts, Citations Needed is an entertaining one that by two journalists goes over a trope or topic per episode. There are also transcripts available. I also recommend that people check out FAIR.org, a site focused on media criticism and more specifically calling out ongoing bad faith practices for current topics





  • MBFC presents itself as “fact check” but it is really just subjective determinations slotted into an inappropriate analysis as judged by a political illiterate. The overall curve of “centrist” sources being high on facts simply reveals their own bias, where they fail to recognize the non-factual components of those sources, the train of think tanks, and whether topics are covered at all, or in certain contexts.

    Ironically, the only time I ever see anyone trying to unironically make use of it and cite it is so that they can avoid critically engaging with media. They just say, “this website says it’s bad” and turn their brains off, successfully short-circuiting cognitive dissonance.




  • Democrats aren’t even a friend to labor when they need your votes. They rarely provide anything material, usually just looking for a photo op. For a small and weak union that can be helpful for pressuring management but for a president, senator, etc, who only comment on big strikes or negotiations, it is of virtually zero impact.

    In terms of policy, the Biden NLRB has maintained most of the anti-labor Trump NLRB policies. Democrats and Republicans love to tag team anti-labor policy. Republicans can openly do so with minimal to no pushback from Dems and Dems can maintain those policies without taking the blame.


  • Slave labor is a system in which a person is bought sold and indentured to a master for a substantial duration, often life. Their labor is coerced as property of that master.

    That is not how China produces cars. They use highly automated systems and paid workers like everywhere else. While Chinese workers are paid less due to the forces of unequal exchange (a system imposed by the US) and an export economy (a system usually imposed by the US but more of a 4D chess move by China to develop productive forces, with the US gladly taking the deal for exploitation), that is not really why the cars are so much cheaper. It is because China has highly concentrated industry and a much less financialized system.

    Speaking about “fair” is amazing in this context. The US is simply trying to protect domestic monopsony industry and to damage Chinese industry. This is a jingoistic and corporate policy.