The meme doesn’t make sense to me either, but I can tell you that the person in the second panel is Michael Parenti, a highly regarded communist historian known for analyzing history through class struggle. The quote in the 3rd panel is a famous one from his lecture about the US War against Yugoslavia:

• Cited quote
• Full lecture

Africa is rich! Only it’s people are poor. There are still problems in Africa today, there are still outrageous things happening today. ‘“Building your own pharmaceutical factories in Sudan” where do you think you can get off where you think you can do that, when you should be buying from the multinational pharmaceutical.’

Take the case of India. India was a rich, advanced, developed country. Until the British went in 1800. Between 1800 and 1830 the Indian textile industry, which was outperforming the British textile industry, was dismantled and the great industrial centers were de-industrialized. The people were sent back out onto the land to grow cotton for the factories in Manchester and London. Between 1850 and 1900, the per capita income fell by 65%. So that poverty in the third world, that so called ‘underdevelopment’ … These countries are not underdeveloped, they were overexploited- they’re maldeveloped.

To be fair, the factory management knew that it was dangerous but didn’t tell the workers and encouraged them to lick the brush.

deleted by creator

I became a socialist because I was an “essential employee” during the height of the pandemic. I was treated like shit by my company, the customers, and the government while they sung my praise. I watched my grandpa get good cancer treatment with the VA (shocker, I know, but it happens) while my sister and grandma had to fight insurance for cancer treatment.

We can’t make a perfect world, but we can make a better one. And it starts with a socialist economy.

Both the democratic party and the republican party are liberal parties. One of them got scratched.

Major developments in the spongeverse lore. Tell your friends!

It would violate my NDA to say anything more than: yes, all of the software I’ve helped develop use the name of mythical creatures during development

Tbh the idea of exploiting 100s of people for my personal gain makes me want to set the gun down and put on a trigger lock.

The US has the WARN Act, which requires 60 days’ notice or 60 days’ pay if at least 500 employees or 33% of the workplace are getting laid off (whichever is smaller). It’s a threadbare legal minimum on severance, but there is a minimum.

Don’t wait for a layoff, start organizing a union for that juicy ‘represented’ employment status (as opposed to at-will). Unions can’t stop layoffs, but they can minimize the impact, negotiate a higher severance, and provide advanced notice. I highly recommend the good folks at CODE-CWA, they specialize in organizing tech workers

If by ‘we’ you mean the billionaires and political leaders in a position to do something, then absolutely.

They’re kids, not English professors

Khan is a good one, I’m personally invested in hoping that Jennifer Abruzzo stays in the NLRB

I’d take the deal for a single can

The guy with a truck had a concept of a plan

how does approval voting allow for spoilers? The experts that study election systems consider it eliminated under approval voting. It’s literally impossible to be a spoiler, because there’s nothing to spoil. There could be 4 real candidates and 16 no-name candidates, and nothing would prevent people from voting for 18 candidates. All of the eliminations you’re concerned about happen all at once, because it’s about having the most total votes. Votes for “spoilers” does literally nothing to affect the chances of other candidates.

As for “genuine voting”, how does one determine whether a vote was strategic vs genuine? Why does everyone have to conform to a ranked system that is highly susceptible to runoff upsets? I don’t care if people vote strategically, because if the options are check boxes or not, strategy is very limited. STAR is based on instant runoffs with a bit of range voting mixed in. Both are highly susceptible to strategy, as well as several undesirable traits that don’t exist with approval. Please explain to me how it prevents strategic voting.

Approval voting is where you mark any number of candidates that you want, and the person with the most marks is the elected person.

The most important issues with a fair voting system are eliminated by this method. Strategic voting will always happen under our performative democracy, which means that all parties are pathways for getting close to the actual goal. It’s only a problem if people are overly worried about genuinely “voting your truth”.

Approval voting is the only method that meets all the requirements for a fair election without elevating an unpopular candidate.

For all intents and purposes, white phosphorus is a chemical weapon that causes chemical burns which means it’s use is highly susceptible to facilitating war crimes, even unintentionally. It’s use should be banned from war.

Whatever it is, it isn’t worth it