RandomMouse @ RandomMouse @slrpnk.net Posts 0Comments 4Joined 2 mo. ago
Perhaps on the ifs. But the alternative is much fucking worse so there's no choice but to try the best option available with as many people as we can get on board.
Law enforcement historically backs down when numbers on the other side are large enough. General strike doesn't really trigger till we hit a certain amount of the population, seems it should be best if triggered and focused in large economic centers. (Cities with high economic impact) Maybe factories, big tech, etc?
That would make it likely law enforcement didn't have the space to react.
A general strike is much larger in scale than a regular strike. It ceases economic activity, not just going to work. Therefore, it is inaccurate to say they require mutual aid networks (them existing is obviously a good thing) because you're referencing union strikes.
If economic activity ceases, enforcement mechanisms are paralyzed. Refer to Oakland in 1946 or France 1968 general strikes to learn about the parameters which created success. Mutual aid networks were not among them.
A general strike is, in my opinion, the only good option left, and I really want people to understand we can do it and we can do it quickly, if only we are all prepared to do what it takes, not misinformed, and not scared of propaganda.
1/5 can only stop the 4/5 if they don't fight back. So many people have been culturally taught to be run over - through distorted ideas of 'respect' 'politeness' 'order' and more.
They won't let us? No. We won't let them. Get up and defy them. In whatever style suits one best. Economic strikes, go off grid, protest with weapons, join a hacker organization, stop paying taxes, boycott the companies you hate... List goes on. Any one thing might feel like nothing, but together it is everything. Online there's so much hopeless content, it is easy to feel like no one else is mobilizing. But they are and they need every single one of us to take action. It's not important that we have the perfect strategy, it's important that we all defy together.
Breeds are defined by organizations that determine breed based on lineage, followed by conformation. They do not align across different countries. Dogs have the AKC, CKC in America. They don't follow the same definitions. It also causes lots of issues to classify things like this and leads to bad decision making by lots of people. Even as it is now, there's no clear definition for things like Pit Bulls. There's also a ton of health issues that arise from defining breeds and trying to follow this logic.
Humans are not controlled and bred based on these things so a Breed Standard would not be possible. There is simply a continuous line of people.
Perform a cluster analysis on dogs - they will kind of fall into clusters because we bred selectively for them. But humans, which have not been selectively bred even in smaller geographic regions, would not provide decent clustering results based on race categories.
Without good clustering, whatever groups you make have more inaccuracies than accuracies in your grouped statements. (Border collies are high energy, greyhounds are lazy > 65% true at best) this is because of the insane complexity of DNA and the lack of selective breeding artificially limiting the DNA diversity. Plus other stuff.