yaddas 🔻

privacy, freedom & free software
shadow wizard money gang
maoist, into dudes
dedollarization, arch user

Public Key

npub1fhrkvtnym9cs4h3vqe3agxljh7nz3xw6x4z7awzrxyay95eqpsrqe0s57l

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsym3mx9ejdjug2mckqvc75r0etlf3gn8dr230whppnzwjz6vsqcpstxuz7n

Author Public Key

npub1fhrkvtnym9cs4h3vqe3agxljh7nz3xw6x4z7awzrxyay95eqpsrqe0s57l

Show more details

Last Notes

2025-02-02 06:56:48

opinion on china?
the fact alone that china has 33% of the world's industrial base alone is an accomplishment few economies can only dream of, and now that china is trying to expand bilateral trade with other nations trading in the US dollar instead of waiting for the ratification of any reforms in the IMF proves that at least their goals are more noble. as for the question on whether this is a good communist society, im not sure. on one hand, they do routinely execute billionaires, but on the other they do have more billionares than the US.
what i definitely believe is that the chinese chip industry is soooo much better than the american one, for instance, the US companies do not produce any of the old chipsets for old computers without the intel management engine or the like, whereas you can outright ask allwinner for a10, a64 chips or chips with the open source hardware & firmware so long as you buy in bulk so they get a return on investment. the difference in philosophies is wayyyy better
of course this isnt universal trend though, like how the recently released 7nm chipset kirin 9000s is the same as all closed source bad chipsets, & in the case of allwinner the most updated open source & free chips are 40nm, but for allwinner, rockchip & FreeScale i.MX6 they are significantly freer than american chips
samsung SBCs, most american companies, like raspberry pi SBCs, intel & qualcomm chipsets enforce signature checks to even begin to boot up. its literally 1984

2025-02-02 06:53:49

- reply

yes, but your confusing a modern tendency & backprojecting it onto adam's smith overall political project, capitalism was trying to free people FROM rent seeking while modern capitalism seek TO extract more rent from the entire economy by disguising trickle down economics as wealth creation.
when endentured servants were incorporated to bourgeois society & afforded the rights of englishmen, they moved further inward into colonial america, & the people that had endentured servants started to need to rely on other unfree laborers to carry out their tasks, but the economic concensus was starting to be had that endentured servants & gradually slaves would have the screws loosened up just like endentured servants & slaveowners would have to once again incorperate themselves with broader free labor/business society
That is, unless of course some technology (like the cotton gin) would be developed & would actually cause slavery to intensify & cause free labor to be put on pause & actually would necessitate that slaveowners tighten the screws on slavery.
as a matter of fact, one of the things that jefferson was thoroughly disturbed on his death bed is he didnt know how the problem of the slave owning south would be dealt with, & the fact that none of the european nation states supported the enfranchisement of slaves & america sought out to copy their institutions kinda explains why theres so many problems in modern america

2025-02-01 17:07:37

- reply

ah, i see. well, i took my analysis of 1776 from platypus affiliated society & gordon wood, & i agree with them until reconstruction & the gilded age & outright disagree with them when they talk about the history after 1917, but in general im much more sympathetic to arguments by michael parenti, michael hudson & jason hickle because i do think the world that the renaissance/bourgeois society tried to create got outcompeted by the industrial revolution & pulled the rug on the founding fathers because nobody couldve predicted the intensification of the US as an industrial powerhouse creating business cycles, creating a bloodthirsty national security state that "administers society in its best interest" & citizen's united.
i do genuinely believe the US began & sought out to expand self governance, but as the US began needed to get stronger capitalist institutions they needed to develop more european styled institutions to create a powerful nation state, which changed american aspirations for an "empire of liberty" to turn into manifest destiny & the erradication of natives
also, on the point of adam smith, i disagree staunchly. you will never find anyone more critical of capitalism than adam smith because he was the one who articulated how people needed to be freed from the unfreedom of economic rent seeking & also how the employer & employee were at odds with each other, with employers demanding less & employees demanding more, but karl marx is a radical figure because he inverts the ideas that adam smith had on its head & emphasises that the society of free labor is coming into contradiction with itself & becoming a source of unfreedom from where there used to be freedom, & the only way the continuation of the enlightenment could continue is through the recomposition of the dictatorship of the proletariat

2025-02-01 15:57:47

man, why cant there be like normal knitting groups, reading clubs, & cooking on nostr, also its kinda surprising there arent that many celebrities on nostr, but i guess they probably get paid more in traditional social media than a niche crypto bro social media or whatever nostr is supposed to be.

2025-02-01 04:04:11

- reply

hahaha, well for the record you seem cool. im a maoist but id also agree to a term like anarcho communist & the like

2025-02-01 04:00:45

- reply

exactly dude, i also think the same thing but i think the question it poses is more about mob rule than authoritarianism, i really hope that later on theres more experiments like the cultural revolution because i hope the masses do genuinely take power, or at least not have the majority oppressing a minority of people & the like.

2025-02-01 03:57:16

- reply

thats very true, the US draws its legitimacy from the fact it says it has democratic institutions & the legacy from the founding fathers, but i mean i dont think they are wrong & that theres some information we are missing by some voices being neglected in the academia like 1619, i just think that the world adam smith envisioned in the 18th century began decaying in the 19th century & becoming an instrument of oppression, & by the dawn of the 20th century the working class finally managed to be conscious enough to finally target imperialism, & fascism but couldnt adequately challenge the CIA & free trade so the USSR gave up their imperial preference just how britain lost the sterling area. but im not saying the USSR was an empire im more saying that it liberalized to the US just like how britain was hollowed out in the aftermath of the lend lease agreement in the 1945

2025-02-01 03:42:16

- reply

im just a communist lmao, i think there should only be a state when socialism exists but when communism is achieved there would be no state

2025-02-01 03:35:08

- reply

yeah, i really agree with kropotkin, but i believe that the only way that we could create a world he envisions is through taking state power & it going away over time, like the engles quote, shifting from the administration of people to the administration of things. also, im curious what your take is on the cultural revolution?

2025-02-01 03:16:58

- reply

nah, its just that typically from what i have talked to regarding to people about 1619 its typically people who are like progressive sorta statist democrat types or libertarians who will not grant any grace to america for being a radical revolution because they didnt free slaves from the outset

2025-02-01 03:09:38

- reply

ah i see. i was just kinda confused by the assertions you were making because you seemed like a liberal to me & i thought you would be sympathetic to 1776 so when you opposed capitalism i was kinda thrown off haha

2025-02-01 02:57:24

- reply

what are you politically?

2025-02-01 02:33:22

- reply

i agree with you that there was vast inequalities, but the point of 1776 wasnt to opress more people but to reform & create more free laborers that could contribute to the stock of existing things. capitalism as an oppressive force didnt truly become a prevailing tendency until the industrial revolution & boarder labor movement, bourgeois society was revolutionary when the artisenal, guildsmen, & indentured servants were becoming & getting afforded the same rights as englishmen, but the industrial revolution, king cotton, & the like caused the intensification of exploitation of slaves

2025-02-01 02:08:26

death grips is so goated bro https://video.nostr.build/32e85b02acd457cf83f3f1226310422d0629de705e7ce78aeadd9d0666b7a5e3.mp4

2025-02-01 02:07:35

https://video.nostr.build/ded8ad2bf3fa353fd6b3c4c7067fa930ab0476fec5e1a438090fe472d7493099.mp4

2025-02-01 01:24:41

- reply

dont get me wrong either, im not a 1776 apologist, but most of my thinking really comes from gordon wood's analysis, because the US revolution didnt come tied with the baggage of the culture it came from, unlike france or china, which were tied to their historical context, the american revolution was primarily driven by the political and humanist ideals of the founding fathers.
in the name of trying to explain why theres a disonance between the good small government goals of the founding fathers wanted to achieve, others blame the state for being not getting trimmed down enough, too bureaucratized, there should, or that the wealth of the west was built on slavery rather than being limited by it.
the point that i disagree with 1619 is that they think that the american revolution was a counterrevolution by the slaveowners so they could keep black people oppressed because white people are comically evil & systemically racist with no nuance, & while i believe some aspects of that happens SIGNIFICANTLY much later in american history, the founding fathers nor pretty much no elected figures had no racially essentialist views until the 1810's

2025-01-31 18:07:35

- reply

i will admit that just because we had an imperfect revolution doesnt mean the goals that our founding fathers aspired to achieve werent exactly as radical then as they are now. the point of the constitution was to create a radical reform project for the following century of free laborers, including the endentured servants & slaves, to create a non centralized nation state akin to a yeoman farmer republic in jefferson's case & a hamilton aspired to use patronage in the absense of republican adhesives to foster free trade & create a strong european nation state & expand an empire of liberty. none of them sought out the deliberate goal to oppress people because in the former he wanted to expand self governance & the latter wanted free laborers.
the point of establishing the US was percisely because the US thought that since there was so much violence & disposession while under british rule, that if the founding fathers created their own country, the violence & fight over land would go away & the natives could be civilized & become yeoman farmers or industrial laborers.
for instance, this view is reflected by the views of our jefferson, he believed that property was transformative & added stock to the existing things by not enfringing on private property rights, & thought that natives could spurn the division of labor, maintain gainful employment, accumulate property, & finally reach the property qualifications to vote.
So then this notion of private property was actually quite emancipatory at the time, obviously in contrast to the European idea that there was only so much finite land and territory that needed to be divided and redivided amongst the great powers, that would then be passed on to their family, alongside political titles, stock dividends, interest payments on their bonds, royalties on their land and mineral holdings, rents on their properties, control over the banks, factories, industries, and media, to exert political capital and become secretaries of state, CIA directors, filter out candidates suitable for presidency in the money primaries, and making the world safe for the fortune 500 by patron states installing military dictatorships over client states to beat workers who get out of line and rolling back vocational safety laws, minimum wage laws, environmental protections, labor and collective bargaining laws, consumer protections, and child labor laws to suck more resources out of client states.

2025-01-31 07:05:20

- reply

like what specifically?

2025-01-31 06:56:47

BRICs contains 50% of the global population while the asian tigers (excluding china), europe & the US have a larger share of voting power in the WTO, with the US having veto power in the IMF, & World Bank than 80% of the global population combined. the US dictate terms to small unstable developing countries & turns them to haiti for trying to use developmentalist policies under the guise of fighting communism.

2025-01-31 06:26:43

- reply

just because 1776 is more accurate than 1619 doesnt mean that we should censor inaccurate history

2025-01-31 06:22:57

https://video.nostr.build/82a58cddbe4147c05dac4fc1be0b0452d4524ff4b4e9fcf8cdf3e4f4ead33ead.mp4

2025-01-31 06:16:42

man why are ivy league liberal leftists so unfunny bro im gonna send them a zipbomb full of "disinformation" & "fact checking"

2025-01-31 06:13:40

https://image.nostr.build/b823c6f2cbba114d55a0cc9f7b6f52a9e468a129121414850e5d882ebb490cd1.jpg

2025-01-31 06:10:26

- reply

i mean, everytime she addresses an argument is always postured as the most comically weak straw men in agruments, atlas shrugged being the prime example

2025-01-31 06:00:25

- reply

thats the point of increasing bilateral trade within brics instead of denominating debts in "hard currency" areas like the dollar, they are gaining more independence by regaining their sovereignty, & while technically "fiat" it is more emancipatory than staying in "hard currency" areas. its also the same reason why free trade with the US in the UK caused the sterling area to collapse during the negotiations of the inter-ally debts & why the EU is becoming a debt hole for the troika & franco-german debts.

2025-01-24 18:33:40

- reply

man, i wanna do that so bad but im too reliant on video games i feel bad ditching it