“It used to be that people would get rich enough to affect their own nation… .” When? Where? There has never been a world where borders are a real thing that insulates one state from another (I assume you mean state, “nation” as the imaginary common identity makes even less sense). This is not a matter of a few individuals making this system function poorly, the purpose of this system is to generate wealth for a privileged few.

European imperialism/settler-colonialism and the capitalism that emerged through it has always functioned this way. It was funded by individuals with systemic privilege that afforded exceptional wealth and was realized through the exploitation of poor Europeans disadvantaged in those societies and the genocide of indigenous peoples all over the world.Thousands and thousands of nations were targeted for genocide by people who would never even step foot on the same continent as them. Wealth concentration may have improved the conditions for settlers in some places, but that wasn’t for the betterment of the state or nation or whatever you have imagined here. Workers and farmers with relatively high material security and wealth were allowed that level of power because it maintained a racialized and gendered hierarchy that was necessary to effectively carry out the violent extraction of wealth for the most privileged in society. That was in no way universal; there hasn’t been centuries of civil recognition and labour rights movements because most people flourished under this system.

There was no break in how this society was organised that allowed these exceptionally naughty billionaires to exist, that amount of wealth concentration is not new and is only possible through a system that devalues life.

I wonder if anyone else has made the observation that a global revolution is necessary to prevent capitalism from killing as much as it desires… 🤔

Very in-character comment, well done.

Just takes a few people to get it started.

Jesus, I see that word so misused on here but someone using it when I ask where I said something two comments above is pretty hilarious.

Where do I say that? I understand American liberalism intimately, btw. People can actually know things and also think you’re wrong.

Jesus how dramatic. Please explain liberalism for me so that I know what I’ve gotten wrong here.

edit: checked their profile, they think liberalism is “leftist.” Politically illiterate liberal gets mad at the read. Blocked.

What’s “righteous” about this?

American liberals would sooner say that the nation is impure than that nationalism is pathological. Many of them literally identify with the state as part of or representative of themselves. Guilt and shame are American rationalisation staples, “I feel bad, but I’m not going to stop.”

Could you name a few books by “advocates on the left” that criticise masculinity but argue for less masculinity rather than a redefinition of masculinity?

You’re telling me people privileged in a system are more likely to defend that system? Wowie, I hadn’t thought of that.

Bazzite’s been working pretty good for me. Was honestly easier to set up too, and fights me less, and runs smoother, and also doesn’t spy on me.

Beyond the cynical liberalism and fascism here, what the fuck did quetzalcoatlus northropi do to earn your disdain? Isnt any life worth its own end?

Imagine paying for Netflix.

Joke’s clear, it just only makes sense if you’re privileged.

Lovely, romanticizing gendered labour. You guys know poor people have always been around, right?

“Now.” Ironic.

You’ve assumed that I’m in a tech knowledge bubble. I use Linux for work, but I am not in the tech field even remotely. Even though I have some professional training and a hobby interest, which prepared me better, I had to use textbooks and online forums to learn how to use my Linux desktop comfortably. I regularly deal with students and am therefore very familiar with low tech-literacy, let alone others in my own life that I have helped. I know there is a skill barrier for entry into Linux.

What I am much better equipped to handle is broad social and economic developments historically, with a particular concern for capitalist erosion of community wellbeing and mutual aid. As I have said, I do not doubt there is value for consumers in this service and I do not doubt that this service appears to be reasonably priced to those consumers. My concern regards the potential attraction that such profitability could generate and that same tech-illiteracy would make users more easily coerced into capitalization. Those conditions are exactly why there is a social as well as skill barrier of entry into Linux. As you said, many consumers have been primed to accept convenience over skill-building, which in turn makes them less capable of choosing when something is not worth the price and abandoning a convenient user experience.

Again, it is good that more people try to make this switch – Microsoft’s near monopoly is undeniably a social detriment – but we do not benefit from suspending criticism of how this switch happens just because we are happy it is happening.

I think it is very purposeful that Zorin has expansive marketing and frames features in terms of price value.

My concern is more oriented toward how capitalization of consumer-facing Linux will look if it proves to be a profitable site of expansion with Windows’ decline in popularity. I don’t care about licenses or the utility of the feature, though I do question its value when there are free options. The support is the more valuable thing, but again I worry about this success given that other distros have communities that serve the same purpose for free with only a little more labour from the user. It’s a good thing this is happening at all, but we should be critical of how it happens.

This is a good point, particularly in the context of value for new users. My comment is more regarding the precedent of framing desktop environments as some sort of premium feature. I do question how much value users still get out of that though, since so many Linux distros have communities that provide essentially the same service for free with a bit more labour on the user.