LengAwaits

"To understand revolutionary suicide it is first necessary to have an idea of reactionary suicide, for the two are very different. Reactionary suicide: the reaction of a man who takes his own life in response to social conditions that overwhelm him and condemn him to helplessness.”

“I do not think that life will change for the better without an assault on the Establishment, which goes on exploiting the wretched of the earth. This belief lies at the heart of the concept of revolutionary suicide. Thus it is better to oppose the forces that would drive me to self-murder than to endure them. Although I risk the likelihood of death, there is at least the possibility, if not the probability, of changing intolerable conditions.”

“But before we die, how shall we live? I say with hope and dignity; and if premature death is the result, that death has a meaning reactionary suicide can never have. It is the price of self-respect.”

– Dr. Huey P. Newton

Why?

It sounds to me like your parents are engaging with nuance in a complicated world, rather than boiling everything down to either "this is good" or "this is bad".

ETA: You're welcome to downvote me, I don't mind, the points don't matter. But I prefer discussion. Tell me why I'm wrong so we can have a conversation!

Sounds a lot like my experience with Americans re: their government.

I guess propaganda can be pretty insidious.

https://www.startrek.com/news/smith-marx-and-picard-star-trek-and-our-economic-future

1 person being held with no due process is as bad as 30000.

Please explain this one to me, because I'm not understanding your math.

"To understand revolutionary suicide it is first necessary to have an idea of reactionary suicide, for the two are very different. Reactionary suicide: the reaction of a man who takes his own life in response to social conditions that overwhelm him and condemn him to helplessness.”

“I do not think that life will change for the better without an assault on the Establishment, which goes on exploiting the wretched of the earth. This belief lies at the heart of the concept of revolutionary suicide. Thus it is better to oppose the forces that would drive me to self-murder than to endure them. Although I risk the likelihood of death, there is at least the possibility, if not the probability, of changing intolerable conditions.”

“But before we die, how shall we live? I say with hope and dignity; and if premature death is the result, that death has a meaning reactionary suicide can never have. It is the price of self-respect.”

– Dr. Huey P. Newton

There's a growing body of research from behavioral neuroscience which indicate that power and privilege have a deleterious effect on the brain. People with high-socioeconomic status often:

• Have reduced empathy and compassion.

• Have a diminished ability to see from someone else's perspective.

• Are more impulsive.

• Have a dangerously high tolerance for risk.

  When you don't need other people to survive, they become irrelevant to you. When you're in charge, you can behave very badly and people will still be polite and respectful toward you. Instead of reciprocity, it's a formalized double standard. When you have status, you're given excessive credibility, and rarely hear the very ordinary push-back from others most of us are accustomed to, instead you receive flattery and praise and your ideas are taken seriously by default.

  Some sources:

Hubris syndrome: An acquired personality disorder? A study of US Presidents and UK Prime Ministers over the last 100 years

(Abstract) or (Full Text)

Does power corrupt? An fMRI study on the effect of power and social value orientation on inequity aversion.

(Abstract) or (PDF Full Text)

Social Class and the Motivational Relevance of Other Human Beings: Evidence From Visual Attention

(Abstract) or (PDF Full Text)

The Psychology of Entrenched Privilege: High Socioeconomic Status Individuals From Affluent Backgrounds Are Uniquely High in Entitlement

(Abstract) or (PDF Full Text)

I tend to think that information should be free, generally, so I would probably be fine with "OpenAI the non-profit" taking copyrighted data under fair-use, but I don't extend that thinking to "OpenAI the for-profit company".

I hope that in publicly questioning the narratives I've been fed all my life I am not assumed to be advocating for China.

I just like to try to think critically, compare disparate sources, and not pretend that I'm somehow immune to propaganda.

It seems like people are quick to try to label me a tankie these days for engaging with the world in that way, but I don't consider myself a tankie. It feels like a thought-terminating cliche.

Is there anything you could share that would shed more light on the Zenz thing? I'm not very keen on just "tuning out" my ideological opponents or dismissing them just because they don't affirm my biases. I'd rather read up on it myself and decide.

Part of admitting that I'm not immune to propaganda, for me, is working to root it out wherever I can by reading and cross-referencing a wide range of sources. If my deepest beliefs and biases can't stand up to that sort of scrutiny then I don't want them anymore.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/tipping-landlord-tenant-gratuity-tiktok-b2291327.html