Pardon, may you elaborate? I am not sure how not buying a game may affect that.

You may wish to re-read what seizing the means of production means.

piracy

Should workers not receive payment for their labour?

Games and film: they already got paid during development, in hopes that the CEO will get ~360x more during sale.

YouTube: ad revenue is nothing in comparison to sponsorship money. Which often involves hitting some metrics, but it's fucked up it exists in the first place so like, meh.

piracy

Should workers not receive payment for their labour?

Stream[sic] gets praise because they do their part to make a shitty industry a smidge less shitty.

My answer to Steam and GOG: open source games and piracy. My answer to YouTube: read OR use Invidious, yt-dlp, etc. to effectively "pirate" the videos out with little to no revenue. My answer to Discord: just avoid OR don't pay for nitro and keep it in a browser with anti-fingerprinting. My answer to any software not inherently service based is to go use alternatives under less influence.

Are you suggesting that the only way to not be a hypocrite is to completely remove yourself{...}

As long as you don't celebrate company achievements, not really that hypocritical.

As most of everything mentioned is just code, it may be (eventually) rewritten.

I get the sentiment, but what are you saying with your examples?

Steam gets praise because they do their part to make a shitty industry a smidge less shitty. The rest of the things you describe are products with their own pros and cons, but not really tools of the elite. Are you suggesting that the only way to not be a hypocrite is to completely remove yourself from the currently existing state of things and go purist hunter gatherer in a commune?

People like some things, and those things also exist in a system that they don’t like. We could have the same things under a different system, but that takes a lot of time and effort that many of the people you call out are contributing to. Until then, people have to live a life with the reasonable options afforded to them.

Your first link is about how voters want them to defeat maga.

The second link is an organization I don't know endorsing(?) a person I don't recognize with 0 context clues of what that means.

The third link is paywalled.

What collaboration are you pointing to? Because I don't see what you're talking about.

Every link goes into the specifics. MAGA are Nazis. I thought you were a busy person.
Do you want me to copy and paste the articles or something?

It begs some obvious questions. What form of collaboration? What specific group is meant by "Nazis"? Why not just write a second sentence? It'd be quicker for everyone. Its pretty clear the person I'm writing to is knowledgeable about this, and I would rather hear it directly.

The first link had an anti LLM filter that took 8 seconds to clear. The last link was paywalled. Seems like a bit of an ask, to expect that level of time and monetary investment of anyone reading. Just elaborate a bit, it's all I'm asking.

DNC triple confirmed they’ll collaborate with Nazis.

What more specificity do you need‽ The links are evidence of the statement.

I’m a busy person too.

You could write about the specific actions in your comment, so the points you're making are comprehensible. Vagueposting with link spam isn't an effective way of communicating your ideas.

I'm a busy girl. I don't have the time to read three entire articles to decipher a single sentence.

Democrats are collaborating with MAGA?

Did you comprehend what I wrote? What imperialism are you talking about?

No. It is a comment on how fascism is a product of capitalism in decay. Since all of these are outspokenly pro capitalism, they want to uphold the underlying contradictions that give rise to fascism in the present and future.

Even the reformists here will only support positive change (mostly domestic) insofar as it lets the system of oppression against the (global) proletariat continue.

I actually think the depiction mimicks the historical event somewhat adequate (at least the Western front) but not in the sense that you do: The US was not the beacon of light that defeated the nazis, that was the Soviet Union. The US and Nazi German fighting was capitalist infighting, similar to that of your democratic leaders and republicans.

Calling everyone involved right wing was a conscious provocation justified by the above.

What in those links are you pointing to? As far as I can tell they don't seem terribly relevant to your point, but maybe I'm missing something

I'm France and feel it personal.

Nah, he is commanding the French/British side of the attack, therefore it's fitting.

From wikipedia...

"Piotr Cywiński, director of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Museum, estimates that of the 70,000 members of the SS involved in crimes in concentration camps, only about 1,650 to 1,700 were tried after the war."

Calling it all paltry would be an understatement.

I'm sorry, just to be clear, is this comment pro Nazi?

Yes but many many more across Europe. We always focus on Nuremberg because it's where the American focus was, but there were plenty of other trials. Some formal, some informal, some mob.

12 death sentences handed down at Nuremberg btw.

I said not to take it personal. Why did you feel to downrank my reply?

If you haven't been notified, DNC triple confirmed they’ll collaborate with Nazis.

They’ve have already hoovered me as a “Russian agent” thrice. I corrected their insult.

This message is for others as well. So don't take my “you” as personal.

Peak liberalism.