Lesser work time is a direct improvement of worker’s material conditions. So is a day during the working week that we can use for using services that could be much less available during weekends or our working days. Whether we live in socialist system or not, it’s just an improvement.

UBI is a way to sustain capitalism artificially. In socialism necessities (and eventually commodities in general)are made available without the proxy of the market for everybody.

Gatekeeping is absolutely a problem. I would go even further - even extremely flawed bourgeois media have their dialectic. As a trash anime enjoyer, I can say that development of the modern tropes is itself an opportunity for a dialectical analysis.

Isekai, harems, getting kicked out from hero’s party… – popularity of all of these tropes have reasons in material conditions of the main audience (which is Japanese youth rather than American/European youth but mostly applies to capitalist society in general too). They are nothing but fantasies addressing concrete problems of society - people’s material conditions stagnating, romantic bonds being commodified, competent workers getting laid off by companies that can’t notice their importance…

People who enjoy these tropes should be encouraged to analyze the material reasons they are so appealing for them rather than judged for liking them. And diamat is a tool we should share with people, not just in direct confrontation with capitalism. There is plenty little things that can be used as distraction by the capital but can also be used by us to help people link dots to the source of their problems.

Don’t know if it’s really unpopular but I certainly agree with that. Metaphysical and idealistic mindset being a “common sense” for people is one of decisive factors sustaining contradictions like workers defending the system actively exploiting them. Dialectic grounded in materialism is necessary for true understanding of how the material conditions shape us and how can we shape them back.

Death to America means replacing the empire with an anti-imperialist state.

We should respect Israel’s right to not exist.

“North Korea” should be replaced with the DPRK though.

A virtual resource controlled by a government that’s supposed to support exchange of goods ans makes it convenient.

I’d argue that no backing and ability to control its value is an advantage over representative currency. As long as government is working in the interest of the people of course.

We should just remember that digits with arbitrary value that nowadays don’t even have to be printed are not a material resource. Having money doesn’t secure anything, its volatile yet effective value emerges from the possibility to exchange it for material resources in given moment.

It’s all about shipping together characters in fiction, right? If that’s the case why do we need to bother with other people’s fantasies?

Is there any causal relation between e.g. shipping siblings in anime and real life incest? If not, and I don’t think there is, it’s just a distraction from real problems.

The first law of dialectic, accumulating quantitative changes leading to a qualitative change eventually.

At some point the realization gets through the inertia if you continue exposing yourself to the facts about the imperial powers acting against your interests and facts about which actions worked against them and which didn’t.

You don’t have to lose empathy to not be naive and to understand why people hurt others.

It’s always dialectical, it’s always driven by their material conditions. People raised “perfectly” might be even less likely to identify with poor people as poor people themselves are. And not seeing another human being in a person of the other class leads straight to apathy or worse.

Behind those “perfect” families of rich white people often hides a narcissistic abuse that’s inherited for generations btw. Such abuse easily makes new abusers.

Mainstream value system that promotes freedom of individual to use their influence against other people also contributes to normalize abusive behavior.

The good villains need to be dialectical. People hurting others happens due to material conditions like anything else.

Imagine people having superpowers lowering themselves to thievery instead of using it as a capital.

On the other hand, bourgeoisie member doing bourgeois things is probably the most easy template. Even in the least dialectical universe of DC Lex Luthor remains surprisingly well written compared to everything else because he is essentially just that.

In general people who benefit the unfair power structures trying to preserve them or even push their direction further to own benefit can easily be good villains.

People who try to challenge the unfair system while being monsters themselves are great material for bourgeois propaganda tools.

I prefer villains that aren’t tools of liberal propaganda.

1. Take a person that has a very right cause.
2. Make them the worst person possible in all other aspects.
3. Profit from vilifying the cause you don’t like.

Superhero movies from DC all have this trope about never killing villains and inevitably letting them murder innocent people again being supposedly a good thing. We all know who benefits from this kind of garbage filling people’s minds IRL.

One of methods of sustaining this terrible narrative is creating atrocious villains that happen to challenge our glorious heroes for this bullshit. The Reverse Flash comes in mind immediately. Batman and Superman also got called out multiple times by their villains.

Of course, when a hero breaks this rule in some alt universe, they immediately become terrible people over day in all aspects of their life, like Superman in Injustice immediately going crazy because he killed the Joker.

Bourgeoisie chases their own short term interest, there is nothing metaphysically evil about it. The consequences are dire for everyone in the long run. Including most of the bourgeoisie as the concentration of capital happens inside the owning class too. Eventually, with destruction of our environment, even for the very wealthiest.

Western bourgeoisie isn’t better or worse by itself. The environment there is different and bourgeois class has overwhelming political power. In e.g. China bourgeoisie exists but it has no power, it’s the most important difference.

The bourgeoisie and also class traitors serving them are more likely to be narcissistic. And narcissistic parents abuse their children emotionally.