rando895

And what are you going to do about it? Be upset? That sounds like a waste of your time, emotions, and intelligence.

Like I said in another response, I'm sure what happened is mostly true, but the framing is for political purposes. It's important to be critical of the purpose of an article (to inform? Or to influence?) so you can focus your energy on the politics that you have influence over.

I remember the article. And I'm not saying that didn't happen, in fact I'm sure the Russian Oligarchs are siphoning tons from the Russian people.

But the fact remains, the article you shared is American propaganda being used to drum up support for more sanctions, or war, or some other purpose, which will just result in American Oligarchs sending Americans and/or their money to places they should never be. There is truth to the article, but the framing is for political purposes.

You want to support oppressed people? Great! You want to denounce a tyrant? Great! You see folks across the Atlantic rising up in revolution against oligarchs? Also great!

But being critical of how the media is presented can go a long way towards supporting the right causes, being upset about things that are worth being upset about, and making sure you don't waste your energy pushing the agenda of some government which should be minding its own business.

And the working people always suffer, and will always suffer, as long as our representatives don't represent us.

Good point. North east US.

And you are right they didn't mention a storm, but that's not my point. The article title clearly exacerbates the problem, and points the blame in a way that suggests the Russians are either too stupid or too poor to fix the problem. Why should any of us care about such a small thing for one? And two, what is their intention? It's well known that NYtimes toes the state line when it comes to propaganda against American "enemies" .

Really the only thing useful from the article is:

"20,000 without heat in Russia due to infrastructure failure. Crews working to fix it."

But then why would anyone care about that?

You do what you want, it's your cabin

I prefer to only read the top line of a meme then post. And no that's not a Lemmy user, that's squidward

I don't think there is any data to back that up.

1st year econ says something supply demand curve something something price. But that's not true in practice

3. And you may own one cabin but it must be used by you and cannot be rented out

Violence is the only option, even if you don't like it. Ask Nelson Mandela.

Alternatively, like in Canada, have your people become the majority and give them Independence, and forget about the destruction of the natives.

Liberation will never be given to you by your oppressor.

Probably important to point this out: private property is not personal property.

E.g. An apartment building rented to tenants is the landlords private property. They have exclusive rights to the decisions, especially economic ones, regarding the building and the profits of the rent.

A car, book, house, pizza, are all your personal property so long as you don't owe a lender anything for them.

So no private property might look like:

The people who live in an apartment building own the building collectively and have the full right therein, but the individual units are each their own personal property.

The dictator of the proletariat isn't one guy. It's the group of people who work. As opposed to now where most countries are a dictatorship of the wealthy.

It literally means the workers (like you and I) dictating the rules. If you're a commie it means democratically. Who dictates the rules now? The wealthy.

Red scare propaganda is so exhausting...