Are Bosses Dictators?




This is very much worth reading (and more serious and materially grounded than the image/headline/subtitle make it sound)

BTW, I found this article by Googling the book under review because Current Affairs magazine had quoted an excerpt on twitter.  The excerpt is worth reproducing here:


Bosses can be hyperbolically described as communist, eh? In that case, sounds like they meet all the criteria needed for Hoppean ancaps to shoot them

Are Bosses Dictators?


The other part of the picture is that, once a group has “we try to hurt our enemies’ feelings” as a norm, it will attract people who want to do that, whether they share the groups’ values or not. Lots and lots of people choose political affiliations based on which ones let them behave the way they want to behave; a cost of tolerating lots of behavior from ‘your side’ is that you get a lot of people who are there for your tolerance.

Hi! I identify as bi and I’m really comfortable with that label, but recently started to worry that it’s kinda transphobic. To me, it implies that I’m not attracted to intersex or nonbinary people, which isn’t true and not something I want to be saying. However, I don’t feel comfortable identifying as pan. Are my worries valid, or am I overthinking this?





Hello! ^^
I think you might be overthinking it a tiny bit, bisexual people can (and do) find people outside of the binary attractive,  and you wouldn’t feel comfortable using the pansexual label, so I think you’re probably in the right label for you :3
With love,

Bisexual means ‘two or more’ and has meant that in this context since the early 90s. And there are bisexual nonbinary people (like me). Definitely overthinking it. ❤ 

I’ve heard “bisexual” being defined as attraction to both one’s own and other genders. That’s still two groups, hence “bi”, but also recognises the entire gender spectrum.

Yeah, except that those of us who are non-binary or agender don’t necessarily have a same gender to be attracted to, which is part of why I am so insistent on the version that has been community-standard since I came out a quarter century ago. 

“Two or more” isn’t that hard.


This is what happens when you’re so stuck on your ideology you’re incapable of nuance. Example: In Finland, infant mortality decreased after the government started providing new parents with basic necessities to care for their baby. Libertarians would say this is bad because it’s “statism”, despite the fact that it is helping people live. Same with easily accessible and inexpensive healthcare.

The fact is you can’t wait for conditions to be ideal to start helping people. If something works, it works. If you’d rather people die, then your politics are not only useless, they’re actively harmful.

This goes for leftists as well. Don’t leave people behind. If there’s a way to improve the lives of your fellow human beings, don’t reject it simply because it isn’t ‘radical’ enough. If people, especially people in countries targeted by economic imperialism, form a state to protect themselves, they aren’t automatically evil or unworthy of your support. Quit this bullshit.