yA3xAKQMbq

hAvE yOu TrIeD bReAkInG iT dOwN iNtO mAnAgEaBlE pIeCeS aNd SoMe DiScIpLiNe

Yes. Yes I did. I took both pills, ground them up to very manageable pieces, took a straw and just very disciplined snorted everything up.

And then I asked for more pills.

Interesting piece of hyperlocal history, very nice.

What I don't understand though is why they never moved from the U-shape to... I don't know the English term, in Germany the most widely used ones are called "Leipziger" or "Kreuzberger" rack.

They are the most ubiquitous rack by far here.
I like them since they stop bikes from falling over and allow for a variety of locking options. For example I usually just lock my bike on the top bar when I just want to drop into the supermarket or something.

The issue with them is only that bike thieves found out that it's far easier to cut through the rack instead of the locks, so they started doing this... 😅

It’s the same in German. The issue is that people learning the language try to make sense of it. It doesn’t feel arbitrary, it is completely arbitrary. As a native you don’t think about that at all, because they’re like one word to you.

When you learn a language like German as a native, you don’t have rules or think about what is gendered how and why.

It’s not that you learn „Sonne“ (sun) and „Mond“ (moon) first and then learn the appropriate gender for each.

You learn „die Sonne“ and „der Mond“ from the start. It’s just one word with a blank in the middle to us.

Lol. Spoken and written French are so different they’re basically two different languages…

Well I guess „the windmill incident“ isn’t really a spoiler anymore, but that one was fun as well.

„Oh. There is… another switch. And it says… ah, yeah I guess that makes sense. Mh. Well that’s unfortunate now, isn’t it… … SORRY!“

Miau! Mio! Miau! Mio!

No, I have a very easy explanation what communism is, it’s just that nobody else agrees is the issue.

different approaches carry a different name

Yeah, well... So let’s see, we have: Marxism, Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism, Titoism, Gulyáskommunizmus (both, as mentioned before, considered „nationalist communism“ by other communists), Rätekommunismus, Realsozialismus, Maoism …

So, which one of those is the true communism?

Joking aside, most of the 20th century was spent with people killing other people because they had slightly different opinions on what true communism means, so it’s really not me who made things complicated.

Unless you’re an ultra-orthodox marxist, there is no such thing as trüe communism™.

There always have been many different ideas what „communism“ is, e.g. there have been various „nationalist communist“ ideologies (complicated by the fact that the Russian SFSR called everything „nationalist“ that wasn’t 100% aligned with its ideas of the Soviet Union, e.g. Hungary).

There are also no clear boundaries between communism, socialism, and anarchism, e.g. Kropotkin with his theories of anarchist communism.

That being said, I don’t think communism is a system (either social or economic), it’s strictly an idealogy, meaning it’s a way to achieve something, i.e. the classless and stateless society. If you follow that thought to its logical end, you cannot even „achieve“ communism at all, since at this point e.g. the proletariat ceases to exist, and as a result you cannot have a „dictatorship of the proletariat“.

It’s… complicated.