always

This is only true for limited restricted industries these days, which include telecommunications, education services, certain financial services, media and cultural industries, market surveys, and some transportation and aviation activities, but this is not true for most manufacturing, logistics and related services, R&D, and environmental stuff.

https://www.china-briefing.com/news/chinas-foreign-investment-negative-list-guide/

https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/china-allow-overseas-investors-access-more-sectors-2025-04-24/

https://www.tumblr.com/badassdemonsword/669331946168582144/this-gif-is-like-almost-biblical-as-if-hes

Watch it be Grail

☞ use full

That doesn’t mean there aren’t people who genuinely believe in it anyway. I’m not a soulist myself, but I am an anarchist and a bit of an antirealist, and that’s almost what soulism is- just those two things combined

I have a soft spot for both dragonfucker and Grail, so I’m biased. Idk about the other alts or what drama I’ve missed from them, but I haven’t seen any evidence presented for these being the same user anyway.

I’m lowkey a bit of an antirealist myself, and I have to say Grail seems extremely consistent with Their belief system. Others see bad faith baiting, but I often see two people talking past one another. Have y’all checked out Their Medium articles and soulism website? I’ve read both thoroughly, and this all tracks and has remained consistent for a long time.

Yes, I agree that They’re hardly an anarchist in the sense that most of us appreciate politically, I just don’t think that’s trolling but rather disagreeing (for the most part- obviously there’s been drama).

I support starting with relevant community bans where rules are violated, and escalating as needed. The anti-AI sentiment might be a dealbreaker, but if They care that much They should just defed on Their end

Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing!

I don’t really wanna let fascists take words away from me, and I’m definitely not gonna start identifying as a liberal. I recently learned that the US right think “leftist” is a slur for Democrats and, while I don’t want to be associated with Democrats, I’m again not gonna let them take words from me. I’m just gonna let them be wrong

If “extremely liberal” becomes synonymous with “the far left,” I guess I’ll change my mind, but currently if I tell a Democrat that I’m a liberal, they think we’re on the same team

Pretty sure liberalism is still a reformist ideology even in eastern Europe, no?

Is this honestly your first exposure to a leftist condemning liberalism?

I wore Braveheart-inspired facepaint for a football game once as a kid when I lived in Germany, except it was yellow instead of blue to match my team color.

Another player asked what/who I was supposed to look like, and I said “Braveheart”, but obviously this 11yo girl had not seen Braveheart- the only Brave Heart she knew was from the Care Bears

I got made fun of a lot that day lol

I was curious…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0d7rzRFSiPw&t=66

Sorry to butt in but I figured I should start identifying the logical fallacies I’ve been referencing.

So you agree that Democrats have not consistently gotten worse on every issue then? And therefore both evils are not getting more evil over time?

This is an invalid inference. Dems aren’t getting worse on every issue ≠ Dems aren’t getting more evil over time

You don’t get to disagree with logic. This is very basic propositional logic. I’m not trying to be pretentious- you’re just genuinely struggling with logic… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_inference

I don’t think I can make this point more clearly, but you’re arguing from a narrow consequentialist, pragmatic perspective, with the assumption that it is objectively true or the default position, but it is not.

You behave as if the broad swaths of legitimate philosophic, political, and moral critique of your perspective simply don’t exist. This leads me to believe that you haven’t come to your conclusions through any actual reasoning, despite your attitude about it.

If you value harming less people, how is the “right” choice not the one that harms less people?.. Long term consequences such as what a worse administration could do for 4 years?.. There is a long term impact to letting the greater evil win. How are Republicans better in the long term?.. I think if your “principles” include less bad things happening, they wouldn’t prevent you from choosing the less bad outcome.

Others have explained this part to you and I think it would be a waste of everyone’s time for me to bother restating the same answers in my own words

Personally, I don’t think choosing the lesser evil is “supporting fascism,” because it directly serves to keep the more fascist party out of office.

“supporting the less fascist option” = “supporting fascism”. You’re playing semantic games to avoid believing/saying that you’re supporting fascism. There is no “voting against” only “voting for” (in this context, obviously- for the presidential race)

Is less suffering, even in the short term, not worth choosing the fascist that hurts less people?

I personally don’t think so. It’s a valid argument, but I don’t believe there is a “right” or “wrong” with this. I enjoy these kinds of discussions as thought experiments, but there’s a time & place for it (and this thread isn’t it, imo)

if both options are fascist, then your only options in the system are “supporting fascists.”

in the capacity of an election choosing the lesser evil is the pragmatic choice… I’d love to have better people to vote for, but right now it’s D and R.

D & R aren’t the only options though. Yes, they’re (probably) the only outcomes regardless of choice, but abstaining and voting third party are both valid options. I understand you disagree- from what I understand, your primary(/only?) concern is the direct/immediate outcome- but, like I said before, this part is a matter of perspective. Other people, like myself, prioritize long-term consequences, principles, etc. over immediate consequences.

please share your long term harm reduction plans

I’ve already seen others explain this to you, so I don’t think it will do any good for me to repeat it in my own words.

Paying taxes to a fascist administration is supporting fascism. I don’t blame people for paying taxes because they feel it’s their “only option”, but it’s dishonest to try to absolve yourself of culpability with semantics.

Similarly:

1. A Democratic administration would have resulted in much less suffering

2. Voting for Democrats supports fascism

It’s important to note, however, that a more accurate statement for #1 is “A Democratic administration would have resulted in much less suffering [in the short term]”

I didn’t say it did ☺ two things can be true

How many marginalized lives have you made worse today?

The irony here is incredible lmao