On paper I don’t know what those things really mean, “reform, tolerance, open-mindedness.” They sound like good things but are contingent, open-mindedness to what, tolerance to what, reform to what? They function as euphemisms for something I’m supposed to imply on my own. I don’t really have a use for this kind of thing.

woke could be taken back by left for its original purpose

I remember before the right adopted it as well, and I don’t think it’s worth saving at this point, it’s just a euphemism anyway. I like the religious connotation of “waking up” though. It describes this phenomenon of capital appropriating and mediating our discourse and approaches to managing the problems it’s caused. It’s a great way to ensure that notions of addressing disparities don’t threaten the bottom line through redistributive approaches that were so popular in the past. Reducing this to individual action and workplace etiquette has a pacifying effect, sometimes very intentionally. The worst thing to me is the economic relation this takes place under, corporations outsource and procure DEI services through consultants funded through private equity, rather than run it through their own employees. Even if the intention is completely positive this exerts a controlling influence under the coercive context of employment where there are inherent hierarchies and power dynamics. It’s also the fact this relation will influence the content of what is procured to that which ultimately benefits capital.

Just thinking of how the Bud Light thing went, nobody talked about how the only reason the company started hiring queer people was a result of union job actions and boycotts from gay bars. The corporation engaged in marketing and appropriated the virtues those people fought for, the right freaked out over the company being “woke,” liberals and well meaning people rushed to defend the corporation and correctly insult the right for their reaction, then the company retracted in some symbolic way leaving their hands empty. Invoking the history and what it took to get these human rights and discrimination laws passed is something that threatens all the interested entities here, and when you understand that you have something real to guide you rather than being subject to the whims of corporate marketing strategies.

You conveniently cut out the next definition

Liberal (adjective): given, used, or occurring in generous amounts.

those pertaining to the liberal ideology (not the liberalism ideology)

This is confusing, you seem to be using colloquial definitions of liberal with political ones interchangeably, but in the context of the political right denouncing liberal political projects as “woke” suggests you mean political liberals in the US.

When I see liberal parties in other countries, namely Europe, they are classed as center-right. Here in Canada they’re a little more spread out but economic right for sure. For just a quick example, I support strong affirmative action, but for political liberals that has become watered down to “equality of opportunity” and disparity frameworks.

Liberal ≠ liberalism. I’ve had to explain this so many damn times in this thread it’s beginning to make me nutty.

It’s because you’re using liberal as in, “wow that was a really liberal amount of gravy,” synonymously with liberal as in, “a supporter of a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.”

That’s liberal as an adjective, not liberalism in its political definition. As a socialist I don’t have a liberal party in my country that I can support. They think capitalism will be fixed if there are no disparities in how people are distributed within it. It’s like thinking equal black and white slave owners in the Antebellum south would have fixed the economic arrangement of slavery.

I don’t think liberal approaches are just unfavorable, I see how they perpetuate the problems they’re invoked to address. We’ve seen nothing but wealth inequality rise as the latest liberal economic consensus came in to effect in the 70s. That economic stratification is what creates these problems, because you have ascriptive taxonomical hierarchies like race that develop out of economic relations like that.

What no historical materialism does to a mfer.

She released some recipe books too. All the former BA crew are still doing stuff, I think Babish and them use the same crew and editors sometimes as well, some overlap at least.

It’s funny how sometimes people try to argue or debate when I say I use Windows to run Ableton or something, like I’m trying to use Windows and making up excuses. My gaming + media creation desktop is a stripped down Windows install cause it just works for that. I also run Linux on everything else and have been a mixed environment sysadmin for like 15 years. Windows Enterprise and massgravel, drivers, Chris Titus Tech’s tool, usable Winblows install in under an hour with active time maybe 20-30 minutes.

1. George Lucas mentions Vietnam as an influence

2. Fascism is clearly represented as well

3. Star Wars is not a politically consistent universe or critique

4. It’s a typical story arc where the antagonist is an amalgamation of things that were considered bad at the time

5. It’s Star Wars so I ultimately don’t care that much

George Lucas said Vietnam inspired the writing, and communism in American pop culture was synonymous with basically every “bad” thing.

I think with Disney and a lot of companies now it’s more obvious that they are consciously trying to “look good” vs Star Trek was a lot more genuine and authentic with it’s intention to include these things, and it was challenging status quo back then whereas today it’s very mainstream (which is a good thing). This is also what I think is (sometimes intentionally) misinterpreted with the “woke” concerns from the right, cause criticizing the company for morally branding themselves can be legit, but only if the actual idea of including and respecting people isn’t lumped in with it. A legit issue with these huge companies that exploit workers is how they commodify their visibly “diverse” employees and claim the virtue for themselves rather than all the effort it took from workers to actually be treated with dignity. Amazon may very well be welcoming and inclusive but they’re gonna fight their diverse employees when they want better conditions and pay. DEI doesn’t erase the inherent conflict between employers and employees.

It does take a bit of practice let not gatekeep here /s

It’s just based on what other’s have said about the Vietnam allegory but it’s also whatever, I’m sure Lucas’ wasn’t thinking of it as a primarily political mission to produce Star Wars, since it’s very much a standard plot with your usual archetype characters and roles.

There’s a similar fan take on Lord of the Rings too which is interesting.

Very interesting! I knew the Vietnam thing but I’m not into Star Wars.

Yeah it’s not actual communism but more like a reflection of the fears of communism in pop culture from the time when it was written in the late 70s. Comment was a bit inprecise but amended.

Star Wars is literally space conservatives rebelling against the galactic communist (1970s US propagandized version of invented communism-fascist aesthetic*) empire…

Firefly is to an even greater degree, like libertarian Browncoats rebelling. I love the fan fic take that the Alliance were the “good guys.”

Thought this was gonna be a Bill Maher meme at first.

Okaaay NEW RULE

Yeah that’s exactly it, MSAA isn’t too bad but FXAA makes edges look pretty blurry. Temporal anti aliasing is also really blurry looking sometimes but gives the impression that the edges could be crisp.

Same one I ordered for my new build, 4060 ti 16gb oc. Hope it can last as long as my current build I’ve had for over a decade with minimal upgrades.