Nezgul

Your definition of socialism is more akin to a definition of social democracy, which is... maybe a form of socialism, depending on who you ask -- it is historically contentious and generally accepted that social democrats aren't socialists.

Socialism can have all of the things that you described, but it is decidedly anti-capitalist. It reorients how workers relate to the means of production. Under capitalism, the means of production are owned by the bourgeois class, while under socialism, they are collectively owned by the workers.

I am fully convinced that won't materialize until a major Western city or province/state/territory/[insert administrative unit here] gets catastrophically and irreparably fucked up.

Yeah! Kinda like how those liberals try to cancel people for wearing make-up and putting on a wig! Or for kneeling! Or for playing Dungeons and Dragons! Or reading Harry Potter! Or going to the bathroom! Or eating mustard! Or wearing beige suits!

These damn liberals!!!

Conservatives: "We don't believe that you should have full control over your body and will happily pass laws to prevent you from exercising that control, including laws that will send you to prison for a life-saving medical procedure."

Women: "oh fuck. Wow. Uh. Okay, I will not be associating with you."

You: "WOAHHHHH WOAHHHHHHHH WOW CALM DOWN THERE LITTLE MISS BIGOT HOW ABOUT SOME RESPECT FOR PEOPLE HUH?"

Yeah. If you scratch too much or too hard, you can tear the skin, so now you have additional itchiness from your body having to heal the tear.

The manager's lack of self awareness in this story is incredible.

"We have a blame culture here and it's causing problems."

"How DARE you! This is all your fault!"

Oh, here's another fun fact for you: an ambulance ride can be so prohibitively expensive that many people actively avoid calling 911 for fear of having to pay the ambulance bill. This results in people experiencing medical emergencies either: (a) driving themselves to the hospital while having their emergency, which is incredibly dangerous; (b) opting to call a ride share like Uber or Lyft instead; or (c) not doing anything at all and hoping the emergency resolves itself.

I'd add that, more than anything else, leftist fixation on older theory is more than just idolizing people who are not very "saintly."

I think, at its core, older leftist theory is still very geared toward an industrial society. It found purchase primarily among trade unions representing industrial workers, and in some ways, I don't think we have adequately "adapted" to a post-industrial world.

Don't get me wrong, the core tenets of labor participation, labor mobilization, and mass action will probably be relevant tools up and until mass automation occurs across the board. But we don't have the same working class base we did a century ago. I'd be interested in seeing a greater emphasis on incorporating, in addition to traditionally working class people in trades and "unskilled services," white collar workers that are nominally distinct from the former groups but are still nevertheless abused and exploited like everyone else.

Obviously, someone who makes $50k/year doing back breaking labor is objectively worse off and more exploited than someone making $100k/year in a computer science or similar field, but the computer science person is probably getting shit on too.

Oh for sure, but it does make me wonder how accurate the sign up reports are.

Does Threads report people who actually sign up and "claim" their "shadow accounts," or does it count actual accounts and "shadow accounts?" The former is definitely a more accurate count, while the latter is basically numbers padding.

Yeah all of this free market media we're enjoying is the real height of journalistic integrity and quality

It's always #3 when it comes down to it. Their ideology only makes sense in a bubble divorced from reality. Poke the bubble, reality starts seeping in, and the ensuing cognitive dissonance causes such a brain cramp that it's easier for them to ignore reality than accept it and adjust accordingly.

I mean, if we extend this logic though, stealing a license is still harmful to the person who possesses the copyright. Breaking into a hotel room deprives the current possessor the exclusive right to possess the room; stealing a piece of software deprives the copyright holder the exclusive right to control their copyrighted work.

Like, I'm not even anti-piracy for the most part. I just think the comparison in the OP is bad and doesn't make a lot of sense.

Someone else in this thread said it best -- "just enjoy ya loot."