woodenghost

Falseknees webcomic

Both have multiple schools, so that is a very broad question. I think the most interesting direction to take it is to look at philosophical differences. But even that is much too broad to answer. Also these philosophies are seldom if ever representative of theological orthodoxy.

Historically and very broadly speaking, Sunni philosophy could be said to be more Aristotelian or peripatetic (Ibn Sina, Falsafa) and Shia philosophy more platonist or neoplatonist (Ismaili Shia). But that's a huge oversimplification, since there is a huge overlap, especially with Aristotle, since Ibn Sina is sometimes claimed by both. Both are connected to different mystical Sufi traditions. Shia has Illuminationism and transcendent theosophy (existence over essence, Twelver Shia, Mulla Sadra). Sunni also had Averroism (Ibn Rushd). Ibn Rushd and Ibn Sina (Avicenna) together strongly influenced almost all medieval European Christian thought and scholasticism.

If you want a good overview, you can listen to the 75 episodes of Peter Adamsons podcast "History of philosophy without any gaps" on philosophy in the Islamic world.

Honest question is there any evidence of any contemporary real life (not talking about online forums) political parties, that self-describes their political orientation with the primary identity label "stalinism"? Or is it just a pejorative used by trotzkyists? Like a fictional straw man baddie they can rally against and feel morally superior. Again not talking about people defending historical Stalinist politics. I'm asking if the label is always and solely used from the outside.

Stalin definitely did not call himself "Stalinist", but Marxist Leninist. Hoxhaists come close, but they would probably identify as "anti-revisionist Marxist Leninist" (or just "Hoxhaist").

Basically, I'm asking if someone can link to the website of a real party with members that has as the first sentence in the "about us" section the line:"We are a Stalinist party, that aims to..."

If not, we should stop using the word as if it was equivalent to all the others in the meme.

There was a book club on menby about The Will to Change half a year ago. Maybe you'll find the discussions interesting. I loved the book as a primer for self reflection.

a communist party actively opposing their government would risk destabilising it and then playing themselves directly into the hands of the imperialist states

Remember that the capitalist economic policies of those liberal governments inherently and inevitably lead to contradictions, instability and crisis. You can be 100% sure, that they'll become unstable without communists doing anything. Especially considering outside pressure, sanctions, wars etc. If there can be any hope of long term stability, they must be opposed by national communists.

Also these states, like any capitalist state, are nothing but an instrument of class warfare against the working class. The very moment those capitalists decide they stands to gain more from selling out their nations by becoming comprador capitalists who represent outside imperialists interests, they'll just do it. In fact, they already tried it multiple times in all of those nations. Putin tried it. You can have critical support and temporary alliances for national liberation, but ultimately, liberalism is not at odds with outside imperialism. They can find arrangements, they are compatible, they have common class interests and they will have to be fought and defeated to defeat imperialism.

While the role of communists in the imperial core is to fight their own imperialist, they should also trust, that comrades in other countries know what's best and which time and strategy is the correct one to act against their bourgeois. And they should be supported uncritically and above their liberal capitalists states, when they ask for it. International solidarity is amongst workers not with capitalist states.

Some section of the domestic bourgeois in colonized countries always has the option to betray their nation by becoming comprador capitalist that represent outside imperialists interests. The working class doesn't have that option, so there is still a fundamental class divide. But the capitalist class is also devided in that case and there might be temporary alliances with the capitalists who aren't compradors to fight for national liberation as a prerequisite for revolution.

Revolutionary defeatism could still be the right strategy for communists in the imperial core though, right? For countries outside the imperial core it's often still national liberation and the fight against compradors that's a prerequisite for communist revolution.

"It was legal at the time. We were just following orders. If we hadn't done it, others would have. You can't judge the past by todays standards." I can already hear the excuses they'll make. It'll all depend on the balance of power, not on cheap talk.

There is a myth, that the originally violet carrots are now orange, because the Dutch made them this way to honor the founder of their monarchy William of Orange. The truth is probably more complicated, though orange carrots did spread and become popular from this place and at that time.

Medieval life hack for self sufficiency: all you need is a simple robe, a vegetable garden, a modest lifestyle, discipline and community, a constant stream of large sums of money for taking in third born sons of aristocrats, high taxes paid to you, being a landlord over large areas of fertil land and of course literally owning the poor peasants who live there and do backbreaking labor for you. Actually, scratch the modest lifestyle.

btw do we know yet, why is all yellow? Just training bias from human made art (seen this claim) or actually reinforcing itself by more and more ai art in the training data? Probably the second one, right? But is there proof?

Yes and because C3 is a golden ball, you should confidently switch to the second door. Because now it's just the Monty Hall problem with balls instead of goats. When the madman chose a door to opened, he deliberately chose a bad (mixed) door, otherwise he would have given away the correct location. The fact, that he opened the third instead of the second gives you new information, that you can take advantage of by switching, increasing your chances. Had the ball been silver, it might have been revealed to come from a bad door.

Edit: damn I just realized he picked the ball from the first door, not the second. Okay in that case we might actually have to calculate probabilities, but I'm too lazy for that.