Technically it is the top-level domain name for Mali.
I’m fairly certain that the Lemmy devs chose it because of their two favorite socialists/communists: Marx and Lenin. But I can’t find a reference to that right now.
Nah, they chose it because the ccTLD along with few others had been free for a long time. I was there when lemmy was just a few months old.
Someone made up these reference about marx/lenin claim and was perfect for wankies to circle jerk and the tankies didn’t refute it or went along with it, so it stuck.
Before that the free domains were mostly used for spam/phishing (because it was free and being similar to .mil), some called it machine learning, my links, my library and so on. US military sent lots of emails to this cctld because of unchecked typo.
Except lemmy (& maybe reddit? to detract people from the fediverse), the .ml domain is not considered marxlenin anywhere else.
Marx was a socialist political philosopher, that helped define the social end goal of communism. Lenin was a militant revolutionary that thought he could ignore Marx’s slow natural social evolution to communism. And force it under authoritarian boot heel. He was aspirationally communist at best, but not communist. His ideology has failed to achieve it everywhere it was tried. Generally, creating a new class of Petit Bourgeoisie or even collapsing into open fascism.
Other than that you are correct. Lemmy.mlhexbear.ml and lemmygrad.ml all chose the Mali TLD because of the abbreviation.
Lenin was a militant revolutionary that thought he could ignore Marx’s slow natural social evolution to communism
Huh, I never thought I’d encounter an actual Menshevik on Lemmy.
Please tell me through materialist historical analysis: without a strong vanguard party pushing for rapid collectivization in 1929 in pursuit of industrialization, and the rapid industrialization (15% GDP growth per year) between 1929 and 1941, what would have happened to all peoples standing between Berlin and the Urals?
A more important question is, did you think critically about what you read. And compare it to actually historical outcomes. Not just take it as dogma. Why do you think the Soviet people ultimately rejected the party Etc. At least symbolically. Why did former vassal States often demolish former Soviet monuments. Did they not read enough Lenin. Or had they lived it.
Unlike the states built around Lenin’s ideology. I believe people should absolutely be allowed to read about opposed ideologies and even organize around them. If they reject you, generally that means you aren’t filling their needs or are being a net burden. Though I also generally reject the idea of, or need for the state entirely. Far too much concentration and corruption. Whether it’s technically left or right.
I did think critically about what I read, and it’s astounding how many predictions that they made came true. For instance the monopolisation of whole sectors of industries was a really specific prediction to make in Marx’ time when nearly every town had their own manufacturers but look at us today with the global food supply controlled by only a handful of corporations.
And the majority of its citizens did not reject the Soviet Union. It was dissolved against the will of the people. Why do you think the CPRF is the second largest political party still today? Why did other communist parties fare so well in the elections after the dissolution? Why did NATO need to systematically destroy Yugoslavia if the people largely disagreed with the system?
Also, I’m gonna be very honest with you here, your statements about Marx and Lenin when you clearly didn’t read them make you look rather silly. As an example, it is widely accepted that abandonment of vanguardism caused the collapse of the SU. So it was that in fact abandonment of Leninism caused it to the collapse. Vindicating it. If we’re talking about comparisons to historical outcomes… And his view on the “free press” still hold up today, in particular when viewed from the side opposing the gaza genocide.
Leninism is the only noncapitalist ideology actually practiced, so I wouldn’t really call it failed. China, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba and Venezuela are the most prominent examples of course.
That is such a simplification that it is probably wrong.
Marx did not really concern himself with the ultimate goal of communism. His great achievement was his analysis of capitalism. Marx did not describe a slow evolution toward communism, but rather a process in which the contradictions he identified in capitalism culminate in revolution. No evolution! The few times he commented on communism, he described its prerequisites. He writes in the Communist Manifesto “In depicting the most general phases of the development of the proletariat, we traced the more or less veiled civil war, raging within existing society, up to the point where that war breaks out into open revolution, and where the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie lays the foundation for the sway of the proletariat.”
Lenin’s approach was enormously successful in some respects. After the October Revolution, the USSR underwent unprecedented industrial development, which greatly improved the living conditions of most people. In general, the argument that “it has never worked before” is very problematic. For some strange reason, communist countries have always found themselves under massive attack from capitalist countries. For example, by Hitler’s Germany or the US. Inconceivable sums of money were invested by global capital and its states to show “that communism does not work.” If it really hadn’t worked, none of that would have been necessary. That still applies today.
Lenin was a right-wing, authoritarian communist and was rightly criticized for this by people like Rosa Luxemburg. But economically, things were improving so rapidly that capitalist states became increasingly concerned. The fear was so great that capitalists in the US even agreed to the New Deal. Something similar happened in Europe.
ML does not stand for Marx and Lenin, but for Marxism-Leninism. A propagandistic self-description of the system of the Soviet Union under Stalin. Another word for it is Stalinism.
Just like .TV domain is actually Tuvalu but Twitch and other livestreaming sites use it as abbreviation. These countries actually make a lot of money from selling top level domains like that.
Technically it is the top-level domain name for Mali.
I’m fairly certain that the Lemmy devs chose it because of their two favorite socialists/communists: Marx and Lenin. But I can’t find a reference to that right now.
Nah, they chose it because the ccTLD along with few others had been free for a long time. I was there when lemmy was just a few months old.
Someone made up these reference about marx/lenin claim and was perfect for wankies to circle jerk and the tankies didn’t refute it or went along with it, so it stuck.
Before that the free domains were mostly used for spam/phishing (because it was free and being similar to .mil), some called it machine learning, my links, my library and so on. US military sent lots of emails to this cctld because of unchecked typo.
Except lemmy (& maybe reddit? to detract people from the fediverse), the .ml domain is not considered marxlenin anywhere else.
https://dev.to/bauripalash/lets-get-your-own-free-domain-5f16
https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/15vrq8o/now_with_freenom_closed_is_there_any_other_way_to/
https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/18/us_military_mali_email_typos/
Marx was a socialist political philosopher, that helped define the social end goal of communism. Lenin was a militant revolutionary that thought he could ignore Marx’s slow natural social evolution to communism. And force it under authoritarian boot heel. He was aspirationally communist at best, but not communist. His ideology has failed to achieve it everywhere it was tried. Generally, creating a new class of Petit Bourgeoisie or even collapsing into open fascism.
Other than that you are correct. Lemmy.ml hexbear.ml and lemmygrad.ml all chose the Mali TLD because of the abbreviation.
Huh, I never thought I’d encounter an actual Menshevik on Lemmy.
Please tell me through materialist historical analysis: without a strong vanguard party pushing for rapid collectivization in 1929 in pursuit of industrialization, and the rapid industrialization (15% GDP growth per year) between 1929 and 1941, what would have happened to all peoples standing between Berlin and the Urals?
it’s hexbear.net
Have you read either Marx or Lenin?
A more important question is, did you think critically about what you read. And compare it to actually historical outcomes. Not just take it as dogma. Why do you think the Soviet people ultimately rejected the party Etc. At least symbolically. Why did former vassal States often demolish former Soviet monuments. Did they not read enough Lenin. Or had they lived it.
Unlike the states built around Lenin’s ideology. I believe people should absolutely be allowed to read about opposed ideologies and even organize around them. If they reject you, generally that means you aren’t filling their needs or are being a net burden. Though I also generally reject the idea of, or need for the state entirely. Far too much concentration and corruption. Whether it’s technically left or right.
I did think critically about what I read, and it’s astounding how many predictions that they made came true. For instance the monopolisation of whole sectors of industries was a really specific prediction to make in Marx’ time when nearly every town had their own manufacturers but look at us today with the global food supply controlled by only a handful of corporations.
And the majority of its citizens did not reject the Soviet Union. It was dissolved against the will of the people. Why do you think the CPRF is the second largest political party still today? Why did other communist parties fare so well in the elections after the dissolution? Why did NATO need to systematically destroy Yugoslavia if the people largely disagreed with the system?
Also, I’m gonna be very honest with you here, your statements about Marx and Lenin when you clearly didn’t read them make you look rather silly. As an example, it is widely accepted that abandonment of vanguardism caused the collapse of the SU. So it was that in fact abandonment of Leninism caused it to the collapse. Vindicating it. If we’re talking about comparisons to historical outcomes… And his view on the “free press” still hold up today, in particular when viewed from the side opposing the gaza genocide.
Leninism is the only noncapitalist ideology actually practiced, so I wouldn’t really call it failed. China, Korea, Vietnam, Cuba and Venezuela are the most prominent examples of course.
I can only recommend, once again, Comrade Cowbees introductory reading list. In particular Marx as viewed by Lenin himself.
That’s a lot of words to say “no.”
That is such a simplification that it is probably wrong.
Marx did not really concern himself with the ultimate goal of communism. His great achievement was his analysis of capitalism. Marx did not describe a slow evolution toward communism, but rather a process in which the contradictions he identified in capitalism culminate in revolution. No evolution! The few times he commented on communism, he described its prerequisites. He writes in the Communist Manifesto “In depicting the most general phases of the development of the proletariat, we traced the more or less veiled civil war, raging within existing society, up to the point where that war breaks out into open revolution, and where the violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie lays the foundation for the sway of the proletariat.”
Lenin’s approach was enormously successful in some respects. After the October Revolution, the USSR underwent unprecedented industrial development, which greatly improved the living conditions of most people. In general, the argument that “it has never worked before” is very problematic. For some strange reason, communist countries have always found themselves under massive attack from capitalist countries. For example, by Hitler’s Germany or the US. Inconceivable sums of money were invested by global capital and its states to show “that communism does not work.” If it really hadn’t worked, none of that would have been necessary. That still applies today. Lenin was a right-wing, authoritarian communist and was rightly criticized for this by people like Rosa Luxemburg. But economically, things were improving so rapidly that capitalist states became increasingly concerned. The fear was so great that capitalists in the US even agreed to the New Deal. Something similar happened in Europe.
ML does not stand for Marx and Lenin, but for Marxism-Leninism. A propagandistic self-description of the system of the Soviet Union under Stalin. Another word for it is Stalinism.
Stalinism is a scare-word, not an accurate description of any political ideology.
Just like .TV domain is actually Tuvalu but Twitch and other livestreaming sites use it as abbreviation. These countries actually make a lot of money from selling top level domains like that.
Yes though I thought I remembered reading something a few years ago about them reclaiming them. But hard to turn down money.