If someone claims something happened on the fediverse without providing a link, they're lying.
Evidence or GTFO.
How about China is, in fact, a dictatorship for starters
That could be true. But I wonder, in general, what is the process for determining whether a country is a dictatorship or not, from the outside? China claims to be a democracy and holds elections, like just about every other country under the sun. Of course, not every country with elections is actually a democracy, but if we're talking "hard facts" I think we need to be able to point to specific, objective things.
The Communist in “Chinese Communist Party” is just there for show.
Isn't the Chinese Communist Party the single largest self-identifying communist party in the world? Shouldn't that factor in, like, at least a little bit into our standards for what defines a communist party? Regardless, this is kind of just your subjective opinion, isn't it? Again, what specific, objective standards are you looking at to distinguish between "real" communism and "fake" communism?
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
There's sweetened and unsweetened ones so that might be it but who knows.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
You should give oat milk a try (or soy/almond, but oat tastes the best imo)
There's no confusion, I addressed that. The Greens and Libertarians both represent broader, legitimate ideological currents, held by people who mostly either fall in line behind the lesser evil or don't vote because they see it as futile. Tulsi's just a grifter.
Partially true. I didn't vote for Stein (I voted PSL), but the Green party is ideologically closer to leftists than the major parties. It's kind of the same on the other side for the Libertarian party, there are more Republicans and non-voters with Libertarian beliefs than there are people who vote Libertarian. Stein herself does seem like something of an opportunist, but she doesn't rely on the same kind of niche cult of personality that Tulsi has built for herself. Most people just know of Stein through the Green party, which does represent various legitimate beliefs.
The policies that we on the left advocate for have the potential to reach a wider audience than just people who are already ideologically committed. By running on a platform that would materially benefit people, it's easier to make the case that people should support the left, regardless of who they are or how they view themselves politically. You're free to write off people like me, but it's not as if we're the only ones who like having healthcare, for instance.
Tulsi is one of countless odious personalities that carve out one specific sliver of the population and speak to them exclusively, and fixate on tiny bits of information that support a narrative that's completely out of line with the broader truth. "If you're anti-war, you should vote Republican. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, calling for ever more exorbitant military spending, saber-rattling with everyone, conducting assassinations and bombing campaigns. And pay no attention to the fact that I myself was on Fox News attacking Obama from the right for not being aggressive enough in the War on Terror, and literally described myself as a hawk regarding it."
She is part of a pipeline that takes people with valid, left-leaning criticisms of the Democratic party and convinces them to accept the Republicans as an alternative, despite them being worse in every respect. She's absolute scum, and she discredits people like me, who actually are anti-war, not just when it means criticizing the Democrats. I will always call out her and her ridiculous little fanclub, who have clearly never read an actual goddamn book in their lives. And the same goes for people like Jimmy Dore and Jackson Hinkle too.
I don't know which of those two statements is more ridiculous. Liberals can absolutely not be trusted with stuff like protecting your grandma's medication. For example, look at what Starmer did as soon as Labour got in power for the first time in ages, he ended winter home fuel subsidies and Labour's popularity has plummeted.
In general, liberals are privileged elites who believe in the system because it works for them. If you ever find that the system has failed you, if you ever find yourself in need of a couch to sleep on, you'll find out exactly how "reliable" people like that really are. Liberal politicians are even worse, being completely bought out by corporate interests, while liberal voters merely fail to hold them accountable.
Communists, meanwhile, are responsible for the vast majority of global poverty alleviation in the world - 700 million lifted out of poverty in China, according to the World Bank. Cuba has the highest number of doctors per capita in the world, and regularly sends them abroad for humanitarian aid. At one point, early in Covid, Vietnam offered to provide masks and supplies to the United States. Before, each of these countries had incredibly backwards, reactionary regimes with incredibly low standards of living, but once the communists took over, rather than "burning everything down," they built schools and hospitals and infrastructure, and improved the quality of life for the vast majority.
In the US, the Black Panthers, who were constantly demonized as being these evil radicals who just wanted to burn everything down, are the reason why kids have food to eat at schools. Because they identified a need in their community, they recognized that kids were going hungry and were unable to learn and wound up stuck in a cycle of poverty, so they started a free breakfast program. The cops broke in and literally pissed on their food, they went door to door claiming it was poisoned, that they were just trying to teach kids to hate white people, and so on. When that didn't work, finally the liberals caught wind of it and figured if the government provided those meals, it would stop the Panthers from using it to promote themselves, and that's how it became a national program. They never would've done it without a bunch of scary black Marxists with guns doing it first, and using the opportunity to promote their ideas.
Lmao "running him over?" The video shows him walking away completely unscathed, after they let him into the tank to talk. The tanks were also leaving the square, not entering it. That's also not where the term comes from.
Famously loyal and trustworthy liberals will never deliberately betray you lmao. Just hope they never find out if you have to break a law the fascists draw up to protect yourself or others 🚔🚔🚔
And hope that you're not part of whichever group they're throwing under the bus to appease the fascists either.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Not sure if you're being sarcastic but if not, then I'm about to blow your fucking mind
STOP EATING RICE!
NAME YOUR DAUGHTER SARAH, IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE THE AMAZON! AND WHATEVER YOU DO...
...DO NOT NAME THEM TRISTEN
If we shut down flights to Antarctica, inflation would've been solved yesterday.
Your fanclub doesn't represent a significant demographic, nobody cares what Tulcels think. Plus, it's not like the democrats can control her, she's an opprotunist who flips whenever she feels like and stands for nothing.
Tammy Baldwin, Jacky Rosen, and Elissa Slotkin are all women who won senate races in states Kamala lost. It's difficult to imagine a scenario involving Kamala losing in which we have more compelling evidence than that that it wasn't because of sexism.
She lost because she was a bad candidate running a bad campaign. The fact that she got to skip the primary, after bombing out of the one in 2020, meant that she was completely unproven and there was no reason to think she had even halfway decent political instincts, and her campaign very clearly demonstrated that she didn't.
Because both of the major parties benefit from excluding the competition.
It's kind of like, if your car won't start, you need to take it to a mechanic, but because it won't start, you can't drive it to the mechanic. We need to change how our elections work because FPTP prevents us from implementing the policies we want, but it's precisely because it prevents us from implementing the policies we want that we're unable to change it. It's a catch-22.
What "racist dogwhistles" did I use, exactly?
I’m also a realist, and know that biden bragging about hindering bibi wouldn’t have helped anything.
Yeah? How about not unconditionally sending Bibi a bunch of weapons and money that he used to commit genocide, you think that might have helped anything?
both sides want to fight for their invisible friends more
Ah, of course, the height of liberal analysis of the situation. I'm sure Israel being a settler-colonizer apartheid ethnostate making shit tons of money through exploitation and keeping the Palestinians in a permanent state of helplessness, poverty, and oppression has nothing whatsoever with why the Palestinians are fighting them, no, it's all because those backwards savages aren't as smart and rational as you are.
This is what happens when you perform absolutely zero material analysis of anything. You're completely oblivious and ignorant of both what's happening and why.
The comments I mentioned were long before Huntington affected him in his later years. Like, I'm talking about his comments on events as they were happening, when he was fully cognizant, and singing and writing smack dab in the middle of his career. You can't just put your own positions into his mouth and write off everything he ever said to the contrary to Huntington's. It's both demonstrably false and also not really cool for you to do, like, he's entitled to having his own views regardless of losing his mind to illness later on.
Woody Guthrie was ditched by his deadbeat, KKK member dad at 14, and grew up into the Great Depression. Those circumstances don't tend to produce moderate politics. Everything I've seen about him suggests he saw things in very black and white terms, with the communists (including the USSR and Stalin) being the only real alternative to the racism and poverty he saw under capitalism and fascism. You can say that wasn't the right perspective but that was his perspective.
You are, of course, right about Korea, but I brought it up because at the time it was a pretty controversial and fringe view, that he was willing to standby even under threat of persecution.