|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Canada11412 Posts
On February 07 2026 01:08 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2026 00:52 LightSpectra wrote:To celebrate Rosa Parks Day, Donald Trump posted a video of the Obamas as apes. Presumably he is hoping that his base will remember that they voted for him because they wanted a race war and thus forget about being a child molester. Waiting for our maga friends to warp reality, logic and the universe itself to explain how trump and his movement are not racist. I trust them to find new depth of intellectual dishonesty. Well the first defence run out by the administration was
“This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King. Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public,” Leavitt said. So the administration knew the content of the video during the first defence... and considering the Obama monkey is literally at the beginning that is presumably what they are defending. (Unless I found the wrong one.) That real America doesn't care about this fake outrage.
When that didn't take, the second line of defence was that Trump isn't actually posting late at night and that it was a staffer that I guess had carte blanche and no oversight. So maybe lol, obviously CEO Trump doesn't have time for petty matters like late night rants on social media. You are a fool if you ever thought The Boss had anything to do with this? (Party of personal responsibility.)
Or, I voted for policy, not personality? (It was bad, but doesn't shift my vote.)
Or, from where I found the repost of the video to see if there was any plausible deniability if Obama was at the end of the video:
The left is having a meltdown over this video because Trump posted it!
They didn’t have a problem with it when @xerias_x posted it last year! 🤣
edit correction. It seems like I found the original AI video that was used in Trump's video that was raging about supposed electoral fraud. But the administration's defence still acknowledges that AI video as the source, which means they know content of the video. And that video (not the one Trump posted) has Obama right at the beginning, so still no squirming out of it, based on their first defence.
|
On February 07 2026 03:26 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2026 02:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 02:13 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 02:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:45 LightSpectra wrote:On February 07 2026 01:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:21 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 01:08 Biff The Understudy wrote:On February 07 2026 00:52 LightSpectra wrote:To celebrate Rosa Parks Day, Donald Trump posted a video of the Obamas as apes. Presumably he is hoping that his base will remember that they voted for him because they wanted a race war and thus forget about being a child molester. Waiting for our maga friends to warp reality, logic and the universe itself to explain how trump and his movement are not racist. I trust them to find new depth of intellectual dishonesty. They are committed at this point. They can't go back, or they'd have to realize just how idiotic they were all this time, and how much of the stuff they supported goes against their core values. Which hurts a lot. So they just don't do it and dig deeper instead. That is the nice thing about building a cult of idiocy. There is no way out that isn't so painful that most people won't take it. + Show Spoiler +I also gotta say that i am kind of impressed by Trump. Whenever you think he couldn't be more disgusting and vile, he always finds a way. This isn't unique to Trump supporters. Everyone here knows Democrats aren't going to save them, yet, they see no way out that isn't so painful they can't take it. Even when that means materially supporting genocide. So they don't, and they just dig in deeper instead. 10/10 for the most predictable thing you could have ever written. Atomic clocks envy your consistency. I suppose the fact that it is true isn't what bothers you, but that anyone has the audacity to point this stuff out is troublesome? On February 07 2026 01:53 Biff The Understudy wrote:On February 07 2026 01:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:21 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 01:08 Biff The Understudy wrote:On February 07 2026 00:52 LightSpectra wrote:To celebrate Rosa Parks Day, Donald Trump posted a video of the Obamas as apes. Presumably he is hoping that his base will remember that they voted for him because they wanted a race war and thus forget about being a child molester. Waiting for our maga friends to warp reality, logic and the universe itself to explain how trump and his movement are not racist. I trust them to find new depth of intellectual dishonesty. They are committed at this point. They can't go back, or they'd have to realize just how idiotic they were all this time, and how much of the stuff they supported goes against their core values. Which hurts a lot. So they just don't do it and dig deeper instead. That is the nice thing about building a cult of idiocy. There is no way out that isn't so painful that most people won't take it. + Show Spoiler +I also gotta say that i am kind of impressed by Trump. Whenever you think he couldn't be more disgusting and vile, he always finds a way. This isn't unique to Trump supporters. Everyone here knows Democrats aren't going to save them, yet, they see no way out that isn't so painful they can't take it. Even when that means materially supporting genocide. So they don't, and they just dig in deeper instead. Mate. Do you ever fucking change track? You sound like a bot. It’s insane. I have been here for 15 years and for 15 years you have repeated the one thing thousands of times. You don’t have ANY other idea? Just think and say something new. You’ll see it’s refreshing. The primary thing I posted since the election has been to try to get all the people that insist on electoralism to discuss how it is going to work. Instead, they've insisted that escaping the country is the only sensible route and steadfastly refused to have any serious discussion about what our attempt at stopping fascism should actually look like. No one really objects (Credit to ZerO for saying something) to dozens of pages of shitposts and the constant pointing out of Republican hypocrisy or idiocy. Other than to point out the Sartre quote, before immediately jumping back into what they themselves identify as a fascist trap. What exactly in your mind is the thing I've "repeated thousands of times" for 15 years. Basically no matter what anyone posts, your response to it is always "democrats bad". No matter what is being talked about, you predictably pivot to "democrats bad" within the first two sentences of your post. I am not going to go through your last posts because i am too lazy to do that, but i would be surprised if there were more than 20% in there that didn't follow this pattern to the letter. ~20% is probably better than plenty of posters as far as posts that aren't just saying some variation of "Republicans bad" or "GH pointing out uncomfortable facts makes me upset" While I'd dispute your analysis/description, it's not like I don't have reasons for my posting. On January 30 2026 04:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 30 2026 01:26 Jankisa wrote:On January 30 2026 00:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 29 2026 19:19 Simberto wrote:On January 29 2026 18:27 Gorsameth wrote:On January 29 2026 17:56 Simberto wrote:On January 29 2026 14:11 Manit0u wrote:On January 29 2026 12:24 Billyboy wrote: Does anyone remember way long ago when Republicans said state rights were really important and were super mad when ever the Feds tried to force states into things. And it wasn't the things, they often said they didn't agree with those or they were unimportant, it was state rights. Well well well well, how the turntables have turned. Like it was already mentioned numerous times, Republicans have absolutely no moral backbone whatsoever. They will say whatever suits their agenda in the current moment and their followers will switch their worldview on a dime if necessary. Trump and his admin have been flip-flopping between contradictory statements for a year now and whatever they say the narrative shifts to support them. This reminds me of those flashy things from Men in Black that make people forget what happened. It seems that every time Republicans flip to a stance contradictory to their previous one it's like their entire voter base immediately forgets everything that was said previously and smoothly transitions into the new reality. The whole process is scarily 1984. The alternative interpretation is that they never really believe anything they say. There are no ideas beyond "winning" in there. No concepts, no beliefs, no deeper stances on anything. And by "they" i don't mean the politicians, i mean the whole US conservative movement. That is not an alternative interpretation, it is objective reality. Maybe once there was an underlying belief, but that hasn't been the case for as long as I can remember. + Show Spoiler +I meant it as an alternative to the "they constantly swap what they believe around" 1984 interpretation of their behaviour. One of those two must be true, and both are not good.
One means they are 1984 levels of brainwashed, the other that they are completely intellectually dishonest.
I also tend to believe it is the latter, especially after more than a decade of contact with our forum conservatives in this thread. It might also be a combination of the two, where some people really always believe the truth of the day, while others just lie all day long. What doesn't exist is an explanation where US conservatives have any leg to stand on. What this also means is that the Democrats and their supporters are the right-wing/conservative edge of sanity, with members like Fetterman clearly going over the edge. I have a feeling that one day, GH is going to be somewhere at a protest and an ICE agent might literally put his boot on his face an GH will be yelling at him to explain that the reason why Trump and Miller empowered people like him to abuse him is actually the democrats not stopping them when they could. Jesus man, you have a worse case of Democrat derangement syndrome then any republican I've seen, and that includes the regulars here who start every long winded post explaining how fascists were in the right for killing people resisting them because those people were manipulated by democrats... No one here needs to be/can be convinced that Republicans are fascists and obviously opposed to their goals. Despite that, it is predominantly what you all post about when you're not bickering with people you all have known for years are just trolling you to waste your time and laugh. So much so, even Zero was asking for better from yall and was promptly (and sadly imo) ignored. Contrary to that, people are still struggling with recognizing/understanding how/why Democrats are purportedly for the same things they ostensibly are, but are actually an oppositional force to what posters here would say are their desired policies. Rather than navigating and illuminating that reality, everyone focuses on how much they don't like that I point it out and they dislike/belittle me as a person for it. It's honestly a pretty lucid picture of what the actual struggle in the US is (and has been for decades, if not it's whole existence) really about. US Bipartisan Core Identity* (arguably applies here as well): There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect It's right there in the founding documents and has been in practice ever since. Trump/Fascism and Democrats being the far-right conservative edge of sanity is a symptom/consequence, not a root cause of this. EDIT: I also have to mention it's pretty funny that when I used to constantly shit on Republicans people here told me that wasn't productive and to stop. Now that it is basically all they do here, they are mad that it isn't all I post too. I wonder how do 21 % of Black men who voted for Trump feel when they see the video he posted? I guess the safest bet is that they don't because they are in such a bubble that the bad shit never reaches them, but man, those guys and Latinos who voted for him and are having their cousins who show up to every meeting and do everything right roughed up, put in camps and deported must really feel weird at the moment. + Show Spoiler +Weird that oBlade now suddenly cares about 2nd amendment, I guess it's been enough time since those guys murdered a guy for legally owning a gun for him to be back on the 2nd amendment train. Also, interesting that his incel brain is not able to hold 2 things in it at the same time, such as intentional murder being on the level of 3rd world countries being caused by stupid policies while overall crime going down because that's a trend in worldwide. It's also weird that GH, despite obviously not being stupid can't understand the futility of his approach to arguing. Basically he's completely unable to internalize this: Fuck us for wanting to talk about the escalating cruelty and stupidity putting the whole world at risk, we should all talk about how shitty Chuck motherfuckign Schumer is, everything else is less evilism. Black people that support Republicans are basically saying "If you can't beat em, join em". Someone like Herman Cain knew what they signed up for, and died for it.
They know about the racism. It's just a lot easier in many respects to find economic success (in a society that seemingly prizes that success above all else) as a Black person by cosigning/rationalizing/ignoring the racist/deplorable things your white club + Show Spoiler +On July 19 2019 08:15 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 06:54 maybenexttime wrote:On July 18 2019 06:43 KwarK wrote:I think you’re not distinguishing between white as a skin colour and white as an exclusionary social group that exerts power within a multicultural society. Let’s call them white skin and white club. White skin has been around forever but white dudes hanging out with white dudes didn’t need to make a big deal about it because what’d be the point. White club is a new thing because you can’t have an exclusionary club without first finding some non whites to not let join.
The membership criteria of white club aren’t just white skin and have changed over time. It used to be white male Anglo Saxon Protestant club, for example. What GH is saying is that white club is a construct, an expression of exclusivity by the dominant group in society to justify abhorrent treatment of people not in the club. Obviously white skin is biological, but white club isn’t.
And in case anyone didn’t know, the first rule of white club is YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT WHITE CLUB. Sorry for bringing up a post from several pages back, but I found this post interesting and I don't think it garnered wider attention. Could you elaborate on that? To what extent do those two groups overlap? What fraction of the white skin population is part of the white club and conspires to undermine the non-white people? Roughly half of the white population votes for Democrats, so they're actively working against the white club, I'd presume. Are Asians part of the white club? If not, why are they one of the targets of affirmative action? I get the impression that there is little overlap between the white skin and white club groups. And yet the affirmative action discrimination seems to be based on one's affiliation to the former, not the latter. To me this seems awfully similar to 20th-century antisemitism, which used the privileged position of a subset of Jews to justify discrimination of Jews in general. These days all people of Northern European ancestry are in white club, but it wasn't always that way. If we take it back to the start of the US the founders were a bunch of incel neckbeards who all got in a room and said "anyone who doesn't look like us, doesn't think like us, or is poorer than us isn't in the club". No women, no blacks, no Catholics, no poors. It's not a conspiracy as you're suggesting with the insiders conspiring to undermine the others, just the monopolizing of power. You didn't employ people outside the club in skilled trades because you already knew a guy in the club who could do it and everyone knows that everyone outside of the club sucks, etc. If you're in the club and mediocre then you can train as a physician, if you're outside of the club but amazing then you can't because everyone knows girls can't be doctors and the gatekeepers are all in the club. The business owners are in the club borrowing money from the bankers who are in the club and trading with the shipping magnates who are in the club. That's why groups which today would be considered privileged (rich white women for example) were treated so poorly for so long (not allowed to vote etc.), they may have been white but they weren't in the club, it was pretty exclusive back then. The club monopolizes power because the club monopolizes power. Take the disenfranchisement laws I keep referencing. The chief of police and the election registrar are both in the club and as long as they're both in the club they're able to restrict the people appointing them to club members in a perfect loop. Unfortunately it's quite difficult to completely monopolize wealth, especially when the excluded communities form their own little Ireland or whatever in Boston. If the club collectively says "no Irish", as they did, and the Irish all say "screw you guys" and make their own little place then eventually you run the risk of rich Irishmen which makes the club look bad because you can't have a club that's built on the idea that all the wealth and power is held by club members when there are outsiders with wealth and power. And so the club slowly expands, by the early 1900s rich Catholics are allowed in, as long as they're male and white. Later women are allowed in, as long as they're rich and white. The 30s roll around and suddenly it's a difficult time to have all the rich white people dicking over everyone else all the time and there's a lot of people saying a lot of scary words like "revolution". The club can't throw open its doors entirely but what they can do is ease up on the rich requirement, while still enforcing the race requirement. By doing so they get a significant number of working class voters to effectively buy in to the system. As long as they believe that they're receiving a marginal benefit from the continuation of the status quo they'll prop it up, and it's becoming hard to prop it up without them. By this point white club is a pretty good name for it. Women and workers are allowed in. Hell, if you're rich enough you could probably even get away with being gay or Jewish, as long as you do it discreetly. It's less exclusive than it used to be but it's still a pretty great club to be in. If you go into a bank to borrow money for a mortgage then you and the bank manager have an unofficial understanding that you're both in the club. He knows he'll have no trouble explaining why he extended a line of credit to John Smith to his underwriters because John Smith is a good club name. If you go to buy a house in a neighbourhood of club members you can rely upon being welcomed. The club is ingrained in the understanding of the world at this point, if a club member applies to be a manager alongside a non club member then it just makes sense to hire the club member, both because of your own bias and the bias of all your customers. Even if you're super progressive for the 1950s and know the club is a sham, you don't want your customers leaving. If you're in the club you have access to education, jobs, credit, investments, and resources that non members just don't have because all the people controlling those things are in the club. The exact same still applies today. If I walk into a Porsche dealership and ask to test drive a car they're not going to mess around, they'll take a look at me and they'll recognize that I'm in the club. I look, sound, and dress like the kind of person who's in the club. It conforms to all of their internal biases, it's fine. It's the same if I go to a bank and ask for a loan, when I have to walk into a room of strangers and run a meeting, when I have an interaction with an elected official or a police officer. I'm given respect and deference because I've been born into a world where people like me get respect and deference and everyone understands that. I'm not ever going to worry that the police are going to give me a rough ride in the back of a truck because I know and they know that that kind of thing isn't done to club members. Being in the club means never having to prove your value to people. Obviously you can go the other direction, you can demonstrate that you have no value, but you've always got that great intro with your private membership. White club isn't actively conspiring, we don't have meetings, it's the monopolization of power by the group in power through cultural conditioning. Your presumption that Democrats are working against white club is false, as GH and MLK will tell you. Democrat strongholds are often the worst offenders when it comes to shit like school segregation which is a classic symptom of limiting access to education to club members. Democrats want all the social credibility of acknowledging privilege without any of the sweeping societal revolution needed to address it because at the end of the day being in the club is great and we'd all much rather feel bad about being in the club than close the club. Asians aren't a homogeneous group. They're not in white club but if they're the right kind of Asian they can get honorary memberships. You're not letting the dry cleaners in but you might let in the guy who owns a chain of a hundred dry cleaners. The overlap of white skin and white club isn't total but it's close. If your first language is Spanish, your English is heavily accented, and your last name is Gonzales then light skin isn't going to help that much. Alternatively if you're third gen Japanese American and middle class or higher than you're probably some kind of honorary member. It's absolutely nothing like antisemitism for the simple reason that the Jews did not control all the money and power in Europe and use it to turn everyone else into a second class citizen. If you're not in the club in America you're a second class citizen. You're more likely to be arrested, you're more likely to be convicted, you're less likely to be hired for jobs, you're more likely to have your civil rights taken away, and so forth. None of that was ever true for the antisemitic ethnic Germans living in Germany. bosses, peers, clients, political representatives. etc... say and do.
You pretty much have to do it to some degree no matter what as a Black person in the US (or white club will ostracize/immiserate/imprison/kill you eventually). Doing it for Republicans can be quite lucrative, while doing it for libs is quite competitive, and doing it "for country" has often been seen as one of the most respectable options. It's how white clubbers have always behaved here though, since the bribe-threats of tribes that facilitated the creation of the US.
I'm all for talking about the fascist fuckery we're all witnessing, but like ZerO (coincidentally the only other openly Black poster you all haven't driven away entirely yet, but also certainly no fan of mine), I'd also like to read discussions about what we can/should/will/are doing about it.
No one here wants to work towards a socialist revolution. Fine, that's your prerogative. However, "run and hide" like Kwark plans, obviously just leaves the fascists in control of the wealthiest and most dangerous nuclear military in the world with no meaningful internal opposition (except perhaps for those that were rejected/unable to emigrate/flee as refugees).
You rightly recognize that Schumer isn't cutting it, but that's just about as far as anyone can seem to get currently.
|
By brother in Christ, I, and many others here join in in criticizing Dems at about 20 % the rate we criticize Republicans, approximately, which seems like a reasonable ratio given the times.
I, personally, posted many things that show that I have 0 faith in Democrats being a good faith opposition, they are, like USA itself, a corporatist party who's primary goal, under the current, and basically any leadership since, what, Carter is to serve the people that are paying them.
To me, this is the reason why Trump 1 and Trump 2 are a thing, they fucked over Bernie and pushed Hillary, they neutered Waltz and refused to make Kamala into anything other then a corporatist stooge by pushing the campaign into the direction that her Uber board buddy and other advisers decided was going to bring in the "white moderates" which is an idea so stupid that it's hard to believe it wasn't intentional sabotage. Don't even get me started on fucking Biden.
When I texted a buddy of mine I came up with as IT for USA companies about the Trump / Obama video today I literally told him that Democrats are going to shoot themselves in their dicks by, again, pushing Newsome who is basically a male / white Kamala, no actual beliefs or stances, just an empty suit to enact the corporate agenda. Since he won't trigger the sexism and racism, he might actually win, but the next guy is going to be worse.
I also believe, and I stated as such that the best hope for USA would be if Democrats coalesced around someone like AOC who, in the absence of them trying to fuck her over in the primaries would wipe the floor with Trump or JD Vance or DeSantis or any other moron they put who will retain the stink of Trump's dippers.
We are not enemies, the problem is that you see all of us as enemies because you were somehow convinced that an impossible revolution where your side has none of the guns and espouses an ideology that entire USA has focused it's ire on for a 100 years is somehow going to win.
In the process of doing so, you are doing the same thing that so, so many have done before, from Jimmy Dore to Matt Taibi, coincidentally, those guys also share some of your other, brainwashed stances and are very clearly useful idiots for Russia, and now Trump, which is why people here despise the way you post, because the path you are on ends with your tongue on a fascist boot in a large majority of cases.
|
On February 07 2026 06:24 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2026 05:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 03:26 Jankisa wrote:On February 07 2026 02:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 02:13 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 02:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:45 LightSpectra wrote:On February 07 2026 01:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:21 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 01:08 Biff The Understudy wrote: [quote] Waiting for our maga friends to warp reality, logic and the universe itself to explain how trump and his movement are not racist.
I trust them to find new depth of intellectual dishonesty. They are committed at this point. They can't go back, or they'd have to realize just how idiotic they were all this time, and how much of the stuff they supported goes against their core values. Which hurts a lot. So they just don't do it and dig deeper instead. That is the nice thing about building a cult of idiocy. There is no way out that isn't so painful that most people won't take it. + Show Spoiler +I also gotta say that i am kind of impressed by Trump. Whenever you think he couldn't be more disgusting and vile, he always finds a way. This isn't unique to Trump supporters. Everyone here knows Democrats aren't going to save them, yet, they see no way out that isn't so painful they can't take it. Even when that means materially supporting genocide. So they don't, and they just dig in deeper instead. 10/10 for the most predictable thing you could have ever written. Atomic clocks envy your consistency. I suppose the fact that it is true isn't what bothers you, but that anyone has the audacity to point this stuff out is troublesome? On February 07 2026 01:53 Biff The Understudy wrote:On February 07 2026 01:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:21 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 01:08 Biff The Understudy wrote: [quote] Waiting for our maga friends to warp reality, logic and the universe itself to explain how trump and his movement are not racist.
I trust them to find new depth of intellectual dishonesty. They are committed at this point. They can't go back, or they'd have to realize just how idiotic they were all this time, and how much of the stuff they supported goes against their core values. Which hurts a lot. So they just don't do it and dig deeper instead. That is the nice thing about building a cult of idiocy. There is no way out that isn't so painful that most people won't take it. + Show Spoiler +I also gotta say that i am kind of impressed by Trump. Whenever you think he couldn't be more disgusting and vile, he always finds a way. This isn't unique to Trump supporters. Everyone here knows Democrats aren't going to save them, yet, they see no way out that isn't so painful they can't take it. Even when that means materially supporting genocide. So they don't, and they just dig in deeper instead. Mate. Do you ever fucking change track? You sound like a bot. It’s insane. I have been here for 15 years and for 15 years you have repeated the one thing thousands of times. You don’t have ANY other idea? Just think and say something new. You’ll see it’s refreshing. The primary thing I posted since the election has been to try to get all the people that insist on electoralism to discuss how it is going to work. Instead, they've insisted that escaping the country is the only sensible route and steadfastly refused to have any serious discussion about what our attempt at stopping fascism should actually look like. No one really objects (Credit to ZerO for saying something) to dozens of pages of shitposts and the constant pointing out of Republican hypocrisy or idiocy. Other than to point out the Sartre quote, before immediately jumping back into what they themselves identify as a fascist trap. What exactly in your mind is the thing I've "repeated thousands of times" for 15 years. Basically no matter what anyone posts, your response to it is always "democrats bad". No matter what is being talked about, you predictably pivot to "democrats bad" within the first two sentences of your post. I am not going to go through your last posts because i am too lazy to do that, but i would be surprised if there were more than 20% in there that didn't follow this pattern to the letter. ~20% is probably better than plenty of posters as far as posts that aren't just saying some variation of "Republicans bad" or "GH pointing out uncomfortable facts makes me upset" While I'd dispute your analysis/description, it's not like I don't have reasons for my posting. On January 30 2026 04:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 30 2026 01:26 Jankisa wrote:On January 30 2026 00:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 29 2026 19:19 Simberto wrote:On January 29 2026 18:27 Gorsameth wrote:On January 29 2026 17:56 Simberto wrote: [quote]
The whole process is scarily 1984.
The alternative interpretation is that they never really believe anything they say. There are no ideas beyond "winning" in there. No concepts, no beliefs, no deeper stances on anything. And by "they" i don't mean the politicians, i mean the whole US conservative movement. That is not an alternative interpretation, it is objective reality. Maybe once there was an underlying belief, but that hasn't been the case for as long as I can remember. + Show Spoiler +I meant it as an alternative to the "they constantly swap what they believe around" 1984 interpretation of their behaviour. One of those two must be true, and both are not good.
One means they are 1984 levels of brainwashed, the other that they are completely intellectually dishonest.
I also tend to believe it is the latter, especially after more than a decade of contact with our forum conservatives in this thread. It might also be a combination of the two, where some people really always believe the truth of the day, while others just lie all day long. What doesn't exist is an explanation where US conservatives have any leg to stand on. What this also means is that the Democrats and their supporters are the right-wing/conservative edge of sanity, with members like Fetterman clearly going over the edge. I have a feeling that one day, GH is going to be somewhere at a protest and an ICE agent might literally put his boot on his face an GH will be yelling at him to explain that the reason why Trump and Miller empowered people like him to abuse him is actually the democrats not stopping them when they could. Jesus man, you have a worse case of Democrat derangement syndrome then any republican I've seen, and that includes the regulars here who start every long winded post explaining how fascists were in the right for killing people resisting them because those people were manipulated by democrats... No one here needs to be/can be convinced that Republicans are fascists and obviously opposed to their goals. Despite that, it is predominantly what you all post about when you're not bickering with people you all have known for years are just trolling you to waste your time and laugh. So much so, even Zero was asking for better from yall and was promptly (and sadly imo) ignored. Contrary to that, people are still struggling with recognizing/understanding how/why Democrats are purportedly for the same things they ostensibly are, but are actually an oppositional force to what posters here would say are their desired policies. Rather than navigating and illuminating that reality, everyone focuses on how much they don't like that I point it out and they dislike/belittle me as a person for it. It's honestly a pretty lucid picture of what the actual struggle in the US is (and has been for decades, if not it's whole existence) really about. US Bipartisan Core Identity* (arguably applies here as well): There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect It's right there in the founding documents and has been in practice ever since. Trump/Fascism and Democrats being the far-right conservative edge of sanity is a symptom/consequence, not a root cause of this. EDIT: I also have to mention it's pretty funny that when I used to constantly shit on Republicans people here told me that wasn't productive and to stop. Now that it is basically all they do here, they are mad that it isn't all I post too. I wonder how do 21 % of Black men who voted for Trump feel when they see the video he posted? I guess the safest bet is that they don't because they are in such a bubble that the bad shit never reaches them, but man, those guys and Latinos who voted for him and are having their cousins who show up to every meeting and do everything right roughed up, put in camps and deported must really feel weird at the moment. + Show Spoiler +Weird that oBlade now suddenly cares about 2nd amendment, I guess it's been enough time since those guys murdered a guy for legally owning a gun for him to be back on the 2nd amendment train. Also, interesting that his incel brain is not able to hold 2 things in it at the same time, such as intentional murder being on the level of 3rd world countries being caused by stupid policies while overall crime going down because that's a trend in worldwide. It's also weird that GH, despite obviously not being stupid can't understand the futility of his approach to arguing. Basically he's completely unable to internalize this: Fuck us for wanting to talk about the escalating cruelty and stupidity putting the whole world at risk, we should all talk about how shitty Chuck motherfuckign Schumer is, everything else is less evilism. Black people that support Republicans are basically saying "If you can't beat em, join em". Someone like Herman Cain knew what they signed up for, and died for it. They know about the racism. It's just a lot easier in many respects to find economic success (in a society that seemingly prizes that success above all else) as a Black person by cosigning/rationalizing/ignoring the racist/deplorable things your white club + Show Spoiler +On July 19 2019 08:15 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 06:54 maybenexttime wrote:On July 18 2019 06:43 KwarK wrote:I think you’re not distinguishing between white as a skin colour and white as an exclusionary social group that exerts power within a multicultural society. Let’s call them white skin and white club. White skin has been around forever but white dudes hanging out with white dudes didn’t need to make a big deal about it because what’d be the point. White club is a new thing because you can’t have an exclusionary club without first finding some non whites to not let join.
The membership criteria of white club aren’t just white skin and have changed over time. It used to be white male Anglo Saxon Protestant club, for example. What GH is saying is that white club is a construct, an expression of exclusivity by the dominant group in society to justify abhorrent treatment of people not in the club. Obviously white skin is biological, but white club isn’t.
And in case anyone didn’t know, the first rule of white club is YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT WHITE CLUB. Sorry for bringing up a post from several pages back, but I found this post interesting and I don't think it garnered wider attention. Could you elaborate on that? To what extent do those two groups overlap? What fraction of the white skin population is part of the white club and conspires to undermine the non-white people? Roughly half of the white population votes for Democrats, so they're actively working against the white club, I'd presume. Are Asians part of the white club? If not, why are they one of the targets of affirmative action? I get the impression that there is little overlap between the white skin and white club groups. And yet the affirmative action discrimination seems to be based on one's affiliation to the former, not the latter. To me this seems awfully similar to 20th-century antisemitism, which used the privileged position of a subset of Jews to justify discrimination of Jews in general. These days all people of Northern European ancestry are in white club, but it wasn't always that way. If we take it back to the start of the US the founders were a bunch of incel neckbeards who all got in a room and said "anyone who doesn't look like us, doesn't think like us, or is poorer than us isn't in the club". No women, no blacks, no Catholics, no poors. It's not a conspiracy as you're suggesting with the insiders conspiring to undermine the others, just the monopolizing of power. You didn't employ people outside the club in skilled trades because you already knew a guy in the club who could do it and everyone knows that everyone outside of the club sucks, etc. If you're in the club and mediocre then you can train as a physician, if you're outside of the club but amazing then you can't because everyone knows girls can't be doctors and the gatekeepers are all in the club. The business owners are in the club borrowing money from the bankers who are in the club and trading with the shipping magnates who are in the club. That's why groups which today would be considered privileged (rich white women for example) were treated so poorly for so long (not allowed to vote etc.), they may have been white but they weren't in the club, it was pretty exclusive back then. The club monopolizes power because the club monopolizes power. Take the disenfranchisement laws I keep referencing. The chief of police and the election registrar are both in the club and as long as they're both in the club they're able to restrict the people appointing them to club members in a perfect loop. Unfortunately it's quite difficult to completely monopolize wealth, especially when the excluded communities form their own little Ireland or whatever in Boston. If the club collectively says "no Irish", as they did, and the Irish all say "screw you guys" and make their own little place then eventually you run the risk of rich Irishmen which makes the club look bad because you can't have a club that's built on the idea that all the wealth and power is held by club members when there are outsiders with wealth and power. And so the club slowly expands, by the early 1900s rich Catholics are allowed in, as long as they're male and white. Later women are allowed in, as long as they're rich and white. The 30s roll around and suddenly it's a difficult time to have all the rich white people dicking over everyone else all the time and there's a lot of people saying a lot of scary words like "revolution". The club can't throw open its doors entirely but what they can do is ease up on the rich requirement, while still enforcing the race requirement. By doing so they get a significant number of working class voters to effectively buy in to the system. As long as they believe that they're receiving a marginal benefit from the continuation of the status quo they'll prop it up, and it's becoming hard to prop it up without them. By this point white club is a pretty good name for it. Women and workers are allowed in. Hell, if you're rich enough you could probably even get away with being gay or Jewish, as long as you do it discreetly. It's less exclusive than it used to be but it's still a pretty great club to be in. If you go into a bank to borrow money for a mortgage then you and the bank manager have an unofficial understanding that you're both in the club. He knows he'll have no trouble explaining why he extended a line of credit to John Smith to his underwriters because John Smith is a good club name. If you go to buy a house in a neighbourhood of club members you can rely upon being welcomed. The club is ingrained in the understanding of the world at this point, if a club member applies to be a manager alongside a non club member then it just makes sense to hire the club member, both because of your own bias and the bias of all your customers. Even if you're super progressive for the 1950s and know the club is a sham, you don't want your customers leaving. If you're in the club you have access to education, jobs, credit, investments, and resources that non members just don't have because all the people controlling those things are in the club. The exact same still applies today. If I walk into a Porsche dealership and ask to test drive a car they're not going to mess around, they'll take a look at me and they'll recognize that I'm in the club. I look, sound, and dress like the kind of person who's in the club. It conforms to all of their internal biases, it's fine. It's the same if I go to a bank and ask for a loan, when I have to walk into a room of strangers and run a meeting, when I have an interaction with an elected official or a police officer. I'm given respect and deference because I've been born into a world where people like me get respect and deference and everyone understands that. I'm not ever going to worry that the police are going to give me a rough ride in the back of a truck because I know and they know that that kind of thing isn't done to club members. Being in the club means never having to prove your value to people. Obviously you can go the other direction, you can demonstrate that you have no value, but you've always got that great intro with your private membership. White club isn't actively conspiring, we don't have meetings, it's the monopolization of power by the group in power through cultural conditioning. Your presumption that Democrats are working against white club is false, as GH and MLK will tell you. Democrat strongholds are often the worst offenders when it comes to shit like school segregation which is a classic symptom of limiting access to education to club members. Democrats want all the social credibility of acknowledging privilege without any of the sweeping societal revolution needed to address it because at the end of the day being in the club is great and we'd all much rather feel bad about being in the club than close the club. Asians aren't a homogeneous group. They're not in white club but if they're the right kind of Asian they can get honorary memberships. You're not letting the dry cleaners in but you might let in the guy who owns a chain of a hundred dry cleaners. The overlap of white skin and white club isn't total but it's close. If your first language is Spanish, your English is heavily accented, and your last name is Gonzales then light skin isn't going to help that much. Alternatively if you're third gen Japanese American and middle class or higher than you're probably some kind of honorary member. It's absolutely nothing like antisemitism for the simple reason that the Jews did not control all the money and power in Europe and use it to turn everyone else into a second class citizen. If you're not in the club in America you're a second class citizen. You're more likely to be arrested, you're more likely to be convicted, you're less likely to be hired for jobs, you're more likely to have your civil rights taken away, and so forth. None of that was ever true for the antisemitic ethnic Germans living in Germany. bosses, peers, clients, political representatives. etc... say and do. You pretty much have to do it to some degree no matter what as a Black person in the US (or white club will ostracize/immiserate/imprison/kill you eventually). Doing it for Republicans can be quite lucrative, while doing it for libs is quite competitive, and doing it "for country" has often been seen as one of the most respectable options. It's how white clubbers have always behaved here though, since the bribe-threats of tribes that facilitated the creation of the US. I'm all for talking about the fascist fuckery we're all witnessing, but like ZerO (coincidentally the only other openly Black poster you all haven't driven away entirely yet, but also certainly no fan of mine), I'd also like to read discussions about what we can/should/will/are doing about it. No one here wants to work towards a socialist revolution. Fine, that's your prerogative. However, "run and hide" like Kwark plans, obviously just leaves the fascists in control of the wealthiest and most dangerous nuclear military in the world with no meaningful internal opposition (except perhaps for those that were rejected/unable to emigrate/flee as refugees). You rightly recognize that Schumer isn't cutting it, but that's just about as far as anyone can seem to get currently. By brother in Christ, I, and many others here join in in criticizing Dems at about 20 % the rate we criticize Republicans, approximately. I, personally, posted many things that show that I have 0 faith in Democrats being a good faith opposition, they are, like USA itself, a corporatist party who's primary goal, under the current, and basically any leadership since, what, Carter is to serve the people that are paying them. To me, this is the reason why Trump 1 and Trump 2 are a thing, they fucked over Bernie and pushed Hillary, they neutered Waltz and refused to make Kamala into anything other then a corporatist stooge by pushing the campaign into the direction that her Uber board buddy and other advisers decided was going to bring in the "white moderates" which is an idea so stupid that it's hard to believe it wasn't intentional sabotage. Don't even get me started on fucking Biden. When I texted a buddy of mine I came up with as IT for USA companies about the Trump / Obama video today I literally told him that Democrats are going to shoot themselves in their dicks by, again, pushing Newsome who is basically a male / white Kamala, no actual beliefs or stances, just an empty suit to enact the corporate agenda. Since he won't trigger the sexism and racism, he might actually win, but the next guy is going to be worse. I also believe, and I stated as such that the best hope for USA would be if Democrats coalesced around someone like AOC who, in the absence of them trying to fuck her over in the primaries would wipe the floor with Trump or JD Vance or DeSantis or any other moron they put who will retain the stink of Trump's dippers. We are not enemies, the problem is that you see all of us as enemies because you were somehow convinced that an impossible revolution where your side has none of the guns and espouses an ideology that entire USA has focused it's ire on for a 100 years is somehow going to win. + Show Spoiler +In the process of doing so, you are doing the same thing that so, so many have done before, from Jimmy Dore to Matt Taibi, coincidentally, those guys also share some of your other, brainwashed stances and are very clearly useful idiots for Russia, and now Trump, which is why people here despise the way you post, because the path you are on ends with your tongue on a fascist boot in a large majority of cases. You'd probably be surprised by how and why (probably which) people would push back on various parts of your description/analysis if that's the sort of stuff people discussed as often as they bicker with Sartres or whine about my posting.
We saw a little of this when people were arguing with Light about nationalizing resources.
I don't see you all as enemies (other than the unabashed fascist posters), despite the incessant personal attacks and puerile shitposting. I basically see many posters as: committed at this point. They can't go back, or they'd have to realize just how idiotic they were all this time, and how much of the stuff they supported goes against their core values. Which hurts a lot. So they just don't do it and dig deeper instead.
That is the nice thing about building a cult of idiocy. There is no way out that isn't so painful that most people won't take it.
I wouldn't use "idiotic", but yeah, I think the evidence indicates this is what we're witnessing.
|
I, for one, am willing to 100% sign Jankisa's analysis.
Democrats are shit, but they are also the best hope the US has of somehow getting out of this without going full fascist. But for that to work, competent, charismatic people with ideas that actually improve the lives of the 99% need to rise to power within that party.
The party will make that as hard as possible, and republicans will support them in that, because republicans love fighting corporatists. So it won't be easy. But it is still the only even vaguely plausible path that saves the US. This is a lot more plausible than the socialist revolution (TM) solving all problems at once, and everyone being totally on board with it.
And this needs to happen quickly, because if Trump doesn't manage to do the full fascist thing, and a boring corporatist democrat wins and nothing improves, the next fascist is gonna be competent enough to make sure that no more real elections happen afterwards.
|
Democrats are perceived as shit because this country is overwhelmingly conservative. The people craved Joe Biden, that's why he won more votes than any other candidate in history by a huge margin. Polls showed people overwhelmingly thought Kamala Harris was too left-wing, not too right-wing.
They can be dragged left if leftists show up to primaries and make it happen, but if leftists don't show up, Democrats have to move even more right to make up for it. Even if the chosen leftist candidate (e. g. Bernie Sanders) doesn't win, a big turnout makes the winning candidate have to shift their platform more to the left, something both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden did to win over Sanders supporters. By contrast, Bill Clinton decided to move the platform to the right in 1992 because not enough lefties turned out for the previous three elections and Democrats were tired of losing. The people wanted neoliberalism, that's what they voted for, that's what they got.
Boycotting elections because Democrats aren't left enough is literally the dumbest possible thing you could do as a leftist. It's like shooting yourself in the foot as a strategy to sprint faster. Republicans literally pay the Green Party to spoil the vote for that exact reason. If you go around telling people to boycott elections because Democrats aren't left enough, you're either working a psyop, or you fell for one.
|
United States43553 Posts
On February 07 2026 05:06 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2026 03:26 Jankisa wrote:On February 07 2026 02:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 02:13 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 02:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:45 LightSpectra wrote:On February 07 2026 01:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:21 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 01:08 Biff The Understudy wrote:On February 07 2026 00:52 LightSpectra wrote:To celebrate Rosa Parks Day, Donald Trump posted a video of the Obamas as apes. Presumably he is hoping that his base will remember that they voted for him because they wanted a race war and thus forget about being a child molester. Waiting for our maga friends to warp reality, logic and the universe itself to explain how trump and his movement are not racist. I trust them to find new depth of intellectual dishonesty. They are committed at this point. They can't go back, or they'd have to realize just how idiotic they were all this time, and how much of the stuff they supported goes against their core values. Which hurts a lot. So they just don't do it and dig deeper instead. That is the nice thing about building a cult of idiocy. There is no way out that isn't so painful that most people won't take it. + Show Spoiler +I also gotta say that i am kind of impressed by Trump. Whenever you think he couldn't be more disgusting and vile, he always finds a way. This isn't unique to Trump supporters. Everyone here knows Democrats aren't going to save them, yet, they see no way out that isn't so painful they can't take it. Even when that means materially supporting genocide. So they don't, and they just dig in deeper instead. 10/10 for the most predictable thing you could have ever written. Atomic clocks envy your consistency. I suppose the fact that it is true isn't what bothers you, but that anyone has the audacity to point this stuff out is troublesome? On February 07 2026 01:53 Biff The Understudy wrote:On February 07 2026 01:44 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:21 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 01:08 Biff The Understudy wrote:On February 07 2026 00:52 LightSpectra wrote:To celebrate Rosa Parks Day, Donald Trump posted a video of the Obamas as apes. Presumably he is hoping that his base will remember that they voted for him because they wanted a race war and thus forget about being a child molester. Waiting for our maga friends to warp reality, logic and the universe itself to explain how trump and his movement are not racist. I trust them to find new depth of intellectual dishonesty. They are committed at this point. They can't go back, or they'd have to realize just how idiotic they were all this time, and how much of the stuff they supported goes against their core values. Which hurts a lot. So they just don't do it and dig deeper instead. That is the nice thing about building a cult of idiocy. There is no way out that isn't so painful that most people won't take it. + Show Spoiler +I also gotta say that i am kind of impressed by Trump. Whenever you think he couldn't be more disgusting and vile, he always finds a way. This isn't unique to Trump supporters. Everyone here knows Democrats aren't going to save them, yet, they see no way out that isn't so painful they can't take it. Even when that means materially supporting genocide. So they don't, and they just dig in deeper instead. Mate. Do you ever fucking change track? You sound like a bot. It’s insane. I have been here for 15 years and for 15 years you have repeated the one thing thousands of times. You don’t have ANY other idea? Just think and say something new. You’ll see it’s refreshing. The primary thing I posted since the election has been to try to get all the people that insist on electoralism to discuss how it is going to work. Instead, they've insisted that escaping the country is the only sensible route and steadfastly refused to have any serious discussion about what our attempt at stopping fascism should actually look like. No one really objects (Credit to ZerO for saying something) to dozens of pages of shitposts and the constant pointing out of Republican hypocrisy or idiocy. Other than to point out the Sartre quote, before immediately jumping back into what they themselves identify as a fascist trap. What exactly in your mind is the thing I've "repeated thousands of times" for 15 years. Basically no matter what anyone posts, your response to it is always "democrats bad". No matter what is being talked about, you predictably pivot to "democrats bad" within the first two sentences of your post. I am not going to go through your last posts because i am too lazy to do that, but i would be surprised if there were more than 20% in there that didn't follow this pattern to the letter. ~20% is probably better than plenty of posters as far as posts that aren't just saying some variation of "Republicans bad" or "GH pointing out uncomfortable facts makes me upset" While I'd dispute your analysis/description, it's not like I don't have reasons for my posting. On January 30 2026 04:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 30 2026 01:26 Jankisa wrote:On January 30 2026 00:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 29 2026 19:19 Simberto wrote:On January 29 2026 18:27 Gorsameth wrote:On January 29 2026 17:56 Simberto wrote:On January 29 2026 14:11 Manit0u wrote: [quote]
Like it was already mentioned numerous times, Republicans have absolutely no moral backbone whatsoever. They will say whatever suits their agenda in the current moment and their followers will switch their worldview on a dime if necessary. Trump and his admin have been flip-flopping between contradictory statements for a year now and whatever they say the narrative shifts to support them.
This reminds me of those flashy things from Men in Black that make people forget what happened. It seems that every time Republicans flip to a stance contradictory to their previous one it's like their entire voter base immediately forgets everything that was said previously and smoothly transitions into the new reality. The whole process is scarily 1984. The alternative interpretation is that they never really believe anything they say. There are no ideas beyond "winning" in there. No concepts, no beliefs, no deeper stances on anything. And by "they" i don't mean the politicians, i mean the whole US conservative movement. That is not an alternative interpretation, it is objective reality. Maybe once there was an underlying belief, but that hasn't been the case for as long as I can remember. + Show Spoiler +I meant it as an alternative to the "they constantly swap what they believe around" 1984 interpretation of their behaviour. One of those two must be true, and both are not good.
One means they are 1984 levels of brainwashed, the other that they are completely intellectually dishonest.
I also tend to believe it is the latter, especially after more than a decade of contact with our forum conservatives in this thread. It might also be a combination of the two, where some people really always believe the truth of the day, while others just lie all day long. What doesn't exist is an explanation where US conservatives have any leg to stand on. What this also means is that the Democrats and their supporters are the right-wing/conservative edge of sanity, with members like Fetterman clearly going over the edge. I have a feeling that one day, GH is going to be somewhere at a protest and an ICE agent might literally put his boot on his face an GH will be yelling at him to explain that the reason why Trump and Miller empowered people like him to abuse him is actually the democrats not stopping them when they could. Jesus man, you have a worse case of Democrat derangement syndrome then any republican I've seen, and that includes the regulars here who start every long winded post explaining how fascists were in the right for killing people resisting them because those people were manipulated by democrats... No one here needs to be/can be convinced that Republicans are fascists and obviously opposed to their goals. Despite that, it is predominantly what you all post about when you're not bickering with people you all have known for years are just trolling you to waste your time and laugh. So much so, even Zero was asking for better from yall and was promptly (and sadly imo) ignored. Contrary to that, people are still struggling with recognizing/understanding how/why Democrats are purportedly for the same things they ostensibly are, but are actually an oppositional force to what posters here would say are their desired policies. Rather than navigating and illuminating that reality, everyone focuses on how much they don't like that I point it out and they dislike/belittle me as a person for it. It's honestly a pretty lucid picture of what the actual struggle in the US is (and has been for decades, if not it's whole existence) really about. US Bipartisan Core Identity* (arguably applies here as well): There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect It's right there in the founding documents and has been in practice ever since. Trump/Fascism and Democrats being the far-right conservative edge of sanity is a symptom/consequence, not a root cause of this. EDIT: I also have to mention it's pretty funny that when I used to constantly shit on Republicans people here told me that wasn't productive and to stop. Now that it is basically all they do here, they are mad that it isn't all I post too. I wonder how do 21 % of Black men who voted for Trump feel when they see the video he posted? I guess the safest bet is that they don't because they are in such a bubble that the bad shit never reaches them, but man, those guys and Latinos who voted for him and are having their cousins who show up to every meeting and do everything right roughed up, put in camps and deported must really feel weird at the moment. + Show Spoiler +Weird that oBlade now suddenly cares about 2nd amendment, I guess it's been enough time since those guys murdered a guy for legally owning a gun for him to be back on the 2nd amendment train. Also, interesting that his incel brain is not able to hold 2 things in it at the same time, such as intentional murder being on the level of 3rd world countries being caused by stupid policies while overall crime going down because that's a trend in worldwide. It's also weird that GH, despite obviously not being stupid can't understand the futility of his approach to arguing. Basically he's completely unable to internalize this: Fuck us for wanting to talk about the escalating cruelty and stupidity putting the whole world at risk, we should all talk about how shitty Chuck motherfuckign Schumer is, everything else is less evilism. Black people that support Republicans are basically saying "If you can't beat em, join em". Someone like Herman Cain knew what they signed up for, and died for it. They know about the racism. It's just a lot easier in many respects to find economic success (in a society that seemingly prizes that success above all else) as a Black person by cosigning/rationalizing/ignoring the racist/deplorable things your white club + Show Spoiler +On July 19 2019 08:15 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 06:54 maybenexttime wrote:On July 18 2019 06:43 KwarK wrote:I think you’re not distinguishing between white as a skin colour and white as an exclusionary social group that exerts power within a multicultural society. Let’s call them white skin and white club. White skin has been around forever but white dudes hanging out with white dudes didn’t need to make a big deal about it because what’d be the point. White club is a new thing because you can’t have an exclusionary club without first finding some non whites to not let join.
The membership criteria of white club aren’t just white skin and have changed over time. It used to be white male Anglo Saxon Protestant club, for example. What GH is saying is that white club is a construct, an expression of exclusivity by the dominant group in society to justify abhorrent treatment of people not in the club. Obviously white skin is biological, but white club isn’t.
And in case anyone didn’t know, the first rule of white club is YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT WHITE CLUB. Sorry for bringing up a post from several pages back, but I found this post interesting and I don't think it garnered wider attention. Could you elaborate on that? To what extent do those two groups overlap? What fraction of the white skin population is part of the white club and conspires to undermine the non-white people? Roughly half of the white population votes for Democrats, so they're actively working against the white club, I'd presume. Are Asians part of the white club? If not, why are they one of the targets of affirmative action? I get the impression that there is little overlap between the white skin and white club groups. And yet the affirmative action discrimination seems to be based on one's affiliation to the former, not the latter. To me this seems awfully similar to 20th-century antisemitism, which used the privileged position of a subset of Jews to justify discrimination of Jews in general. These days all people of Northern European ancestry are in white club, but it wasn't always that way. If we take it back to the start of the US the founders were a bunch of incel neckbeards who all got in a room and said "anyone who doesn't look like us, doesn't think like us, or is poorer than us isn't in the club". No women, no blacks, no Catholics, no poors. It's not a conspiracy as you're suggesting with the insiders conspiring to undermine the others, just the monopolizing of power. You didn't employ people outside the club in skilled trades because you already knew a guy in the club who could do it and everyone knows that everyone outside of the club sucks, etc. If you're in the club and mediocre then you can train as a physician, if you're outside of the club but amazing then you can't because everyone knows girls can't be doctors and the gatekeepers are all in the club. The business owners are in the club borrowing money from the bankers who are in the club and trading with the shipping magnates who are in the club. That's why groups which today would be considered privileged (rich white women for example) were treated so poorly for so long (not allowed to vote etc.), they may have been white but they weren't in the club, it was pretty exclusive back then. The club monopolizes power because the club monopolizes power. Take the disenfranchisement laws I keep referencing. The chief of police and the election registrar are both in the club and as long as they're both in the club they're able to restrict the people appointing them to club members in a perfect loop. Unfortunately it's quite difficult to completely monopolize wealth, especially when the excluded communities form their own little Ireland or whatever in Boston. If the club collectively says "no Irish", as they did, and the Irish all say "screw you guys" and make their own little place then eventually you run the risk of rich Irishmen which makes the club look bad because you can't have a club that's built on the idea that all the wealth and power is held by club members when there are outsiders with wealth and power. And so the club slowly expands, by the early 1900s rich Catholics are allowed in, as long as they're male and white. Later women are allowed in, as long as they're rich and white. The 30s roll around and suddenly it's a difficult time to have all the rich white people dicking over everyone else all the time and there's a lot of people saying a lot of scary words like "revolution". The club can't throw open its doors entirely but what they can do is ease up on the rich requirement, while still enforcing the race requirement. By doing so they get a significant number of working class voters to effectively buy in to the system. As long as they believe that they're receiving a marginal benefit from the continuation of the status quo they'll prop it up, and it's becoming hard to prop it up without them. By this point white club is a pretty good name for it. Women and workers are allowed in. Hell, if you're rich enough you could probably even get away with being gay or Jewish, as long as you do it discreetly. It's less exclusive than it used to be but it's still a pretty great club to be in. If you go into a bank to borrow money for a mortgage then you and the bank manager have an unofficial understanding that you're both in the club. He knows he'll have no trouble explaining why he extended a line of credit to John Smith to his underwriters because John Smith is a good club name. If you go to buy a house in a neighbourhood of club members you can rely upon being welcomed. The club is ingrained in the understanding of the world at this point, if a club member applies to be a manager alongside a non club member then it just makes sense to hire the club member, both because of your own bias and the bias of all your customers. Even if you're super progressive for the 1950s and know the club is a sham, you don't want your customers leaving. If you're in the club you have access to education, jobs, credit, investments, and resources that non members just don't have because all the people controlling those things are in the club. The exact same still applies today. If I walk into a Porsche dealership and ask to test drive a car they're not going to mess around, they'll take a look at me and they'll recognize that I'm in the club. I look, sound, and dress like the kind of person who's in the club. It conforms to all of their internal biases, it's fine. It's the same if I go to a bank and ask for a loan, when I have to walk into a room of strangers and run a meeting, when I have an interaction with an elected official or a police officer. I'm given respect and deference because I've been born into a world where people like me get respect and deference and everyone understands that. I'm not ever going to worry that the police are going to give me a rough ride in the back of a truck because I know and they know that that kind of thing isn't done to club members. Being in the club means never having to prove your value to people. Obviously you can go the other direction, you can demonstrate that you have no value, but you've always got that great intro with your private membership. White club isn't actively conspiring, we don't have meetings, it's the monopolization of power by the group in power through cultural conditioning. Your presumption that Democrats are working against white club is false, as GH and MLK will tell you. Democrat strongholds are often the worst offenders when it comes to shit like school segregation which is a classic symptom of limiting access to education to club members. Democrats want all the social credibility of acknowledging privilege without any of the sweeping societal revolution needed to address it because at the end of the day being in the club is great and we'd all much rather feel bad about being in the club than close the club. Asians aren't a homogeneous group. They're not in white club but if they're the right kind of Asian they can get honorary memberships. You're not letting the dry cleaners in but you might let in the guy who owns a chain of a hundred dry cleaners. The overlap of white skin and white club isn't total but it's close. If your first language is Spanish, your English is heavily accented, and your last name is Gonzales then light skin isn't going to help that much. Alternatively if you're third gen Japanese American and middle class or higher than you're probably some kind of honorary member. It's absolutely nothing like antisemitism for the simple reason that the Jews did not control all the money and power in Europe and use it to turn everyone else into a second class citizen. If you're not in the club in America you're a second class citizen. You're more likely to be arrested, you're more likely to be convicted, you're less likely to be hired for jobs, you're more likely to have your civil rights taken away, and so forth. None of that was ever true for the antisemitic ethnic Germans living in Germany. bosses, peers, clients, political representatives. etc... say and do. You pretty much have to do it to some degree no matter what as a Black person in the US (or white club will ostracize/immiserate/imprison/kill you eventually). Doing it for Republicans can be quite lucrative, while doing it for libs is quite competitive, and doing it "for country" has often been seen as one of the most respectable options. It's how white clubbers have always behaved here though, since the bribe-threats of tribes that facilitated the creation of the US. I'm all for talking about the fascist fuckery we're all witnessing, but like ZerO (coincidentally the only other openly Black poster you all haven't driven away entirely yet, but also certainly no fan of mine), I'd also like to read discussions about what we can/should/will/are doing about it. No one here wants to work towards a socialist revolution. Fine, that's your prerogative. However, "run and hide" like Kwark plans, obviously just leaves the fascists in control of the wealthiest and most dangerous nuclear military in the world with no meaningful internal opposition (except perhaps for those that were rejected/unable to emigrate/flee as refugees). You rightly recognize that Schumer isn't cutting it, but that's just about as far as anyone can seem to get currently. It’s weird how centrally I feature in your fantasies. Why is it that you can’t imagine your future without describing the role I play in it? But in any case, you’re wrong. I also imagined the future and it turns out I’ll be a successful revolutionary and you’ll still be a cowardly weasel.
|
On February 07 2026 07:54 LightSpectra wrote: Democrats are perceived as shit because this country is overwhelmingly conservative. The people craved Joe Biden, that's why he won more votes than any other candidate in history by a huge margin. Polls showed people overwhelmingly thought Kamala Harris was too left-wing, not too right-wing.
They can be dragged left if leftists show up to primaries and make it happen, but if leftists don't show up, Democrats have to move even more right to make up for it. Even if the chosen leftist candidate (e. g. Bernie Sanders) doesn't win, a big turnout makes the winning candidate have to shift their platform more to the left, something both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden did to win over Sanders supporters. By contrast, Bill Clinton decided to move the platform to the right in 1992 because not enough lefties turned out for the previous three elections and Democrats were tired of losing. The people wanted neoliberalism, that's what they voted for, that's what they got.
Boycotting elections because Democrats aren't left enough is literally the dumbest possible thing you could do as a leftist. It's like shooting yourself in the foot as a strategy to sprint faster. Republicans literally pay the Green Party to spoil the vote for that exact reason. If you go around telling people to boycott elections because Democrats aren't left enough, you're either working a psyop, or you fell for one.
Also agreed. Even more than the democrats being shit, the US voters being shit is the core problem. But that is even harder to fix.
|
On February 07 2026 07:49 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2026 06:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 06:24 Jankisa wrote:On February 07 2026 05:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 03:26 Jankisa wrote:On February 07 2026 02:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 02:13 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 02:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 07 2026 01:45 LightSpectra wrote:On February 07 2026 01:44 GreenHorizons wrote: [quote] This isn't unique to Trump supporters.
Everyone here knows Democrats aren't going to save them, yet, they see no way out that isn't so painful they can't take it. Even when that means materially supporting genocide. So they don't, and they just dig in deeper instead. 10/10 for the most predictable thing you could have ever written. Atomic clocks envy your consistency. I suppose the fact that it is true isn't what bothers you, but that anyone has the audacity to point this stuff out is troublesome? On February 07 2026 01:53 Biff The Understudy wrote:On February 07 2026 01:44 GreenHorizons wrote: [quote] This isn't unique to Trump supporters.
Everyone here knows Democrats aren't going to save them, yet, they see no way out that isn't so painful they can't take it. Even when that means materially supporting genocide. So they don't, and they just dig in deeper instead. Mate. Do you ever fucking change track? You sound like a bot. It’s insane. I have been here for 15 years and for 15 years you have repeated the one thing thousands of times. You don’t have ANY other idea? Just think and say something new. You’ll see it’s refreshing. The primary thing I posted since the election has been to try to get all the people that insist on electoralism to discuss how it is going to work. Instead, they've insisted that escaping the country is the only sensible route and steadfastly refused to have any serious discussion about what our attempt at stopping fascism should actually look like. No one really objects (Credit to ZerO for saying something) to dozens of pages of shitposts and the constant pointing out of Republican hypocrisy or idiocy. Other than to point out the Sartre quote, before immediately jumping back into what they themselves identify as a fascist trap. What exactly in your mind is the thing I've "repeated thousands of times" for 15 years. Basically no matter what anyone posts, your response to it is always "democrats bad". No matter what is being talked about, you predictably pivot to "democrats bad" within the first two sentences of your post. I am not going to go through your last posts because i am too lazy to do that, but i would be surprised if there were more than 20% in there that didn't follow this pattern to the letter. ~20% is probably better than plenty of posters as far as posts that aren't just saying some variation of "Republicans bad" or "GH pointing out uncomfortable facts makes me upset" While I'd dispute your analysis/description, it's not like I don't have reasons for my posting. On January 30 2026 04:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 30 2026 01:26 Jankisa wrote:On January 30 2026 00:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 29 2026 19:19 Simberto wrote:[quote] + Show Spoiler +I meant it as an alternative to the "they constantly swap what they believe around" 1984 interpretation of their behaviour. One of those two must be true, and both are not good.
One means they are 1984 levels of brainwashed, the other that they are completely intellectually dishonest.
I also tend to believe it is the latter, especially after more than a decade of contact with our forum conservatives in this thread. It might also be a combination of the two, where some people really always believe the truth of the day, while others just lie all day long. What doesn't exist is an explanation where US conservatives have any leg to stand on. What this also means is that the Democrats and their supporters are the right-wing/conservative edge of sanity, with members like Fetterman clearly going over the edge. I have a feeling that one day, GH is going to be somewhere at a protest and an ICE agent might literally put his boot on his face an GH will be yelling at him to explain that the reason why Trump and Miller empowered people like him to abuse him is actually the democrats not stopping them when they could. Jesus man, you have a worse case of Democrat derangement syndrome then any republican I've seen, and that includes the regulars here who start every long winded post explaining how fascists were in the right for killing people resisting them because those people were manipulated by democrats... No one here needs to be/can be convinced that Republicans are fascists and obviously opposed to their goals. Despite that, it is predominantly what you all post about when you're not bickering with people you all have known for years are just trolling you to waste your time and laugh. So much so, even Zero was asking for better from yall and was promptly (and sadly imo) ignored. Contrary to that, people are still struggling with recognizing/understanding how/why Democrats are purportedly for the same things they ostensibly are, but are actually an oppositional force to what posters here would say are their desired policies. Rather than navigating and illuminating that reality, everyone focuses on how much they don't like that I point it out and they dislike/belittle me as a person for it. It's honestly a pretty lucid picture of what the actual struggle in the US is (and has been for decades, if not it's whole existence) really about. US Bipartisan Core Identity* (arguably applies here as well): There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect It's right there in the founding documents and has been in practice ever since. Trump/Fascism and Democrats being the far-right conservative edge of sanity is a symptom/consequence, not a root cause of this. EDIT: I also have to mention it's pretty funny that when I used to constantly shit on Republicans people here told me that wasn't productive and to stop. Now that it is basically all they do here, they are mad that it isn't all I post too. I wonder how do 21 % of Black men who voted for Trump feel when they see the video he posted? I guess the safest bet is that they don't because they are in such a bubble that the bad shit never reaches them, but man, those guys and Latinos who voted for him and are having their cousins who show up to every meeting and do everything right roughed up, put in camps and deported must really feel weird at the moment. + Show Spoiler +Weird that oBlade now suddenly cares about 2nd amendment, I guess it's been enough time since those guys murdered a guy for legally owning a gun for him to be back on the 2nd amendment train. Also, interesting that his incel brain is not able to hold 2 things in it at the same time, such as intentional murder being on the level of 3rd world countries being caused by stupid policies while overall crime going down because that's a trend in worldwide. It's also weird that GH, despite obviously not being stupid can't understand the futility of his approach to arguing. Basically he's completely unable to internalize this: Fuck us for wanting to talk about the escalating cruelty and stupidity putting the whole world at risk, we should all talk about how shitty Chuck motherfuckign Schumer is, everything else is less evilism. Black people that support Republicans are basically saying "If you can't beat em, join em". Someone like Herman Cain knew what they signed up for, and died for it. They know about the racism. It's just a lot easier in many respects to find economic success (in a society that seemingly prizes that success above all else) as a Black person by cosigning/rationalizing/ignoring the racist/deplorable things your white club + Show Spoiler +On July 19 2019 08:15 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 06:54 maybenexttime wrote:On July 18 2019 06:43 KwarK wrote:I think you’re not distinguishing between white as a skin colour and white as an exclusionary social group that exerts power within a multicultural society. Let’s call them white skin and white club. White skin has been around forever but white dudes hanging out with white dudes didn’t need to make a big deal about it because what’d be the point. White club is a new thing because you can’t have an exclusionary club without first finding some non whites to not let join.
The membership criteria of white club aren’t just white skin and have changed over time. It used to be white male Anglo Saxon Protestant club, for example. What GH is saying is that white club is a construct, an expression of exclusivity by the dominant group in society to justify abhorrent treatment of people not in the club. Obviously white skin is biological, but white club isn’t.
And in case anyone didn’t know, the first rule of white club is YOU DO NOT TALK ABOUT WHITE CLUB. Sorry for bringing up a post from several pages back, but I found this post interesting and I don't think it garnered wider attention. Could you elaborate on that? To what extent do those two groups overlap? What fraction of the white skin population is part of the white club and conspires to undermine the non-white people? Roughly half of the white population votes for Democrats, so they're actively working against the white club, I'd presume. Are Asians part of the white club? If not, why are they one of the targets of affirmative action? I get the impression that there is little overlap between the white skin and white club groups. And yet the affirmative action discrimination seems to be based on one's affiliation to the former, not the latter. To me this seems awfully similar to 20th-century antisemitism, which used the privileged position of a subset of Jews to justify discrimination of Jews in general. These days all people of Northern European ancestry are in white club, but it wasn't always that way. If we take it back to the start of the US the founders were a bunch of incel neckbeards who all got in a room and said "anyone who doesn't look like us, doesn't think like us, or is poorer than us isn't in the club". No women, no blacks, no Catholics, no poors. It's not a conspiracy as you're suggesting with the insiders conspiring to undermine the others, just the monopolizing of power. You didn't employ people outside the club in skilled trades because you already knew a guy in the club who could do it and everyone knows that everyone outside of the club sucks, etc. If you're in the club and mediocre then you can train as a physician, if you're outside of the club but amazing then you can't because everyone knows girls can't be doctors and the gatekeepers are all in the club. The business owners are in the club borrowing money from the bankers who are in the club and trading with the shipping magnates who are in the club. That's why groups which today would be considered privileged (rich white women for example) were treated so poorly for so long (not allowed to vote etc.), they may have been white but they weren't in the club, it was pretty exclusive back then. The club monopolizes power because the club monopolizes power. Take the disenfranchisement laws I keep referencing. The chief of police and the election registrar are both in the club and as long as they're both in the club they're able to restrict the people appointing them to club members in a perfect loop. Unfortunately it's quite difficult to completely monopolize wealth, especially when the excluded communities form their own little Ireland or whatever in Boston. If the club collectively says "no Irish", as they did, and the Irish all say "screw you guys" and make their own little place then eventually you run the risk of rich Irishmen which makes the club look bad because you can't have a club that's built on the idea that all the wealth and power is held by club members when there are outsiders with wealth and power. And so the club slowly expands, by the early 1900s rich Catholics are allowed in, as long as they're male and white. Later women are allowed in, as long as they're rich and white. The 30s roll around and suddenly it's a difficult time to have all the rich white people dicking over everyone else all the time and there's a lot of people saying a lot of scary words like "revolution". The club can't throw open its doors entirely but what they can do is ease up on the rich requirement, while still enforcing the race requirement. By doing so they get a significant number of working class voters to effectively buy in to the system. As long as they believe that they're receiving a marginal benefit from the continuation of the status quo they'll prop it up, and it's becoming hard to prop it up without them. By this point white club is a pretty good name for it. Women and workers are allowed in. Hell, if you're rich enough you could probably even get away with being gay or Jewish, as long as you do it discreetly. It's less exclusive than it used to be but it's still a pretty great club to be in. If you go into a bank to borrow money for a mortgage then you and the bank manager have an unofficial understanding that you're both in the club. He knows he'll have no trouble explaining why he extended a line of credit to John Smith to his underwriters because John Smith is a good club name. If you go to buy a house in a neighbourhood of club members you can rely upon being welcomed. The club is ingrained in the understanding of the world at this point, if a club member applies to be a manager alongside a non club member then it just makes sense to hire the club member, both because of your own bias and the bias of all your customers. Even if you're super progressive for the 1950s and know the club is a sham, you don't want your customers leaving. If you're in the club you have access to education, jobs, credit, investments, and resources that non members just don't have because all the people controlling those things are in the club. The exact same still applies today. If I walk into a Porsche dealership and ask to test drive a car they're not going to mess around, they'll take a look at me and they'll recognize that I'm in the club. I look, sound, and dress like the kind of person who's in the club. It conforms to all of their internal biases, it's fine. It's the same if I go to a bank and ask for a loan, when I have to walk into a room of strangers and run a meeting, when I have an interaction with an elected official or a police officer. I'm given respect and deference because I've been born into a world where people like me get respect and deference and everyone understands that. I'm not ever going to worry that the police are going to give me a rough ride in the back of a truck because I know and they know that that kind of thing isn't done to club members. Being in the club means never having to prove your value to people. Obviously you can go the other direction, you can demonstrate that you have no value, but you've always got that great intro with your private membership. White club isn't actively conspiring, we don't have meetings, it's the monopolization of power by the group in power through cultural conditioning. Your presumption that Democrats are working against white club is false, as GH and MLK will tell you. Democrat strongholds are often the worst offenders when it comes to shit like school segregation which is a classic symptom of limiting access to education to club members. Democrats want all the social credibility of acknowledging privilege without any of the sweeping societal revolution needed to address it because at the end of the day being in the club is great and we'd all much rather feel bad about being in the club than close the club. Asians aren't a homogeneous group. They're not in white club but if they're the right kind of Asian they can get honorary memberships. You're not letting the dry cleaners in but you might let in the guy who owns a chain of a hundred dry cleaners. The overlap of white skin and white club isn't total but it's close. If your first language is Spanish, your English is heavily accented, and your last name is Gonzales then light skin isn't going to help that much. Alternatively if you're third gen Japanese American and middle class or higher than you're probably some kind of honorary member. It's absolutely nothing like antisemitism for the simple reason that the Jews did not control all the money and power in Europe and use it to turn everyone else into a second class citizen. If you're not in the club in America you're a second class citizen. You're more likely to be arrested, you're more likely to be convicted, you're less likely to be hired for jobs, you're more likely to have your civil rights taken away, and so forth. None of that was ever true for the antisemitic ethnic Germans living in Germany. bosses, peers, clients, political representatives. etc... say and do. You pretty much have to do it to some degree no matter what as a Black person in the US (or white club will ostracize/immiserate/imprison/kill you eventually). Doing it for Republicans can be quite lucrative, while doing it for libs is quite competitive, and doing it "for country" has often been seen as one of the most respectable options. It's how white clubbers have always behaved here though, since the bribe-threats of tribes that facilitated the creation of the US. I'm all for talking about the fascist fuckery we're all witnessing, but like ZerO (coincidentally the only other openly Black poster you all haven't driven away entirely yet, but also certainly no fan of mine), I'd also like to read discussions about what we can/should/will/are doing about it. No one here wants to work towards a socialist revolution. Fine, that's your prerogative. However, "run and hide" like Kwark plans, obviously just leaves the fascists in control of the wealthiest and most dangerous nuclear military in the world with no meaningful internal opposition (except perhaps for those that were rejected/unable to emigrate/flee as refugees). You rightly recognize that Schumer isn't cutting it, but that's just about as far as anyone can seem to get currently. By brother in Christ, I, and many others here join in in criticizing Dems at about 20 % the rate we criticize Republicans, approximately. I, personally, posted many things that show that I have 0 faith in Democrats being a good faith opposition, they are, like USA itself, a corporatist party who's primary goal, under the current, and basically any leadership since, what, Carter is to serve the people that are paying them. To me, this is the reason why Trump 1 and Trump 2 are a thing, they fucked over Bernie and pushed Hillary, they neutered Waltz and refused to make Kamala into anything other then a corporatist stooge by pushing the campaign into the direction that her Uber board buddy and other advisers decided was going to bring in the "white moderates" which is an idea so stupid that it's hard to believe it wasn't intentional sabotage. Don't even get me started on fucking Biden. When I texted a buddy of mine I came up with as IT for USA companies about the Trump / Obama video today I literally told him that Democrats are going to shoot themselves in their dicks by, again, pushing Newsome who is basically a male / white Kamala, no actual beliefs or stances, just an empty suit to enact the corporate agenda. Since he won't trigger the sexism and racism, he might actually win, but the next guy is going to be worse. I also believe, and I stated as such that the best hope for USA would be if Democrats coalesced around someone like AOC who, in the absence of them trying to fuck her over in the primaries would wipe the floor with Trump or JD Vance or DeSantis or any other moron they put who will retain the stink of Trump's dippers. We are not enemies, the problem is that you see all of us as enemies because you were somehow convinced that an impossible revolution where your side has none of the guns and espouses an ideology that entire USA has focused it's ire on for a 100 years is somehow going to win. + Show Spoiler +In the process of doing so, you are doing the same thing that so, so many have done before, from Jimmy Dore to Matt Taibi, coincidentally, those guys also share some of your other, brainwashed stances and are very clearly useful idiots for Russia, and now Trump, which is why people here despise the way you post, because the path you are on ends with your tongue on a fascist boot in a large majority of cases. You'd probably be surprised by how and why (probably which) people would push back on various parts of your description/analysis if that's the sort of stuff people discussed as often as they bicker with Sartres or whine about my posting. We saw a little of this when people were arguing with Light about nationalizing resources. I don't see you all as enemies (other than the unabashed fascist posters), despite the incessant personal attacks and puerile shitposting. I basically see many posters as: committed at this point. They can't go back, or they'd have to realize just how idiotic they were all this time, and how much of the stuff they supported goes against their core values. Which hurts a lot. So they just don't do it and dig deeper instead.
That is the nice thing about building a cult of idiocy. There is no way out that isn't so painful that most people won't take it. I wouldn't use "idiotic", but yeah, I think the evidence indicates this is what we're witnessing. I, for one, am willing to 100% sign Jankisa's analysis. Democrats are shit, but they are also the best hope the US has of somehow getting out of this without going full fascist. But for that to work, competent, charismatic people with ideas that actually improve the lives of the 99% need to rise to power within that party. The party will make that as hard as possible, and republicans will support them in that, because republicans love fighting corporatists. So it won't be easy. But it is still the only even vaguely plausible path that saves the US. This is a lot more plausible than the socialist revolution (TM) solving all problems at once, and everyone being totally on board with it. And this needs to happen quickly, because if Trump doesn't manage to do the full fascist thing, and a boring corporatist democrat wins and nothing improves, the next fascist is gonna be competent enough to make sure that no more real elections happen afterwards.
It would seem to me that LightSpectra clearly is not "100% willing to sign Jankisa's analysis" and that we know (because others also think Democrats should nominate an old corporatist white guy, despite the certain doom you two say that entails) light is not alone.
Arguably that election already happened, and project 2025 are those competent enough fascists.
On February 07 2026 08:05 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2026 07:54 LightSpectra wrote: Democrats are perceived as shit because this country is overwhelmingly conservative. The people craved Joe Biden, that's why he won more votes than any other candidate in history by a huge margin. Polls showed people overwhelmingly thought Kamala Harris was too left-wing, not too right-wing.
They can be dragged left if leftists show up to primaries and make it happen, but if leftists don't show up, Democrats have to move even more right to make up for it. Even if the chosen leftist candidate (e. g. Bernie Sanders) doesn't win, a big turnout makes the winning candidate have to shift their platform more to the left, something both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden did to win over Sanders supporters. By contrast, Bill Clinton decided to move the platform to the right in 1992 because not enough lefties turned out for the previous three elections and Democrats were tired of losing. The people wanted neoliberalism, that's what they voted for, that's what they got.
Boycotting elections because Democrats aren't left enough is literally the dumbest possible thing you could do as a leftist. It's like shooting yourself in the foot as a strategy to sprint faster. Republicans literally pay the Green Party to spoil the vote for that exact reason. If you go around telling people to boycott elections because Democrats aren't left enough, you're either working a psyop, or you fell for one. Also agreed. Even more than the democrats being shit, the US voters being shit is the core problem. But that is even harder to fix. When you then say this, it's basically just bringing us back to: It feels like we’re all doing the math on our current velocity toward the cliff and distance from it and maximum braking force, but the math isn’t actually very hard. We just keep recalculating because the result we keep getting is unfathomable
|
On February 07 2026 08:05 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2026 07:54 LightSpectra wrote: Democrats are perceived as shit because this country is overwhelmingly conservative. The people craved Joe Biden, that's why he won more votes than any other candidate in history by a huge margin. Polls showed people overwhelmingly thought Kamala Harris was too left-wing, not too right-wing.
They can be dragged left if leftists show up to primaries and make it happen, but if leftists don't show up, Democrats have to move even more right to make up for it. Even if the chosen leftist candidate (e. g. Bernie Sanders) doesn't win, a big turnout makes the winning candidate have to shift their platform more to the left, something both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden did to win over Sanders supporters. By contrast, Bill Clinton decided to move the platform to the right in 1992 because not enough lefties turned out for the previous three elections and Democrats were tired of losing. The people wanted neoliberalism, that's what they voted for, that's what they got.
Boycotting elections because Democrats aren't left enough is literally the dumbest possible thing you could do as a leftist. It's like shooting yourself in the foot as a strategy to sprint faster. Republicans literally pay the Green Party to spoil the vote for that exact reason. If you go around telling people to boycott elections because Democrats aren't left enough, you're either working a psyop, or you fell for one. Also agreed. Even more than the democrats being shit, the US voters being shit is the core problem. But that is even harder to fix.
It's only insurmountable if you surrender like GH has. (Assuming GH isn't a crypto-conservative, which seems more likely.)
There was a time when feudalism seemed insurmountable, when the divine right of kings seemed insurmountable, when chattel slavery seemed insurmountable, when gay marriage would never be legal. But they were all defeated by the moral courage of people wanting to change the world and using their voice, and later vote, to do so.
|
On February 07 2026 08:14 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2026 08:05 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 07:54 LightSpectra wrote: Democrats are perceived as shit because this country is overwhelmingly conservative. The people craved Joe Biden, that's why he won more votes than any other candidate in history by a huge margin. Polls showed people overwhelmingly thought Kamala Harris was too left-wing, not too right-wing.
They can be dragged left if leftists show up to primaries and make it happen, but if leftists don't show up, Democrats have to move even more right to make up for it. Even if the chosen leftist candidate (e. g. Bernie Sanders) doesn't win, a big turnout makes the winning candidate have to shift their platform more to the left, something both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden did to win over Sanders supporters. By contrast, Bill Clinton decided to move the platform to the right in 1992 because not enough lefties turned out for the previous three elections and Democrats were tired of losing. The people wanted neoliberalism, that's what they voted for, that's what they got.
Boycotting elections because Democrats aren't left enough is literally the dumbest possible thing you could do as a leftist. It's like shooting yourself in the foot as a strategy to sprint faster. Republicans literally pay the Green Party to spoil the vote for that exact reason. If you go around telling people to boycott elections because Democrats aren't left enough, you're either working a psyop, or you fell for one. Also agreed. Even more than the democrats being shit, the US voters being shit is the core problem. But that is even harder to fix. It's only insurmountable if you surrender like GH has. (Assuming GH isn't a crypto-conservative, which seems more likely.) There was a time when feudalism seemed insurmountable, when the divine right of kings seemed insurmountable, when chattel slavery seemed insurmountable, when gay marriage would never be legal. But they were all defeated by the moral courage of people wanting to change the world and using their voice, and later vote, to do so. It seems a bit naive to think that feudalism, monarchy or chattel slavery were overcome with a voice, as opposed to multiple wars. So if the corporatism in the US is as institutionalised as any of those things have been in the past... well, good luck using only your voice (and later your vote)!
|
Feudalism was voted abolished by the French National Assembly before any of the French revolutionary wars.
I've talked previously about how the Labour Party of the UK democratically, lawfully, peacefully nationalized 20% of their economy. There are no hard reasons the same thing can't be repeated today, it's just the barriers are different.
|
On February 07 2026 08:14 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2026 08:05 Simberto wrote:On February 07 2026 07:54 LightSpectra wrote: Democrats are perceived as shit because this country is overwhelmingly conservative. The people craved Joe Biden, that's why he won more votes than any other candidate in history by a huge margin. Polls showed people overwhelmingly thought Kamala Harris was too left-wing, not too right-wing.
They can be dragged left if leftists show up to primaries and make it happen, but if leftists don't show up, Democrats have to move even more right to make up for it. Even if the chosen leftist candidate (e. g. Bernie Sanders) doesn't win, a big turnout makes the winning candidate have to shift their platform more to the left, something both Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden did to win over Sanders supporters. By contrast, Bill Clinton decided to move the platform to the right in 1992 because not enough lefties turned out for the previous three elections and Democrats were tired of losing. The people wanted neoliberalism, that's what they voted for, that's what they got.
Boycotting elections because Democrats aren't left enough is literally the dumbest possible thing you could do as a leftist. It's like shooting yourself in the foot as a strategy to sprint faster. Republicans literally pay the Green Party to spoil the vote for that exact reason. If you go around telling people to boycott elections because Democrats aren't left enough, you're either working a psyop, or you fell for one. Also agreed. Even more than the democrats being shit, the US voters being shit is the core problem. But that is even harder to fix. It's only insurmountable if you surrender like GH has. (Assuming GH isn't a crypto-conservative, which seems more likely.) There was a time when feudalism seemed insurmountable, when the divine right of kings seemed insurmountable, when chattel slavery seemed insurmountable, when gay marriage would never be legal. But they were all defeated by the moral courage of people wanting to change the world and using their vote to do so. I haven't surrendered?
Contrary to what you believe, I vote (not for Republicans). I don't have a problem with people voting. I even recognize that voting has and will play a role in many liberation efforts.
I mentioned we need (and could basically have almost overnight) a 21st century Cybersyn project.
It wouldn't even sound especially socialist in the context of a modern society. It sounds like common sense that regular Democrat, independent and even Republican voters could get behind. Particularly if it leans more toward public co-op rather than "state owned".
I don't actually believe the people/voters are the problem (though I recognize there are plenty of hurdles there as well). There are people with actual power, money and influence that are the real obstacles and the sort of opposition everyone including Acro is going to point out to you.
|
GH votes for Jill Stein to keep his purity intact.
That she is funded by Russia (secret communists) and has dinner with such great socialists as Michal (I'm totally not bought by Russia) Flynn only furthers her purity.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/russians-launched-pro-jill-stein-social-media-blitz-help-trump-n951166
He will never be convinced, and he just likes to stir the pot and play victim. If you want to shut him down just play along and ask him for a plan of how to achieve socialism. Or ask him how he would avoid the problems that plagued previous or current communists. Then you get to hear to here crickets. Because the truth is an expert on Dems Bad/ US bad and does not know very much about socialism other than the first page. All the media he follows is not actual socialists and he drinks it down the same as MAGA folk.
|
Man reading about Trump is just crazy. Like how did you elect a spoiled 10 year old.
The post prompted anger from Democrats but also some rare criticism from Republicans, including the GOP’s only Black senator, Tim Scott, who spoke to Trump about the video.
But sadly even his one black friend couldn't convince him.
President Donald Trump would not apologize this evening for sharing a video depicting the Obamas as apes, saying he only saw the beginning of the clip. The White House has blamed the since-deleted post on a staffer, and Trump told reporters he “didn’t make a mistake.”
Must be my TDS acting up again to find this so embarrassing I physically cringe. You Republicans nailed finding the best man for the job. He's really solving lots of American problems. And the ones he hasn't he is spending his time to make it better for all of you.
|
I think Melania's documentary has inspired her husband. Donald Trump's posting of a definitely completely innocent monkey video is surely a teaser for a movie that he and Epstein once co-wrote and starred in, and now it'll be revealed in theaters all over the world... + Show Spoiler +
|
This is literally the worst timeline
|
Northern Ireland26237 Posts
On February 07 2026 14:48 decafchicken wrote: This is literally the worst timeline Most aggravating and irritating, that’s for sure
|
|
|
|
|
|