|
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 |
On March 13 2026 22:23 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2026 05:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 05:25 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 04:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:38 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:00 LightSpectra wrote:On March 13 2026 00:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
The reality is that white men (and to a lesser degree women) are the voters fucking it up for the rest of humanity >98% of voters of all races in the United States vote for Democrats or Republicans. How curious to say this when believing in uniparty imperialism, since Democrats would win everything if white men and most white women vanished overnight, who according to you are either just as bad or negligibly better. over 90,000,000 people didn't vote for either of them because the majority of the country finds both of them unfavorable but have been convinced they have no alternative. I think we all would actually agree that we'd be far better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of arguably sane party politics in the US. On March 13 2026 01:08 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 00:43 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 00:32 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 00:15 GreenHorizons wrote:[quote] No you wouldn't. Otherwise, I'm sure you can find people willing to sponsor your travel lol. It's not that I don't understand your thinking about practicality. This typical "white moderate" Niemöllerism masked as "practicality" neglects the fact that all of the best science says your idea of "practical" leads to us all to certain doom. [quote] Not nearly as much as people think, and we're making progress, despite those like yourselves that have fought us every step of the way. [quote]. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-socialism-gaining-ground-among-votersThe reality is that white men (and to a lesser degree women) are the voters fucking it up for the rest of humanity The task before us is to make socialism more real in our lives, not convince potential socialists to fall in line with the status quo which promises them certain doom. I honestly find it hilarious that you are referencing "science" in order to defend your completely pie in the sky approach to USA politics. What science is it? Das Kapital? Perhaps the works of Chomsky, who field tested his manufacturing consent techniques with his pal Epstein. As an European and as compared to Trump I long for Obama, fuck man, even Biden was amazing to compared to this, so I find it very rich that you think that "no I wouldn't". + Show Spoiler +I think your main problem is that you don't have the ability to understand that people with different opinions and views on the world that might be right exist, it makes you very obnoxious to deal with. You a climate denier too now? You literally wouldn't. "Manufacturing Consent" had some valuable insights, but I'm not really a fan of Chomsky. I come to socialism through the Black radical tradition (something seemingly no one here has any familiarity with beyond what I've explained). EDIT: I remember Mohdoo has read some Cedric Robinson and been better for it though. It's hard to understand you + Show Spoiler + when you are trying to be as pretentious as possible.
Since you seem to be extra delusional, here are some milestones on climate change fight:
Beneficial Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Inflation Reduction Act - Biden
Ratification of the Kigali Amendment - Obama
Signing the Paris Agreement - Obama
Clean Power Plan - Obama
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - Obama
Detrimental Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Repeal of the EPA Endangerment Finding - Trump
2 x Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement - Trump
Rescission of Methane Pollution Standards - Trump
Rescission of NEPA Climate Review Regulations - Trump
Repeal of the Clean Power Plan - Trump
Great gotcha there, you are very smart! I think it is a skill issue. You'd probably have better luck copy pasting it into an AI and having it explain it to you. Great deflection buddy, really shows how smart you are! You throw out a stupid example, gets told that it's stupid, with receipts and then you throw a temper tantrum because only AI can make a list of policies, right? + Show Spoiler +People voted for Biden, more people then ever, actually.
Then, Biden and Harris got panned and attacked for their "progressiveness", they got attacked by both right and left (this is where you and the rest of your ilk comes in) on everything else, the voter turnout was depressed and Trump won with a much larger margin then before.
I personally don't think the biggest reasons have anything to do with their progressiveness or lack of it, as stated many times, but it sure as fuck isn't because 90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough.
The only person in this thread, including both "centrists", normal progressives, leftists and right wingers who thinks that USA has a deep pool of untapped socialists is you. There is no one else, there is no polling, there are no political results, there is nothing, yet you refuse to live in reality.
You are just as delusional and lying to yourself and others as oBlade, and you are also getting triggered when shown who full of shit you are, just like oBlade.
Horseshoe theory in practice.
Also, occasionally it hits me how fucking funny it is that you (used to before tucking your tail and running away) used to stan for Russia against Ukraine, the most openly fascist country in the modern world, while you are trying to sell yourself as a progressive here.
Tankies man, brain rot is real. I'm talking about reading comprehension and how (apparently) a lack of it is impeding your (and Light, Gors, etc) ability to follow/make a coherent argument in response to what I'm saying. Instead you make strawmen like "90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough" and "only AI can make a list of policies, right?" to triumphantly defeat and self-soothe. I was saying that you copy pasting my post (and now our responses) into an AI would likely help you understand why your responses are nonsensical/silly/oblivious because it is not emotionally wrapped up in this discussion and could more easily articulate the logic presented. Unfortunately, brainrot is OP and you didn't/don't understand that. It's basically a "weather vs climate" discussion with you guys talking about the weather while I'm talking about the climate. The potential overlap would be in non-reformist reforms I'm still hoping we could all at least agree on us all being better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of sanity in US 2-party politics? I find it hilarious that you think that I need AI to reply to your drivel, but you do you buddy. Anyhow, I think that there is something with your analogy, weather vs climate. So if you are the guy worried about the climate, and we are the people worried about the weather, you are the guy lecturing us how stupid we are for not looking at the climate all the while we are trying to board up the house and get the family to the tornado shelter. No one cares about the climate during a storm, when shit is bad, you deal with things one thing at the time, we can worry about the climate when it's nice and sunny, when we are literally drowning in fucking fascism it's prudent on trying to find pragmatic ways to get out of it. I don't think you should need it, but I can definitely see how it could help you integrate the BRT context into your analysis without me having to write a treatise or you having to read several books. Basically, part of what I'm pointing out is that there are already people drowning and dying no matter how well you board up the house (in part because it's full of " white club" members and built on their exploitation as a foundation) and you're effectively irrefutably Niemöllering those people. Another part is that the "storm" isn't attacking the system, it is/is a product of the system. I'm sure the people drawining will be much better if we all stop trying to address the intimidate threat and focus on attacking the only people who are able to do something about the storm. Again, none of the positive developments for people of color or LGBTQ folks came from some fictional socialists, all of them came because "white moderates” came on board, they didn't come on board because people insulted them or kept screaming at them how they are a part of the problem, they came on board when they saw they are on the wrong side of history. What you are doing, actively, is saying that both parties in the US are villains, creating a false equivalence and alienating 80 % of the electorate, I have to read exactly 0 books to see that what you are doing is stupid and counter productive.
They'll continue dying indefinitely so long as people refuse to recognize the threat is coming from inside the "white club" house that is built on a foundation of the exploitation of the POC and LGBTQ folks you're trying to use as human shields for your Niemöllering.
You're just wrong/misinformed about the history of positive developments for POC and LGBTQ folks. This is part of why I suggested you use AI or preferably read some Cedric Robinson (or at least about his perspective) to help you integrate the history of the Black Radical Tradition into your analysis. There are other people here that know this (from previous discussions on how progress was won in the US) and could/should correct you on this so as to avoid the cognitive block you'll have hearing it from me.
Only about 2% of people (in the North) were abolitionists and Lincoln himself said "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..." as one example.
The short version is that history demonstrates that along with labor, basically none of the gains come from the politicians. The politicians just eventually accept (as surrogates for donors/capital) that they have to change the laws or social order will collapse because of disruptive direct actions. Progress most certainly doesn't come from prioritizing the fee-fees of white moderates.
Both parties can be villainous (and objectively are, along with their own supporters referring to them as a lesser "evil") without being a false equivalence.
You're basically doing the lib version of "the mean liberals socialists telling truths made me an Nazi appeaser". If coddling is what you're after, ignore politics and try a sex worker that does mommy play.
|
Northern Ireland26359 Posts
On March 14 2026 00:41 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2026 23:53 WombaT wrote:
OBlade isn’t an idiot, they can’t not observe this phenomenon outside of living in some bubble isolated from most mass media forms, which patently isn’t the case. You can't prove that, on the contrary there is plenty of evidence that he is one.
While the end result is ultimately the same, for my money they’re a non-idiot acting in the service of idiocy for whatever reason.
|
Voting for the same political party as 90% of POC and LGBTQ vote for is using them as human shields.
An out-of-context quote from the guy who abolished slavery is proof that he never cared about abolishing slavery.
You should use the misinformation vortex commonly called "AI" to learn similar things. I am very smart.
|
On March 13 2026 23:20 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Sorry Oblade about the military parades, that was indeed entirely wrong. I recalled something about Trump adding a new parade for his birthday or whatever and wrongly internalized it in my brain and then regurgiated it without thinking.
I still think the point that Trump's regime is glorifying military strength to a greater degree than other presidents is correct though, even if the second half of that sentence I wrote is entirely wrong.
Got it. He did luck out because his birthday is the same as the birthday the Army considers for itself as having predated the foundation of the nation when it was the Continental Army in the Revolution.
On March 13 2026 23:39 doubleupgradeobbies! wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2026 22:04 oBlade wrote:
Hats are not a cult of personality. Hats are clothing. Writing on them can express support.
Yes, hats are clothing, Writing on them can express support, nice cherry picking. Do you often see other large groups of wearing any other political slogan around in their every day life outside of an explicitly political context? Of course hats are just the visible outward symptom in the context of a cohort of people people who will swallow bullshit like '[tarriffs] have made us very rich as a country' or 'I will build a wall, and I will have Mexico pay for that wall'.
If by "large groups" you mean specific masses of people, I don't see that for MAGA either. I see individual people wear hats.
If you do mean individuals, I see them wear all the things I already listed.
On March 13 2026 23:39 doubleupgradeobbies! wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2026 22:04 oBlade wrote:
You can't pathologize only support and not opposition. You end up with a lopsided worldview where revolutionary opposition is the default moral good and supporting things is evil.
In the context of a forum discussion, I absolutely can. Because, in the context of my point, the opposition being a cult would neither negate the support being a cult, nor does it in any way effect whether or not this is an indicator of fascism.
I got it. If you want to think everyone's a cult, that's certainly consistent. Adding "fascism" only to the clothes that won is weird, it makes winning hats S-tier bad while losing t-shirts are only A-tier bad. My point is not Y is also a cult so X isn't. My point is if this is common innocuous behavior then rather than concluding Y and Z are abounding cults, the initial assumption X is a cult might be worth taking another look at.
On March 13 2026 23:39 doubleupgradeobbies! wrote:Show nested quote +
People who wear "He Will Not Divide Us" and "Love Trumps Hate" t-shirts are not members of a cult of antipersonality by that fact alone. Just because there's no election now. They are just showing and broadcasting opinions. Which is specifically protected by our Bill of Rights.
Ok, sure, if there were large numbers of people doing this outside of specifically political contexts, that might not technically be a cult because there isn't a central figure of support here... but I agree, the thought behind it is pretty culty. I don't really see how the Bill of Rights is relevant. Cult-like behaviour isn't necessarily (or even usually) illegal?
Cults don't need a figure. Cults of personality do but there are cults besides of personality.
I'm just not impressed at you gatekeeping "context." People buy Creed t-shirts and wear them at places other than Creed concerts. Yankees hats are also worn in football season. Your standards of normalcy that they are supposed to remain in their designated compartments doesn't seem the same as western free expression. As long as more people get randomly attacked for wearing red hats than anything else, I'm on the don't jump to conclusions demonizing clothes side.
You see more MAGA hats than Build Back Better hats now because winning is stylish, and also "MAGA" is aesthetically more stylish. (Similar to why Newsom and leftists can't help but copy and imitate Trump, or do Trump impressions.) I absolutely see Love Trumps Hate, He Will Not Divide Us, #RESIST. I saw plenty of Hope and Change and Yes We Can t-shirts. Saw many more people watch Obama be inaugurated. These are not irrational behaviors. You're allowed to just like people and things. If you're Australian you might get only a partial seep of US culture and think red hats are the only merch that circulate, I don't know.
|
Do you think people who wear Creed shirts would support Creed committing a violent insurrection against Congress to nullify the U.S. Constitution?
|
On March 14 2026 01:12 LightSpectra wrote:
Do you think people who wear Creed shirts would support Creed committing a violent insurrection against Congress to nullify the U.S. Constitution?
I think people who wear Michael Jackson shirts are not supporters of a pedophile. They are fans because they don't think he's a pedophile.
|
On March 14 2026 01:17 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2026 01:12 LightSpectra wrote:
Do you think people who wear Creed shirts would support Creed committing a violent insurrection against Congress to nullify the U.S. Constitution? I think people who wear Michael Jackson shirts are not supporters of a pedophile. They are fans because they don't think he's a pedophile.
I didn't even bring up Trump repeatedly covering up files implicating him as a child molester. What a curious thing to mention apropos to nothing.
Edit: And what's weirder is the fact that the evidence for Michael Jackson being a pedophile was extremely strong, it was a confirmed fact that he slept nude next to underage boys and owned magazines of underage boys' faces photoshopped onto adult porn stars. You sure you want people wearing Trump merch to be compared to MJ fans?
|
On March 14 2026 01:04 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2026 00:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 22:23 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 05:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 05:25 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 04:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:38 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:00 LightSpectra wrote:On March 13 2026 00:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
The reality is that white men (and to a lesser degree women) are the voters fucking it up for the rest of humanity >98% of voters of all races in the United States vote for Democrats or Republicans. How curious to say this when believing in uniparty imperialism, since Democrats would win everything if white men and most white women vanished overnight, who according to you are either just as bad or negligibly better. over 90,000,000 people didn't vote for either of them because the majority of the country finds both of them unfavorable but have been convinced they have no alternative. I think we all would actually agree that we'd be far better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of arguably sane party politics in the US. On March 13 2026 01:08 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 00:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
You a climate denier too now?
You literally wouldn't.
"Manufacturing Consent" had some valuable insights, but I'm not really a fan of Chomsky. I come to socialism through the Black radical tradition (something seemingly no one here has any familiarity with beyond what I've explained).
EDIT: I remember Mohdoo has read some Cedric Robinson and been better for it though.
It's hard to understand you + Show Spoiler + when you are trying to be as pretentious as possible.
Since you seem to be extra delusional, here are some milestones on climate change fight:
Beneficial Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Inflation Reduction Act - Biden
Ratification of the Kigali Amendment - Obama
Signing the Paris Agreement - Obama
Clean Power Plan - Obama
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - Obama
Detrimental Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Repeal of the EPA Endangerment Finding - Trump
2 x Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement - Trump
Rescission of Methane Pollution Standards - Trump
Rescission of NEPA Climate Review Regulations - Trump
Repeal of the Clean Power Plan - Trump
Great gotcha there, you are very smart! I think it is a skill issue. You'd probably have better luck copy pasting it into an AI and having it explain it to you. Great deflection buddy, really shows how smart you are! You throw out a stupid example, gets told that it's stupid, with receipts and then you throw a temper tantrum because only AI can make a list of policies, right? + Show Spoiler +People voted for Biden, more people then ever, actually.
Then, Biden and Harris got panned and attacked for their "progressiveness", they got attacked by both right and left (this is where you and the rest of your ilk comes in) on everything else, the voter turnout was depressed and Trump won with a much larger margin then before.
I personally don't think the biggest reasons have anything to do with their progressiveness or lack of it, as stated many times, but it sure as fuck isn't because 90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough.
The only person in this thread, including both "centrists", normal progressives, leftists and right wingers who thinks that USA has a deep pool of untapped socialists is you. There is no one else, there is no polling, there are no political results, there is nothing, yet you refuse to live in reality.
You are just as delusional and lying to yourself and others as oBlade, and you are also getting triggered when shown who full of shit you are, just like oBlade.
Horseshoe theory in practice.
Also, occasionally it hits me how fucking funny it is that you (used to before tucking your tail and running away) used to stan for Russia against Ukraine, the most openly fascist country in the modern world, while you are trying to sell yourself as a progressive here.
Tankies man, brain rot is real. I'm talking about reading comprehension and how (apparently) a lack of it is impeding your (and Light, Gors, etc) ability to follow/make a coherent argument in response to what I'm saying. Instead you make strawmen like "90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough" and "only AI can make a list of policies, right?" to triumphantly defeat and self-soothe. I was saying that you copy pasting my post (and now our responses) into an AI would likely help you understand why your responses are nonsensical/silly/oblivious because it is not emotionally wrapped up in this discussion and could more easily articulate the logic presented. Unfortunately, brainrot is OP and you didn't/don't understand that. It's basically a "weather vs climate" discussion with you guys talking about the weather while I'm talking about the climate. The potential overlap would be in non-reformist reforms I'm still hoping we could all at least agree on us all being better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of sanity in US 2-party politics? I find it hilarious that you think that I need AI to reply to your drivel, but you do you buddy. Anyhow, I think that there is something with your analogy, weather vs climate. So if you are the guy worried about the climate, and we are the people worried about the weather, you are the guy lecturing us how stupid we are for not looking at the climate all the while we are trying to board up the house and get the family to the tornado shelter. No one cares about the climate during a storm, when shit is bad, you deal with things one thing at the time, we can worry about the climate when it's nice and sunny, when we are literally drowning in fucking fascism it's prudent on trying to find pragmatic ways to get out of it. I don't think you should need it, but I can definitely see how it could help you integrate the BRT context into your analysis without me having to write a treatise or you having to read several books. Basically, part of what I'm pointing out is that there are already people drowning and dying no matter how well you board up the house (in part because it's full of " white club" members and built on their exploitation as a foundation) and you're effectively irrefutably Niemöllering those people. Another part is that the "storm" isn't attacking the system, it is/is a product of the system. I'm sure the people drawining will be much better if we all stop trying to address the intimidate threat and focus on attacking the only people who are able to do something about the storm. Again, none of the positive developments for people of color or LGBTQ folks came from some fictional socialists, all of them came because "white moderates” came on board, they didn't come on board because people insulted them or kept screaming at them how they are a part of the problem, they came on board when they saw they are on the wrong side of history. What you are doing, actively, is saying that both parties in the US are villains, creating a false equivalence and alienating 80 % of the electorate, I have to read exactly 0 books to see that what you are doing is stupid and counter productive. They'll continue dying indefinitely so long as people refuse to recognize the threat is coming from inside the " white club" house that is built on a foundation of the exploitation of the POC and LGBTQ folks you're trying to use as human shields for your Niemöllering. You're just wrong/misinformed about the history of positive developments for POC and LGBTQ folks. This is part of why I suggested you use AI or preferably read some Cedric Robinson (or at least about his perspective) to help you integrate the history of the Black Radical Tradition into your analysis. There are other people here that know this (from previous discussions on how progress was won in the US) and could/should correct you on this so as to avoid the cognitive block you'll have hearing it from me. Only about 2% of people (in the North) were abolitionists and Lincoln himself said "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..." as one example. The short version is that history demonstrates that along with labor, basically none of the gains come from the politicians. The politicians just eventually accept (as surrogates for donors/capital) that they have to change the laws or social order will collapse because of disruptive direct actions. Progress most certainly doesn't come from prioritizing the fee-fees of white moderates. Both parties can be villainous (and objectively are, along with their own supporters referring to them as a lesser "evil") without being a false equivalence. You're basically doing the lib version of "the mean liberals socialists telling truths made me an Nazi appeaser". If coddling is what you're after, ignore politics and try a sex worker that does mommy play. Voting for the same political party as 90% of POC and LGBTQ vote for is using them as human shields. An out-of-context quote from the guy who abolished slavery is proof that he never cared about abolishing slavery. You should use the misinformation vortex commonly called "AI" to learn similar things. I am very smart.
I'd prefer people read books and stuff (hell a wiki article would do wonders for some of you sometimes) but you're all typically too busy reading/responding to oBlade/eek/Sartres type posts in order to feed your desperation for your incessant mocking and gawking. That is actually the counterproductive energy in this dynamic.
|
Northern Ireland26359 Posts
On March 14 2026 00:46 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2026 22:23 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 05:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 05:25 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 04:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:38 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:00 LightSpectra wrote:On March 13 2026 00:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
The reality is that white men (and to a lesser degree women) are the voters fucking it up for the rest of humanity >98% of voters of all races in the United States vote for Democrats or Republicans. How curious to say this when believing in uniparty imperialism, since Democrats would win everything if white men and most white women vanished overnight, who according to you are either just as bad or negligibly better. over 90,000,000 people didn't vote for either of them because the majority of the country finds both of them unfavorable but have been convinced they have no alternative. I think we all would actually agree that we'd be far better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of arguably sane party politics in the US. On March 13 2026 01:08 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 00:43 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 00:32 Jankisa wrote:[quote] I honestly find it hilarious that you are referencing "science" in order to defend your completely pie in the sky approach to USA politics. What science is it? Das Kapital? Perhaps the works of Chomsky, who field tested his manufacturing consent techniques with his pal Epstein. As an European and as compared to Trump I long for Obama, fuck man, even Biden was amazing to compared to this, so I find it very rich that you think that "no I wouldn't". + Show Spoiler +I think your main problem is that you don't have the ability to understand that people with different opinions and views on the world that might be right exist, it makes you very obnoxious to deal with. You a climate denier too now? You literally wouldn't. "Manufacturing Consent" had some valuable insights, but I'm not really a fan of Chomsky. I come to socialism through the Black radical tradition (something seemingly no one here has any familiarity with beyond what I've explained). EDIT: I remember Mohdoo has read some Cedric Robinson and been better for it though. It's hard to understand you + Show Spoiler + when you are trying to be as pretentious as possible.
Since you seem to be extra delusional, here are some milestones on climate change fight:
Beneficial Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Inflation Reduction Act - Biden
Ratification of the Kigali Amendment - Obama
Signing the Paris Agreement - Obama
Clean Power Plan - Obama
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - Obama
Detrimental Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Repeal of the EPA Endangerment Finding - Trump
2 x Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement - Trump
Rescission of Methane Pollution Standards - Trump
Rescission of NEPA Climate Review Regulations - Trump
Repeal of the Clean Power Plan - Trump
Great gotcha there, you are very smart! I think it is a skill issue. You'd probably have better luck copy pasting it into an AI and having it explain it to you. Great deflection buddy, really shows how smart you are! You throw out a stupid example, gets told that it's stupid, with receipts and then you throw a temper tantrum because only AI can make a list of policies, right? + Show Spoiler +People voted for Biden, more people then ever, actually.
Then, Biden and Harris got panned and attacked for their "progressiveness", they got attacked by both right and left (this is where you and the rest of your ilk comes in) on everything else, the voter turnout was depressed and Trump won with a much larger margin then before.
I personally don't think the biggest reasons have anything to do with their progressiveness or lack of it, as stated many times, but it sure as fuck isn't because 90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough.
The only person in this thread, including both "centrists", normal progressives, leftists and right wingers who thinks that USA has a deep pool of untapped socialists is you. There is no one else, there is no polling, there are no political results, there is nothing, yet you refuse to live in reality.
You are just as delusional and lying to yourself and others as oBlade, and you are also getting triggered when shown who full of shit you are, just like oBlade.
Horseshoe theory in practice.
Also, occasionally it hits me how fucking funny it is that you (used to before tucking your tail and running away) used to stan for Russia against Ukraine, the most openly fascist country in the modern world, while you are trying to sell yourself as a progressive here.
Tankies man, brain rot is real. I'm talking about reading comprehension and how (apparently) a lack of it is impeding your (and Light, Gors, etc) ability to follow/make a coherent argument in response to what I'm saying. Instead you make strawmen like "90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough" and "only AI can make a list of policies, right?" to triumphantly defeat and self-soothe. I was saying that you copy pasting my post (and now our responses) into an AI would likely help you understand why your responses are nonsensical/silly/oblivious because it is not emotionally wrapped up in this discussion and could more easily articulate the logic presented. Unfortunately, brainrot is OP and you didn't/don't understand that. It's basically a "weather vs climate" discussion with you guys talking about the weather while I'm talking about the climate. The potential overlap would be in non-reformist reforms I'm still hoping we could all at least agree on us all being better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of sanity in US 2-party politics? I find it hilarious that you think that I need AI to reply to your drivel, but you do you buddy. Anyhow, I think that there is something with your analogy, weather vs climate. So if you are the guy worried about the climate, and we are the people worried about the weather, you are the guy lecturing us how stupid we are for not looking at the climate all the while we are trying to board up the house and get the family to the tornado shelter. No one cares about the climate during a storm, when shit is bad, you deal with things one thing at the time, we can worry about the climate when it's nice and sunny, when we are literally drowning in fucking fascism it's prudent on trying to find pragmatic ways to get out of it. I don't think you should need it, but I can definitely see how it could help you integrate the BRT context into your analysis without me having to write a treatise or you having to read several books. Basically, part of what I'm pointing out is that there are already people drowning and dying no matter how well you board up the house (in part because it's full of " white club" members and built on their exploitation as a foundation) and you're effectively irrefutably Niemöllering those people. Another part is that the "storm" isn't attacking the system, it is/is a product of the system. I'm sure the people drawining will be much better if we all stop trying to address the intimidate threat and focus on attacking the only people who are able to do something about the storm. Again, none of the positive developments for people of color or LGBTQ folks came from some fictional socialists, all of them came because "white moderates” came on board, they didn't come on board because people insulted them or kept screaming at them how they are a part of the problem, they came on board when they saw they are on the wrong side of history. What you are doing, actively, is saying that both parties in the US are villains, creating a false equivalence and alienating 80 % of the electorate, I have to read exactly 0 books to see that what you are doing is stupid and counter productive. They'll continue dying indefinitely so long as people refuse to recognize the threat is coming from inside the " white club" house that is built on a foundation of the exploitation of the POC and LGBTQ folks you're trying to use as human shields for your Niemöllering. You're just wrong/misinformed about the history of positive developments for POC and LGBTQ folks. This is part of why I suggested you use AI or read some Cedric Robinson (or at least about his perspective) to help you integrate the history of the Black Radical Tradition into your analysis. There are other people here that know this (from previous discussions on how progress was won in the US) and could/should correct you on this so as to avoid the cognitive block you'll have hearing it from me. Only about 2% of people (in the North) were abolitionists and Lincoln himself said "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..." as one example. The short version is that history demonstrates that along with labor, basically none of the gains come from the politicians. The politicians just eventually accept (as surrogates for donors/capital) that they have to change the laws or social order will collapse because of disruptive direct actions. Progress most certainly doesn't come from prioritizing the fee-fees of white moderates. Both parties can be villainous (and objectively are, along with their own supporters referring to them as a lesser "evil") without being a false equivalence. You're basically doing the lib version of "the mean liberals socialists telling truths made me an Nazi appeaser". If coddling is what you're after, ignore politics and try a sex worker that does mommy play.
The history tends to show that those in the middle ground don’t drive change, but it’s when relative radicals open a path, actual change occurs when the ‘Niemollers’ move with it.
Often on an issue that to modern sensibilities seems insane that it was ever a question.
But what’s the cause here? There’s no real great obvious underlying structural injustice to play hardball on and shame the ‘white moderate’. It’s not women being people, or black folks being people, or why are we criminalising gay people is it?
If the cause as it were is preventing the encroachment of Fascism in the United States, and you did fuck all, the easiest, least sacrificial political action possible to do so, there is no moral high ground or shame leverage that one can prick the conscience of Joe and Jane liberal with.
‘You need to work harder to stop Fascism while I (at least rhetorically) worked against very basic bare minimum mitigation’ is not something you can sell to anyone. Even people who’ll jump on the newest NFT and time share schemes will go ‘hold on a minute…’
I think you’ve good political instincts in other areas but how you can’t see this does utterly baffle me
|
On March 14 2026 01:20 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2026 01:04 LightSpectra wrote:On March 14 2026 00:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 22:23 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 05:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 05:25 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 04:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:38 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:00 LightSpectra wrote:
[quote]
>98% of voters of all races in the United States vote for Democrats or Republicans. How curious to say this when believing in uniparty imperialism, since Democrats would win everything if white men and most white women vanished overnight, who according to you are either just as bad or negligibly better. over 90,000,000 people didn't vote for either of them because the majority of the country finds both of them unfavorable but have been convinced they have no alternative. I think we all would actually agree that we'd be far better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of arguably sane party politics in the US. On March 13 2026 01:08 Jankisa wrote:[quote] It's hard to understand you + Show Spoiler + when you are trying to be as pretentious as possible.
Since you seem to be extra delusional, here are some milestones on climate change fight:
Beneficial Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Inflation Reduction Act - Biden
Ratification of the Kigali Amendment - Obama
Signing the Paris Agreement - Obama
Clean Power Plan - Obama
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - Obama
Detrimental Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Repeal of the EPA Endangerment Finding - Trump
2 x Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement - Trump
Rescission of Methane Pollution Standards - Trump
Rescission of NEPA Climate Review Regulations - Trump
Repeal of the Clean Power Plan - Trump
Great gotcha there, you are very smart! I think it is a skill issue. You'd probably have better luck copy pasting it into an AI and having it explain it to you. Great deflection buddy, really shows how smart you are! You throw out a stupid example, gets told that it's stupid, with receipts and then you throw a temper tantrum because only AI can make a list of policies, right? + Show Spoiler +People voted for Biden, more people then ever, actually.
Then, Biden and Harris got panned and attacked for their "progressiveness", they got attacked by both right and left (this is where you and the rest of your ilk comes in) on everything else, the voter turnout was depressed and Trump won with a much larger margin then before.
I personally don't think the biggest reasons have anything to do with their progressiveness or lack of it, as stated many times, but it sure as fuck isn't because 90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough.
The only person in this thread, including both "centrists", normal progressives, leftists and right wingers who thinks that USA has a deep pool of untapped socialists is you. There is no one else, there is no polling, there are no political results, there is nothing, yet you refuse to live in reality.
You are just as delusional and lying to yourself and others as oBlade, and you are also getting triggered when shown who full of shit you are, just like oBlade.
Horseshoe theory in practice.
Also, occasionally it hits me how fucking funny it is that you (used to before tucking your tail and running away) used to stan for Russia against Ukraine, the most openly fascist country in the modern world, while you are trying to sell yourself as a progressive here.
Tankies man, brain rot is real. I'm talking about reading comprehension and how (apparently) a lack of it is impeding your (and Light, Gors, etc) ability to follow/make a coherent argument in response to what I'm saying. Instead you make strawmen like "90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough" and "only AI can make a list of policies, right?" to triumphantly defeat and self-soothe. I was saying that you copy pasting my post (and now our responses) into an AI would likely help you understand why your responses are nonsensical/silly/oblivious because it is not emotionally wrapped up in this discussion and could more easily articulate the logic presented. Unfortunately, brainrot is OP and you didn't/don't understand that. It's basically a "weather vs climate" discussion with you guys talking about the weather while I'm talking about the climate. The potential overlap would be in non-reformist reforms I'm still hoping we could all at least agree on us all being better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of sanity in US 2-party politics? I find it hilarious that you think that I need AI to reply to your drivel, but you do you buddy. Anyhow, I think that there is something with your analogy, weather vs climate. So if you are the guy worried about the climate, and we are the people worried about the weather, you are the guy lecturing us how stupid we are for not looking at the climate all the while we are trying to board up the house and get the family to the tornado shelter. No one cares about the climate during a storm, when shit is bad, you deal with things one thing at the time, we can worry about the climate when it's nice and sunny, when we are literally drowning in fucking fascism it's prudent on trying to find pragmatic ways to get out of it. I don't think you should need it, but I can definitely see how it could help you integrate the BRT context into your analysis without me having to write a treatise or you having to read several books. Basically, part of what I'm pointing out is that there are already people drowning and dying no matter how well you board up the house (in part because it's full of " white club" members and built on their exploitation as a foundation) and you're effectively irrefutably Niemöllering those people. Another part is that the "storm" isn't attacking the system, it is/is a product of the system. I'm sure the people drawining will be much better if we all stop trying to address the intimidate threat and focus on attacking the only people who are able to do something about the storm. Again, none of the positive developments for people of color or LGBTQ folks came from some fictional socialists, all of them came because "white moderates” came on board, they didn't come on board because people insulted them or kept screaming at them how they are a part of the problem, they came on board when they saw they are on the wrong side of history. What you are doing, actively, is saying that both parties in the US are villains, creating a false equivalence and alienating 80 % of the electorate, I have to read exactly 0 books to see that what you are doing is stupid and counter productive. They'll continue dying indefinitely so long as people refuse to recognize the threat is coming from inside the " white club" house that is built on a foundation of the exploitation of the POC and LGBTQ folks you're trying to use as human shields for your Niemöllering. You're just wrong/misinformed about the history of positive developments for POC and LGBTQ folks. This is part of why I suggested you use AI or preferably read some Cedric Robinson (or at least about his perspective) to help you integrate the history of the Black Radical Tradition into your analysis. There are other people here that know this (from previous discussions on how progress was won in the US) and could/should correct you on this so as to avoid the cognitive block you'll have hearing it from me. Only about 2% of people (in the North) were abolitionists and Lincoln himself said "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..." as one example. The short version is that history demonstrates that along with labor, basically none of the gains come from the politicians. The politicians just eventually accept (as surrogates for donors/capital) that they have to change the laws or social order will collapse because of disruptive direct actions. Progress most certainly doesn't come from prioritizing the fee-fees of white moderates. Both parties can be villainous (and objectively are, along with their own supporters referring to them as a lesser "evil") without being a false equivalence. You're basically doing the lib version of "the mean liberals socialists telling truths made me an Nazi appeaser". If coddling is what you're after, ignore politics and try a sex worker that does mommy play. Voting for the same political party as 90% of POC and LGBTQ vote for is using them as human shields. An out-of-context quote from the guy who abolished slavery is proof that he never cared about abolishing slavery. You should use the misinformation vortex commonly called "AI" to learn similar things. I am very smart. I'd prefer people read books and stuff (hell a wiki article would do wonders for some of you sometimes) but you're all typically too busy reading/responding to oBlade/eek/ Sartres type posts in order to feed your desperation for your incessant mocking and gawking. That is actually the counterproductive energy in this dynamic.
In what ways does this post you made, or many of them, not constitute the “mocking and gawking” you have complained about 100s of times.
Glass house and all that mate.
|
The constant references to Niemoeller is also interesting. He's the example par excellence of someone who spent their entire (edit: post-war) life regretting not voting against the Nazis. If your position is "don't vote for Democrats because letting fascists win elections is actually a better way to stop fascism," you should probably stop reminding people of the guy who spent his entire post-war life lamenting letting fascists win elections.
Somewhat also like the references to "white moderates", which is what MLK Jr. called people who opposed civil disobedience to fight voter suppression, when GH's position is that people should suppress their own votes because electoralism doesn't work.
Telling people to read books so they can identify your tortured mis-references sure is something. Like a rich person who shoplifts petty amounts, it almost seems more like a cry for help.
|
On March 14 2026 01:26 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2026 00:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 22:23 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 05:57 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 05:25 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 04:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:38 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 01:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 13 2026 01:00 LightSpectra wrote:On March 13 2026 00:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
The reality is that white men (and to a lesser degree women) are the voters fucking it up for the rest of humanity >98% of voters of all races in the United States vote for Democrats or Republicans. How curious to say this when believing in uniparty imperialism, since Democrats would win everything if white men and most white women vanished overnight, who according to you are either just as bad or negligibly better. over 90,000,000 people didn't vote for either of them because the majority of the country finds both of them unfavorable but have been convinced they have no alternative. I think we all would actually agree that we'd be far better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of arguably sane party politics in the US. On March 13 2026 01:08 Jankisa wrote:On March 13 2026 00:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
You a climate denier too now?
You literally wouldn't.
"Manufacturing Consent" had some valuable insights, but I'm not really a fan of Chomsky. I come to socialism through the Black radical tradition (something seemingly no one here has any familiarity with beyond what I've explained).
EDIT: I remember Mohdoo has read some Cedric Robinson and been better for it though.
It's hard to understand you + Show Spoiler + when you are trying to be as pretentious as possible.
Since you seem to be extra delusional, here are some milestones on climate change fight:
Beneficial Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Inflation Reduction Act - Biden
Ratification of the Kigali Amendment - Obama
Signing the Paris Agreement - Obama
Clean Power Plan - Obama
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - Obama
Detrimental Climate Policies of the last 20 years:
Repeal of the EPA Endangerment Finding - Trump
2 x Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement - Trump
Rescission of Methane Pollution Standards - Trump
Rescission of NEPA Climate Review Regulations - Trump
Repeal of the Clean Power Plan - Trump
Great gotcha there, you are very smart! I think it is a skill issue. You'd probably have better luck copy pasting it into an AI and having it explain it to you. Great deflection buddy, really shows how smart you are! You throw out a stupid example, gets told that it's stupid, with receipts and then you throw a temper tantrum because only AI can make a list of policies, right? + Show Spoiler +People voted for Biden, more people then ever, actually.
Then, Biden and Harris got panned and attacked for their "progressiveness", they got attacked by both right and left (this is where you and the rest of your ilk comes in) on everything else, the voter turnout was depressed and Trump won with a much larger margin then before.
I personally don't think the biggest reasons have anything to do with their progressiveness or lack of it, as stated many times, but it sure as fuck isn't because 90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough.
The only person in this thread, including both "centrists", normal progressives, leftists and right wingers who thinks that USA has a deep pool of untapped socialists is you. There is no one else, there is no polling, there are no political results, there is nothing, yet you refuse to live in reality.
You are just as delusional and lying to yourself and others as oBlade, and you are also getting triggered when shown who full of shit you are, just like oBlade.
Horseshoe theory in practice.
Also, occasionally it hits me how fucking funny it is that you (used to before tucking your tail and running away) used to stan for Russia against Ukraine, the most openly fascist country in the modern world, while you are trying to sell yourself as a progressive here.
Tankies man, brain rot is real. I'm talking about reading comprehension and how (apparently) a lack of it is impeding your (and Light, Gors, etc) ability to follow/make a coherent argument in response to what I'm saying. Instead you make strawmen like "90 million socialists stayed home because Kamala wasn't pure enough" and "only AI can make a list of policies, right?" to triumphantly defeat and self-soothe. I was saying that you copy pasting my post (and now our responses) into an AI would likely help you understand why your responses are nonsensical/silly/oblivious because it is not emotionally wrapped up in this discussion and could more easily articulate the logic presented. Unfortunately, brainrot is OP and you didn't/don't understand that. It's basically a "weather vs climate" discussion with you guys talking about the weather while I'm talking about the climate. The potential overlap would be in non-reformist reforms I'm still hoping we could all at least agree on us all being better off if Democrats took their rightful place as the far-right edge of sanity in US 2-party politics? I find it hilarious that you think that I need AI to reply to your drivel, but you do you buddy. Anyhow, I think that there is something with your analogy, weather vs climate. So if you are the guy worried about the climate, and we are the people worried about the weather, you are the guy lecturing us how stupid we are for not looking at the climate all the while we are trying to board up the house and get the family to the tornado shelter. No one cares about the climate during a storm, when shit is bad, you deal with things one thing at the time, we can worry about the climate when it's nice and sunny, when we are literally drowning in fucking fascism it's prudent on trying to find pragmatic ways to get out of it. I don't think you should need it, but I can definitely see how it could help you integrate the BRT context into your analysis without me having to write a treatise or you having to read several books. Basically, part of what I'm pointing out is that there are already people drowning and dying no matter how well you board up the house (in part because it's full of " white club" members and built on their exploitation as a foundation) and you're effectively irrefutably Niemöllering those people. Another part is that the "storm" isn't attacking the system, it is/is a product of the system. I'm sure the people drawining will be much better if we all stop trying to address the intimidate threat and focus on attacking the only people who are able to do something about the storm. Again, none of the positive developments for people of color or LGBTQ folks came from some fictional socialists, all of them came because "white moderates” came on board, they didn't come on board because people insulted them or kept screaming at them how they are a part of the problem, they came on board when they saw they are on the wrong side of history. What you are doing, actively, is saying that both parties in the US are villains, creating a false equivalence and alienating 80 % of the electorate, I have to read exactly 0 books to see that what you are doing is stupid and counter productive. They'll continue dying indefinitely so long as people refuse to recognize the threat is coming from inside the " white club" house that is built on a foundation of the exploitation of the POC and LGBTQ folks you're trying to use as human shields for your Niemöllering. You're just wrong/misinformed about the history of positive developments for POC and LGBTQ folks. This is part of why I suggested you use AI or read some Cedric Robinson (or at least about his perspective) to help you integrate the history of the Black Radical Tradition into your analysis. There are other people here that know this (from previous discussions on how progress was won in the US) and could/should correct you on this so as to avoid the cognitive block you'll have hearing it from me. Only about 2% of people (in the North) were abolitionists and Lincoln himself said "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it..." as one example. The short version is that history demonstrates that along with labor, basically none of the gains come from the politicians. The politicians just eventually accept (as surrogates for donors/capital) that they have to change the laws or social order will collapse because of disruptive direct actions. Progress most certainly doesn't come from prioritizing the fee-fees of white moderates. Both parties can be villainous (and objectively are, along with their own supporters referring to them as a lesser "evil") without being a false equivalence. You're basically doing the lib version of "the mean liberals socialists telling truths made me an Nazi appeaser". If coddling is what you're after, ignore politics and try a sex worker that does mommy play. The history tends to show that those in the middle ground don’t drive change, but it’s when relative radicals open a path, actual change occurs when the ‘Niemollers’ move with it. Often on an issue that to modern sensibilities seems insane that it was ever a question. But what’s the cause here? There’s no real great obvious underlying structural injustice to play hardball on and shame the ‘white moderate’. It’s not women being people, or black folks being people, or why are we criminalising gay people is it? + Show Spoiler +If the cause as it were is preventing the encroachment of Fascism in the United States, and you did fuck all, the easiest, least sacrificial political action possible to do so, there is no moral high ground or shame leverage that one can prick the conscience of Joe and Jane liberal with.
‘You need to work harder to stop Fascism while I (at least rhetorically) worked against very basic bare minimum mitigation’ is not something you can sell to anyone. Even people who’ll jump on the newest NFT and time share schemes will go ‘hold on a minute…’
I think you’ve good political instincts in other areas but how you can’t see this does utterly baffle me
The cause is all of those and more. Racial capitalism is built on and sustained by some of the worst possible crimes imaginable including bipartisan engagement in genocide.
Joe and Jane liberal have literally rationalized aiding and abetting genocide rather than "see they are on the wrong side of history". It's not their morality that moves them, it's their personal well being or "pretty tolerable lives" as several of you have repeatedly stressed. It is almost exclusively their "pretty tolerable lives" being threatened/taken away that has moved them historically.
|
Northern Ireland26359 Posts
On March 14 2026 01:32 LightSpectra wrote:
The constant references to Niemoeller is also interesting. He's the example par excellence of someone who spent their entire life regretting not voting against the Nazis. If your position is "don't vote for Democrats because letting fascists win elections is actually a better way to stop fascism," you should probably stop reminding people of the guy who spent his entire post-war life lamenting letting fascists win elections.
Somewhat also like the references to "white moderates", which is what MLK Jr. called people who opposed civil disobedience to fight voter suppression, when GH's position is that people should suppress their own votes because electoralism doesn't work.
Telling people to read books so they can identify your tortured mis-references sure is something. Like a rich person who shoplifts petty amounts, it almost seems more like a cry for help.
You should do more than vote, I think that’s a fair observation and something that would benefit society if more widely upheld.
The problem comes from well, not doing that, or advocating against it. It’s a stretch goal from the bare minimum.
Like if I want to be fucking ripped, which in this analogy is a goal akin to proper radical reform, I’ll need to work out, but I can’t just skip not eating like shit. If I don’t do that it’s almost immaterial how much iron I pump
|
Has literally any Democrat in this thread ever said at any point "voting is totally sufficient by itself, don't even bother with protests, canvassing, union activity, civil disobedience," etc.?
|
On March 14 2026 01:54 LightSpectra wrote:
Has literally any Democrat in this thread ever said at any point "voting is totally sufficient by itself, don't even bother with protests, canvassing, union activity, civil disobedience," etc.?
You guys don't really debate about anything Democrats are/should be doing (other than perhaps a little when I press it). There's been no discussions on who should be primaried in the midterms for not sufficiently resisting Trump (DPB's/John Oliver's idea) or how to identify who that is (my idea) as just one example.
All you guys do here is mock and gawk Sartres while waiting to spam variations of "vote blue no matter who" because you believe that is the most effective way to preserve your "pretty tolerable lives" regardless of who has to lose their life as a consequence.
This isn't even opinion/prognostication at this point, it's demonstrable fact that several of you have expressed/exemplified pretty openly.
|
Why should any Democrats be primaried if you think we shouldn't vote for Democrats at all because electoralism doesn't work?
|
On March 14 2026 02:14 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2026 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 14 2026 01:54 LightSpectra wrote:
Has literally any Democrat in this thread ever said at any point "voting is totally sufficient by itself, don't even bother with protests, canvassing, union activity, civil disobedience," etc.? You guys don't really debate about anything Democrats are/should be doing (other than perhaps a little when I press it). There's been no discussions on who should be primaried in the midterms for not sufficiently resisting Trump ( DPB's/John Oliver's idea) or how to identify who that is (my idea) as just one example. All you guys do here is mock and gawk Sartres while waiting to spam variations of "vote blue no matter who" because you believe that is the most effective way to preserve your "pretty tolerable lives" regardless of who has to lose their life as a consequence. This isn't even opinion/prognostication at this point, it's demonstrable fact that several of you have expressed/exemplified pretty openly. Why should any Democrats be primaried if you think we shouldn't vote for Democrats at all because electoralism doesn't work?
There are a lot of different ways to respond to this, but you do understand I am advocate of non-reformist reforms and those involve elections, like primarying Democrats right?
|
On March 14 2026 02:22 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2026 02:14 LightSpectra wrote:On March 14 2026 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 14 2026 01:54 LightSpectra wrote:
Has literally any Democrat in this thread ever said at any point "voting is totally sufficient by itself, don't even bother with protests, canvassing, union activity, civil disobedience," etc.? You guys don't really debate about anything Democrats are/should be doing (other than perhaps a little when I press it). There's been no discussions on who should be primaried in the midterms for not sufficiently resisting Trump ( DPB's/John Oliver's idea) or how to identify who that is (my idea) as just one example. All you guys do here is mock and gawk Sartres while waiting to spam variations of "vote blue no matter who" because you believe that is the most effective way to preserve your "pretty tolerable lives". This isn't even opinion/prognostication at this point, it's demonstrable fact that several of you have expressed/exemplified pretty openly. Why should any Democrats be primaried if you think we shouldn't vote for Democrats at all because electoralism doesn't work? There are a lot of different ways to respond to this, but you do understand I am advocate of non-reformist reforms and those involve elections, like primarying Democrats right?
I'll let GH reply to your post:
On January 03 2026 03:05 GreenHorizons wrote:
Bernie was an electoralism compromise for me back in 2015 before I figured out I aligned most with revolutionary socialism. The 2016 election process was the end of electoralism for me.
|
On March 14 2026 02:26 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2026 02:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 14 2026 02:14 LightSpectra wrote:On March 14 2026 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 14 2026 01:54 LightSpectra wrote:
Has literally any Democrat in this thread ever said at any point "voting is totally sufficient by itself, don't even bother with protests, canvassing, union activity, civil disobedience," etc.? You guys don't really debate about anything Democrats are/should be doing (other than perhaps a little when I press it). There's been no discussions on who should be primaried in the midterms for not sufficiently resisting Trump ( DPB's/John Oliver's idea) or how to identify who that is (my idea) as just one example. All you guys do here is mock and gawk Sartres while waiting to spam variations of "vote blue no matter who" because you believe that is the most effective way to preserve your "pretty tolerable lives". This isn't even opinion/prognostication at this point, it's demonstrable fact that several of you have expressed/exemplified pretty openly. Why should any Democrats be primaried if you think we shouldn't vote for Democrats at all because electoralism doesn't work? There are a lot of different ways to respond to this, but you do understand I am advocate of non-reformist reforms and those involve elections, like primarying Democrats right? I'll let GH reply to your post:Show nested quote +On January 03 2026 03:05 GreenHorizons wrote:
Bernie was an electoralism compromise for me back in 2015 before I figured out I aligned most with revolutionary socialism. The 2016 election process was the end of electoralism for me. You can't possibly be stupid enough to not know/understand there is a difference between electoralism and elections. They aren't synonyms.
EDIT: On March 14 2026 02:39 LightSpectra wrote:
Does that mean you're retracting the accusation of "electoralists" against people who said Kamala Harris, despite her flaws, must win the 2024 election because Donald Trump winning will be worse for everyone in virtually every way?
I stand corrected, you can be that stupid.
EDIT 2:
Wut?
|
Does that mean you're retracting the accusation of "electoralists" against people who said Kamala Harris, despite her flaws, must win the 2024 election because Donald Trump winning will be worse for everyone in virtually every way?
EDIT: I stand corrected, you can be that stupid.
Gee, it would be a shame if someone could just go in your posting history and find you doing the exact thing you just said I'm stupid for saying you do
https://tl.net/forum/general/532255-us-politics-mega-thread?page=4473#89442
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
