EPTThe fact that there will be real humans beings at the voting booth this November with their vote more influenced by outrage at the former than the latter does not inspire me with much love for the human race.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5916
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3418 Posts
The fact that there will be real humans beings at the voting booth this November with their vote more influenced by outrage at the former than the latter does not inspire me with much love for the human race. | ||
|
Turbovolver
Australia2454 Posts
| ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3418 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States44398 Posts
| ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1846 Posts
As I mentioned before, I dislike Hasan for many reasons, including his brain dead takes on many topics, but one thing that him and many of his ilk, on all 3 sides of the horse shoe (yeah, I'm sticking with that, sue me) share is the overwhelming hypocrisy. The far left and pretend centrists stick to Twitter and Twitch despite them being owned by people they ostensibly hate because that's how they make their money, and I guess that it's more tolerable for the right wingers and centrists then a wanna be communist like Hasan, but staying on Twitter despite the cesspool that it was turned in to while preaching anti-billionaire rhetoric just reveals such a laughable lack of conviction to your projected principles that no one should take you seriously. And that goes for anyone who dislikes Trump, Musk and the international axis of authoritarianism, but I guess GH found his rationalization of his organizing making up for his rampant hypocrisy because he thinks he is closer to Hasan then to us randoms on line. And since he also rationalizes it that way, that allows him to do a bunch of shitty things and be a raging hypocrite as long as he campaigns with the "correct" people. | ||
|
dyhb
United States831 Posts
| ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3418 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18478 Posts
On August 20 2026 22:33 dyhb wrote: If you’re spending your millions on conspicuous displays of wealth, I’m less interested in what you have to say about people even richer than you. He’s suddenly ethically required to sprout a conscience at $1 bil that isn’t understandable at $10 mil, or maybe $100 mil? Nah, fuck the champagne socialists and their toadies. They’re in the top 1% and certainly act like the rest of their cohort minus the talking bit. If you're spending your copious free time on frivolous displays of internet forum heroism, I'm less interested in what you have to say about people even richer than you. He's suddenly ethically required to sprout a conscience at $1 mil that isn't understandable at $10 thou, or maybe $100 thou? Nah, fuck the champagne centrists and their toadies. They're in the top 10% and certainly act like the rest of their cohort minus the talking bit. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24419 Posts
On August 20 2026 10:58 Turbovolver wrote: In fairness to GH, I think it's logically coherent to say that meaningful organisation trumps personal participation/consumption. The issue more surrounds what meaningful organisation actually looks like. Something GH has repeatedly refused to even make suggestions about. + Show Spoiler + Similarly, it's not the end of the world if Hasan wears all designer goods and drives a designer car, if the gathering of a large chat community under his banner gets out there and makes some real positive change in the world. Crickets on that front too, though, from what I gather. Of course it is/does. Of course I have, though it's not like I have the basic tenets of political organization locked in my vault (third way Democrats really did a number on people's understanding of politics). For those ("vote blue no matter who" Democrat advocates) in the US though, being an active member of the party is an obvious and indisputable bare minimum. Additionally, for those to the left of centrists that religiously defend the status quo, it would be being an active member/supporter of unions. Left of that, it would be being an active member/supporter of DSA Left of that, it's basically local/international orgs with socialist/anarchist tenets. Internationally, it would be supporting those (and their local equivalents/allies) in the capacities one can. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On August 20 2026 22:45 LightSpectra wrote: Why is a rich person saying "rich people should pay more taxes" somehow more objectionable than a rich person saying "rich people should pay less taxes"? I’ve genuinely never understood this at all. It seems quite an effective stick to beat any left-leaning person who doesn’t dress solely in burlap sacks with some holes cut out. I mean I get why those who stand to lose things under a more left-leaning society attempt that attack, but it’s forever confused me that it lands so well seemingly. Speaking more generally and not about a Hasan Piker specifically as I know little about him, and tbh in general I don’t really like many of the dynamics seen with political streamers. Seems to end up compromised by commercial considerations of various kinds, or people build up big parasocial followings who’ll defend them to the death, while similar groups of haters do the opposite. Feels it ends up too focused on people and not necessarily the issues at hand | ||
|
dyhb
United States831 Posts
On August 20 2026 22:45 LightSpectra wrote: If you say they should pay more taxes, but he already has the option to personally pay more taxes and doesn't, then maybe I think his real message is that the rich should do exactly as he does: live in luxury, wear designer clothing, and otherwise flaunt his wealth.Why is a rich person saying "rich people should pay more taxes" somehow more objectionable than a rich person saying "rich people should pay less taxes"? In almost every other context, a left-wing person asserts excuses made by the 1% that are self-serving to the 1%. But he says the right things, so he gets all the toadies defending him. Same question to you, where is the social responsibility ethically come in? We know it's higher than $8 mil, but I'm guessing it's less than $1 bil? On August 20 2026 22:54 Acrofales wrote: Now we have the real man of the people, getting on what people do with their free time. Well, with you, I better not call it "free" time.If you're spending your copious free time on frivolous displays of internet forum heroism, I'm less interested in what you have to say about people even richer than you. He's suddenly ethically required to sprout a conscience at $1 mil that isn't understandable at $10 thou, or maybe $100 thou? Nah, fuck the champagne centrists and their toadies. They're in the top 10% and certainly act like the rest of their cohort minus the talking bit. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3418 Posts
On August 20 2026 23:40 dyhb wrote: If you say they should pay more taxes, but he already has the option to personally pay more taxes and doesn't, then maybe I think his real message is that the rich should do exactly as he does: live in luxury, wear designer clothing, and otherwise flaunt his wealth. Hasan personally donating more money to the treasury is not going to change anything for anyone because $8m is a drop in the bucket compared to the literal trillions that people like Musk and Bezos are hoarding. $8m is less than what Pete Hegseth spends of the taxpayer's dime to get dinner every month. If you want to call Hasan rich, ok go for it, I don't care, but it obscures the impossible scale of wealth that centibillionaires have. Some people having $8m isn't civilization-endangering in the same way some people having $80,000m is. Besides, on a political level I don't care how much wealth anyone has, so long as they're paying their fair share (enough so everyone can have healthcare, housing, etc.), go to jail when they commit felonies, and aren't buying elections. In almost every other context, a left-wing person asserts excuses made by the 1% that are self-serving to the 1%. But he says the right things, so he gets all the toadies defending him. Same question to you, where is the social responsibility ethically come in? We know it's higher than $8 mil, but I'm guessing it's less than $1 bil? I don't know what Hasan does with his money and I don't care. But it's hard to take your opinion seriously when you're on record complaining about "class prejudice and envy". If you're poor and want to improve society, it's envy; if you're rich and want to improve society, it's hypocrisy. Ten year old meme. | ||
|
Billyboy
2613 Posts
Not all people who are on the left want everyone exactly equal, what they want is fairness, which is very complex. They also want the people with the most to give the most. It’s pretty ironic that people on the left seem to follow Jesus teaching better than those on the right when there is far more “Christian’s”, especially hardcore ones, on the right. | ||
|
oBlade
United States6636 Posts
The idea is, the government gives them a loan, so they can pay their taxes back to the government. If they default on the loan, the government will take back the shares which were collateral. Even though the shares may be wholly worthless by the end of the loan term. This is why people don't want to hear it. A Hardee's worker can say tax the rich, fuck the rich, okay whatever. Nobody wants to hear that from the Khanns and Pikers of the US Whether someone is fucking the poor or not, the Khannas and Pikers of the world are not economically oppressed at all. Therefore they should have the economic freedom to get brains and be constructive. But their ideas are plugging the surge protector into itself, and Maoism, respectively. On August 20 2026 22:54 Acrofales wrote: If you're spending your copious free time on frivolous displays of internet forum heroism, I'm less interested in what you have to say about people even richer than you. The beginning and the end have to be the same for this to work. If the consequent is about money, the antecedent had to have been about money. Not time. The hypocrisy, or ulterior motives, or being full of shit, have to be about the same subject. I don't know how you didn't see that. And the targets have to have the same base beliefs which Piker and dyhb probably don't. All you did was make a non sequitur. | ||
|
dyhb
United States831 Posts
On August 21 2026 00:08 LightSpectra wrote: It makes talk pretty easy if you're never required to back it up. Let's say he was a total hypocrite and fronting for his subscribers. He's rich, and likes it, and is confident that his fellow rich will stop measures aimed at him. Would he act any different? Anything at all?Hasan personally donating more money to the treasury is not going to change anything for anyone because $8m is a drop in the bucket compared to the literal trillions that people like Musk and Bezos are hoarding. $8m is less than what Pete Hegseth spends of the taxpayer's dime to get dinner every month. If you want to call Hasan rich, ok go for it, I don't care, but it obscures the impossible scale of wealth that centibillionaires have. Some people having $8m isn't civilization-endangering in the same way some people having $80,000m is. Besides, on a political level I don't care how much wealth anyone has, so long as they're paying their fair share (enough so everyone can have healthcare, housing, etc.), go to jail when they commit felonies, and aren't buying elections. I don't know what Hasan does with his money and I don't care. But it's hard to take your opinion seriously when you're on record complaining about "class prejudice and envy". If you're poor and want to improve society, it's envy; if you're rich and want to improve society, it's hypocrisy. Ten year old meme. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3418 Posts
On August 21 2026 01:02 dyhb wrote: It makes talk pretty easy if you're never required to back it up. Let's say he was a total hypocrite and fronting for his subscribers. He's rich, and likes it, and is confident that his fellow rich will stop measures aimed at him. Would he act any different? Anything at all? Back up what? Is he going to commit tax evasion if taxes are raised on people like him? Then he can go to jail if that happens. Like you tried to say earlier on a different topic, be consistent. In this case, about the top 1%. If you can't level the social responsibility and it isn't about envy and prejudice arguments against literally the top 1% of earners in the US, what are you even doing here? Defending millionaires against billionaires, the top 0.1% against the mere top 1%? The "social responsibility" I want is for is for the government to collect more taxes from the wealthy. Hasan could even be a billionaire and it'd still be morally right for him to call for more taxes. What proof do you have that he's "rich and want to improve society?" You seem to be under the impression that socialists think wealth is something like a religious sin. I don't care about Hasan's soul, I don't care about him personally, I barely know anything about the guy beyond what Republicans are campaigning against him for. I don't watch his stream, I probably wouldn't hang out with him if I knew him in real life. The only reason I'm participating in this conversation at all is because of the accusation of hypocrisy because Hasan can't be a millionaire and leftist at the same time, or leftists can't agree with anything a millionaire says. Whether or having $8m is some kind of personal moral failure is not something I care about on a political level. I care about the structural inequality that leads to some people having $8,000m and some people working 40+ hours a week but still can't afford rent or healthcare. If we had universal healthcare, robust safety nets, 100% clean energy, etc. then socialism would be as niche as veganism and antinatalism. Barely anyone would care about centibillionaires existing if they weren't actively using their wealth to make the world worse for the rest of us. Hasan is not doing that. Rich people supporting more taxes on rich people are like white people that opposed slavery & segregation or men who supported women's suffrage. Making the world a better place from a place of privilege is a good thing. If Hasan were secretly donating to politicians that want to cut taxes for the rich then yeah, that would be absurdly hypocritical and he'd probably instantly lose his entire fanbase overnight. If Hasan was a megacorp executive that was unethically extracting more wealth from the working class while just giving lip service to more taxes on the rich, then yeah, that would be hypocritical. If a murderer says "murder is wrong" that's hypocritical, but murder is still wrong independent of his hypocrisy. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11607 Posts
| ||
|
dyhb
United States831 Posts
On August 21 2026 01:17 LightSpectra wrote: He'll never have to pay them if he's indeed a hypocrite that only talks a tough game. His rich compatriots with the same luxury lifestyle protect him. Heck, he can even move out of California to dodge a wealth tax. Your defenses of "it's only a drop in the bucket" would still ring true!Back up what? Is he going to commit tax evasion if taxes are raised on people like him? Then he can go to jail if that happens. The "social responsibility" I want is for is for the government to collect more taxes from the wealthy. Hasan could even be a billionaire and it'd still be morally right for him to call for more taxes. You seem to be under the impression that socialists think wealth is something like a religious sin. I don't care about Hasan's soul, I don't care about him personally, I barely know anything about the guy beyond what Republicans are campaigning against him for. I don't watch his stream, I probably wouldn't hang out with him if I knew him in real life. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3418 Posts
On August 21 2026 02:09 dyhb wrote: He'll never have to pay them if he's indeed a hypocrite that only talks a tough game. His rich compatriots with the same luxury lifestyle protect him. Heck, he can even move out of California to dodge a wealth tax. Your defenses of "it's only a drop in the bucket" would still ring true! If he does something blatantly hypocritical then I'll be happy to condemn him for his hypocrisy. He is under no social responsibility as a millionaire or a billionaire if the government doesn't actually compel him to give his money? I want to make sure I am understanding your point of view. The whole "Elon could do X but doesn't" isn't actually a thing if "Hasan could do Y but doesn't" would never suit him, no matter how small the ask. On a personal level I think any rich person who blows it on stupid stuff like giga-yachts when they could be giving to charity are assholes, sure. Since Elon Musk is literally like 100,000x richer than Hasan it's 100,000x as true for him. But I'm not advocating for more taxes on them because they're assholes, I'm advocating more taxes because of a politically-engineered structural inequality. I'll skip further discussion of personal social responsibility from the rich, since you don't care about him personally and don't know anything about him other than what Republicans bring up to you. Which, ouch, relying on Republicans to learn about the charity and lack of charity from the rich? How many people in this country have $8m or more? Something like three or four million people last I checked. Do you want me to personally stalk each and every one of them until I find something to be outraged about? Would that be a good use of my time? That does begin to explain your perspective. I do care that the rich guys who talk about all their grand ideas for improving society are also the rich guys who don't do anything besides talk about said grand ideas. You don't have to, in fact you don't have to comment to those that do. If Hasan were running for office you'd be well within your rights to not vote for him because you hate millionaires or hypocrites. But letting Mike Rogers win the Michigan election for U.S. Senate even after he said he was going to protect a sieg heiling CSAM-mass-producing centibillionaire because you don't like that El-Sayed hangs out with a hypocritical Internet streamer seems pretty absurd to me. Seems more like something a strawman of socialists would do rather than the "moderate Democrat" you've self-identified as. I'm still not entirely clear why you don't seem to be outraged at rich people who want to cut their own taxes (essentially making life worse for the 99% just so they can buy more frivolous bullshit or more elections), but rich people who advocate raising taxes on themselves is a line too far. Although I do understand that you'll find some excuse to complain (whether it's envy or hypocrisy) whenever anyone does. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22675 Posts
'centralists' purity testing left candidates. | ||
| ||
