The American socialist worldview is just totally broken

[88m3]

They are the same poster.

It's the same as vote blue no matter who types making fun of the always vote R types. Same people. Similar views but they support a different team.

imagine unironically typing this after the Trump administration and what has happened to the courts

I realize you're sheltered and all but fukk

 

[LOST IN THE SAUCE]

imagine unironically typing this after the Trump administration and what has happened to the courts

I realize you're sheltered and all but fukk

You're laughing but he's making a very valid criticism. What policies do you actually care about? Is it just about being on the winning team for you, or is it important for you to help working class people? What do you actually stand for? What are leftists trying to accomplish that you are against, policy wise?

You made up some bullshyt for the sole purpose of punching left and then when I called you on it you just move on to the next troll. You might be doing good in your life, this might just be a way for you to root for the winning team and shyt on your rivals on both sides, but for some of us these things matter and even effect our lives directly. If you don't believe in Left solutions, alright, but feel free to state your position and offer up some type of argument.

 

[88m3]

You're laughing but he's making a very valid criticism. What policies do you actually care about? Is it just about being on the winning team for you, or is it important for you to help working class people? What do you actually stand for? What are leftists trying to accomplish that you are against, policy wise?

You made up some bullshyt for the sole purpose of punching left and then when I called you on it you just move on to the next troll. You might be doing good in your life, this might just be a way for you to root for the winning team and shyt on your rivals on both sides, but for some of us these things matter and even effect our lives directly. If you don't believe in Left solutions, alright, but feel free to state your position and offer up some type of argument.

What are you really asking me about now?


I've repeatedly said I take issue with people on the left supporting Putin, Assad, and Xi for example


That's the only axe I'm grinding at the moment


Not sure why you guys are pretending this isn't an issue(I guess you could be embarrassed but this an anonymous forum)

 

[LOST IN THE SAUCE]

What are you really asking me about now?


I've repeatedly said I take issue with people on the left supporting Putin, Assad, and Xi for example


That's the only axe I'm grinding at the moment


Not sure why you guys are pretending this isn't an issue(I guess you could be embarrassed but this an anonymous forum)

Yeah, you said that, and then when @Rhakim challenged you on it you made up some bullshyt and ducked him. His comment is still there if you'd like to respond now. I'll even quote it for you:

Probably because American socialists don't preach support of genocidal dictators?






Well damn, maybe the Democratic establishment should stop supporting them then, considering how none of their base is in line with the clear, decades-long policy of strong support for those atrocious rulers.

Do you seriously not realize that the Democratic party in power has maintained steady support for all of those regimes, including both diplomatic alliance and massive military assistance? I'm not talking about "honoring treaties", I'm talking about a steady position of firming up their military hold on power, overlooking their human rights abuses, and explicitly blocking attempts to condemn atrocities because they don't want to be mean to their friends.






Outside of Ortega none of those have been supported by the American socialist left. The fact that you think so is clown-like. I can only assume this is where you pretend that Fox News Tulsi is a socialist or grab some other random media figure or paid propaganda syncopate aiming for right-wing followers that doesn't have jack shyt to do with actual movements.



I mean, the hypocrisy in standards you have to have to claim that the democratic establishment in general doesn't support Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan, but that American socialist movement in general does support Xi, Putin, Kim, Luksashenko, and Assad, is fukking overwhelming. That single post alone would enough to expose you as a clown to anyone who knows anything about the American political landscape.


Democrats will try to fukking blacklist you and call you an anti-semite merely for the thought of criticizing Israel and supporting BDS is damn near equated with treason....but you want to claim that you don't know anyone who supports Israel? And our refusal to sanction Saudi Arabia and insistence on sending them more and more weapons to kill Yemenis with.....Egypt and Pakistan being among the largest recipients of military aid in our lifetimes despite their despicable records.....none of that is support to you?

 

[mastermind]

imagine unironically typing this after the Trump administration and what has happened to the courts

I realize you're sheltered and all but fukk

‘Vote Blue No Matter Who, Vote Blue No Matter Who,’ Chants Man Filling In Every Bubble On Democratic Primary Ballot

KANSAS CITY, MO—Determined to support all Democratic candidates without exception, local man Todd McMaster reportedly chanted “Vote blue no matter who, vote blue no matter who” Tuesday as he filled in every bubble on his party’s presidential primary ballot. “Let’s see, there’s one for Bernie...

www.theonion.com

 

[Rhakim]

You're laughing but he's making a very valid criticism. What policies do you actually care about? Is it just about being on the winning team for you, or is it important for you to help working class people? What do you actually stand for? What are leftists trying to accomplish that you are against, policy wise?

You made up some bullshyt for the sole purpose of punching left and then when I called you on it you just move on to the next troll. You might be doing good in your life, this might just be a way for you to root for the winning team and shyt on your rivals on both sides, but for some of us these things matter and even effect our lives directly. If you don't believe in Left solutions, alright, but feel free to state your position and offer up some type of argument.

For my entire life, the Democrats have run on being the "less bad" party.

"Maybe we won't try to fix the problems that are destroying the country, but we promise to pursue destruction less aggressively than those other guys!"


Refuse to address wealth inequality, just let it grow slower

Refuse to address racial inequality, just don't let it get worse

Refuse to address environmental catastrophe, just let it happen slower

Refuse to stop war-mongering, just do it less enthusiastically

Refuse to reform education, just keep it public

Refuse to reform health care, just expand it

Refuse to reform the justice system, just keep monitoring it



When Republicans want to redistribute wealth, they go all-in. When Republicans want to fukk up environmental laws, they go all out. When Republicans want to reform education, they actually pass something. When Republicans want to support the military and warmongering and a police state, they get that shyt done.

Hell, they get it done with plenty of help from moderate Democrats too, when you look at all the ones who voted for the Iraq War or No Child Left Behind or the Patriot Act or Bush's tax cuts. Even the establishment that didn't vote for those things only held off cause the Republicans went a little too far, but the basic ideas weren't out of line with how they had acted.


When the history of this era is written, what will turn out to be the most consequential Democratic policies between 1980 and 2024? Do you really want to go there?

* The Crime Bills
* Welfare "reform"
* Wall Street deregulation
* Neoliberal free trade agreements
* Bailing out Wall Street after the collapse
* Invading Libya


There's a decent argument that those moves had the most lasting long-term impact. What a list.

 

[Pressure]

Damn, they said utopia though? Who said that? Bernie? AOC? India Walton? Gustavo Petro? MLK? Huey from Boondocks? Some guy on twitter with an anime profile picture?
That's crazy bro, please share the sources so we can also feel self righteous every time some terrible shyt happens in a war no one is advocating for, like you.

I don't recall the left advocating for countries to surrender to avoid a long drawn out was when the US invades places because it would be a better alternative than a 20 year occupation...

But maybe that's because we get the job done fairly quickly.

The truth is @88m3 despite trolling has been right. Our resident leftist have given up supporting the idea that a country wants to defend itself from an imperialist aggressor because the country isn't America.

@Rhakim @mastermind and others have showered themselves in the idea that borders don't matter, sovereignty is negotiable, and Ukrainians should be willing to sacrifice a specific number of their populace because Russia might stop their immoral imperialist war if Ukrainians surrender.

 

[Pressure]

For my entire life, the Democrats have run on being the "less bad" party.

"Maybe we won't try to fix the problems that are destroying the country, but we promise to pursue destruction less aggressively than those other guys!"


Refuse to address wealth inequality, just let it grow slower

Refuse to address racial inequality, just don't let it get worse

Refuse to address environmental catastrophe, just let it happen slower

Refuse to stop war-mongering, just do it less enthusiastically

Refuse to reform education, just keep it public

Refuse to reform health care, just expand it

Refuse to reform the justice system, just keep monitoring it



When Republicans want to redistribute wealth, they go all-in. When Republicans want to fukk up environmental laws, they go all out. When Republicans want to reform education, they actually pass something. When Republicans want to support the military and warmongering and a police state, they get that shyt done.

Hell, they get it done with plenty of help from moderate Democrats too, when you look at all the ones who voted for the Iraq War or No Child Left Behind or the Patriot Act or Bush's tax cuts. Even the establishment that didn't vote for those things only held off cause the Republicans went a little too far, but the basic ideas weren't out of line with how they had acted.


When the history of this era is written, what will turn out to be the most consequential Democratic policies between 1980 and 2024? Do you really want to go there?

* The Crime Bills
* Welfare "reform"
* Wall Street deregulation
* Neoliberal free trade agreements
* Bailing out Wall Street after the collapse
* Invading Libya


There's a decent argument that those moves had the most lasting long-term impact. What a list.

You're so egotistical and wrong.

 

[88m3]

Yeah, you said that, and then when @Rhakim challenged you on it you made up some bullshyt and ducked him. His comment is still there if you'd like to respond now. I'll even quote it for you:

he moved the goal posts to the US government and obviously they're bound by treaties and geopolitical realties

That still doesn't justify the support I see for Putin, Xi, Assad and other horror shows around the world

They even do business with Russia and China

I'm was talking about regular people and voters in this country

not special interest groups or the fukking government


he knows that and so do you

 

[LOST IN THE SAUCE]

I don't recall the left advocating for countries to surrender to avoid a long drawn out was when the US invades places because it would be a better alternative than a 20 year occupation...

But maybe that's because we get the job done fairly quickly.

The truth is @88m3 despite trolling has been right. Our resident leftist have given up supporting the idea that a country wants to defend itself from an imperialist aggressor because the country isn't America.

@Rhakim @mastermind and others have showered themselves in the idea that borders don't matter, sovereignty is negotiable, and Ukrainians should be willing to sacrifice a specific number of their populace because Russia might stop their immoral imperialist war if Ukrainians surrender.

The left is too busy advocating for the US to not invade countries at all. I'm confused why you would try to say that as some kind of gotcha. What a weird take.

I saw @Rhakim saying the war will inevitably need to be solved through diplomacy, and nothing else you're claiming. His question seemed to be when is the right time for a country like Ukraine that is under attack to try to reach a diplomatic compromise, and how much human life is worth sacrificing before it's time to make that compromise. The rest just seems to be disingenuous grandstanding from you and @88m3 .

he moved the goal posts to the US government and obviously they're bound by treaties and geopolitical realties


I'm was talking about regular people and voters in this country

not special interest groups and fukking government


he knows that and so do you

So who are these regular people who support Putin, Assad, and Xi that you believe represent the left? Where can I find them? Organizing, trying to affect change in their neighborhoods, or shytposting on Twitter and Youtube? Are these people in your city? Friends of yours?

 

[Pressure]

The idea that aggression only needs to be spoken about objectively when America is "winning" Is why these discussions can't be taken as seriously objective critique.

 

[Pressure]

saw @Rhakim saying the war will inevitably need to be solved through diplomacy, and nothing else you're claiming. His question seemed to be when is the right time for a country like Ukraine that is under attack to try to reach a diplomatic compromise, and how much human life is worth sacrificing before it's time to make that compromise. The rest just seems to be disingenuous grandstanding from you and @88m3 .

The only thing dishonest is:
1.) not accepting that Russia chose to unilaterally invade th3 Ukraine for no valid reason
2.) that Ukrainians choosing to defend their sovereignty is wrong.

 

[LOST IN THE SAUCE]

The only thing dishonest is:
1.) not accepting that Russia chose to unilaterally invade th3 Ukraine for no valid reason
2.) that Ukrainians choosing to defend their sovereignty is wrong.

I must have missed that post. If you could quote it for me please.

 

[Rhakim]

I don't recall the left advocating for countries to surrender to avoid a long drawn out was when the US invades places because it would be a better alternative than a 20 year occupation...

What a weird take. First off, no one has advocated "surrendering", so chalk that up as more evidence that you don't feel you can defend your position without misrepresenting the other. But yes, pretty much any option that avoided war with the USA would have been TREMENDOUSLY more beneficial for Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Did you not see what happened to those countries? Decimated by the USA bombing, descending into civil war, adding strength to some of the most bloodthirsty terrorist and extremist groups we've ever seen....yeah, war completely fukked them.

Of course, "war" and "surrender" are not the only two options. But warmongers are always disingenuous on that front.

The truth is @88m3 despite trolling has been right. Our resident leftist have given up supporting the idea that a country wants to defend itself from an imperialist aggressor because the country isn't America.

That makes zero sense and is pure bullshyt. I have never, ever been pro-imperialist, not have I ever seen pro-imperialism as a position of "the left". And a country can be perfectly justified in wanting to defend itself via traditional military warfare and also end up strategically lost and create vastly more suffering for its people in the process.

@Rhakim @mastermind and others have showered themselves in the idea that borders don't matter, sovereignty is negotiable, and Ukrainians should be willing to sacrifice a specific number of their populace because Russia might stop their immoral imperialist war if Ukrainians surrender.

Now you've gone full 1984 with the doublespeak. YOU dumbasses are the ones happy to indefinitely sacrifice the Ukrainian populace with no end game in sight.

And your claim that I pushed the idea "borders don't matter" directly contradicts my clear statement from yesterday that borders absolutely matter. So either you're falsely misrepresenting me out of ignorance, or you're just a liar. Either way you look like a piece of shyt.

In this thread I have asked all three of you at least 10 times what your endgame is beyond indefinite war. And I am still waiting for the answer.

 

[Rhakim]

You're so egotistical and wrong.

You're so incapable of engaging in any discussion without either tossing out ad hominems or straight lying. This one was the ad hominem, the other one was the lying. Which will you choose next?

The idea that aggression only needs to be spoken about objectively when America is "winning" Is why these discussions can't be taken as seriously objective critique.

This is yet another lie. Just completely made up out of whole cloth.

The only thing dishonest is:
1.) not accepting that Russia chose to unilaterally invade th3 Ukraine for no valid reason
2.) that Ukrainians choosing to defend their sovereignty is wrong.

Two more complete and total lies - none of us have done that. And note that you and 88m3 had been challenged multiple times to back up your lies with actual citations, and fail.

he moved the goal posts to the US government and obviously they're bound by treaties and geopolitical realties

How the fukk did I "move the goalposts" to the US government? How am I supposed to talk about what establishment democrats really do if I don't talk about what they do when they hold power in government? This is one of the most inane deflections I've seen.

And I have NEVER talked about actions taken to uphold treaties. You are the only one who ever mentioned treaties, and you injected that as a deflection. I am talking about outright support of those regimes, doing things like attacking anyone who boycotts Israel or even criticizes them, refusing to sanction nations who have committed insane human rights atrocities, or sending them weapons with which they kill more people. That is support.

And what's this "geopolitical realities" bullshyt - so you can just make up that the left supports random dictators, but when the establishment does it its excused by "geopolitical realities". Well then, why doesn't "geopolitical realities" apply to everything else too, or is that an excuse that only works one way?

That still doesn't justify the support I see for Putin, Xi, Assad and other horror shows around the world

They even do business with Russia and China

I'm was talking about regular people and voters in this country

not special interest groups or the fukking government


he knows that and so do you

NO ONE here has supported any of them. I have never met a leftist in my life who has supported Putin, Xi, or Assad. You are full of shyt.