I love Twitter rule

您正在查看线程的一部分.

显示上下文

246 留言

They said elsewhere that they're autistic. The need to be exact and truthful when people generalize something like a community is something i identify with. Its why I dont really love the stormfront joke myself, just go along with it for community peace. This person to me is clearly well intentioned and is an example of the dunk impulse going too far because I think they're trying to do right.
ETA: Actually I got them mixed up with another user they never said they were autistic. But I still think they are well intentioned.
- Their further response to me tells me they aren't well intentioned.
  
  Ah damn, I misplaced my faith.
  
  its okay to believe the best in people, can't fault you there
  
  We aren't going to tolerate intolerance in this instance. I personally don't have a problem with communists. But I do have a problem with authoritarian communists. If you think me making this distinction is acting in bad faith, then you might run into more issues than just me here.
  
  You might run into more issues than just this thread by casually tossing out the "authoritarian" label like you did on Reddit where the groups in question couldn't defend themselves
  
  I think you'll find that goes both ways. We can defend ourselves too. You are not on Hexbear. This is Blahaj.
  
  Defend what? I don't think the parallel you want to draw works quite as well as you think. My point is that Redditors can cast stones in their ignorance at people who they would struggle to string a whole sentence together to describe without buzzwords because they know jack shit about what those people actually think. Western communists are typically quite familiar with the ideology of liberals.
  
  Defend what?
  ourselves
  they know jack shit about what those people actually think
  I'm interested to learn more about what those people actually think.
  Western communists are typically quite familiar with the ideology of liberals.
  I'm not sure how they can be if they think everyone to the right of them is a liberal.
  
  But defend yourselves from what?
  Not everyone to the right is a liberal, people like theocrats exist, but the whole of mainstream American society is neoliberal (with influence from those evangelical theocrats), which is a subset of the larger political-philosophical category of liberalism. We can point to some differences between Republican and Democrat, but they are overwhelmingly of style and PR, not the substance. There are very specific issues, like abortion, where you can pretty reliably see differences, but even here the difference is overstated and this is evidenced by the fact Obama didn't even try to codify Roe when he got elected and had Dems controlling congress.
  Why is this? Well, I think you can avoid needing to offer people a carrot if you can just offer them not getting the stick, but if you make them secure then they'll start asking for carrots. But that's personal speculation.
  More important is the overwhelming consensus seen on a variety of issues when you look at their actions. Biden has over and over had the chance to let Trump-Era executive orders simply die, but he has repeatedly signed on to their continuation or even expansion. All the power that Trump unfortunately wielded in office to push EOs and theoretically to veto seems to have evaporated when they touched old Joe's hands. Why is that? It can't be ignorance.
  I knew people who thought Joe would be less hawkish on China, since that is traditionally the role of Republicans, but he in fact has been more hawkish! He has done a better job of stabilizing relationships with America's North Atlanticist allies, but the imperial policies under Trump and Obama have continued aside from pulling out of Afghanistan (which Trump began working on but was too much of a coward to follow through on, we need only see the media backlash to Biden doing so to understand why).
  I'm interested to learn more about what those people actually think.
  Then consider speaking of them less presumptuously
  
  But defend yourselves from what?
  Brigading, trolling and logical fallacies.
  the whole of mainstream American society is neoliberal
  The mainstream politicians definitely are. But polling suggests an overwhelming majority of Americans support progressive ideas.
  https://www.citizen.org/news/progressive-policies-are-popular-policies/
  Then consider speaking of them less presumptuously
  I'll speak how I want thanks. I live in a free country.
  
  I personally don't have a problem with communists. But
  Sounds like you have a problem with communists, or do you think that the country with the biggest army, police force, and imprisoned population (disproportionately of racial minorities) is somehow not authoritarian?
  
  We have a federal presidential constitutional republic or FPCR in the US. It has three branches of government at the federal level that ideally work as checks and balances on each other. Then there are many subordinate state governments that act as a means of delegating responsibility for the federal government. Our representatives in federal, state, and local governments are democratically elected and ideally should represent the majority of the population. We the people rule in America. The US is not without its flaws, but we are a democracy.
  
  The PRC has the same three branches of government, including a President at the head of the executive branch, and a constitution that lays out their roles (more thoroughly than the US does the power of the judiciary), and it also holds direct elections for municipal offices. Neither country directly elects its President, as the PRC has elected officials vote and the US has the Electoral College say "just trust me bro" before giving the election to the other guy half the time (based on elections this century).
  
  We can see how the electoral college votes, just as we can see that China's elections are a sham. Loyalty to Xi is the only thing that matters in Chinese politics now.
  
  We can see how the electoral college votes, hence why I wasn't worried about asserting that it just hands the votes to the other guy half the time, because if you are going to have a popular vote anyway, there's not much cause to just tip the scales in the direction of land owners unless you were against democracy.
  Have you ever made the slightest effort to investigate China's elections? Or do you just believe what the western press tells you about them? There's that saying that there is no need to burn books if you can just persuade people not to read them and we have here a demonstration why.
  
  The electoral college is one of the flaws I would like to see fixed. We should abolish the electoral college. It disproportionally benefits Republicans because they control more land, as you said. Representative democracy is supposed to represent the majority of people not a minority.
  I read a variety of what the free press has to offer about China. Xi has clearly consolidated power around him. It's not a secret.
  
  The US is not without its flaws, but we are a democracy.
  We literally had a bunch of unelected people in robes declare the president, just over 2 decades ago.
  Our representatives in federal, state, and local governments are democratically elected and ideally should represent the majority of the population.
  ideally should is doing a lot of lifting in that sentence- They don't. Local governments are often dominated by landlord interests, as well as homeowners- that's often accomplished by systematically disenfranchising renters.
  Again, the unelected people in robes declared that money is speech, not only swaying elections but allowing influence to be bought directly. How is that a democracy?
  You seem to be conflating the concept of 'democracy' with the freedom to spend money however it may hurt someone else structurally. That's pretty authoritarian if you're someone without money.
  
  The Supreme Court has numerous issues. For starters, they aren't elected so they aren't beholden to the people. They have minimal ethics guidelines so they can accept bribes from billionaires. They don't have term limits, so they are effectively 9 kings and queens. The electoral college allowing two presidents to win their first term without the popular vote and the Senate giving conservative states over representation has allowed conservatives to capture the court. edit: typo
  These compounding issues are destroying our democracy. If we don't fix these issues we will not have democracy. The Supreme Court is already stripping rights from people, it's only a matter of time before Republicans win back the Congress and the Presidency. If the Republicans are still controlled by fascists then and we haven't fixed these problems we are going to be trouble.
  ideally should is doing a lot of lifting in that sentence- They don’t. Local governments are often dominated by landlord interests, as well as homeowners- that’s often accomplished by systematically disenfranchising renters.
  Yeah, rent is way too expensive. Another reason for socialism to the pile. edit: spacing
  
  I would make the case that the supreme court has never been anything other than a reactionary institution, and it sounds like you agree.
  I would go on to point out that the rights 'won' by the supreme court are ephemeral and can be snatched away at any moment-
  Take some of the examples of 'liberal' rulings- Roe vs wade came about the whole question of abortion from a liberal angle of privacy. Rather than simply providing a universal standard of prenatal healthcare to people, they opted for this sideshow. It's never been about life, maternal mortality is ridiculously high in the the US, it's about maintaining the profitable status quo.
  The gay marriage ruling is another example of how worthless rights won by supreme court are- and how we should expect them to be retracted at any moment.
  
  Yeah, with the way the Supreme Court is now definitely. The concept of settled law was bullshit. It's nine votes and whoever has the most wins. McConnell understood that better than most apparently. Hopefully we will be able to fix this in time to stop a fascist take over.
  
  https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm
  
  The cotton workers and the train workers should seize the means of production via their democracy. If they don't have a democracy, they should perform a revolution to establish one.
  Referring to a revolution by the people as authoritarian is like saying the oppression of a king is freedom. It doesn't make sense under closer observation. Using force to achieve freedom does not invalidate that freedom. Once the revolution has been won, the people rule themselves. Any authority over them is a temporary construct of their own making that can be removed and replaced.
  
  I completely agree, do you see why I linked it in response to the use of authoritarian?
  
  Not really, sorry. It's legit going over my head. =(
  
  Authority isn't necessarily bad. For example, suppressing the free speech and ability to congregate for nazis is good.
  
  I think hate speech, threatening violence against another person based on inherent characteristics or for any reason really, should not be allowed. Nor should people be allowed to storm the capital to stop the peaceful transfer of power. Other than that though I think people deserve free speech and freedom of assembly even if I disagree with the speech or reason for assembly. Nazis tend to say a lot of hate speech and storm the capital so it isn't really necessary or good to make an exception for them specifically.
  I'm not interested in proactively suppressing Nazis, as that would make us no different than them. To put it another way, I'm not interested in rounding people up solely based on their political views. I am for punishing Nazi's for their hate speech and insurrection. I think there should be consequences for actions and hate speech. I am also for educating people and getting Fox News off the air.
  The authority vested in democratic leaders is ephemeral enough that it is the only desirable form of authority. At the end of the day, it's the people who rule, not their leaders. By comparison the authority that dictators wield is very enduring and hard to get rid of. They make every decision and the dictators' egos are what everyone around them has to be loyal to.

246 留言