Jesus Christ
This was a full dose of lib-virus
Glad I got my anti-lib vaccine, although I did feel a tinge of something before the burnt toast smell became overwhelming, my vision went red, and I just heard “red sun in the sky” in my head
People who parrot the “right to exist” line are usually either so far gone down the propaganda pipeline that you alone will not be moving them on the issue or, worse, they’re a full blown ideologically driven Zionist cynically trying to equate their fascist pet project with the existence of humans inside and outside of Israel.
And honestly before Oct last year I think a lot of westerners, especially Americans, could plausibly fall under the former. Maybe they saw pictures or heard a news story from Israel’s various criminal murder campaigns, looked into it just a tiny bit, and immediately got smacked with the “wow! Seems like you don’t think Israel has a right to defend itself or exist!” And a lot of well meaning liberals will throw their hands up and go “no no no I’m sorry! I didn’t know!” and never talk about it again due to the way Zionism has fairly successfully tied Israel to Jews as a people (which is antisemitic as fuck) and so Israel is regarded as “not your business” if you aren’t Jewish. Your acceptable choices are ignoring/avoiding it or being pro-Israel… nothing else.
But since October, where there was very little excuse before, there is NO excuse now to claim ignorance. As much as I try to attribute people’s actions to ignorance rather than bad intent, I can’t do so anymore on this issue. I simply refuse to accept anyone who can parrot the right to exist BS doesn’t know exactly what Israel has been doing for 75 years and especially the last 20 or so and especially especially the last 9 months. We all see the videos/pics, everyone who didn’t know before knows now at least a general REAL history of how Israel came to be, so if they’re falling back on right to exist it’s for a specific reason. They’re trying to do what the intent of that phrase is which is to sort of humanize the state of Israel, to make it a person basically, and that “person” represents all Jews in the world. If you wish to see that state dismantled then you’re explicitly saying you want Jews to not exist. Obviously this is all antisemitic (the biggest irony in all this) as fuck and basically just early 1900s nationalistic insanity that, yes, you’d be hearing from Nazis or perhaps the fucking KKK.
So, no matter what you say or do, you aren’t pushing those people who are fully committed to equating a nation state with a group of people. To them you might as well just be saying “Jews don’t have a right to exist.” They’re so far down in their racist dark places that many of them probably do believe this to a large extent, or they’re just totally cynical right wing pieces of shit who revel in being able to murder people AND being able to silence you with false claims of antisemitism. Either way, like I said, you won’t be moving them.
The only thing that can probably move them is making it fully untenable to be a Zionist. It needs to have the same stigma as openly calling yourself a Nazi or openly supporting Rhodesia. It used to be very popular to support Rhodesia amongst far right wing types. Ask people under 30 or maybe even 35 what Rhodesia was now days and you’ll get a lot of “huh? Never heard of it” responses. Just gotta keep pushing to cut off aid to Israel, keep pressuring private industry/unis to divest, and finally to enact sanctions and remove all political protections at the UN. Once Zionists are totally isolated from the world it’ll all crumble and you’ll never hear another dumbass say that right to exist line.
That’s where I’m at with that stupid phrase. Don’t debate them, just force them to stfu. It will take a lot more time and effort, but they’re losing, they know they’re losing, and I dunno. Fuck their dumb little racist slogans in the end.
Something which never sinks in with liberals (because it might bust their brains, I dunno) is “terrorist” just means “doesn’t align with state interests.” I would also add “and usually non-state actors” but Bibi has been calling Iran a “terror state” so I guess we’re scrapping the state actor part and just going with “they do things opposed to us dominating everything- that’s terrorism!” 2003 all over again.
I have noticed libs jumping over “unpatriotic” as was the claim in 2003ish towards anti war protesters and landing directly on calling them pro-Hamas and pro-terrorist which is just a zero-mask call for state violence on protestors (and they got their wish). I don’t think the more soft-hearted, mostly “well-meaning” liberals have let it sink in yet that if you call someone terrorist you aren’t only being hyperbolic and stupid, you are saying “this person is an enemy of the state and appropriate force must be used to eliminate them… immediately.” That’s just what it means, I’m sorry. They are quite literally saying “kill this guy!” Why? “For being an anti-genocide terrorist!”
I call them liberals so much and so instinctively at this point that I legitimately get confused when they get all pissy. We should keep forcing it into common American understanding though.
The term “conservative” as it’s popularly used 1) kinda means nothing (which is perfect for them) so 2) is an ever changing term.
A conservative in 1970 US politics vs now are very different in their approach and thinking… obviously some stuff remains unchanged, but in the 1960s/70s you could still just be like a Strom Thurmond KKK guy openly denouncing integration and rights for black people while serving in the senate until you’re 100 goddamn years old… literally. Richard Nixon signed the EPA into law which today would be off the table even for Obama, I imagine. It would never get to his desk whatever his personal philosophy would be.
So their ideas and way of speaking changes since their only true ideology is something boiled down to “support ‘free markets’” or allow capitalists to exploit labor maximumly and use any wedge issues which are beneficial along the way such as racism, abortion, etc. Maintain US hegemonic dominance around the world through soft and hard power, as required, in service to capital.
On the other hand, ask a hardcore fascist/Nazi or even KKK guy their thoughts in 1960 or today and it’s “we want a separate nation only available for white people…” blah blah blah, all the shit. Their ideology remains the same as always. They believe in racial supremacy of white people, however they break that down, and they want a “pure land” for their chosen race. The more politically savvy ones will swap words around for plausible deniability, but the core ideology is basically the same in the end. They hate communists, they hate non-whites, especially being forced to live around and respect them as humans, they blame all societal ills on non-white minorities and/or non-cis, straight minorities. Same old tale.
On the left, if you filter out the liberals LARPing (gotta similarly filter the more libbed up conservatives from their Nazi compatriots as well), you’ll hear the same arguments that communist-types have had since the 1960s, since the 1920s, and further back. Because it’s rooted in an ideology, so specific arguments of the time period change maybe, wording might change, but fundamentals like labor being the source of all value and thus capitalists having no right to the value created by others… remains core and unchanged.
[this isn’t a “give it to the Nazis for ideological purity” argument, btw, to the liberals in my walls. It’s about political terminology and ties to strongly held ideology which American “liberals” and “conservatives” both share in common. Just about the only thing Nazis can ever coherently express is their hatred for non-white people. Beyond that, good fucking luck finding any sense in their statements and beliefs]
Correction:
One is a boring, sleepy genocidal geriatric
The other is an entertaining genocidal geriatric
Your move, America!
Also I like how libs spend their time downvoting memes here. You guys could just go read your hug box “Joe is good!” memes on the entirety of reddit, twitter, or lemmy minus basically two instances.
If I put the cheese out too obviously the mouse will know what I am doing
But if I eat some cheese in the corner and, “oppsie” drop a small piece in a sticky trap area… I might just awaken to an angry mouse chirping at me.
You still haven’t given an example of wtf you’re talking about.
Who the fuck are these mysterious (assumedly) pro-Stalin, pro-USSR, etc. “tankies” who ALSO are pro-USA/pro-capitalism?
Just give a name! Find a person in history or today and type their name into your text box and hit send. Is this asking a lot?
If they use it to mean “person who doesn’t get bogged down in stupid details over the USSR (or China) just for the sake of hating a communist country” then fine. I don’t care. It just gets old seeing it used as “person left of me, which means they’re bad” by the most historically illiterate motherfuckers on the planet. The kind of fuckers who say they want socialism and then cry every time someone protests in a street. Do you see what I mean? It’s not the word, I don’t care in the end. I get like a death threat per day from random Nazis who (ironically) call me antisemitic for criticizing Israel. I’ll take tankie over that, given the choice. But it’s worth acknowledging the people calling me or us or whoever “tankie” are absolutely just the dumbest fuckers online. That’s all.
Bro, wtf is a tankie if not a communist? You’re just out here making up bullshit. I want a definition!
I’ve been led to believe “tankie” was referring to fans of the USSR, which, I suppose if you wanna be annoying, one could argue “weren’t communists.” But you didn’t do that. You didn’t say “Stalin betrayed Marxist Leninism” or whatever. I could assume that’s what you meant, but I’d rather read it from you.
It’s starting to feel like, to me, that tankie just means “someone more left than me, and that makes me angry!” Because I can say who isn’t calling people tankies. That would be Marxists of whatever variety. I can also say who does seem to be using that word all the time… socdems, liberals, sometimes outright fascists. It definitely seems to be the bludgeon of liberals who fancy themselves to be socialists though. I’m going to include most leftist anarchists under the umbrella of liberal because that’s just how I roll. Like a big ol’ tank.
Anti-communism has always been a reaction to communism (leftist movements broadly).
Anyone who unironically uses the word tankie… ever… is immediately written off in my book. They’re terminally online and have never read anything, never thought about anything seriously, they’re useful idiots for fascists at best and, a lot of times, just fascists.
I feel like they think I’m being hyperbolic or forcing a false dichotomy, but, no, if you self-label as anti-communist that’s basically the same as modern day “all lives matter” people which was a right wing, reactionary, movement against the movement for justice for black people in the US. There is a movement which is objectively on the side of people, justice, etc. and there is a reaction to that movement. Just how it goes. If you identify on the reactionary side… well, there you go. Not sure why this is so complicated for the “bBUT TANKIES” dipshits.
“If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black”
I don’t even see how I was being rude. It’s more of a joke or whatever you might call it to say “someone’s questions and/or actions are so out of line that I believe a bot is posting.”
Maybe it’s not a good joke, or funny or whatever, which is fine, but I don’t agree with the assertion that I was being overly rude. I think he’s just irritated someone came in and listed a bunch of pretty much irrefutable shit and destroyed his little attempt to change the conversation.
If you type like a bot, I’m gonna call you a bot. I outlined my reasoning which was “your question had absolutely nothing to do with the OP’s meme.”
I apologize when I’m wrong, so I won’t be apologizing here.
I don’t know what the removed portion says, whether that’s on my end censoring or just rules around here, but feel free to DM me what was after “were a” and before the comma. I’m curious what I was being.
This is me acknowledging upfront that I’m typing back to some sort of chatgpt-like AI bot. Aintnoway this is a person. I’m drawing this conclusion based off the complete fucking irrelevancy of this question in the context of the OP meme.
Here’s a spicy meatball for you: America is basically always the fucking “bad guy” historically, minus literally two times both of which it took waaaaaaayyyy too long to finally intervene. 100 years in the case of the union army finally ending chattel slavery in the US and years + a provoking attack in the case of fighting world-wide fascism. Every other war or military action the US has done, broadly without exception, has been evil shit, bad, solely for the interests of US capital (first) and/or allied nations such as the UK, France, etc. and their capital and imperial interests.
So, the obvious question then is: who the fuck does the US think it is to be the great arbiter of truth?
The country that bombed an entire northern half of a nation so heavily that no buildings existed basically? And for what? Wanting a democracy more aligned with the USSR and/or China? (DPRK or North Korea if this isn’t obvious).
Or the country that dropped two unnecessary atomic bombs on Japan basically with the intention of scaring the shit out of the USSR? And why did the USSR need scaring? Why did all those Japanese civilians need to be vaporized? Because, again, the USSR was explicitly opposed to US capital interests and this was simply unacceptable. The US gov would (and still does) happily vaporize millions of people if trade networks and access to resources can be maintained.
Hey here’s a relevant one to ponder considering the Russia/Ukraine conflict: you mean the country that funded a group of mostly psychopaths and religious fundamentalists in Afghanistan and the general region in the 1970-1980s who ran across that country murdering, raping, doing truly unspeakable shit, basically forced Soviet intervention in an attempt to maintain some semblance of a government. And then several decades later led basically directly to the 9/11 events and two more decades of the US ruthlessly bombing and murdering and supporting the same warlords… you’re telling me this country that would befriend and support people like bin Laden gets to say who’s the “bad guy” in the world?
So, off the bat, the US’s opinion is less than dogshit in value. Even dogshit would be disgusted at stepping in the US’s opinion.
If there ever to be any sort of intervention for some sort of righteous cause it absolutely has to start with the US sitting the fuck out of any negotiations, talks, votes, whatever. The US has proven too many times for 100 years+ that it absolutely cannot be trusted to do ANYTHING good. It will poison any discussion- something becoming very clear and apparent to world leaders who are now often seeking to bypass the US and use countries like China as an intermediary.
But you have open discussions, UN votes and such, you find the facts of the situation, and you figure out what the most “just” end to a conflict is.
It gets sketchy from there because I’m basically never going to justify bombing countries. It’s not happening. I could potentially see justification for a UN sanctioned removal (assassination) of especially toxic leaders… but the problem there, of course, is complicated by so many questions: “do we have access to all the relevant facts? What is the CIA (or to be totally fair: Russia or Chinese intelligence) hiding from us? How did the person/political group gain power? Trace it allllllll the way back. Who benefits from their downfall or continued time in power? Who loses? Is this just more US bullshit (always the first and main question from me)?”
Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi in Libya, bin Laden, Pol Pot, my list can continue, are all specific reasons that I find it very very very hard to believe the ANY US state dept condemnation and “justification for war.” Even fucking Putin is the direct fucking result of US interference and meddling that eventually caused the dissolution of the Soviet Union (in part anyway) and the resulting catastrophic, what I’d call a genocide, mass privatization and selling off of public property for pennies on the dollar of its actual value in former Soviet states which resulted in a shitload of suicides, material conditions plummeting, and, eventually, “strong men” like Putin rising up and seizing it from the puppets the US put in power.
So when it comes to the Ukraine/Russia stuff, all I can do, with all the historical context, is say “well, this was expected.” I really do feel bad for normal people caught up in the bullshit. I just think many Americans fail to grasp a very plain and simple truth: the American government is the reason for the shit in Ukraine. Whether you think Putin has a point or that he’s doing infinite genocide, it doesn’t matter, he’s there, those countries exist, because of meddling from the fucking United States. My main concern is less-so over a border conflict (which honestly I do not give a half fuck about- help evacuate Ukrainians who don’t want to be Russian and then cede the eastern parts to Russia. Why do Europeans care again? Oh yeah, orcs, bad guys, etc. never mind!) but more focused on Americans learning fucking something after the same thing happening a hundred times. Stop fucking meddling and stop creating reasons for war! And stop fucking falling for the state department lines like “well, maybe we did do some bad stuff! But Putin is doing it NOW! So we gotta stop him!” No. No, we never have to do anything. It’s a false dichotomy. It’s bullshit sold to tug on your poor American exceptionalism feefees and make you go “yeah, we blundered around. That was bad. But we meant well! Putin is just an evil orc-man!” I know it’s hard as fuck for Americans to accept that we are the bad guys, we did and do the bad shit, and that more meddling will never undo or fix OR EVEN HAS THE TRUE INTENTION OF “FIXING” situations once they boil over. That’s hard to accept, it sucks knowing that people before you put dominos in place and the least-bad option for you is mostly to stand back and let shit happen. If you try to put more dominos in or stop some from toppling, I can promise you based on all available history, those dominos are millions of people’s lives and you’re just setting up more to die no matter any sort of intentions you may have (which are probably wrong and misguided anyway).
This is the epitome of
“iPhone? Capitalism! Ugg uhh! GOOD!”
“No iPhone! COMMUNISM! Ugg uhh! NO GOOD!”
You have no fucking clue what words mean. Communism describes an economic system of nations (typically). It doesn’t describe companies. Nor does capitalism.
What you’re asking about (you’re not really asking for anything- you’re just a terrible right wing troll) is called a worker co-op. Which do exist sometimes and a few have been successful.
But that’s irrelevant because we’re discussing a system under which rich guy’s whose family stole land/wealth (primitive accumulation! Read!) does NOT get to be the Lord of his little fiefdom. His stolen, and do not think for a second it’s not stolen, assets/wealth/land would be taken back and held in common, in a state most likely, and workers would use these resources, factories, whatever, to produce commodities not for profit but for the betterment of society as a whole. Surplus value, profits, would be reinvested into society, not hoarded by capitalist dude or his family.
So, long story short, nothing changes. Except for one thing. The thieves at the top who stole are brought back down to earth. Possibly executed depending on their crimes coughEloncough or forcefully made a worker again- OH NO, THE HORRORS!
Meanwhile, under capitalism… everything seems fine! Pay no attention to all those homeless people slowly dying on the streets as a warning to the others to never get caught slippin’. Pay no attention to the formerly commonly-owned public works in Eastern Europe and now-Russia sold out from under the people to capitalists at the insistence of other capitalists and now left to rot and serve as something to “warn” ignorant westerners about while they ignore their own crumbling infrastructure.
But hey, the grandkids of some weirdo right wing Soviet citizens who came to the US under dubious circumstances told you communism is bad. So, hey, what can I say against that? Truth? Facts? Objective reality?
“No, no. You don’t understand. These grandkids of a piece of shit said this thing happened and we have to throw away all dreams and hopes of anything better.”
Oh I remember this guy. He made the bold choice of taking the username goat and then instead of meaning “greatest of all time” just went with… a literal goat. Which, I think everyone has to agree, you absolutely have to respect.
I wonder if someone can create or has already created a “Marxist AI” that can argue purely from like an ML stance, avoiding the bullshit centrist shit. Let the perverts debate a literal robot all day.
What extensions does chrome have which are useful that Firefox doesn’t?
My only recurring issue with Firefox, which may have been fixed I dunno, is it for some reason it “isn’t officially supported” or whatever exact wording to use hardware security keys (like yubikey, which I use on every account that allows it). It’s only certain websites that don’t want to work though. Like google, Microsoft and many others were fine but I think paypal didn’t want to work properly but it does work on Edge, Chrome, probably Brave. Overall annoying as fuck at times but I deal with it to be out of Google’s-world
That 74 is kind of tricky and my vision is “normal”
This reminds me of a time I was taking one of these colorblind tests. The person administering it was flipping (way too fast) through the numbers and I was reading them fine. A trickier one came up which I could very clearly read, like this 71/74 one, and I said (because fucker was flipping way too fast) “71… no, 74 actually.” He marked it wrong. It felt like a real life Seinfeld incident after that where I kind of stopped the whole test and was saying basically, as nicely as I could, “hey. I said 74. Mark that correct.” MFer didn’t even vocalize a response. I can’t remember but I think he did like two more numbers, said I passed with whatever number of tests with one incorrect. I had to get my eyesight examined after that (this was for some pilot shit. Like a physical) and I told the doctor and he kind of shrugged it off too like “you passed it. It doesn’t matter.” IT MATTERS TO ME GODDAMNIT
Thanks for triggering this random traumatic event from over a decade ago.
I’m just envisioning Trump coming over to Biden’s makeup/prep room, whatever they get, before the debate to say good luck in private and just let him know it’s nothing personal between them. While they’re chatting Biden is getting layers upon layers of makeup caked on and Trump is just nervously inching closer and closer to Joe’s water bottle with a tiny bottle of visine eye drops. Just enough to fuck him up and counteract the speedball.