GarbageShoot [he/him] @ GarbageShoot @hexbear.net

Posts

0

Comments

1,193

Joined

3 yr. ago

Didn't you get the memo that it's now a "cultural genocide" in Xinjiang because the feds who constructed the worldview you are spoonfed realized a narrative of "literal genocide" was rhetorically unable to cope with the lack of evidence?

The bulk of Taiwanese support the status quo, including that being their official diplomatic position, so I think it would go over better than you imagine. The diehard separatists are a minority faction.

Now go per capita and check out other countries

Wildly overdone meme, but the art is honestly pretty cool in this case

I mean, Atlanticists are imperialists and should be condemned, but your view is rather unhelpful since it means the vast majority of statements connected to the UN since ~1980 fall under the same view. It's not like the PRC denies that the RoC government exists and effectively controls the island of Formosa, in our context it is just a rhetorical affectation to the effect of the RoC government not being legitimate, which is a pretty fair stance to take given the RoC's own positively absurd territorial claims.

You aren't brainwashed, you are just enculturated to a very reactionary ideology. I actually agree that it's better to analyze them as separate countries for the purpose of something like this graph, but this thinktank (which, to be clear, is very Atlanticist, i.e. aligned with your geopolitical views) is almost surely gunning for having their little infographics be diplomatically palettable in hopes that they get used by important bodies.

I wonder what's going on with the DPRK

Alright but hear me out: AI-generated odors

Involvement with the riots, presumably

Just straight racism, lol

I think this says very little of substance besides "our Great Leader is cool, Juche is cool, we must protect the revolution". Oh, and supporting central organization. What do you think it says?

5 is the only one that looks iffy to me. I guess you could say 3 too, but honestly they are a little redundant.

You vote for the least objectionable. We don't always get everything we want. Welcome to life, brought to you by unrelenting determinism.

And immediately back to the Adult in the Room bullshit. If you support the Lesser Evil unconditionally, you can't change their position. They would be a fool to do anything but take your support for granted, so what the fuck should they care what you think or that you want them to move left? You talk like your perspective is mature, but you're being strung along with the most astonishing naiveté.

You look at their voting record and public statements, and vote for the one that is most likely to support legislation and policies that align with your values. That's what I mean by "voting for."

So if it's essentially a certainty that they won't, what do you do in the general?

ETA: Besides Manchin and Sinema, who are going independent anyway, which examples of Dems are Republicans with a D in front of their name?

Are you forgetting about uncle Joe?

Here's the problem: What do you mean "voting for" those things? Very little policy is done by referendum. What do you do when both Rs and Ds are rightists with different wording?

A child who just started puberty is about the same as one who has not yet started puberty except for menstruation in the case of girls.

get married

Shit, I missed this one. Never mind, you're just a pedo.

first liberal saint of Genocide.

Thought that was Churchill

Hoping for the free market to resolve your problems is hazardous. Your logic works well enough for local clinics (liberal logic tends to do okay the more localized things are), but remember that doctors are at the mercy of hospital policy and furthermore patients are at the mercy of insurance policy. It is probably already an element of the plan for Republicans to use their levers in other states to pressure insurers not to cover abortions, and then suddenly that means abortions are either not viable or the problem of the danger of back alley abortions is replaced with the problem of medical debt.

What Ohio did was good, but it's not huge and some of the problems with it are foundational to the capitalist mode of production.

This tends to require pushing the Democrats left first, which unconditionally voting for them will not accomplish because their donors are not unconditionally supportive and those donors are furthermore not urging them to move left.

This is one of those "not all men" "not all white people" things. It's common practice to speak in generalization about groups that have a general consensus of chauvinism (whether demographics, organization members, or whatever). One thing that is good about this is that it encourages the relative outliers to not identify with the group (e.g. you can't 'opt out' of being white, but you can stop personally self-identifying with the social formation of whiteness). When a .ee or .ml user disparages their instance, they are not disparaging themselves or literally every single person in it (despite the denotative meaning of the words they use) but are pointing to a broad and explicit consensus around certain views and traits. Incidentally, there are groups that you can opt out of, whether it's being a member of a bourgeois-democratic party ("not all Liberals") or something more trivial, like being a user on a neoliberal instance. I think it's better to stay on one's instance and try to change it, but it's worth noting for the sake of completeness, and there are some instances that are not worth trying to change except to kill, like .world

We can language police all day long, but this line is old-hat and there's little reason to believe any wording would be received as "correct" and "properly inoffensive" except for silence. A "possible ally" who is alienated by something this trivial wasn't ready to be an ally anyway.

tbf there are members on that instance and yours who have said essentially the same thing about their own instances. I assume they stay for the slop associated with broader federation (which I don't begrudge).