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

Posts

0

Comments

1,193

Joined

3 yr. ago

tl;dr I don't have an answer for your problem, but I have some thoughts on it that hopefully might contribute to you finding an answer.

I think it's probably bad to think of the homeless, etc. as being drug-addled and especially as being dangerous. Usually, if they do have a drug problem (especially alcoholism) it came after becoming homeless and not before, and functions as a way to self-medicate to ease the pain of their terrible conditions. There is, of course, a strong correlation with mental illness that they are often also self-medicating, but "mentally ill" does not mean the same thing as "dangerous". You probably don't want to have them as a baby sitter, but that's much more because of mental illness impairing their ability to care for others (and often themselves) rather than there being a realistic chance they would actually hurt the child directly.

People, religions, politicians, corporations and so on speak of charity as a great thing, and it's certainly not a bad thing, but there being a need for charity for people to survive is a symptom of a system that doesn't care for a substantial portion of the population that lives in it, and typically brutally exploiting those people. Charity is like a bandage, it can help to tend to a wound that has been inflicted, but we must ask "Why is there a wound in the first place? What inflicted it? How can it be prevented?" Your society, like mine, is organized in part to hurt these people in order to exploit them. No amount of charity can change that fact, only a change in social organization can change it.

Not just stupid, absolutely depraved!

Yeah, there are like five never-trumpers that the Democrats opine about constantly, but that has nothing to do with my question

leftist gatekeeping

Just to be clear, are you imagining that anyone who supports Biden is a leftist?

Look Jack, if you don't like it, you can vote for the other rapist

The hand has cyan in it

The US military throughout East Asia is notorious for doing sex crimes

I think people jump to "Read On Authority" to quickly, a behavior that amounts to scripture-quoting, but

I just threw it into chatgpt, I think I understand now. It's basically saying that some level of authority is necessary for society to function (which I wouldn't have argued against otherwise).

chatgpt sucks and has demonstrated that again here. On Authority essentially argues that a socialist revolution 1: is itself a monumental exercise of authority and 2: requires authority to be protected when it exists in a world fundamentally hostile to it. There are some ancillary arguments about command structures, but overall it is written in opposition to anarchist dogmatism about "Authority" being an evil thing that must be discarded.

I'll let someone else unpack the "Stalinist Russia" part

One is a country, one is an individual, to say that any individual is more important to the war than the United States is the literal definition of Great Man Theory (i.e. childish nonsense).

This is without getting into other considerations like how Netanyahu is a scapegoat for faux-progressives who want to deflect away from how this genocide has enthusiastic support from many powerful institutions within Israel. It is an Israeli project much more than Netanyahu's personal project.

P.S. Assassinating Putin wouldn't end the war in Ukraine either (nor would assassinating Zelensky or Biden)

The NED is notorious for basically being a CIA cut-out

Tibet was de facto independent for a while, but it re-joined China voluntarily circa 1950. About 10 years later, with some help from western agitation and assets, the theocratic ruling class felt too threatened by development empowering their serf population and sought to secede in order to maintain their fiefdom. Mao sent in the PLA and crushed the secessionist revolt.

You really can't "no u" this one because of Imperial China, the PRC's claim to Tibet is completely valid. You'd probably have more luck trying with Xinjiang, though evidently that is viewed as slightly played-out now.

I got that too. I feel like it's just what they do for answers that are broadly Leftist + hates Dems

You Ain't Been Doing Nothing If You Ain't Been Called A Red

It might be helpful to the survey to include a y/n so they don't need to guess whether you are a dom or a sub in that situation

I remember there was a lot of arguing about this around that time. People were literally repeating the "tanks ran over corpses repeatedly to mulch them" story. Top minds of

Turns out most people despise rentiers

Participating in society =/= social climbing

It's countless layers of hypotheticals away from reality and I think recommending bourgeois governments liquidate their bourgeoisie is silly in the way that, in medieval times, recommending the kings of the world abolish noble titles and the monarchy is silly, you aren't going to get these institutions to just kill themselves. What I support is the proletariat, by reason of having class antagonism with the bourgeoisie, fighting a war against the former's control of the state.

What do you support?

That depends on if you do or do not want to fight a global revolutionary war against the bourgeoisie, since they would never allow such a thing to succeed in their liberal republics

No, the 2% is for the ones who obey the law, and is enforced with something more like 100% for those who break the law.