‘They will vote against Harris’: Arab Americans in Michigan desert Democrats over Gaza
GarbageShootAlt2 @ GarbageShootAlt2 @lemmy.ml Posts 1Comments 475Joined 2 yr. ago
I think that Trump 2 is starkly different from Trump 1. I maintain my interpretation of Trump 1 and happily await someone explaining to me a basis for predicting Trump 2's methodological shift. I personally really struggle to understand it unless it's truly that his brain was broken by losing in 2020 and he became the Joker. Perhaps it's just that the actual fascists finally were able to figure out how to more effectively control him/convince him to cooperate, since he was notoriously unruly and refused to defer to allies who knew what they were doing (and this is part of what made him so much less threatening from a long-term standpoint than he could have been, not that he didn't present problems).
Looking at the context of this conversation (why are you even back here? why did you even remember it? did you think this was a great chance to gloat about how Momala would have made everything okay?) I think it's more productive to try to understand how Republicans generally have taken this hard right shift, and it's not because Trump is a wizard who can make everyone do what he wants, we have seen him come into conflict with the Republican establishment many times before, but they are backing him on a lot of the more fascist policies (with the exception of some of the courts). It's also worth noting that the Democrats, infamously Schumer, are extremely capitulatory to him, and obviously some fascist policy was done under their lead, like with Gaza, but remembering discourse from when I was writing, I can infer that you were arguing that the extermination of just the Palestinians was the lesser evil, so I guess that doesn't matter. Anyway, my original point is that the threat isn't coming fundamentally from Trump, but from the Republican Party and neoliberalism generally, and I see no reason to think that is less true now.
In my personal life, I've actually been really pleasantly surprised to see former "lesser evil" types realize that the Democratic Party needs to be destroyed because they are ultimately collaborators with the Republicans who will never, ever actually solve the problems producing fascist threats (and also do really awful things in their own right). I think they learned the correct lesson from the last several years, but of course diehards remain and will act like this is a moral victory for them somehow, when Kamala was adopting Trump 1 policy and even worse and Dems keep saying "we lost, I guess we weren't reactionary enough" and shifting ever-further right.
I truly hope that one day you realize that the Dems are more opposed to genuine leftism than to Republicans and have and will work to suppress it while protecting the Republican establishment. If you truly hate Republicans and not just Trump in particular, you need to look beyond the Dems and beyond the tip of your nose (a single election cycle).
This newspaper has a hard on for downplaying north Korean aggression.
Such a fucking chickenhawk you are. "Aw, these authors want to BUST MASSIVE LOADS all over KOREAN STRONGMEN. They want to be TOPPED by KIM JONG UN!" literally just because they want the peaceful reunification of their nation instead of a war for the US to have effective control of a land border with China.
This author makes every possible attempt to downplay North Korean aggression, blaming it on SK or the US every time.
From what you share I see quoting activists and trying to defuse stories that seem very improbable because there is a long history of SK and US media just making shit up about NK and it being gobbled up uncritically. But please, tell me about unicorns and state-mandated haircuts, it'll be a good use of both our time. The kids eat the rats and the rats eat the kids.
Edit: Oh, but to answer the main question I missed:
It’s gotten to the point where Korean intelligence officials are telling reporters to hold off on relaying reports about North Korean troops from Ukrainian officials until they receive third-party confirmation
Because it's talking about intelligence officials talking directly to reporters, my feeling is that it's an anonymous source, though it should definitely have made this clear.
That would be irrelevant because it's not SK's "free press," it's their government agents issuing this warning.
Seoul is right in the headline.
And in the article (right at the top, repeatedly) it's not SK press, it's SK intelligence agents saying this. The headline wouldn't say "Seoul" and then have it be a private entity; "Seoul" is a metonym for the SK government. People only conflate individual institutions with the government when it's China and some Chinese business does something stupid but not illegal.
Even the Ayatollah doesn't mean it that way. It's death to "America," i.e. the political entity, not death to "Americans," i.e. the people who happen to have been born there.
It just makes you sound like a dweeb because "disinformation" is the dem-aligned version of "fake news". I don't have the slightest interest interest in your life story.
White colonial ideology has historically been violently opposed to "equal rights and fair treatment," merely proclaiming such things while devising excuses to exclude people from it. You are speaking as though the non-white savages would need to have "equal rights and fair treatment" imposed upon them by whites, which is just being a classic racist piece of shit.
"When I'm mad about orang man, I do a racism" is not a compelling excuse.
That's a silly argument. Biden (aside from being an unrepentant segregationist!) acted as an active agent of white supremacy, and Kamala would have too, just like every President has.
As an aside, it wasn't the majority of the population. It wasn't even the majority of the voting-eligible population. It was like a little over a quarter, I think.
Conversely, other social media have been also known to suppress the right and protect the left
Where the hell are these socialist social media sites supposed to be? Are you going to say that it's Lemmy, like that's a comparable example?
Rights are not handed to us by God or by Nature, they are legal constructs, created by people. They are not immaculate or immune to criticism or alteration on the basis of what we think would be better for human society. White supremacy must be smashed to its very core, and part of accomplishing that task is making sure it's as difficult for white supremacists to recruit and congregate as we can possibly make it.
It's bizarre idealism to think that opposition to white supremacy will be overcome with no loss of enthusiasm or membership, that any interference actually has zero effect and we're just better off letting them do what they want.
It was still a white supremacist country under Biden and all previous Presidents and it would have been so under Kamala. This isn't something that gets changed by elections.
I made no value judgements about insulting people (you don't really need to specify "in online debate"), I was amused by the fact that you called it "disinformation" when it was just an insult and pointing out how silly it was.
I could give you what I want, equal rights and fair treatment, but that’d be a bit white colonialist.
What's wrong with you? Touting your virtuous heart at the same time as just being openly racist
Compared to last election, several million were people who recently voted Democrat, yes.
You are not intelligent or informed.
Going passed the disinformation in your first line.
lmao "It's disinformation when someone calls me unintelligent and uninformed". What happened, did you get tired of people telling you "that's not what ad hominem means" and reach for the next rhetorical pejorative that crossed your mind?
Bernie is a bastard, but I think it's backwards thinking to blame voters rather than candidates. In a nominal democracy, it's the job of the candidates to appeal to people to get votes. If there is any merit to this idea, we must conclude that the failure was the Harris campaign for not generating the confidence needed to vote for her -- which is a very expected outcome when you're running as reactionary a campaign as she did, calling the wall a "good idea" and so on.
So long as you have an excuse not to read, any pretext is fine
How so? Perhaps you misread my comment (I think you missed the last "to"). Or you can just say that I'm mentally ill and therefore not worth the most basic level of conversation.
I think Trump's pretty bad too, which is why I'm glad the Dems are prioritizing being strong opposition to him instead of capitulating (wait . . .) or getting distracted punching left at Mamdani over non-issues (shit . . .)