GarbageShootAlt2 @ GarbageShootAlt2 @lemmy.ml

Posts

1

Comments

475

Joined

2 yr. ago

I disagree about sortition, but I appreciate pushing back on elitist, misanthropic bullshit like you did. I think elections with a strong ability to quickly recall faithless representatives is a much better solution because it involves the decision-making of the whole community, rather than a community member chosen at random.

Seems like campaign finance reform is a more pertinent question then.

I've always really loved Zarbon. He has a cool design that fits his snobbish attitude and then when he sacrifices his looks to transform into his grotesque true form, to was a good foreshadowing of Frieza.

Also the Ginyu Force, of course. Ginyu himself is great and even the oft-overlooked Guldo is pretty interesting (and DBZ needs more weird bullshit powers like his).

Yeah, you're probably right

Which West Germany didn’t face?

We already established they had a Nazi problem

the latter is more of that “librul witchcraft” of globalization.

Again, the poverty in the region was longstanding and persists even today.

the Soviets brutalized the East, and that left a legacy of uneducated poverty.

I'm not impressed with your link, remember that the West had the RAF, which enjoyed a fair deal of popular support. I'd also need a source on things like poor education since socialist states historically are the most consistently excellent at things like mass literacy (though of course modern Germany is fine in that regard).

So it's reduced to "They were poor" which was always the case and is still the case, though at least there was virtually no homelessness in the East, which the West and notably modern Germany cannot say.

Oh, and you’re right there were no camps in East Germany, those camps were in the USSR

I said death camps, which the USSR also didn't have. Labor camps are just a form of prison labor that people use the Holocaust's work-to-death camps to sound more brutal than they are. Prison labor was also practiced in West Germany, is practiced in modern Germany, and is practiced in whatever liberal state you like. The equivocation here is really the peak of the "Soviets were also Nazis" bullshit that is of course popular with the aggrieved German liberals and anticommunist historians the world over.

Well no, there's one step further, but I hope we can avoid talking about it because it doesn't concern Germany.

I obviously don't expect you to have a positive regard of the Soviets, but equivocating between the East German government and Nazis is frankly disgusting. We can start with something uncontroversial: The East Germans absolutely did not have death camps (probably the closest thing they did was the killing of many former Nazis) and were not engaging in ethnic cleansing.

The modern trend of people from the former East Germany supporting AfD probably has more to do with the interceding decades of liberal rule, combined with the region's historic relative poverty (which preceded even the Nazis).

It should also go without saying that I despise the Russian federation like I despise all liberal governments, and the Russian government especially for its primary purpose being anti-communist suppression. That said, again, "hard Nazi" is a disgusting thing to call them when they aren't doing things like running death camps or engaging in ethnic cleansing. It's just hysterical projection from the liberal masters of a country that has a civil religion around an actual Nazi collaborator and perpetrator of the Holocaust, Stepan Bandera.

Whatever that poster planned to implement their beliefs would probably devolve into adventurism but, taken at face value, I think it would be much more accurate to call their proposal blanquist.

Notice how Germany is a good country nowadays

That really isn't true, and it's not true for the same reasons as you describe of the American South. There was relatively little denazification in West Germany, and the West German government eventually became the German government, so now we have a country where the supposedly liberal parties respond to the blatantly fascist AfD by adopting their policy positions.

This is such a ridiculous deflection. Trump lying enough would make it the more plausible interpretation that whatever Kamala said that was blatantly false was actually a string of accidents? On what basis? Someone lying more does not mean that someone else who says fewer falsehoods is less likely to be a liar. It's just an excuse to say "But Trump!" like voteblues always do whenever someone questions their team.

That or the wring their hands about how "It's tough but we need to support them anyway"

Yeah, but that's something that is harder to be succinctly convincing about to someone who is enough of a philistine to say "nazis were socialist" to begin with. That said, in the source I linked, the very next paragraph is:

‘We might have called ourselves the Liberal Party. We chose to call ourselves the National Socialists. We are not internationalists. Our Socialism is national. We demand the fulfilment of the just claims of the productive classes by the State on the basis of race solidarity. To us, State and race are one…

If it's nearly as appropriate to call yourselves liberal as it is to call yourselves socialist, you probably aren't much of either (and indeed, as much as I despise liberals, Hitler was not a liberal either).

The hegemonic ideology of the capitalist world. Here's the Wikipedia summary to give you something palatable. They don't mean "liberal" in the American sense of "Democrat-aligned".

As far as Israel’s founding, yeah fine I’m not that old afaic the world fucked up by letting Israel happen but once they’re all there what now?

Well, there is (or was) continuous immigration to Israel from various other (almost exclusively white) countries as part of the project of continuous growth to settle new territory. A lot of them can just go back to their home country and a number already have on at least a temporary basis because of the war.

For the sake of argument we can say there are recent settlers who really cannot go back, and for them the answer is to rehouse them, since obviously no one here wants genocide, that's just a Zionist myth.

But it should be the duty of the founders and masters of Israel, those being the US and UK, to rehouse Israelis in their borders. The same should go for other major sponsors of the Zionist project, like Canada, Australia, and of course Germany. All of these countries (especially America) can afford to do so.

That wouldn't eliminate the Jewish population, but the goal has never been to eliminate the Jewish population.

I mean, I think religion is stupid but

They're much more of an ethnostate than a theocracy, though they have features of both

neither side is ever going to stop fighting because religion.

You are severely misunderstanding the lines of the conflict, but you're misunderstanding them in exactly the way you were told to by the neoliberal media trying to both sides a conflict that was always, always a settler-colonial state trying to exterminate and replace the indigenous Palestinian population. The Palestinians are not fighting to exterminate Jews, they are fighting to destroy the settler-colony that ousted them from most of their land. There's no shortage of evidence of Palestinian society being basically pluralist, allowing Christian churches to stand for centuries (until Israel bombed them) and taking care of Jewish graveyards and so on.

It is not a religious war, it's a colonialist war.

What do you think a relationship between Trump 2.0 and Netanyahu looks like? You care about Palestinians and you want to risk a second Trump term?

I think Biden was already fully supporting Bibi. Trump can't "fully support him but even more now".

I agree, but Merriam-Webster remains a bad way to try to squash claims of nuance. You are correct independent of the bad and redditor-esque method of argument you chose. You should know very well that texts with actual authority exist that better establish these things, like the DSM in this case.

Here's the thing, taking your paraphrased quotes as accurate (and I believe they are) she is not appending any condition on arming Israel. She did not say "If Congress apportions funds, I will arm Israel," [let alone "If and only if,"] she said "I will continue to arm Israel," without any conditional, which Biden has demonstrated the President can do at least to some extent through unilateral executive authority in addition to Congress being able to do it. Therefore, the statements are equivalent. I therefore maintain that "lol/lmao" is a valid response to claiming they are different.

I’m no fucken liberal

Voteblues are liberals, sorry

We should have cut Israel loose 30 years ago

Assuming it had to be founded, it should have been destroyed 70-something years ago

She has not promised to “keep sending Israel bombs”. She has said that she would continue to arm Israel

lol

Fair enough, apologies for presuming.

That's not true, currency is an invention, it's not as old as humanity. Primitive agrarian societies (and of course hunter-gatherer societies) broadly did not use currency.

https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/vv.html

I'm an ML but no, states are more fundamental than capitalism. There were states prior to capitalism and they will likely exist after capitalism, but capitalism cannot exist without a state as the special apparatus of class oppression.