WoahWoah @ WoahWoah @lemmy.world

Posts

10

Comments

1,730

Joined

2 yr. ago

🙄

Sounds like a brilliant plan. "They're being fascist so we have to be fascist!" has worked so well in history.

You effectively said, "I didn't do anything to change anyone's mind, and neither did the party that I support through the bare minimum of voting once every four years, so since the majority of people in this country don't agree with me, I think I want to play fascism instead of democracy too! Except I'm the good kind of fascist! I just don't think the majority of voters should get their way, that's all."

Hard eye roll on that one.

You can't beat fascism with fascism. It doesn't work that way.

The problem is that the democrats are playing the game called "democracy." The Republicans stopped following the rules of the game because they don't want to play it anymore. If the Democrats do what the Republicans do, then the game is no longer be played. You can't really give up on democracy and then bring it back. It rarely ever works that way.

If you cede the ground of democratic norms, rules, and policies just to win, you ultimately lose because you no longer have a democracy. In many respects, getting the Democrats to start doing the same thing is precisely what the Republicans want. Because that means they can finish burying democracy, and they're better positioned to win the game called "fascism."

Is he still trying to sue people into liking him? What a loser.

The amount of his picks that are involved with sexual abuse of minors seems pretty over-the-top even for a republican administration. At this point, do any of them not have histories of involvement with sexual abuse and/or harassment? Maybe Oz... idk.

It's just posturing. Putin knows he's in the driver's seat now. He can do basically whatever he wants, so he can actually amplify his brio for the next six weeks, and then he can actually act on some of the threats after Trump is in office. As I've argued elsewhere, his goal at this point is likely to give an excuse and cover for Trump to exit NATO, which would dramatically open up his options and leverage in Europe more broadly.

This is the political version of saying "if global warming is real, then how come it snowed on Christmas?"

I hope one day when you grow up you realize how stupid you sound.

Skill problem.

Yes, or it could be the incredibly obvious fact that it's a generation that grew up on media and technology that amplified fear and anger for profit and with corporate powers leveraging the most advanced technologies in the world to seek, compete for, gain, and hold attention as much as possible in almost every waking moment.

You have derivative citizenship? I mean, you'll probably be fine, but you're in a riskier category than a natural-born citizen of natural-born-citizen parents. The country is crazy right now. Likely most or all the worst-case scenarios won't occur. But you're slightly more exposed than others. That being said, if they're coming for you, things will have become so fucked in the US and world more generally that it wouldn't really matter where you are.

She also lost because she's not a man. And she also lost because she's not white. You're deluding yourself if you don't think race and gender had an influence in the election.

Johnson: No.

Totally agree. I find this one much less forced. Hopefully it doesn't get taken up in the culture wars. It would just be nice to have an accepted neuter term for... latino/as.

Fair enough, but to be clear, the origin of latine isn't from within the US. It migrated from Spanish-speaking countries (largely within the demographics we talked about earlier) as a corrective for latinx. I think you'll find most people in the United States have not seen "latine" used before. It's used more outside of the US than within it.

😉

For whom?

That's kind of a "you" problem, no?

Have you considered why Poland doesn't do anything unless the US allows it? When the command to jump is issued by NATO, Poland asks the US military "how high?" NATO is an extension of US global force projection that the EU benefits from through the deterrence the US military offers and by allowing dramatically lower defense-spending allocations to the member states. "NATO" is simply in no position to dictate much of anything to a country that has a defense budget that equates to roughly 40% of the entire planet's defense spending.

But, hey. Good luck, I hope you're right. Nevertheless, in terms of hard power, the EU is simply not a superpower on the global stage, especially militarily. If you think the contribution to NATO by the United States is easily dismissed, I think you'll get the opportunity in the next year or so to see if you're right. It's worth noting that the majority of NATO member-state military leaders would strongly disagree with you.

If the United States were to withdraw from NATO, the alliance would face an existential crisis. Despite your vague posturing, the U.S. forms the backbone of NATO’s military power, financial resources, and strategic coherence. The U.S. contributes unparalleled military capabilities, such as advanced technology, global logistics networks, and nuclear deterrence. Without U.S. leadership, NATO would lose its primary deterrent against major threats, particularly Russian aggression, leaving Europe vulnerable and fragmented. Eastern European nations like Poland and the Baltic states, which rely on the U.S. for security guarantees, would face heightened existential threats, exposing NATO’s diminished ability to uphold its core mission of collective defense.

Additionally the absence of U.S. leadership would render NATO’s operations ineffective and its credibility irreparably damaged on the global stage. No other NATO member has the capacity to fill the void left by the U.S., either militarily or diplomatically. The alliance’s cohesion relies on the U.S.’s ability to unify diverse member states around shared goals and put power, funds, and assets behind it, something no European power can replicate. This would embolden adversaries, destabilize the European continent, and undermine decades of transatlantic security cooperation. In essence, NATO without America would become a hollow shell—an alliance in name only.

You should look up what "subtext" means.