cecinestpasunbot @ cecinestpasunbot @lemmy.ml

Posts

0

Comments

444

Joined

2 yr. ago

These two things are not the same and are regulated by different laws. By your logic we could conclude that Biden couldn’t do anything.

It’s also important to note that Biden used the weakest legal reasoning available to him when canceling student load debt. Debtor advocates were very critical of him at the time for doing that because it increased the likelihood it would be shot down in court.

That’s a lot of condescension for someone who can’t even answer a simple question.

So you admit he can do it without congress. However, you think it would make him look like Trump and so he shouldn’t do it…

That’s very strange reasoning. What exactly do you think would be the actual consequences? Over two thirds of Americans support legalization. If Biden got marijuana descheduled it would likely be an incredibly popular move.

It doesn’t require federal legislation actually. Biden could simply order the AG to deschedule marijuana which would effectively legalize it nationally.

A lot of people voted for Biden in the primaries because they were being told he had the best chance of beating Trump. Plenty of those people actually favored the policy proposals of other candidates.

I don’t think anyone who supported say Bernie or Warren thought that Biden was a progressive. However, there were attempts made by the Biden campaign to appeal to progressives. After Bernie lost, Biden and Bernie staffers actually collaborated to release a joint list of policy proposals. I think that gave a lot of progressives false hopes for what a Biden presidency could be.

I’d say Taiwan serves US geopolitical interests beyond just chip manufacturing. It exists as a separate political entity thanks to the US who intervened in the Chinese civil war to protect Chiang Kai-shek’s military dictatorship. The PRC wants to remedy what they perceive as the consequences of foreign interference in China’s political affairs. That enables the US to use their support for Taiwanese independence as leverage in their attempts to suppress China’s economic rise.

Let’s be fair, the ROC under the KMT and Chiang Kai-shek was far from democratic despite their claim to Sun Yat-sen’s legacy.

While no party in Taiwan is openly in favor of reunification, there are major parties like the KMT and the TPP that are in favor of building a closer relationship with mainland China. Combined they are currently polling higher than the DPP which is considered to be the “pro independence” party.

So while I would agree that peaceful reunification is not possible in the near term, i think changes in the geopolitical dynamics between the US and China could make it more likely.

I suspect China believes it can outpace the economic growth of Taiwan in the long run. If Taiwan’s business elites start to think they’re missing out on that growth by opposing reunification, then you’ll see a political shift in Taiwan.

Of course he will. Baiting the media to compare him to Hitler has been part of his campaign strategy since 2016. For anyone who doesn’t actually know any better, it makes the media appear unhinged.

Well that assumes Trump is capable of utilizing the presidency to organize an effective fascist movement and institute a fascist coup. Frankly, I don’t think he is. He would need buy in from the primary beneficiaries of our current economic system, ie the capitalist elite.

Until their class position is threatened by an organized left or labor movement, they won’t resort to supporting a fascist coup. As economic inequality rises, this becomes a less and less distant possibility. Unfortunately, inequality will likely rise no matter who wins the 2024 election.

That’s why you can’t prevent the rise of fascism simply by voting. It’s not enough. Instead, fascists and their wealthy backers have to be out organized at a grass roots level.

Unfortunately if the US is indeed trending towards fascism, no amount of voting can prevent it.

The US has a long track record of supporting some of the most brutal regimes all around the world if it serves their geopolitical interests. In that way its support for Israel isn’t much of an anomaly.

More specifically though, Israel serves as a base from which the US can project military power. That prevents other states in the region from taking full advantage of their natural or geographic resources.

For example, the US wants to ensure oil is traded in US dollars. That creates demand for the dollar which inflates its value relative to other currencies. In that way, US financial capital is given an advantage over the rest of the world. This arrangement isn’t necessarily ideal for oil rich countries as it essentially means some of the value of their oil is getting siphoned off. However, the threat of military intervention may keep these states in line. However, many of them have started to experiment with trading in other currencies which might make the US uneasy.

The second thing I can think of is the US wants to ensure Egypt does not use the Suez Canal as a political weapon like it has historically. In such cases, Israel has been used as proxy through which western countries invaded Egypt to try and take back control of the canal. Since the canal remains very important trade route from which the US and its allies benefit, the US needs some sort of leverage to ensure it stays open to them.

They were actually banned from reddit for posting “John Brown was right” memes implying that the radical abolitionist was correct to kill slaveowners. They can be excessive and annoying but they’re certainly not fascists.

I somewhat agree. I do take issue with the notion that the Nordic working class has been bought off though. That makes it sound like they’re conscious advocates of imperialism which I don’t think is generally true. Rather I’d argue that free from hyper exploitation, they can’t develop a meaningful class consciousness. As such, it’s difficult for them to see how their long term interests are put at risk by the capitalist system and how a socialist system could maintain their high standard of living without requiring imperialism.

I doubt the Nordic working class are receiving a meaningful share of the value stolen through imperialist means. Instead, I think the Nordic bourgeoisie are able to accumulate wealth without having to hyper exploit their local populations thanks to imperialism. This ameliorates the local class antagonisms and creates the superficial appearance that a capitalist system can maintain a stable high standard of living for the working class.

Of course, if imperialist exploitation can no longer ameliorate said antagonisms, class conflict will re-erupt in Nordic countries. The danger here is that parts of the working class may be convinced that their standard of living is predicated on imperialist conquest which is the basis for fascism. The good thing is I don’t actually think that’s true. A more reliable way for Nordic workers to maintain their standard of living would be for them to suppress the interests of their local bourgeoisie and transition to an actually socialist model.

Saying the Democrats control the republicans is silly but saying that they use the republicans as a threat to stay in power is indisputable. They literally funded pro trump candidates in republican primaries under the assumption they would be easier to beat in the general election.

That’s an interesting analysis. If it’s correct then it would suggest that while China has a larger economy it has yet to achieve the influence over international finance that the US currently enjoys.

If you ever visit China you’ll realize how silly your comment is. There are electric scooters literally everywhere. You can’t escape them. They don’t look dinky at all either and are more akin to Vespas than the standing scooters that are popular to rent in the US.