No, they’re just posturing while they can. I’m 100% both are thrilled with everything going on.

One of the few good things about this mess is that the US no longer commands respect.

Except for all the times you negotiate with terrorists. “Never negotiate with terrorists” is what oppressors do when they don’t want to negotiate with the oppressed (who may or may not be terrorists), not a strategy anyone has ever seriously implemented.

Yeah no there’s no way wealthy liberal Washington would advocate for seizing private property. He’d probably rather you just shoot anyone with a MAGA hat.

That’s so surprising, I am shocked. I wonder if anyone could’ve predicted this.

That makes a lot more sense.

Uh… Why do you think terms matter for Putin? Though either way he’s popular enough to win a somewhat fair election.

First off, there’s no need to be that combative. Second,

Here’s a hint, look at the first 3 letters of the word “oxidation.”

There’s plenty of oxygen dissolved in water.

But then again there’s only a few countries that do and none of them are superpowers.

Really? Which ones?

Not quite, but they’ll probably be a factor (obligatory here’s hoping we’re wrong on both counts). Israel’s conduct in general (this is in no way restricted to a particular faction or part of the Israeli political spectrum) is making antisemitism more mainstream, but the West is due for a fascist takeover and it’s not like fascists need much reason to go after Jews.

I mean this money isn’t literal money; it’s assets and shit. As shown by Elon Musk’s Twitter fiasco, that kind of “money” can’t be converted into liquidity on a moment’s notice. The assumption that giving away all one’s wealth immediately leads to maximum good is also not true, because the whole point of capital is that it grows. In Mackenzie’s example she could donate six billion right now and end up right where she started (ignoring inflation, which we probably shouldn’t). That means that, hypothetically, she could donate 36 billion dollars every seven years, or about 5 billion dollars per year, forever. That’s 50 billion per decade, and there are many decades in a human lifetime. You count how many homeless children that is. Capitalism is an unethical system, but there’s merit to participating in an unethical system where one is given power if they can do more good with their presence than with their absence. It’s basically the same logic as a regional bureaucrat with a conscience in a dictatorship. For fun I tried to calculate how much money adjusted for inflation you could give out starting from 36 billion dollars over a human lifetime, assuming all remainder gets given away on death and that the giver is going to die exactly forty years later. Here’s the result: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/ysyzv7ur1m (x axis in years, y axis in billions of dollars). Here you have four donation schemes, in order from the top, with growth rate 11% and inflation 4.5%:

1. Give away 5.14 billion (approx. 36/6) at the end of each year, give away remaining principal after 40 years.
2. Give away all 36 billion immediately.
3. Give away exactly what one gains, adjusted for inflation, without touching the principal (in this case 2.25 billion in 2026 dollars), give away principal after 40 years.
4. Let principal grow, give away all at once after 40 years (you’ll have to zoom out for this one).

Of course saving a starving kid now is better than saving a starving kid later so these numbers shouldn’t be taken at face value, but you get the idea. Money is power, and there are better things to do with power than immediately give it away.

Edit: Made a mistake in the math. #1 should be 11% of 36, or roughly 4, per year.

Scholars of fascism whose job literally is to study it: Am I a joke to you?

Yes I know the cliche saying of “every president is war criminal” blah blah blah. But last president atleast were attacked or provoked by recognized threat.

And there you are. What you’re now doing for Obama, Bush and Biden the establishment is willing to do for Trump. Either they’re all terrorists or none are. For the record I believe “terrorist” as a label does more harm than good; I prefer terms like “fascist,” “imperialist” and “war criminal,” but also half the things you just listed have nothing to do with terrorism and the other half has clear equivalents for past presidents.

No other president has caused this much global terror in the modern era.

Uh… ever heard of the War on Terror?

Now to answer your question, the reason Trump is (mostly, some people are doing so) not being called a terrorist is that “terrorist” is actually a pretty mild label in the grand scheme of things; other labels (again, like “fascist,” “imperialist” and “war criminal”) better reflect the sheer depth and breadth of the depravity. Also some definitions of terrorism explicitly restrict it to non-state actors.

Uh… what the fuck are you even talking about? Reported for incivility and baseless accusations, and for the record fuck Xi.

That’s not what that word means though. There are plenty of reasons, from self-enrichment to ideology, one might want to become a dictator that have nothing to do with insecurity.

Is he an insecure baby though? He’s definitely a brutal dictator, but nothing he does strikes me as insecure. And to get ahead of that particular argument, not tolerating challenges to one’s authority is just authoritarianism 101.

I mean sure but “how to build the best possible society” and “how to build the best possible capitalist society” are different questions with different answers. The state is/can be superfluous under socialism, but under capitalism it’s an unavoidable arena for fighting over political power, and the less political leadership is paid the more that arena is rigged in favor of the rich. Also you could multiply those hundred million dollars by ten and it’d still be a rounding error in the wider US government budget, so it’s not like that money is actually competing with anything.

Absolutely, 100%. There’s a reason those 17 (???) sanctions packages didn’t hit all at once in February 2022.

It’s not about worth; it’s about opportunity cost. Worse paid people are easier to bribe. It just shouldn’t be possible to buy off people with that much authority with a luxury cruise or a cushy K-street job. You can’t do that with, say, the CCP and it shows.

Even with everything going on in America right now, it definitely doesn’t suppress free speech more than Germany or Britain. I mean the Palestine Action thing is still happening (while Reform gets to yap all day long, mind you).