I’m confused as to which parts of the left it’s supposed to split. The communists and the democratic socialists? The anarchists and the worker democracy folks? The DSA from independents like Sanders?
I feel like the message of the post is more so about uniting as the left flank against pro-corporate politicians like most of the democrats and republicans.
Whataboutism. Godric, what is your deal? Everything you post on this subject is so meh. You seem to simultaneously care so much, yet are so uninformed. Did a communist rear end you at some point? This all feels like some weird little personal vendetta at this point, and I just don’t really understand what you get out of this.
How did this thread become about the Hitler-Chamberlain pact and the Molotov Ribbentrop pact all of a sudden?
Sounds pretty liberal to me. Liberal means pro capitalism right?
I haven’t found a reason to say anything.
His assertions were narrowly phrased to make it clear that he’d never fight a war over anything worth fighting over
No they weren’t. He quite explicitly promised “no new wars”. Turns out you can just lie on the campaign trail.
And of course, you and me, we’re politically well versed. When someone asks us the connection between the JCPOA and the number 38, we know. We know about Trump’s illegal assault on North Korea, as well as Biden bombing Yemen. But most folks aren’t as well read and politically in the know as you are. Some are working two jobs, and just do not have the time to read up on all this. When they see Harris saying “I will ensure America has the most lethal fighting force in the world”, and Trump saying “no new wars”, all they see is one person being in favor of war and another being against it. Sure, they’re a bit under educated (for good reason), but based on the knowledge they have, if they were anti war, it’d be moronic not to vote for Trump.
And that’s exactly the problem we’re seeing here. It’s democrats flushing easy political wins down the fucking toilet because they can’t help themselves from making wildly unpopular statements. Harris with war, Crowley with data centers. Either they love losing, or these are their actual policy positions. You can decide for yourself which you think is more likely.
It’s like Trump successfully positioning himself as the peace candidate because Harris couldn’t bring herself to condemn a genocide, and couldn’t help herself from saying things like “I will ensure America has the most lethal fighting force in the world” at the DNC. Or like when Trump managed to position himself as the peace candidate because his opponent was the butcher of Libya who couldn’t bring herself to condemn the illegal invasion of Iraq she voted for.
Even after defeating a objectively bad progressive
I believe what we’re seeing here is called “getting what you vote for”. Nicely done, Wisconsin!
https://www.simplypsychology.org/autism-justice-sensitivity.html
You think wrong. Psychologists do use a heightened sensitivity to injustice as a diagnostic criterion when trying to see if someone has ASD.
And to highjack this comment as well to correct the record on your view of empathy and autism: empathy can be roughly divvied up into cognitive empathy (reasoning why someone is feeling a certain way) and emotional empathy (recognizing that someone is feeling a certain way). The former strongly depends on one’s theory of mind, which tends to be under developed in people with ASD. Saying that someone with autism has “reduced empathy” is reductive and can lead to wrong conclusions (for example, one could conclude that autistic people care less about justice).
And now on to our most important kitchen table issue: do you condemn Hasan?
deleted by creator
Just like all the other democrats, this man is not a real democrat. A true democrat supports universal healthcare. And given that someday, in the future, a true democrat may pop into existence, the only rational choice is to vote blue, regardless of what the person on the ballot believes and whether you agree with them or not. Do your part.
I support Hakeem Jeffries. Because sure, he may not advocate for anything thay improves my material conditions, but he may at some point in the future have a change of heart. And have you seen the other guy?
Oh poor genocide joe boohoohoo. I hope I didn’t hurt anyone’s feewings. He deserves so much worse than this. Look, if you would react the same way to me saying “I’m glad Hitler’s dead”, then fair game, more power to you. Otherwise, you’re being a fucking hypocrite. If you commit a genocide, you can go fuck yourself, and you deserve everything that’s coming to you, and more.
This is going to sound weird, but: actually shut your mouth. Physically keep it shut. You’ll end up talking anyway, and that’s okay. When you notice you’re talking more than most again, physically shut your mouth.
I hope he suffers just as much as the billions of dollars he sent to Israel for the Gaza genocide made the men, women, and children of Gaza suffer. I hope he’s still mentally present enought to understand his suffering and what it does to those he loves. I hope it lasts.
Makes perfect sense to me, some things are best taught through punishment, I don’t question this for a moment. And I could see that eating at the wrong time is something you want kids not to do. So, I completely agree with you.
But my question is not whether this should be punished at all, it’s about which genius thought that sharing would be a good idea for a punishment. There’s a million and a half different kinds of punishments the teacher could choose from, and they often choose “sharing” as the punishment, teaching kids to associate sharing with punishment. I don’t care to question that punishment is in order, I just care about the kind of punishment that is often chosen.
republicans-from-40-years-ago
You’re off by a factor 10.
Kind of tangentially related to the tweet, but who thought it was a good idea to teach kids to associate sharing with punishment?
If businesses were people that’d be a great point.
Using the phrase “game theory” when you really mean “I’ve had a bit of a think” is an antipattern, and much more transparent than you seem to think.