99
For decades, we have been in the streets in defense of the Palestinian people, and will continue to fight until the total liberation of Palestine!
this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
99 points (76.2% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7576 readers
148 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You can't respond to any of my points, so you project and call me an accelerationist for saying Capitalism is getting worse and we need to have a revolution. You can't make this up, you declined to answer my question about a jumping off point from the Dems because that point doesn't exist for you. Genocide is okay for you then, everything is justified except fighting back.
Yes, if I had to pick between the immediate safety of my friends and family over the safety of random strangers, I will pick my friends and family. Truly a shocking revelation!
I've answered the question of where my line is to another user.
And yes, wanting a revolution is accelerationist nonsense - look at history and tell me how many popular uprisings actually made life better and for how long. Most revolutions aren't actually done by the "plucky group of militiamen," they are done by government insiders who use leftists to get a W and then boot them out.
So, yes, genocide is okay by you as long as it's people overseas. Can't say I agree.
Revolution isn't accelerarionist, accelerationism is different.
Secondly, the vast majority of Leftist revolutions have dramatically improved metrics like life expectancy, home ownership, literacy rates, and more, this is just unfathomably wrong. Read Blackshirts and Reds, specifically the second chapter but I'd read from the start.
Yes, genocide is acceptable insofar as I know my actions won't stop it, and I'm not gambling with the lives of people I care about over "maybe the revolution will stop it eventually" or whatever nonsense you believe will happen.
And no, I'm not reading a book about your claims. This is an internet argument lol
The bottom line remains this: calling every Dem supporter genocide lover and telling them how evil they are isn't going to do shit for the cause besides piss people off and undermine thr message. The vast majority of discourse online is about how obnoxious you guys are lmao
You are gambling with their lives, the Dems continue to push right as Capitalism decays. You have no solution for this, just acceptance. Thinking revolution is nonsense is also ridiculous.
You made the claims, I offered a source thoroughly debunking them. If you think the Tsars, the fascist Batista regime, or the nationalist Kuomintang were better than the Communists in Russia, Cuba, and China, you have no clue what you're talking about, nor how brutal previous conditions were.
You literally admitted to being fine with genocide, I don't see how it gets more mask-off than that.
My point is that your entire premise of "don't vote for the Democrats" while plotting a revolution is nonsensical.
If you think both need to be overthrown, why allow the much worse option for the climate and average person to get into power by withholding your vote? Does it not make more sense to pick the least damaging option available to you while plotting for long term goals? Are you okay with more people dying from the Republican party's policies when you can actively stall/stop them?
And if you think I'm mask off or whatever platitudes you tell yourself for "being fine with genocide" go off I guess. Nuance never hasnt been the far left's speciality (except when infighting).
You haven't supported that point.
The Republicans are monstrously evil, but are no way "much worse" than the monstrously evil Democrats, because both serve their donors alone.
You said you were okay with genocide, said you refuse to read books, and never responded to my counters to your ridiculous claims supporting the Tsars, Batista regime, and Kuomintang over the Leftists.
Its pretty obvious as I've continually hammered that the Dems are the less damaging option, which is why I support them.
The Republicans are "much worse" if you leave your little echo chamber: look at the track record for each party. The Republicans want to mass deport immigrants, constantly deny climate change exists, and have their plan to kill off trans people and other sexual minorities in their playbook. Not to mention the whole "Muslim ban" they did under Trump. The Democrats by contrast... don't do those things. That's all there is to it for me to know they are better. Make a vent diagram on the actual policies each party has implemented, and you will see a stark difference, even if they are both "Right."
There we go with the classic attenpt at a gotcha again. I never said I supported any of those regimes, yet you seem to think I do. I have the cognitive capacity to look at the aftermath of those things and go "man, that sure was a lot of dead people. maybe I should try the peaceful approach first."
furthermore, how many of those Arab Spring revolutions ended with things being better for the people? My claim is that across all revolutions, there is a rather high chance for things to go tits up and ruin everything.
They do, but the Democrats have deported more and are continuing to do so right now, with no sign of Harris wanting to do different from Biden on that or any front other than having a Republican in her cabinet (by her own characterization, the biggest difference between the two of them is her wanting that last thing).
This is that classic thing where the kids in cages under Obama "didn't exist" until Trump entered office and finally there was an incentive by a branch of the media to report on it, though they did so only to blame Trump for it and not doing a thing to hurt their sacred cow Obama. You keep chanting "grow up" like it's some own, but it seems plain that you are basing it off of your perception of the "Adults in the Room," the Dems and their media lackeys, with any substantial break from them and their professed ideology representing immaturity by the very fact.
It's clear you believe that, but it's clear that I don't. You haven't supported that logically.
The Democrats still do those things, please leave your echo chamber. Virtue signaling isn't policy.
The "peaceful approach" doesn't exist. You justify the immense daily violence and condemn retaliation against it.
And yet revolution is required for things to improve.
Tell me, does the ACA save and improve lives of the average person: yes or no?
Does investing in repairing bridges mean that people will be less likely to die: yes or no?
Does enshrining the right to abortion (at a state level thus far) improve the lives of the average person: yes or no?
The democrats are trying to mass deport legal immigrants and have a plan to kill off all sexual minorities by labeling them pedophiles? News to me.
I'd rather gamble on a peaceful regime change over the possibility of millions of people dying because we fucked the revolution and let another Stalin take power...
Not nearly as many could be if the Democrats were willing to abolish private healthcare, and weren't in the pockets of big pharma
Not nearly as many as investing in public transit and high speed rail, rather than remaining in the pockets of the automotive industry
Absolutely, it's on the Dems that this was never federally implemented.
Yep, take a look at all the kids in cages under Biden along the border.
Even under Stalin life expectancy doubled, healthcare was free and widely available, employment was guaranteed, education was free and widely available at the college level, and workers had more PTO than in the US. Was Stalin some grand hero? No, of course not, but the revolution was widely successful, not a failure. Read Why do Marxists Fail to Bring the "Worker's Paradise?", it's only 20 minutes instead of a full book, though you absolutely need to read Blackshirts and Reds if you're going to continue this historical revisionist nonsense.
So the Democrats did improve the lives of people, you're just bitching because they didn't complete the revolution themselves lmfao.
Just admit you want the worst possible situation to occur under the Republicans so the revolution is more likely to happen or whatever and cut the bullshit dude.
Bandaids on a gaping wound is like celebrating a fire department that throws a bucket on the raging flames, lmao.
I don't, so I won't. You keep pressing this point because you can't read books and can't engage with my points.
So you don't want to improve people's lives by your admission and would rather let things get worse because they don't magically make everything better completely.
Jesus christ, I don't think I'd want the revolution to succeed if you don't want to improve people's lives while working to make things better long term.
No, I would rather get the firehose out and start putting the fires out, rather than acting like the bucket is the best we can do. I already said, developing high speed rail, free healthcare and education, massively expanded public housing, all of that is extremely achievable. Other countries, even developing ones, manage to do it. You have this defeatist mentality that the Democrats are somehow trying their best but just entirely inept, when in reality they serve their donors alone.
All improvements are gradual, the Dems are doing less than the bare minimum and are expecting applause for it. Cuba has better LGBT legislation than the US does, there's no excuse.
So all improvements are gradual, but also I won't vote for gradual change, but also the Dems should be doing more while having to fight for any reform in the split government. Got it.
Dems aren't gradual change but virtue signalling, they serve their donors. There's a difference between gradual change and kabuki theatre.
Yes I'm sure funding FEMA is virtue signaling...whatever you say
Do you have any actual points other than displaying a lack of knowledge surrounding world history?
Do you have any other points besides not wanting to assist in harm reduction?
Thats all this amounts to if we aren't trying to fix the system and going for a revolution, so I still see zero reason to not simply pick the least damaging options until that happens.
You're not doing harm reduction, you're tying your hands withiut doing anything. The Dems are still damaging.
Are the Dems exactly as damaging as Republicans? There's not a shred of difference between the two at all? You can't think of anything that makes the Dems better? OK lol
Is tossing a bucket on a raging fire exactly as damaging as doing nothing? There's not a shred of difference between the two at all? You can't think of anything that makes the Dems better? OK lol
Cute.
I'm certain the Palestinians we save from genocide will be thrilled to starve to death the next climate-change induced famine hits because we didn't try to minimize the damage.
Yep, that's why we need to get rid of the dems and reps, because neither is doing what we need to save the climate. Genocide, ignoring Climate Change, and the Dems/Reps, name a truer combo.
The ACA is an excellent example because it's the Dems operating at the peak of their faux-progressivism. It did help some people in an immediate sense because it had some useful concessions in it, but its basic function of being state-mandated private healthcare entrenched the power of private interests, allowing them to fight all the better against advocates of universal healthcare, while conservatives can accuse anyone wanting something better of trying to roll back the marginal improvements that the ACA's concessions brought (and they have been doing this, in case you haven't followed the last few Dem primaries).
As capitalism decays fascism becomes a certainty. I would suggest reading "The Economy and Class Structure of German Fascism" which offers a political-economic analysis from the perspective of a German who had access to the semi-internal communications of the capitalist class as capitalism was entering its fascist stage in Germany.
If you aren't joining a socialist org that is moving toward the abolition of capitalism you're lying down and accepting fascism will happen.
Stop pretending you don't have any agency and go join an org.
Cuba, Vietnam, China, USSR, hell even the dprk. Look at life expectancy, literacy, infant and maternal mortality, extreme poverty metrics, worker self management systems, and moving from dictatorship to soviet style proletarian democracy
All of these revolutions were lead by organizations that didn't have government insider connections like that.
You are factually correct, but this is rhetorically a poor point to make unless your goal is to have the argument be an endless quagmire of tangents upon tangents (which I don't think it is). Clearly you would generally know better than I, but I can't help but feel that a simpler answer like:
"The liberal revolutions against feudalism broadly had a progressive character, though feudalists and conservatives generally portrayed them as barbarous, traitorous, heretical, etc. Socialist revolutions were likewise broadly progressive, with their rightward opponents portraying them the same way"
Would be a good way to touch on this point generally without just begging them so directly to vomit every red scare myth and reactionary reddit thread they've ever seen at you, or just leave because those things went through their mind and that was enough.
Good point, thanks for the criticism