TheDemonBuer

joined 1 year ago
[–] TheDemonBuer 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

But Russia and China are both capitalist countries.

They're certainly not ideologically liberal, even if they have embraced some liberal economic principles, albeit under significant state control and direction.

[–] TheDemonBuer 1 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

Of course, I should have said the Western liberals are defending their position atop the global hegemonic order, and the MLs are trying to unseat them.

[–] TheDemonBuer 2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

I was just trying to think of models that are eligible for the maximum $7,500 tax credit, and that are relatively affordable. There are lots of great EVs out there from several different manufacturers.

Edit: I will mention, though, the Equinox EV looks like it's a pretty good car, for the price. Car and Driver rated it 8.5/10.

[–] TheDemonBuer 103 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (15 children)

...Tesla - by far the nation's biggest EV maker - have told a Trump-transition committee they support ending the subsidy...Elon Musk, one of Trump's biggest backers and the world's richest person, said in July that killing the subsidy might slightly hurt Tesla sales but would be "devastating" to its U.S. EV competitors, which include legacy automakers such as General Motors.

Jesus. So much for the idea that Tesla is working to accelerate the transition from ICE vehicles to EVs.

I will never buy a fucking Tesla. Ever. I would buy a Chevrolet Equinox EV, and I encourage anyone who is in the market for a new vehicle to buy one before the tax credit goes away.

Edit: I would also get the Honda Prologue. It's also eligible for the $7,500 tax credit. So is the Volkswagen ID.4.

[–] TheDemonBuer 7 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

Marxist-Leninists support Soviet and Chinese imperialism for the same reason liberals support Western imperialism: they're both ideologues who want their people and ideals at the top of the global hegemonic order. They're in a war for global ideological (and possibly ethnic) supremacy, with the winner getting to rule the world.

[–] TheDemonBuer 1 points 17 hours ago

Maybe you're right. Maybe group autonomy and independence must be sacrificed for economic and material stability. Maybe strong, centralized technocratic states are better for the broad base of people than allowing each group to have their own autonomy and self governance. If that's true, then I guess the US needs to become more like China. How do we go about doing that?

[–] TheDemonBuer 5 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Well, I'm not a bolshevik, or Marxist-Leninist/Maoist, whatever, so that's not what I want. I realize that MLs don't really give a shit what people want, though. Still, I think the US getting taken over by MLs is pretty unlikely.

[–] TheDemonBuer 3 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Isn't more division inevitable, though? I know a lot of people want to believe that Americans are more unified than not, and that we only disagree on some details, but agree on the core principles, but is that actually true? I think most Americans generally believe in broadly liberal ideals, like individual rights and freedoms, but disagree pretty strongly on which rights and freedoms should be prioritized (or recognized/enforced at all), and for whom. And that makes a pretty big difference. Those differences are more fundamental than a lot of people would like to acknowledge. Plus, there are, I think, a not insignificant number of Americans who aren't guided by liberal principles at all. I'm one of those people, and, look, I understand that people like me are a small minority, but we exist. And I'm kind of sick of not having any representation at all.

[–] TheDemonBuer 1 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

The Soviet Union failed, though.

[–] TheDemonBuer 8 points 19 hours ago (10 children)

What is the solution?

[–] TheDemonBuer 2 points 20 hours ago

People have been doing this?

[–] TheDemonBuer 29 points 20 hours ago (17 children)

I have this fantasy that I and everyone in the US who shares my ideology could all move to the same state, take over the state legislature and just build our own semi autonomous micro nation. But then I realize that 12 people moving to the same state probably isn't going to make any difference.

 

According to these CNN exist polls, 53% of respondent voters were women, and 47% were men. 54% of female respondents voted for Harris, 44% for Trump. 54% of male respondents for Trump and 44% for Harris. That means Harris should win the popular vote, if these polls are indicative of the election as a whole. But, she isn't winning the popular vote, she's losing by more than five million votes. That must mean that many more women than men voted on election day, but many more men than women voted early and/or by mail/absentee. Isn't that kind of odd? You'd think the gender breakdown of mail in and early voting would be roughly the same as election day voting. The only other thing I can think of is these exit polls just aren't indicative of the election broadly. Maybe CNN's exit polls aren't capturing a large or diverse enough sample size?

view more: next ›