I’m talking takes that make them immediately throw out the civility fetish and reach for the most crying wojack buzzwords in their vocabulary
Pointing out that California has more money than most countries with universal healthcare/housing for the homeless/free tuition/mandated labor reps on boards/etc and California has no Republicans obstructionists, therefore the only reason California doesn't have those progressive mainstays is because the Democratic Party fundamentally just doesn't believe in them.
Liberals like to argue that California should be a country based on that but don't consider that this new country would have angry neighbours that control its water supply
Tell the libs if they care about democracy they should really hold a UN-style plebiscite on the future of California. All residents, regardless of citizenship, get to vote (UN standards, remember). LA and southwards would vote to join Mexico, northern CA would vote to finally break away from the rest of the state, and the rest could stay California. It would be an improvement for everyone, honestly.
the first liberal countries, the UK, US and Netherlands were the first to legalize slavery, whereas the ancienne regime of monarchist europe largely abolished slavery as a consequence of every subject being allowed to be a practicing christian (and therefore being able to attend church, have a family, etc.)
edit: this is basically the synopsis of Domenico Losurdo's "Liberalism, A Counter-History"
edit2: the book also goes into detail on colonialism, genocide, slavery and so on, and dunks on all the "greats" of old liberalism such as locke, burke, tocqueville, bentham; it's a very exhaustive display of all of the inherent contradictions of liberalism
One of the first uses of "science" was race science which the Capitalists used to justify black slavery. Medieval European Christians were appalled by the idea of owning another human being for life (serfdom is a mutual relationship, levels beyond "slavery"), so slave owners had to invent a reason why it was OK (black and brown people aren't human because of skull shapes, it's just the SCIENCE). Why do you think the Enlightenment dorks loved ancient Rome?
huh, and here i thought slavery was a natural extension of serfdom. it has been justified as a mutual relationship (by idiots, to be sure) before, seeing as how chattel slaves got 'free' housing, food, etc. will read up more on the subject, tho.
As much as medieval europe abhored slavery, they sure did participate and profit from it. A lot of the ventures that spurred the age of discovery were fuelled by opening new slave markets in West Africa.
Scientific racism, the curse of ham, civilizing the slaves so they can accept christ etc. are justifications of something that already existed and not the cause.
This, Catholic Spain is in the running for biggest genocidal slave empire in history.
a very important counterpoint, i stand completely and obviously corrected
It depends, serfdom varied from not completely terrible to basically slavery by another name depending on the region.
Serfs were more akin to citizens of a small microstate. The time you worked for the lord wasn't crazy or anything, and theoretically you could buy "freedom", the thing was there was nowhere else to go. Being tied to a Lord was almost certainly better than risking it as a vagabond or trying your luck in a city. They were nowhere near "owned".
also why recent immigrants to the united states made up the bulk of the fighting forces of the Union Army ... If you are interested, Radio war nerd does a "blue" retelling of the Civilwar currently and its facinating to witness the "Democrat / Spineless Lib / Paid to Lose" Prototyps of Mc Cellen and Co.
Holy shit that top one is :so-true: and using those two "boogeymen" is ALWAYS going to get people seething
Just being a moral person honestly. It fucking infuriates them so much because deep down they know they are not good people. But they need to tell themselves they are, cause the GOP is worse they can get away with this. However when a person with principles shows up they lose their fucking shit because they are challenged for once. They think the farthest acceptable left, is a bit left of Franco, and so when they meet literal communists it breaks their whole worldview
Nah that only works if you are financially stable middle class or richer. The biggest cope libs have is to summon the meritocracy card. If youre "moral" and work min wage, for instance, they wont think about what youre saying too much because you obviously are a terrible uneducated person for being poor.
If youre rich but youre not fortunate enough to have a job in an ethical non-profit or whatever theyll still cope with the "hypocrisy" card.
When they start trying to wield the class hierarchy against you, I find it useful to start using infantalizing language, and to specifically characterize them as an out-of-touch class minority. It's not going to "gain traction" or anything -- if you pull this on reddit or other lib-holes you'll eat a bajillion downvotes or whatever -- but it does fucking irk them if you challenge the notion that their perspective is inherently more rounded or complete.
Pointing out similarities between them and fascists. Their reaction is pretty much exactly this:
:wojak-nooo: noooo u r stoopid tankie who went to school in :GDR: u don't understand proper civilized democraterinoooos
Is it Germans who say this or US Americans?
Also, damn, you got to experience the DDR?
It's German and no, sadly i didn't have that luck - but libs here are so convinced of the power of
propagandaeducation that some of them assume that not believing in CIA fairytales and horseshoe theory can only be explained by having been socialized in a classroom where this guy's picture here hung on the wall :honecker-interesting:
Being Queer and not supporting the Dems 100%. Fastest way to see an "ally" morph into a vicious queer phobe.
I've seen so many straight liberals talk down to me and say shit like "the dems have been good for queer people you're just privileged"
It comes from the delusion that the Democrats have actually ever done anything for Queer people. This delusion comes from the fact that most Queer people, historically, have been democrats because the Dems have been marginally less homophobic. So what the party does is coopt the fact that most of the accomplishments of the Gay Rights Movement were done by independent grass roots activists. One of the things that really radicalized me was going back into the history of the past 20 years and realizing that the actual democratic party as an institution had done almost nothing to really support queer rights, and had often acted as a roadblock to them.
Great encapsulation of Obama's playstyle.
Being too timid to speak out in favor of gay marriage despite it being the big domestic social issue at the time (esp. among progressives). But he doesn't want to support gay marriage because that doesn't triangulate in the Midwest or what the fuck ever.
So he plays it safe, then loses the House anyway, then gay marriage becomes legal anyway. maybe that's not the exact sequence of events but lol
During Stalin and Mao's time in office, their countries saw two of the most dramatic life expectancy increases in human history.
yep. China's life expectancy increase under Mao is #1 in recorded history
That they are the "good cop" of imperial capitalism, while conservatives are the "bad cop." Both are still cops working together towards the same goals.
"You justify letting people die of poor"
"Slavery is intrinsic to 'economic liberalism'"
"Good things can happen"
"Whenever you get scared you choose fascism. Hell, you choose fascism over even social democracies whenever the chance presents itself"
Russiagate and rent control are tied for my num one spot of ‘Takes that make libs cry blood’
Just tell them you’re not voting for Biden/Harris.
It’s hilarious because liberals will come up with any vague reason not to vote for progressive candidates, so I just started saying the same thing about democrats and they instantly lose their shit.
“I’m not voting for Harris, I just don’t think she can win an election”
“Biden? I agree with everything he stands for, but he’s too old”
