- cross-posted to:
- chapotraphouse
- cross-posted to:
- chapotraphouse
You must log in or # to comment.
I forgot how ignorant and self-righteous Reddit liberals were. The ones I've seen are easily the loudest and dumbest people on this network of federated instances. They have their "conviction" and "is wrong" sliders completely maxed out.
You're right I haven't completely purged the liberal inside me and I hate myself for it being there still
spoiler
Thank you so much for showing me that not every liberal I meet here will be ignorant and self-righteous. I can no longer say that has been the totality of my experience with them. I now have hope that my next encounter will be just as positive as this one was.
Does my username make me look like a dude to you? Why are liberals so fucking awful? It's only ever you. Nobody in the left does this.
Go fucking fuck yourself you fucking piece of shit. Talking about other people's sOcIaL uNdeRsTandIng while you're fucking misgendering people AND JUSTIFYING IT AS IF YOU'RE A FUCKING VICTIM once you're called on it. You're rancid scum and I hope we get fucking defederated so we don't have to deal with filth like you.
My lack of social understanding? Gender neutral?
I have to smash through the wall like Hbomberguy right now
Show"DO YOU FUCK DUDES? AnomalousBit?"
Do you go around telling other people that you fuck dudes? What do other people assume you mean when you say that you fuck dudes?
You could have just been like "Yeah you're right, sorry I didn't mean to misgender you." but instead you doubled down on being a transphobic dickhead and literally proved my point about liberals being shitbags in the process.
No, it wouldn't be a problem if he said he fucked dudes. The implication though is that "dudes" is a gendered term. The complaint is that she was misgendered by someone who then doubled down on the misgendering. Her statement was not homophobic.
The only argument she's making is that dudes is a gendered term, and him doubling down after the fact is bullshit
In my experience, sexual inferences are the fastest way to educate someone who doesn't see a word as being gendered, but I can see how what they said could be read as using gay sexual activity in a negative way to someone not reading this thread and skimmed over the rest of the text in that reply.
Playing dumb is used by bigots as a shield to continue their bigotry unimpeded. Not allowing any room for them to play dumb is the only way to reach those kind of people.
What they are conveying is that "dude" is clearly not a gender-neutral term, as a straight guy would agree that they "fuck people", weird as the phrasing is, but not that they "fuck dudes." It demonstrates that they themselves don't perceive the social understanding of the term "dude" as gender neutral, not that "fucking dudes" is bad. It could also be used to debate a lesbian by the same token.
Maybe if you lived in any of the countries you disparage all day long
Most of the users on Hexbear are American and a decent number of the remainder are Brits and Aussies. Our criticisms do not come from having never received the privilege of witnessing these countries being shit first-hand, as much as you might like to pretend it's only those dirty foreigners not understanding your national glory.
So the foreigner part is self-evident, and I think the "second-world", "potato vodka," etc. covers the "dirty" pretty plainly. I don't know why I'm even saying this, because basically what I'm doing is just teaching you to dogwhistle more effectively, but on the other hand this post is on lemmy, so hopefully I'm helping to point this out to other people so they will be more aware of these things when you and your ilk take your next crack at it.
You also call them troll farmers, but the racial coding just keeps finding its way in somehow. Funny, that.
Yeah, we get it, you're a paranoid national chauvinist on top of being a transphobic asshole, that was already obvious.
I don't know a single trans person that views dude as a gender neutral term, the only people spouting that nonsense are transphobic cis dudes like you who make up excuses to misgender and harass us. Go die in a house fire, reactionary cissie shit.
Real talk from a very trans-supportive communist: is this universal? I definitely grew up in a conservative environment but definitely was under the impression that I and the trans people I am close to all thought dude was a term of endearment when used amongst friends, including women and enbys. I likely overuse the term from thinking I would be a skater after playing Tony hawk's pro skater and being into hiking/climbing/camping culture, but is this a universal thing among trans people you know?
Not defending the other person, libs very often hide behind the argument once called out, and I'd never call you "dude," or pretty much anyone not my direct friend, but I just wanna make sure I'm not hurting people unnecessarily without knowing it. Maybe it's the "being friends" part that makes the difference, and I hope so. Otherwise I got some trans-comrades to apologize to
Adding here after thinking more, I guess I usually use it to refer to a non-specific thing, like saying "ah dude, that's cool" and shit like that. Like saying "oh man." Is this related??? Need some help here lol
Real talk from a very trans-supportive communist: is this universal?
I find it to be at least extremely common, both in English-speaking spaces online and in German-speaking trans communities online and IRL (i'm German). Ultimately it's a matter of preference, there will be trans people who disagree, but there definitely are a lot of us who take offense. Same goes for terms like guy and especially for bro / bruh etc., or for German terms like Typ or Alter (in this context roughly comparable to guy or dude) which are generally at least masc-leaning. I'd definitely take offense to all of these, but sure, there are exceptions.
Still, these are exceptions, and more importantly, what we see here is a perfect example of how not to deal with such a situation: When somebody calls you out on misgendering, the only sensible response is to edit the post in question and to apologize. If you do that, it's normally no big deal, everybody moves on with their day. And it takes a few seconds to edit a post and a few more to reply "sorry, i've edited this" while it can quickly take hours to start an argument over this. Yet i see over and over again that liberals in particular are incapable of showing that amount of basic human decency. Instead, they have to assert their privilege to define what we're allowed to find offensive, talk down to us and act as if they're the one ones who've been hurt because we've called their feeling of superiority and infallibility into doubt by saying they've made a mistake. That's where it gets transphobic even if the misgendering was unintentional, that's where it gets patronizing as well.
Fully agree with the description. Fuck that lib. Keep tearing them apart til they apologize and edit.
In Dutch-speaking communities i still hear the American phrases a lot, but the equivalents in dutch rarely. But in international groups oriented towards my hobbies, dude is still used a good bit. But I'll just stay alert, just wanted to hear a bit more from a trans-comrade who most definitely would speak frankly to me (I understand that in-person call-outs can sometimes be difficult for such "small" things). Gonna only use it as a phrase of exclamation among friends that know me well I think and continue checking up regularly on my comrades.
Just to be clear, i'm not saying "don't say dude", the term in itself is perfectly fine. Just saying it's not unusual at all that trans people find it not to be gender neutral and particularly that the response in that case shouldn't be to start an argument where you assert a right to label trans people in ways that have clearly and already hurt them. It's the latter that made me go from "oof, that person should edit this post" to "scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds".
Yeah, people weren't aware of transphobic language 14 years ago, i know that, i've lived through that time.
"Dude" can be gender neutral but given the context of it in your response it really fucking looks like a microaggression against her for being trans
Generally considering that "dude" is a somewhat masculine word, so using it to refer to someone with she/her pronouns in her username (implying that she doesn't want to be referred to with male terms) without knowing if they're okay with that word just makes you look like a piece of shit.
Look, you started hot in this thread but tired after a few comments. They adjusted, you didn't, and you got rocked; it happens. Hit the showers and we'll get after it early tomorrow with some film.
I said nothing about any one's race
Earlier in the same comment:
Sorry your government (most likely Russia or China)
It's not my government, and neither is Russia, but you aren't fooling anyone by disparaging someone by identifying them as living in China (or Russia, since the EU recently decided again that it's Not White Enough).
Your comments elsewhere say the quiet part a little louder, like the bit about "potato vodka". Do you think I've never seen a motte-and-bailey argument before? It's clear what you mean when you use a term like "second world" as a pejorative.
I mean, America is also majority white. If you made quips about curry when discussing someone that you allege to be stationed in India, I think you can tell that that would be called racist. Same if you talked about a Chinese national eating rice noodles or dumplings or take your pick. You are adding in elements of racial coding that are unnecessary and it doesn't look like an accident.
"Anyone who disagrees with me is being paid by China or Russia"
lol. lmao, even.
second world
I am SHOCKED to see xenophobia, racism, and chauvinism from a liberal anti-communist
Hey buddy, you didn't reply to my earlier post about Guaido getting owned. Running away from your emotions won't make them go away. Cmon, let's sit down and have a chat about how you feel. Does that make you mad?
I always say that the second a liberal is criticised for being insensitive that they start sounding like a boomer Republican arguing on Facebook.
Thank you for proving that to the entire thread here.
i'm sure there has to be a better option in your society than grinding it out in a shitty troll farm.
Sadly, no. Here in the United States of America, there is no opportunity for those outside the ruling class. Hence I spend my days posting away in hexbear.net's volunteer troll farm.
Here let me help you with some 20th century posting technology far in advance of your instance:
What do you see as the end result of convincing yourself that everyone here is a bot (or running bots, you go back and forth) and is out to get you?
"Am I out of touch? No! It must be that these people are paid to know things!"
It's not about whether one wins or loses. It's about you losing.
Oh man can you imagine modern commie blocks with modern materials being built in cities instead the same dogshit five over ones? Owning a commie block with your commie neighbors, getting together and deciding to paint whatever, or knock some walls out and make an indoor community garden...
How Guaido doing these days lmao Does it make you mad the "elected" president is never going to actually be president lol
Your entire history on Lemmy is malding over Guaido getting BTFO. How mad does that make you feel? Don't be shy.
Check their history. Langley is definitely not sending their best.
Here's Guaido getting owned by randos Does that make you upset?
Do you think a troll farm would really spend that much time talking to itself? Are you so arrogant that you believe they'd do that level of kabuki theater in order to impress you?
Is there a base case or do the layers of irony go on to infinity?
Person: says something
Another person: this other person has no nuance
Yet another person: this other person has no nuance, ironically
Yet another person: this other person has no nuance, ironically
(ad infinitum)
Maybe this is just dialectics, although a little snarky
"Starting shit about obvious jokes" is like Stage 8 terminal malding
In what way is making a kinda-funny Marxism joke indicative of being a bot? The previous comment to mine references Dialectics, because the convo is just "A, B, sassy A, sassy B. I merely tied in Historical Materialism, Marx's grand Dialectical theory, to overplay the goofy small back and forth.
Are you sure you're not a bot? Do you have free will?
Okay just... there's no such thing as 'self' projecting. It's just projecting. That's redundant.
And nothing they said is untrue. What kind of self flagellation is required to just say a type of political person is bad? Do you need permission from a conservative to talk shit about their faults?
They are a hexbear user. All the content coming in from that instance is "DuMb LiBrUlS"
In fairness dumb liberals have a hegemonic control of media, government, culture, and public opinion in the US and most of the EU, with the exception being almost entirely fascists.
I hate to quote a fascist beast like Patton, but; " "They've got us surrounded again, the poor bastards."
We don't have to go looking for liberal ignorance, violence, cowardice, and foolishness. It's everywhere in every direction.
Woah there, you can't forget about the Russia/China apologia as well
Says the natoid lmao
Two things can actually be bad at once you know. Understanding geo politics doesn't mean support. The world isn't a marvel movie.
Not only can 2 things be bad but 2 things can be different degrees of bad.
I'd rather live in a country where I can openly criticize those in power without risk to my personal well-being and have the possibility for pushing my government towards positive ends.
Yeah there's some risk associated with protesting in the US but at least I don't have to worry about the going to the gulag or a tiananmen square situation.
I mean, I should have known you'd regurgitate the propaganda, but it's always a disappointment anyway. Such a stupid response, too. That's basically a non-sequitur. For one, there being two evils does not necessitate siding with the lesser. You can acknowledge there are no good guys, and instead pick the position most likely to lead to the least amount of suffering over all. That is and will always be peace, but you blood thirsty natoids just can't imagine that. Your response is also dumb as hell given that modern Russia is a capitalist state, not the USSR lmao. Bringing up Gulags is a bit like bringing up slave plantations in the USA.... except the USSR is actually completely dissolved so its even less relevant. For the record, the US still legally permits slavery in the instance of criminal conviction. Say, sure would be wild if the US disproportionately policed and convicted black and brown people, wouldn't it? That'd seem like a loophole legitimizing slavery over time! But that's just whatabouttism so feel free to ignore it like a good little natoid. You're grossly ignorant regarding tiananmen square as well, but I won't bother citing anything since you'll just dismiss it out of hand.
Instead, I'll ask what are your thoughts on the repression of Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, Ireland Independence, French Yellow Vests/Public Benefits/Police Racism, and so on and so forth in "Free" and "Democratic" countries? What about the United States having the highest incarceration rate in the world, largely filled with black and brown people subjected to forced labor while in prison? What would happen if your "protest" did more than carry signs in publicly designated and permitted areas? Wouldn't you be beaten, arrested, and convicted under the fullest extent of the law? So sorry that you're so cucked you can't imagine doing more than asking your leaders nicely for change and politely going home when they say no, but real protest is certainly illegal in "Free" Western countries, and if you ever actually engaged in it you'd see exactly how brutal those governments can be.
Principled communists aren't unapologetic supporters of every single thing socialist countries do/have done, but we take issue with the nakedly hypocritical framing from Western powers. The atomic unit of propaganda is emphasis. You ignorantly reduce entire foreign countries to a single word/event while myopically ignoring the conditions before and after, but hem and haw and whine about nuance and procedure and the necessity of the barbarity around us every day... When you're not ignoring it outright that is. That's what makes you a useful idiot to our own system of oppression. It's an embarrassment.
Yeah there's some risk associated with protesting in the US but at least I don't have to worry about the going to the gulag
Good thing protestors in the US and UK don't get arrested on flimsy charges or crippled or murdered by cops
Snowden, Assange, manning, dozens of maimed protestors and the largest prison system in the world would like a word with you after seeing what you just posted here.
I swear to god I'll buy sync premium if they give the ability to sort by controversial. This is the stupidest more redditesque thread I've run into and i don't want to miss anymore.
I'll take that over believing pig shit memes are reasonable discourse any day.
I guess that's why it's so popular on hexbear. Thanks for clearing that up.
I defy you to find a use of that that wasn't preceded by something that deserves to literally be shit upon. I dare you.
Do you think that is intended as discourse? Or might it be intended as the opposite of that?
Funny I would say the sane about the Marxists here most of whom seem to only be educated through social media/forums and most of whom seem to have no formal education in sociology/anthropology/and most especially economics. The number of times where it becomes clear that a Marxist is arguing from a conclusion is too high to be ignored.
Even im weirded out by how thoroughly the left was suppressed on reddit and other platforms. People on reddit only saw themselves mirrored and thought they were the only ones who existed.
Yeah, you can call yourself a leftist all you want, but when 90% of your posts is calling Biden and Zelensky Nazis but you never criticize Putin or Trump, I get certain doubts.
You're so vain
You don't think that this post is about you, do you?
What's the difference between a fascist and an "anarchist" who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
There's no practical difference, just window dressing. They both cheer on oppression and pain for those suffering under Republicans.
And don't even get me started on communists. Left and right authoritarians, I've gotten death threats from both of them. Whether it's some leftist telling me I would "get the wall" when the Revolution comes or some fucking Republican telling me that the US was only for Christians and that they'll go after "traitors" soon, you get to the same fucking place at the end of the day. The only real difference is that there's far more Republicans, and they're far more organized than left authoritarians.
bOtH sIdEs
This is why libs get clowned on so hard. You claim to support "the only viable left leaning political party", and yet you're kneecapping large swaths of people on the ground engaging in direct action advancing left leaning values. Remember, segregation wasn't ended because black people voted, blood was spilt in the streets. Same with the LGBT community, see the stonewall uprising, aka, the first pride parade.
I don't care how you vote, but if you can't see the difference between an anarchist engaging in direct action against an oppressive state and fascists doing hate crimes; well, I'd say it's time to get off your high horse and do a little introspection.
yet you're kneecapping large swaths of people on the ground engaging in direct action advancing left leaning values
Direct action is meaningless if you're hostile to building a coalition broad enough to actually gain any significant political power. It doesn't matter how many lit memes anarchists and communists share on social media and how much they horn on about "direct action," this is a democracy and without votes going to candidates who can win, it is ultimately meaningless.
You want me to do some introspection? I did. I remember being young and convinced socialism was the way forward. Then I grew the fuck up and did some introspection.
Direct action is meaningless if you're hostile to building a coalition broad enough to actually gain any significant political power.
Spoken like someone who's never done organizing, participated in protests or any other direct action. You're a keyboard warrior who's probably never even interacted with a socialist IRL.
this is a democracy and without votes going to candidates who can win, it is ultimately meaningless.
Not a democracy and also I already gave 2 examples showing the contrary.
I remember being young and convinced socialism was the way forward. Then I grew the fuck up and did some introspection.
No need to be a condescending dick. I'm also guessing I'm older than you, not that it's relevant.
I've participated in dozens of protests. Protests with political organization can lead to change. Protests without political organization are just yelling at a wall.
No need to be a condescending dick.
If you don't want someone to take offense at what you write, don't smugly tell them to learn introspection. Act like an arrogant dick, get treated like an arrogant dick.
Protests with political organization can lead to change. Protests without political organization are just yelling at a wall.
Right... I'm not sure why you think I'm not in favor of organized resistance.
If you don't want someone to take offense at what you write, don't smugly tell them to learn introspection. Act like an arrogant dick, get treated like an arrogant dick.
You were doing a "both sides" between anarchists and fascists, eerily similar to Trump, while claiming to be "left leaning". I think my response was warranted, if not understated. But frankly, that's plain ignorant.
Like I said, attempting to degrade the only left leaning political coalition means someone is hostile to any sort of positive left leaning activism. If that doesn't describe a given anarchist, then what I said doesn't apply to them. If it does, then they might as well be a Trumpster.
Who or what is this sole "left leaning political coalition"? If you're referring to Democrats they are neither left leaning nor a coalition. They are a center-right political party. Coalition implies multiple parties. And the Democratic party isn't exactly known for activism, unless you're counting fundraising events.
Suuuuuure they're right leaning.
And the Democratic party isn't exactly known for activism
They're the only hope for getting anything actually done, like the climate change actions taken by Biden. I don't always agree with the Democratic Party, but nobody other than them or Republicans are organized better than a herd of cats or numerous enough to win office, so...
hey’re the only hope for getting anything actually done, like the climate change actions taken by Biden.
HAHAHAHA....
You mean his approving more oil drilling than Trump?
They're the only hope for getting anything actually done, like the climate change actions taken by Biden.
Then we're fucked. Because idk if you've noticed, but the planet is still dying. We are well on our way to passing the point of no return.
but nobody other than them or Republicans are organized better than a herd of cats or numerous enough to win office, so...
This actually has nothing to do with popularity or ability to organize. Its a problem with how our constitution is written, primarily the fact that we use first passed the post, see Duverger's law.
Then we're fucked. Because idk if you've noticed, but the planet is still dying. We are well on our way to passing the point of no return.
You're right. What's been done so far won't fully solve the problem. Better undermine support for people trying to get what can be done, done, and then doom all over the Internet.
This actually has nothing to do with popularity or ability to organize
Nah, even in areas with ranked choice voting, third parties are jokes. Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of reforms designed to allow them a more reasonable and equal access to the political levers of power, but the two most significant third parties are the Greens and Libertarians. Neither one is a political force, and not just because of first past the post voting. Niche, ideologically focused parties will always underperform wide coalitions within democracies.
You're right. What's been done so far won't fully solve the problem. Better undermine support for people trying to get what can be done, done, and then doom all over the Internet.
The libs are the ones undermining the progress. It ought to be self evident by now that radical measures need to be taken, and that the markets will not solve the climate crisis, the kind of regulation we need would kill entire sectors of the economy. Even when it comes to moderate improvements, Democrats are obstructed by both the minority opposition and members of their own party (as libs are always quick to remind me).
The Democrats will never be able to do what needs to get done. So you undermine the chance for meaningful change when you tell people, "don't worry, Biden is on it, just vote and everything will be fine".
Nah, even in areas with ranked choice voting, third parties are jokes. Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of reforms designed to allow them a more reasonable and equal access to the political levers of power, but the two most significant third parties are the Greens and Libertarians. Neither one is a political force, and not just because of first past the post voting. Niche, ideologically focused parties will always underperform wide coalitions within democracies.
Which areas? Areas in the US? Yeah, hundreds of years of entrenched power at the local, State, and federal level will do that. Would take time and likely ranked choice at the federal level to change.
"we just need to kill the economy to save the planet" doesn't seem like a productive way to sell reengineering our economy to lead us towards carbon neutrality, doomer
Someone who believes Biden is the only hope for climate action doesn't need to be calling anyone else a doomer, lmao
"Look, I'd love to have a habitable planet, but have you considered the stock market?"
If you don't think a global problem that's intertwined with every aspect of the economy might require a similarly far-reaching solution, you aren't taking this seriously.
lead us towards carbon neutrality,
Jesus Christ even the things you think are the goal are woefully weak and limited. You think "carbon neutrality" will solve climate change? We need massive carbon negativity.
the climate change actions taken by Biden
Because who else would greenlight controversial pipeline projects that will accelerate the rot of remote ecosystems and the pollution of our atmosphere and waters? Oh right, any other elected official on either side of the Dem / Republican line...
I’ve participated in dozens of protests. Protests with political organization can lead to change. Protests without political organization are just yelling at a wall.
Protests !== organizing. Organizing achieves political change. Protest does not. Leftists know how to organize, liberals do not.
If liberals don't know how to organize and leftists do, why does the Democratic party dominate elections
Because leftists understand that actual progress doesn’t come from voting?
This is unnecessary aggro, and you are the only one here making sweeping assumptions.
They must mean that referendum we had to overturn Roe v. Wade, or the one that got us universal healthcare
No I think they mean the 2016 Democrat primary and the subsequent election
I remember being young and convinced socialism was the way forward.
Did you actually do any studying about socialism during this phase, or is this the "Che Guevara T-Shirt" socialism I've heard so much about?
We both know it wasn't even Che Guevara T-Shirt socialism. It was definitely "I think the nordic model is pretty cool" socialism.
Direct action is meaningless if you're hostile to building a coalition broad enough to actually gain any significant political power
The US isn't a democracy, you can't build coalitions with people who want to destroy everything you stand for, direct action got George Floyd justice not votes, and the people you back turned around and decided to fund the police to record levels, it's a war not an electoral campaign
I remember being young and convinced socialism was the way forward. Then I grew the fuck up and did some introspection.
Do you know how to communicate in anything other than thought terminating clichés?
The Democrats have significant political power how's that working out?
This is delusional. Direct action absolutely has its place, but all the things you mentioned were ultimately won at the ballot box. As it should be. Don't let a childish revolution fetish blind you to what constitutes a viable framework for lasting progress.
It's funny how libs think they can tell me when direct action is necessary, and it's always in the past tense, never in the present.
Not an ML. And certainly don't think I'm the only leftist. Lots of different types of leftists, many I disagree with. But unless you're opposed to capitalism, then you're a liberal, not a leftist.
Yup, like I said, lots of leftists I disagree with. That includes ML's. What's your point exactly?
My point is that I got you confused for a different poster. Please accept my deepest apologies.
Liberals aren't leftists, but there's a whole world of political thought to the left of liberals.
I am a ML and everything I have seen of Jenkem's posting here makes me think they are probably a leftist.
We probably don't agree on everything, but they're no liberal.
Hey now. Anarchists and Maoists and a bunch of others are leftists too.
Liberals are not.
Can you define direct action for me? What do you think it is?
the only viable left leaning political party in the US
I vote for Democrats because shit, why not? But what is the worth of a party that:
- Does not function as a party (single defectors routinely kill major legislation without consequence)
- Is incapable of countering the rising tide of fascism, or unwilling to do so
- Has no plan to address the Supreme Court, which will continue to kill anything legitimately good if left unchecked
- Is too beholden to capital to push even the most tepid climate change legislation (the Green New Deal)
- Constantly attacks its left flank, preferring to chase the votes of suburban reactionaries
- Isn't even reliably pro-labor
- Tailed popular movements on all sorts of civil rights issues
- Still can't be bothered to even de-schedule marijuana, the most slam-dunk popular policy one could imagine + a huge driver of mass incarceration
- Is on basically the same page as Republicans with respect to foreign policy
- Generally offers nothing besides "at least we're not as bad as Republicans, most of the time"
Where is that party going? It's never going to meaningfully address climate change, it offers only crumbs to the working class, and any social change has to be led from the outside.
the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
There is no "viable left leaning political party in the US" lmao. You are a far right country. Both parties are far right. If you were over here in the UK you would all be tories and even then I'm not sure if that's far enough right for the average democrat.
Commies and fascists are the same thing because they do the violence. The reasons they do the violence is not relevant.
I, a good democrat, don't do the violence. Those bodies that keep piling up in other (dirty, evil) countries during Democrat run governments are coincidental. All the funding I give to police departments totally aren't related to the police blasting people in the streets daily. I know this because my ideology is totally not conservative.
I really want to know what you said before the communist told you that you deserved the wall
the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
I might be misunderstanding you, so I apologize if that is the case, but if you are referring to the Democrats they are far from left leaning. They aren't even center leaning.
You can't even say they have a better track record than the Republicans. They bomb countries as much (or in recent years even more) than the Republicans. They advocate for wars. They fund ICE even more than the Republicans. They stand up just as much for reproductive rights (read: not at all). They just do all of it while waving a rainbow flag.
I really hope you meant the Greens or the CPUSA; which have their own issues but are certainly more left than either the Democrats or Republicans.
the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
If you mean the Democrats (which you must to say ""viable"") you are too lost in the sauce.
"Come on guys, we should back the Strassers. They aren't perfect but come on!"
That's not fair to Estonians. This can only come from the mind of a Burgerländer.
idk I saw some pretty awful posts from the Estonian admin of lemm.ee
This comment is giving me so much whiplash.
I was sure it was gonna be ironic when they started comparing anarchists to fascists, but fun fact: no, they actually mean it. Anarchists are fascists, everyone. You've heard it here first!
I swear, if there's something liberals hate more than what's on their right, it's what's on their left.
Vibes based politics is endemic among liberals. We try to help them but it's mostly futile.
The US has two right wing parties. Never mind nationally, I've had Democrat electeds oversee cops "sweeping" encampments just as brutally as any Republican would, what exactly is supposed to be the harm getting reduced here?
What's the difference between a fascist and an "anarchist" who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
There's a viable left leaning political party in the US? What is it?
He live in a world where CPUSA has massive political influence
What’s the difference between a fascist and an “anarchist” who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
Sorry which party is this? Dems are not even a remotely left-leaning party. Joe Biden literally criminalized the rail workers using their legal right to strike.
This is also like a children's picture book-level of understanding of fascism. As if the Dems' policy of 4 more years of the status quo could prevent fascism at all. That has literally never worked as a way to combat fascism.
Joe Biden literally criminalized the rail workers using their legal right to strike.
And then used his platform and office to force the rail companies to address their concerns. You fucks are so dishonest
A bad deal that didn't get close to meeting the unions demands is not "addressing their concerns"
No he fuckin did not, the rank and file wanted 14 days, the rank and file pushed for a strike, which union leadership did not want, the rank and file did not vote to sabotage their striking rights, Biden and the Capitalists wanted 0 days and no strike, the Squad "wanted" 7 days and were willing to sacrifice the right to strike despite knowing perfectly well the 7 days bill would die in the Senate
4 days is an insulting crumb to incentivize workers from not engaging in unauthorized slowdown measures, sick and tired of you Blue MAGA slugs
What's the difference between a fascist and an "anarchist" who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
Left leaning? According to who or what? If you said socially progressive there might be a point here, but the democratic party is no where near left wing. And the social progressiveness only serves to take advantage of those being oppressed in order to win votes. It's hollow, and when people start losing rights (like women and abortion) the Democrats will make 500 excuses about why they can't do anything, instead of actually doing something. The democratic party serves as a ratchet to kill and absorb left wing movements and keep the acceptable discourse within the sphere of economic liberalism.
I'm begging Americans to read literally anything about their political system from a non American, non Eurocentrist perspective. Begging. I'll start by linking some here.
The specific combination of factors in the historical formation of U.S. society—dominant “biblical” religious ideology and absence of a workers’ party—has resulted in government by a de facto single party, the party of capital. The two segments that make up this single party share the same fundamental liberalism. Both focus their attention solely on the minority who “participate” in the truncated and powerless democratic life on offer. Each has its supporters in the middle classes, since the working classes seldom vote, and has adapted its language to them. Each encapsulates a conglomerate of segmentary capitalist interests (the “lobbies”) and supporters from various “communities.”
American democracy is today the advanced model of what I call “low-intensity democracy.” It operates on the basis of a complete separation between the management of political life, grounded on the practice of electoral democracy, and the management of economic life, governed by the laws of capital accumulation. Moreover, this separation is not questioned in any substantial way, but is, rather, part of what is called the general consensus. Yet that separation eliminates all the creative potential found in political democracy. It emasculates the representative institutions (parliaments and others), which are made powerless in the face of the “market” whose dictates must be accepted. Marx thought that the construction of a “pure” capitalism in the United States, without any pre-capitalist antecedent, was an advantage for the socialist struggle. I think, on the contrary, that the devastating effects of this “pure” capitalism are the most serious obstacles imaginable.
TIL you have to endorse letting the Ukrainians fall to fascist imperialism to be on the left
You're working from a number of false premises - Like the people in the DPR and LPR don't want to be part of Ukraine, because the Galacian fascists who control the government in Kiev won't stop trying to kill them. What about the self-determination of people not to be slaughtered by Banderite fascist death squads? What about the self-determinations of Crimeans to finally break with Ukraine after trying for thirty years? Ahh, you will say, but those elections weren't real, so I can say that no one in any of those regions actually wants to be free of the violence directed at them by hte Rada.
ANd I could go on and on and on but you know what the truth is and you know I'm a lying tankie and blah blah blah we've all done this dance before.
You tell these commies bro, our hero Zeleksny has already sworn to led the white race to victory
TIL you have to endorse letting the Ukrainians ethically cleanse the Donbass and Crimea to be on the left
you say that like the average ukrainian has any say in what their government does.
"the Ukrainians" are not a monolith. You may be aware that a civil war raged for 8 years before Russia invaded?
the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
we have one of those? what's the name of the party?
If the democrats truly are the only viable "left" option then the only reasonable course of action would be to burn the whole state apparatus down and start anew.
You won't advocate for that of course because the fact is you don't really care about things being better, you care about pretending to be on the moral high-ground, so vague platitudes about things getting better in the abstract you get from democrats is just enough for you, because you probably endure no economic hardship and politics is just an extension of sports to you.
Is your issue with anarchists or authoritarians? I somehow doubt that anarchists are sending you death threats. Nor do I see anarchists kneecapping the Democrats. Anarchists don't want a state, though many do vote for the moderate right-wing (not "left leaning") Democrats simply because they think it's the right thing to do.
Your sweeping generalizations and attempts to paint all of us with the same brush betray your own lack of knowledge, but don't worry, I'm sure the planet will last long enough for the Democrats' slow incremental change, and I'm sure my family in border camps are very thankful to be in liberal concentration camps.
Is your issue with anarchists or authoritarians?
I think you're giving too much credit to "authoritarianism" as a political dimension beyond those weird conservatives who want ersatz father figure heads of state
Apologizing after saying something stupid is a level of grace we rarely see from the smugtrust
Any objective measure of politics puts them on the right wing. Your only measure is relative. Because you have no ideology whatsoever you have no underpinning with which to judge a political party.
The point isn't somehow that Conservatives are left wing, but that Democrats aren't "reformers" either! Most of what they do is "rehabilitate" and I don't mean that with respect to the criminal code.
Democrats are right wing because they uphold capitalism and advance imperialism. Conservatives aren't reformers, but neither are Democrats, "sorry."
I somehow doubt that anarchists are sending you death threats.
Nah I believe it a lot of Anarchists are fighty and wouldn't be nearly as indulgent with this absurdity as we are.
they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
Are you talking about the party that doubled Trump's deportation numbers, expanded oil drilling and fracking and striped the rail unions of their right to strike? I know you're not talking about THAT party, you think we've all been at brunch and hadn't been paying attention like you jackasses?
I've gotten death threats from both of them.
are these "death threats" in the room with us right now?
What's the difference between a fascist and an "anarchist" who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?
Mutual Aid: A Theory of Evolution is available on Gutenberg. Go learn something.
In order to counter the Trump bot accusations going on this thread:
The Trump appointed Supreme Justices are conservative stooges that are clearly just trying to ram through as much conservative stuff into the justice system as they can. The cagey abortion rights the US enjoyed (though sometimes not in practicality) were abolished, which is bad. There were in fact a lot of posts about this on hexbear at the time it was happening. You can now search this if you so desire.
Trump escalated sanctions against Cuba. This comes up from time to time, but he's obviously not in a position to directly affect this at this precise moment, though the cudgel of "swing state" Florida Cubans is used to avoid any de-escalation.
Trump-supporting state legislatures are escalating attacks against trans people, both as a practical threat (bigots can attack trans people under the assumption that their state's law enforcement won't do anything about it) and as a legal escalation to remove any federal protections for trans people. This is also bad. Trump is also partly running on this. This comes up frequently on hexbear.
Trump didn't succeed in the wall (which itself has had varied response amongst his supporters), but he did increase funding for ICE, expanded detention camps etc. This comes up when it's in the news, but Trump specific policies don't tend to be news regarding this right now for some reason.
Trump's tax cuts for certain sectors and the ultra-wealthy. idk why you'd think hexbear would support this?
and so on
I'm not sure why I'm doing this. I'm not sure why people are surprised that a news aggregation and commentary site tends to talk about things that are currently happening as opposed to things that happened three years ago.
Yeah, it's so strange that people confuse you with a Kremlin bot when you repeatedly spew the same fucking bullshit talking points as the bots themselves.
Anarchy and Communism are not the fucking same, what a removed meme
Lmao that hat reminded me of this (short) video:
Edit: Piped doesn't seem to be working? Maybe an issue with Shorts. https://youtu.be/qowJStEn534
https://piped.video/watch?v=qowJStEn534
Also check out his other shorts, he never misses, legitimately great content.
Ayyy Krolden! Long time no see, I remember you from the beforetimes! Hope you've been doing well!
Pro-Soviet (no longer exist) ≠ pro modern Russia
Against continued war in Ukraine ≠ pro Russia
Libs will never forgive the Soviets for saving eastern Europe from fascism lol
Take a deep breath. As someone who's been in your shoes, this may not click right away.
Every single thing you've ever heard, learned, watched, or read about another country that was ever an enemy of the united states has been some version of an exaggeration or a lie. You live in the most intense propaganda machine that has ever been created. You live in the most intense surveillance state that's ever been created. You live in the biggest, richest empire that has ever been created.
- What made the USSR brutal?
- What made the USSR authoritarian?
- Are you willing to apply the same standards to all countries?
The Soviet Empire directly occupied every constituent "Republic" as colonies, as well as occupied the Warsaw Pact countries as satellite vassals, and used military force to put down any rebellion from their puppet nations in the Warpac. They denied the people any say in government, subverted unions into agents of the state instead of advocates for the workers, and systematically crushed any domestic political dissent using secret police.
As to whether I'm okay with consistently applying that? Sure. The last time the US fought a military conflict in order to annex a nation into empire was 1902. The Soviets did it consistently throughout their empire's existence.
Much of what you're claiming is undermined by the fact that the vast majority of Soviet people voted to keep the USSR. How could that have happened if people had no say in the government, and if the SSRs were just colonies? It's also undermined by facts like the early USSR letting some former Russian vassals become independent (e.g., Finland), successive Soviet constitutions granting more and more power to SSRs and national groups, and the steady rise in living conditions under the USSR/the sharp decline in living conditions after its dissolution.
And if you're serious about applying those same standards to every country, you'd see the U.S. as one of the most evil countries in the world. Our treatment of black Americans and American Indians was literally a model for the Nazis, and eclipses the scale and severity of even the most fevered anti-communist propaganda. We've fought wars of aggression all over the Global South. We've strangled popular anti-colonial movements in their crib and kept them down by backing murderous dictators. We illegally monitor as much of our citizens' communications as possible, have extrajudicially assassinated opposition leaders, have attempted to blackmail opposition leaders into killing themselves, violently repress even peaceful left-wing protests (while providing police escorts for Klan rallies and Proud Boys), hell, the Chicago PD was running a black site torture operation.
But I'm guessing you don't take that part seriously, otherwise you'd have questioned whether such an evil country -- that's militantly opposed every communist movement since before the USSR even existed -- is a reliable source on the shortcomings of communist states.
Do you consider it necessary to preserve the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics, in which the rights and freedoms of a person of any nationality will be fully guaranteed?
That was the question; it's quite clearly referring to preserving the USSR. Comparing that to the difference between the Romans and the EU is disingenuous and you know it.
And you noticed six SSRs boycotted it! But I thought the USSR "used military force to put down any rebellion from their puppet nations"? Which is it? Was dissent tolerated or not? Or, as in almost every country, were some types of dissent tolerated (local officials protesting national decisions) while other types were not (violent opposition to the state backed by hostile foreign governments)?
whataboutism
So you flat-out lied when you said you held all countries to the same standards. Holding all countries to the same standards involves discussing other countries to place actions in context (incidentally, this is a huge part of what passes for international law). It's not just shutting off your brain and screeching "whataboutism!" when someone asks you to acknowledge some things are bad even when your team does them.
reeeee'ing
Take this disgusting garbage back to
and shit in your hatNa, you're still the nazi here
The Soviets liberated the death camps, nothing else really matters
secret police.
This is what you call "intelligence agencies in a country I dislike"
cointelpro, mkultra, etc. etc.
The Soviet Empire
gotta say I know this comes from brainworms but without context the name sounds cool
never want to use it cause its dumb but still
You do know that's worse, right?
Holy shit EPIC le reference, i tip my fedora to you kind sir
It is?
Remind me during the cold war, which countries were on the side of pro independence anti colonial movements in Africa, and which countries were pro colonisation and pro apartheid? I'll think you'll find that more often than not, the USSR was on the side of anti colonial independence movements, and that the US and Western Europe were on the side of the pro colonial forces.
Even if the USSR only supported anti colonial movements out of pure self interest and cynicism, it's a hell of a lot better than supporting colonialism and neocolonialism like the USA and Western Europe did back then during the cold war.
Westerners have never forgiven the soviet union for saving them from fascism.
Which is why they all voted to stay in the moment they got the right to vote on it. Right?
You say that like three random politicians from belarus, ukraine, and russia didn't just sign a paper one day and declared the ussr gone
or that 76% of the citizens voted to preserve the Soviet Union
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Bad is the enemy of good, and right-wingers are bad.
