If someone claims something happened on the fediverse without providing a link, they’re lying.
Funny how female Dem senators won in three of the swing states Kamala lost. Given the limited data, it’s hard to imagine how we could possibly have more evidence that you’re wrong.
Your dataset is two, and they both ran with very similar strategies of moving right to try to appeal to moderate Republicans. Biden meanwhile had the enormous failure of Covid working to his advantage.
Pretty much all of those things have to do with gerrymandering, lmao.
I’m used to y’all punching down at regular people to defend the Democratic party from any and all criticism, but I didn’t realize you’d also punch down to deflect blame from the Republican party too. I thought it was just a matter of party loyalty, but I guess it’s more pathological than that.
Seriously, mentioning gerrymandering is a “victim complex?” At that point, why even care about politics at all? Everyone should stop worrying about how rigged things are and just pull themselves up by their own bootstraps! Who even cares how much democracy crumbles around me, no matter how undemocratic it gets, I’ll just, what did you suggest? Call my gerrymandered wife-beater representative and ask nicely?
But then I guess you wouldn’t get to condescend and look down on people. I suppose that’s the real purpose of politics, huh?
Hey, I have an idea. Maybe, since you’re so much better than everyone, you should go out to backwoods East Tennessee, drive up secluded driveways, walk past the Confederate flags in the yards, knock on their doors, and explain to them why they should vote Democrat. Sound good?
Gotta be patient. As soon as the T’s are gone, then they’ll start using LG.
But on the plus side, the fact that LGB haven’t been removed makes me feel slightly hopeful? This is a clear step back obviously. But it makes me feel that finally the idea that gay, lesbian, bisexual people exist and don’t need conversion therapy has actually sunk in and we can’t be erased so easily.
No, that’s completely wrong. They’re coming after trans people because trans people are the easiest target right now. They also intend to get rid of gay, lesbian, and bisexual people, but it’s easier to focus on one group at a time and attempt to split people apart.
They did the same shit in the UK with the “LGB Alliance,” mostly straight TERFs collaborating with the Heritage Foundation and doing absolutely nothing to advance the rights of the people they claimed to be supporting, focusing entirely on attacking trans people to the point of making alliances with extreme reactionaries and anti-feminists.
Anyone using the “LGB” acronym is either a reactionary using divide and conquer tactics aiming at attacking all LGBT rights, or a useful idiot to said reactionaries. There is no plus side here.
Reminder that the “LGB Alliance” in the UK literally worked with the Heritage Foundation and described it as “the only possible course of action.” It was an op with most of the supporters being straight transphobes trying to sow division. This move has the Heritage Foundation written all over it, they love that tactic, divide and conquer.
It’s gerrymandered to all hell. A federal court literally ruled it’s gerrymandered along political, rather than racial lines, which makes it legal somehow.
TN-4, which includes the college town of Murfreesboro, used to lean blue, but they lumped it together with a bunch of rural areas going all the way out to East Tennessee and now it’s one of the safest red seats in the country, held by a dirtbag domestic abuser.
Gov. Haslem may have been a corporate tool but at least he pushed back on some of the culture war bullshit. Ever since he retired, the far-right kicked into overdrive. They’re all trying to outdo each other and the state government has no understanding of how the law even works. If an issue is mentioned on Fox News, a new law will be proposed about it within the week.
I’m going to break the rules and just nominate every SNES RPG. FF4, FF6, Chrono Trigger, Earthbound, Mario RPG, Lufia 2, and even more that weren’t released in America like Live A Live, Fire Emblem 4 and 5, Star Ocean, and Front Mission. Even listing that many, there are many more that I haven’t played that it would be totally fair to say, “How could you forget X?” Amazing era for that type of game, and I’m only partially saying that because of nostalgia.
It seems pretty clear to me that applying the definition I gave previously of “authoritarian violence” as “state-perpetrated violence against citizens with ideas the state finds threatening”, slavery could be considered “authoritarian violence” but “freeing the slaves” couldn’t.
What? How? The state did not order people to own slaves, and the slavers could free their slaves at will. It seems pretty clear to me that the opposite is true, that private citizens were operating in way that most reasonable people would call authoritarian, but by your definition cannot be called authoritarian because it’s only authoritarian when the state does it.
I suppose you could argue that the state failing to prevent individuals from performing authoritarian acts is a form of authoritarianism, but at that point the definition starts to break down. Is it possible for a state to be authoritarian through inaction? Suppose, for example, interracial relationships are technically legal, but every time one happens or is even suspected, a lynch mob strings someone up on a tree, and the government fails to prosecute.
If the state can be authoritarian through inaction, then at that point it becomes rather unclear what authoritarianism even means. You define it as, “state-perpetrated violence against citizens with ideas the state finds threatening.” But if those people pose a genuine threat to others, then doesn’t the state have an obligation to stop them in order to not be authoritarian, just as they do with the lynch mob in the previous example? And for that matter, isn’t it authoritarian for the US to allow Coca-Cola to fund death squads, in the original example?
I don’t think the term “authoritarian” defined in this way is useful or holds up under scrutiny.
Until Coca-Cola is its a government, no, that’s not authoritarianism.
Which was more authoritarian: slavery or freeing the slaves? Slaveowners were not the government, therefore, according to you, nothing they did could be considered authoritarian, right?
It seems pretty arbitrary to single out one single heirarchy and say that only that heirarchy is capable of being authoritarian.
I believe in reclaiming “tankie” in the same way as “queer.” Schoolyard bullies don’t really care to distinguish between the many different labels encompassed by LGBT+, and so they inadvertently invented a term that could be very inclusive and all encompassing, even if you’re still figuring out who you are, you call always fall back on “queer” to give the general idea.
In the same way, the term “tankie” gets applied to people of all sorts of different left ideologies. There are significant differences between different leftist ideologies, but our critics don’t care to understand or distinguish between them, so I consider tankie to be a similarly inclusive term. Do you support anything that any socialist government has ever done? Do you think Cuba had an effective literacy program? Congratulations, you’re a tankie, welcome to the club.
Note that my identifying with the term isn’t really an invitation for people to use it. But, you know, if people want to keep using it as this broad, meaningless term that lumps a bunch of people together, as I see it, it only works to our advantage as “tankies,” it pushes people towards us and helps us remember what we have in common instead of fighting over our differences. So I’m not exactly going to fight the label particularly hard.
From their bio:
Well, I didn’t vote for you!
Unfortunately they don’t seem to be banned from db0, but they got banned from that specific .world comm (they’ve previously been banned from politics and world news), a two month ban from .ml, and ofc a permaban from Hexbear.
db0 (the individual) said, “We’re looking into it” 5 hours ago
You’re right, you didn’t ask, you just asserted that it was false. You get how that’s worse, right?
“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
Yeah, Holocaust denialism is a fast-track to being made fun of on Hexbear.
I didn’t ask who was put in the camps first, I asked him who the real victims of WW2 were.
You literally did the opposite lmao. I quote, “ah yes, the holocaust was checks notes started to persecute commies.” Nowhere did you ask me “who the real victims of WW2 were.” You also responded to my comment that said “Historically speaking, the Nazis literally first built the camps to put Marxists in” to challenge the claim.
I’m glad to see that you’ve realized that you were completely fucking wrong, but now instead of owning up to it you’re just trying to backtrack and lie about what was said in order to save face.
You collaborate with Nazis, you deserve the wall. The soviets weren’t victims, and they got what they deserved. Every single one of those 27 million.
So we’ve gone from denying that the Nazis putting communists in concentration camps to outright praising them for the killings.
Of course, many of the people who died were innocent civilians who were brutally massacred by the Nazis solely for being “racially inferior.” And the agreement regarding the division of Eastern Europe was secret at the time, so the soldiers fighting had no knowledge of any collaboration.
So, like, at this point we can all see that this guy’s a Nazi, right? He literally started with Holocaust denialism and is now praising the Nazi’s mass extermination of civilians.
revisionist bullshit.
Projection, as always.
Well, that’s twice as long as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact lasted before the Nazis and Communists went right back to killing each other, not just in a “hostile competition” but in a large scale, total war that left tens of millions of people dead.
The point is that the US put aside ideological differences because the USSR was fighting against the Nazis, they were not “co-belligerents.”
When minor things are against the rules which are selectively enforced, it means the authorities get to pick and choose who to punish based on whatever criteria they feel like, which gives them power.