bunbun

"Vote blue no matter who" means that liberals and more progressive people are supposed to support the Dems even if the party is entirely incompetent and outright harmful to the causes people support. Because the Republicans will fuck everything up even more. Harm reduction, right? So I am explaining that the recent decisions of the democrats were finally the opposite of that.

Tim Walz and his Democratic-Farmer-Labor party's record in one session:

• Statewide paid family and medical leave for all workers
• Child tax credits
• Child care assistance
• Free school breakfast and lunch for all students
• Free public college for lower-income families
• Codified Roe v. Wade
• Extensive legislation on protecting trans people
• Banned conversion therapy
• Labor protections for nurses, teachers and school workers, Uber and Lyft drivers, Amazon workers
• Banned non-compete agreements
• Put over a billion into the housing budget. Ten times more than the previous one
• Background checks and red-flag laws for gun purchases
• Banned no-knock warrants and white supremacists from pig forces
• Additional billions in public transit and infrastructure investments, environmental programs
• Right to repair law

Each of those issues is widely popular among voters, and are objectively progressive policies. So the Democrats are doing a smart thing by campaigning on them.

Now on the Palestine issues Kamala is currently doing the exact opposite. Morals aside, since we're talking about the materialist side of politics, this is an incredibly popular issue with Americans, 70% of whom are in support of a permanent ceasefire. The uncommitted movement is going to play a significant role in this election. And if she doesn't present a strong stance on this very soon, she might undo all the good decisions that the Dems made in the past month, like dropping Biden, supporting Kamala, and picking a progressive VP.

On one hand you have this fake progressive guy:

https://x.com/prem_thakker/status/1820824112165429293

https://x.com/prem_thakker/status/1820833101200699409

And the other option was this:

During the wave of campus protests against the war this spring, Shapiro compared protesters to white supremacists and the KKK, contributing to rhetoric that led to state and vigilante violence against protesters across the country. He applauded the decision to send police to disband a pro-Palestinian encampment at the University of Pennsylvania, even though the school’s own faculty members condemned the “arrests and suppression of non-violent, anti-war protests” after riot gear-clad forces cleared and arrested students.

I stg whenever positive American politics or policies come up, this community throws out the dialectics and defaults to "america bad". Tim Walz is better for the country than every other option that was on the table, all the Newsoms and Buttigieges of the dem party. This is not a point of contention, this is the material conditions that we're under.

What alternative would you prefer?

As far as the real options go, you literally couldn't have had better? Yeah he's not a MLM, what a surprise. But I'll take a governor who has a record of directly improving people's lives - school breakfast and lunch, Pre-K, time off for parents, abortion/trans/IVF rights, gun regulations, ecological legislation, etc. To say that it's a "fake progressive" by the standards of the democratic party is insane, who the fuck isn't then? Even on Palestine he's the "stop the fighting, two-state solution", which is as radical as a politician can possibly get regarding US foreign policy.

Your response and the amount of likes you got shows me that people here still believe that America is not as racist as it actually is

I don't think it's about people not believing in the all-encompassing systemic institutional racism. That's kinda impossible if you look at literally any statistic with racial distribution.

This type of stuff is deranged by any standards. With how extremely individualistic the people, especially the conservatives are, you normally expect the hatred to be projected outwards, not inwards. That's the whole point of in-circles. So I'd expect to hear something like "I will take my second amendment and actually murder this person for standing near my white child". And the "You're no longer my kid" - "K" is definitely not a typical interaction.

What 80 years of peace at home does to a mf.

So you're saying America bad? Even though they didn't nuke anybody for 80 years? Curious.

That's what peak revolutionary performance looks like.

While we're here, what is your opinion on the movie Resident Evil: Extinction (part 3)? When it came out, the mainstream opinion basically was that it had ruined the whole franchise, poopoo dogwater. I personally quite liked it as a standalone movie, fun action film.

Edit: just rewatched it, still a banger. It's surprisingly woke. And big queen energy all around, women get it done.

I mean, this is much more about the conservatives rather than the anarchists. Trans people? Women's intelligence and bodily autonomy? Minorities' humanity? Poor people's right to exist? No thanks, we'll work on it not being a thing, even if the woke fake news are trying to persuade us differently. Anarchists, on the other hand, just deny the existence of showers.

Apparently this is a controversial opinion, but I fuck with most anarchists. Obviously, there are plenty of reactionaries under their umbrella, not unlike communist/socialist one. But overall our goals align so much more than they diverge, and in the immediate future they're almost one-to-one. Once we get to the stateless (or near-) society with no policing, jails, and capitalist ownership of the means of production, we can bicker with them and assert our vision. But today it's mostly counterproductive leftist infighting.

The Y-axis is the reconciliation.

We have currently had 12 consecutive months of record breaking global temperatures, with an average of 1.63°C above the pre-industrial levels. Good times.