Sorry, but you are suggesting that the best strategy possible to stop the genocide is to be nice to the person committing the genocide
No, I suggested we adopt the best strategy regardless of what it is.
You said that even if the best strategy possible is to be nice, you wouldn’t consider doing do.
Then my comment argues you shouldn’t.
83% of statistics are made up. Here’s the original comment:
I’d imagine if one genuinely cares about stopping the genocide they’d be exactly as civil as they’d strategically need to be.
In the scenario where celebrating Bidens death is strategic I actually made an argument pro celebrating his death.
It would require bad reading comprehension to interpret it differently than what it literally says.
they are responsible for a genocide
So then shouldn’t we do everything strategically possible to oppose the genocide?
Why is “we should adopt the best strategy possible to stop genocide” so offensive to you?
Poor reading comprehension on your part?
I’m not going to be trying to persuade anyone about culture war bullshit that doesn’t matter.
The original guy was talking about strategy. Is there a strategic reason to try to persuade those people not to celebrate Trump’s death?
I’m sure as well. I don’t want the guy to die, I want him to stop doing harm.
If death is how that happens I could take that. If death isn’t necessary I’d prefer it.
Ideally we could try people who commit war crimes publicly.
I wish you luck in the war on manners.
I’d imagine if one genuinely cares about stopping the genocide they’d be exactly as civil as they’d strategically need to be.
If your excitement in the cancer diagnosis of a old man is more important to you I get why people are weirded out.
Forgive me, because I don’t disagree with the goal. But it seems naive.
The democrat party cannot be reformed. It must be destroyed
If we create a new party in the exact same electoral system why should we be any more optimistic of it working out this time?
As soon as libs realize the middle class isn’t even being served by these antidemocratic ghouls, maybe we can have a real third party.
Right, and as soon as the capitalists realize this third party is gaining traction over the dems they’ll stop trying to buy and lobby democrats and instead try to buy, coopt, and float their own candidates in this new party while pumping huge amounts of money for their preferred candidates over ours.
Are the democrats the root problems, or are the democrats/Republicans both a result of the means in which we discuss politics being monopolized and owned by huge capital?
Haha fair, that fits the definition of Lost-like, but I was thinking of that narrow era of network mystery boxes that popped up in the immediate aftermath of Lost chasing its success.
No matter how good they were, none of them were Lost so they got canceled. (Except for Fringe thank god)
From at least gets to live outside that shadow.
Ah yes, the Lost-likes.
Manifest, Fast Forward, Continuum, Revolution, Terra Nova… loved them all. All of them canceled.
The Man from Earth
B4
Triangle
Time Lapse
Daybreakers
Evolution
Knowing
The fact that the transition takes a very long time isn’t proof that it isn’t transitioning.
Okay, what proof is there China has been making progress on the transition?
What even is this assumption that transitional periods must last less than a decade? Seriously, where the heck does that come from?
That’s approximately the time Xi has been president. Since 2012. I’m not going to place blame on him for regimes before him.
When Lenin attempted to implement this transition he eventually fell ill and was unable to prevent Stalin’s authoritarian takeover.
It seems as though there needs to be some time limit on having full state power consolidated in one place because every regime change risks the goals being changed.
If a leader gets in who realizes that having a board seat on powerful companies can benefit them personally, and they decide not to transition, what can be done at that point?
To answer your question, this transitional state is necessary as long as capitalism remains the overwhelmingly dominant mode of production on the planet because in a mainly capitalist world, transfer of technology and resources mostly happen between businesses doing business.
China was the second-largest supplier of the US in 2024, with goods valued at $462.62 billion.
Capitalism will remain the dominant mode of production as long as China continues to play a key role in funding of the American economy and continuing to loan them increasingly more money.
Private property and markets can’t just be abolished immediately after a revolution, it’s not magic. Young socialist systems have to go through a transitional phase during which private property and markets are still allowed under strict oversight of the state.
That makes sense
His does not make them capitalist as the proletariat still has control over this private sector via the socialist state, such as in China where all of the essential industry that is necessary for every other, known as the commanding heights, are fully state owned
Okay… but when will this “transitionary period” finish.
If a “transitionary period” takes more than a decade at what point do we say “they aren’t transitioning” and call it what it is, state owned capitalism.
I don’t think people have an issue with her having her own sexuality.
I think people have finally woken up about the sickening exploitation in the entertainment industry and the way women are sexualized and pressured by major labels then thrown away when they aren’t “sexy” anymore, absolutely destroying their mental health and sense of self worth as going far back as Marilyn Monroe, Judy Garland, Amy Winehouse, Amanda Bynes, Brittany Spears, etc.