superniceperson @ superniceperson @sh.itjust.works Posts 0Comments 51Joined 1 wk. ago
Just a reminder that communists weren't the ones to appoint nazis to power; anti communists were. The ones that thought violence is never the answer and we should just vote harder if we don't want fascists in power.
And everytime those people get power fascists get power shortly after. Maybe it's not financially funding, but anti'tankies' are responsible for every instance of fascism taking power. Because equality and equity scares you people.
What do they call semaphores? (Manually operated single instruction flag or non electronic switching traffic signs)
A) those countries had far less embedded capitalists. They did not reform, they advanced in a linear direction.
B) you're a north American, half of you are fascists and the other half are conservative Catholics. Don't you people specifically still kill native women so regularly there's multiple euphemisms about it?
Anyone basing strategy on the last sixty years instead of the last four is too stupid to be taken seriously. Hence the US' reputation as he dumbest nation.
Yeah I wonder if there was a reason the communists were fighting both the nazis and 'social democrats,' and had to spend more time fighting the larger group that was openly funding the nazis.
A) yes, it is impossible to reform an embedded regime of wealth. You need revolution, which will likely require tanks even in the age of drones.
B) tankie is anything to the left of burning children alive for warmth, at least how it's used on this site.
I do forget there are Americans from the dark ages here sometimes.
I'll have you know I'm a supernice person, with the only exception being towards fascists and Americans that don't realize both of their political parties ideologies boil down to fascism.
Many have, but that's the thing Israel is still committing genocide if Palestinians leave their home.
I miss when neolibs held beliefs or could speak. Since Trump became the king of your ideology all of you have become infinitely dumber.
Nobody has ever been forced to live. Its a choice you make.
That nonsense argument aside, the digital world objectively cannot be legislated like the physical world. Otherwise I'd have stolen more money than has ever been printed or designated. It doesn't make sense to treat digital objects like physical ones, mainly because they share nothing in common.
Pretending like the government needs to know what you jack off to, or pretending that some random megacorp needs a photo of you or your is to keep kids safe is ridiculous on so many levels.
This isnt about buying alcohol, this is about giving the government warrantless access to all of your information for enjoying your own sexuality.
There is no reasonable way to implement this as a law; is the argument against it.
Either everyone gets tracked by the government openly (which also means your browsing history can be accessed by a foia) or private companies get access to personal information they shouldn't have.
Neither case prevents all access points of porn, but both would require fundamental changes to society itself, as well as internet infrastructure, and would forever isolate any and all states that are stupid enough to implement these requirements.
So yes, kids shouldn't have access to porn. Parents and people in those kids lives are responsible for that, not big daddy government.
If we learn nothing else from the fall of the US we can learn that you do not willingly give the government more power or information.
Its cute you have your own call out forum for people that disagree with your neoliberal generic beliefs and all; one that only you post to or really participate in bar a few lost /all viewers, but that's not an argument.
People being upset that their livelihoods are being destroyed while their previous bosses become immeasurably richer while doing even less work were objectively on the right side of history given where it has lead us-- with the greatest wealth disparity in all of known human history, and the most people food and shelter insecure in all of human history.
None of the good ones that have lasted. Only disposable trash that needs to be nearly entirely rebuilt every 50 years.
The luddites were unironically entirely correct and capitalist disenfranchisement of capital has made the world objectively worse despite the wealth it brought to 0.001% of the population.
Why? Its not like apartments are built by private industry. Not any lasting ones at least.
Yes, yes it is.
Defending the weak and oppressed is a core pillar of Islam. Its not hypocritical .
Sure thing, all progress that has been made in terms of rights in the US has happened without voting. Through demands and violence are rights won and maintained; not electoralism which has only cost us rights over time
How about you put on your thinking cap and understand why voting in a presidential election is fucking pointless.