NoneOfUrBusiness

Honestly if it was only about the deadweight it’d be a better idea to work from within rather than without. But the Democratic Party isn’t just deadweight; it’s an angry chimpanzee you need to continually appease at great personal cost that will still punch and kick you, and might even hop off and run away (which you don’t want to happen because reasons). Now imagine you want people to follow you but they also have to carry chimpanzees. That’s the problem with involving the DNC.

Constitution has nothing to say here really.

Fair enough, but it sure as hell should. How are the people of St. Louis not literally up in arms over this?

What the fuck? How the hell is that constitutional?

They’re saying they want MAGA to keep being antisemitic in the hopes that Zionists will turn against them and use their massive amounts of political power to put a stop to the MAGA takeover of America. Of course the problem with this is that, aside from the fact that Zionists don’t in fact have that kind of power over US politics (they’re just a moderately large lobby with a dedicated activist base), Zionists don’t want Jews living outside Israel to lead fulfilling lives and therefore have no idea with rampant MAGA antisemitism.

Haha no. Zionists want the world outside of Israel to be unsafe for Jews so they’ll immigrate to Israel and help build their dream ethnostate.

That’s what should happen, but with the current group of dunces in charge? Absolutely not.

If “hate” is too strong word, then how would you describe your original use of “fucking disgusting?”

I find their attitude about many things disgusting, but I don’t care about them enough to hate them. I have better things to hate in my life, like Zionists. And speaking of Zionists:

If these were Jewish people, when would they be sufficiently not Jewish enough for you to not find them disgusting?

I’ll ask: When would Zionists stop being disgusting? See what I mean? Okay back from the top:

I have pointed out several times, they face a literal existential threat by saying anything now. Which means they have an unquestionably legitimate excuse to say nothing, that you are insisting isn’t as valid as them just being fucking disgusting.

They’re saying things though; if they were silent I’d give them a pass (to an extent; all Americans who go that route share a moral responsibility for not acting). They’re vocally criticizing the regime, and have torn into Trump over the opsec stuff by your own admission. Yet there’s not a word about the mass murder.

I’ve pointed out what over 50 liberals were saying BEFORE the Trump admin was persecuting them. And you’re belief is those words aren’t to be listened to because liberals are too fucking disgusting to be honest.

You tried to argue that, and I laid out a counterargument that you then proceeded to dismiss and claim I just hate liberals too much. Look if you want to have a real conversation here you’ll have to engage with my arguments just as I engage with yours.

Okay, so when is that?

When they stop caring about the interests of capital and start caring about human life. More specifically wealth redistribution, strong regulation on capital, healthcare for all, strong climate legislation, not murdering people abroad directly or through Israel, etc are bare minimum criteria that liberals of all shapes and stripes fail miserably, because if they adopt these things they’ll stop being liberals and become some variant of democratic socialist. Liberals are fundamentally people who ostensibly care about both democracy and capitalism, but resolve tensions inherent between the two by falling on the side of capitalism. This is why AOC and Bernie for example are not liberals.

Or is there something they could say worth listening to? What would that be to you if it exists at all?

Liberals are worth listening to when they stan for democracy (so civil and political rights, what little social welfare and climate legislation they do support, etc), and not worth listening to when they stan for capitalism against democracy (so tax cuts and handouts for billionaires, unnecessary privatization, etc).

This, kids, is why allowing the government to curtail your rights because of “terror” is such a bad idea.

Instead of, you know, acknowledging in any way they are saying exactly what you told me I could never find them saying.

I didn’t say that, though; you did. I said they’re not saying it right now, which they aren’t. Also again, the ineffectual actions of a minority don’t absolve the majority of responsibility, otherwise all of America right now would be free of blame for twenty five years of bombing brown people in the Middle East and 80 years of helping Israel ethnically cleanse Palestinians. Hint: It’s not.

When, exactly, would be the right time to stop hating liberals?

What metric do you have in mind, that once libs reach, you would no longer hate them?

Hate is a strong word. I’m pissed off at their current and past actions, and I’ve never liked them, but I don’t hate them. It’s mostly just disdain, disappointment and a hint of just desserts. That aside, if your question is what threshold for me not having negative feelings about liberals is? When they’re no longer liberals. I mean no leftist has anything resembling good feelings for liberals; the ideology is fundamentally about protecting capital while giving the masses breadcrumbs so they don’t revolt.

Again straight out of the fascist playbook.

Any chance I could get enough of your empathy to explain what part of my comment is “liberal apologia?”

So in a nutshell: It’s the exact same rhetoric liberals use to whitewash Biden, Harris and the Democratic establishment’s support of Israel, and while that not may not necessarily be you 99% of people who say this either fundamentally don’t care about the people whose murder they’re justifying or are actually braindead. The citation of a small minority faction that cares, the appeal to some vague “pressure” that will cause change if we just have patience, and the implication that just because they don’t have official power they can’t and don’t need to do anything, you might not notice it but if you switched a few words you’d sound exactly like someone arguing that the Uncommitted Movement is literally Satan in August.

For more details, you took one action from three years ago that a minority of Congress democrats did that was not followed up by anything and that had no effect as evidence that liberals are calling for an end to the mass murder of brown people, but that’s literally not what’s going on. Some Democrats (which aren’t all liberals; AOC is a democratic socialist) wrote a letter saying they don’t think the president should have the unilateral power to murder brown people all over the world and when he ignored it did nothing. The so-called Congress Progressive Caucus has over 100 members so the fact that only 50 congressmen signed this letter is fucking pathetic. If any of these people actually cared, they’d do something about it. If signing one letter three years ago is supposed to convince me that they care beyond an extremely superficial level, then… uh… no.

Also, you raised Bernie and AOC as examples of a new trend within liberalism, but that’s straight up false. AOC is a (I think) democratic socialist, and Bernie ie a straight up socialist. These aren’t new flavors of liberal; they’re simply not liberals at all. The only thing liberals have done concerning these two is fight them at every turn.

Then you said that neoliberalism is in decline, which is not true. The people who actually run the show in the Democratic party are still all neoliberals. Schumer is still Senate minority leader, Jeffries is still House minority leader, Pelosi is still Pelosi. Maybe we’ll see neoliberals losing power in the midterm election if there’s even a free and fair midterm election, but now? Nope. And in places where neoliberals are being removed from power, they’re not being replaced by nice liberals (those don’t exist; the neo in neoliberalism is basically for show); they’re being replaced by socialists and other progressives. The existence of those people doesn’t make liberalism “nice” because these are also not liberals same as Bernie snd AOC.

And finally, the idea that criticizing the Trump admin’s opsec will somehow help stop him is laughable at best, dangerous at worst, because his supporters don’t give a shit. The arguments that Hegseth needs to be fired and all that do nothing to actually hurt Trump (who can just nominate whoever the fuck he wants). There’s no 5D chess game being played to oust Trump here.

I couldn’t be assed to write all this, so I just said liberal apologia and moved on, but there.

Because someone with the political knowledge you have could certainly be doing a lot more with their life.

Dude I fucking wish. The math changes a lot for authoritarian states, particular ones where political apathy is as common as it is in Egypt. I do intend to he there if there’s ever an opportunity to change that, but for now? Nothing to do but wait.

Okay you only seem to be interested posting liberal apologia rather than engaging with my point, so I won’t respond further. I will, however, note that I’m interested in what they’re doing now, not the one thing a minority of them did three years ago that, I should say, amounted to fucking nothing.

Why the NYPD in particular?

As an Arabic speaking Muslim, this is not how I wanted to get Western media representation.

He’s literally a Christofascist cosplaying a crusader.

They’re the same picture. If anything the way he’s acting is more reflective of the actual crusaders than how westerners usually think of them.

Not quite. The other person is right about the benzene ring, but also testosterone has a non-aromatic double bond, making it less stable because in organic compounds double bonds are more reactive than single bonds.

It has basically an entire benzene ring,

It’s been a while since I took organic chemistry, but isn’t that literally just a benzene ring?

In short, modern Libs:

A) Are doing the right thing for once (by kinda being mad about mass murder) B) Not doing as much mass murder as Trump / Russia. C) Might not be around much longer due to Democratic party infighting and Trump working up towards arresting his political rivals.

Okay I think that’s where you got me wrong. While empathy is still not what I’d call it, you’re kind of right in that it would make no sense to criticize liberals for their hypocrisy right now (though in an honest to goodness power struggle it is good ammunition if the left decides to go down that route). However, that’s not what I was criticizing; what I was criticizing is how liberals are still not mad about mass murder. Liberals are mad about the incompetent manner in which the mass murder was done, the bad opsec, but they don’t give a shit about the mass murder itself. That’s what’s ticking me off. Like these fuckers killed 53 people to protect their best buddies’ genocide and they’re getting worked up over bad opsec‽ If you’ll notice, liberals—both rank and file and leaders—are not calling for an end to the actual mass murder; they’re calling for the incompetent leadership to be removed so that competent leadership can come and do the same mass murder but competently. And when you point out that it makes no sense to call for better leadership for the mass murder machine you get downvoted to oblivion. If they were calling for an end to the mass murder (which they won’t because of “freedom of navigation” and “US interests in the region”) you’d be right and it’d make no sense to get mad at them; libs being hypocritical isn’t exactly news.

How do we classify wanton killing of innocent people? Lockerbie bombings come to mind.

I mean just call it what it is. Politically motivated bombing, mass shooting, etc. Basically what the media already does when it’s a white person doing these things.

but there’s none to be had about throwing extra explosions around to “intimidate” a third country.

There is, and not having that discussion does nothing but help the imperial core maintain their facade of moral legitimacy even as they murder innocent people all over the world.