this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
81 points (98.8% liked)
askchapo
23090 readers
428 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try [email protected] if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Glad to hear you'll be giving your enthusiastic endorsement to genocide. Make sure to tell the guy whose kid just got blown up about Project 2025. It'll definitely make him feel better
Nooo you don't get it, it's not a game and they're a real adult in the room! They ran the model and plugged in the data, and
has an expected value of 2,999,999,999 innocent deaths while 
will cause 3,000,000,000!
Meanwhile Genocide Joe is actually a saint
We can tell when we're being a lil stinker, it's funny you read it as bad faith.
So as long as Biden "If there wasn't an Israel we'd have to invent one" isn't literally bathing in the blood of Palestinian children he's still the lesser evil?
You really think they'd balk at voting for him if he was literally bathing in the blood of children?
But if it was Biden v trump, what action would he have to take for you to abstain from voting? I figured you wouldn't vote for trump - I don't think anybody on Hexbear will unless they're going for accelerationism or are in a blue state.
Rule of law in America is only the rule of the bourgeoisie. Where is the rule of law in his response to Israel? Oh right, it's the rule of Israel's law.
So Biden denying the Palestinian death toll doesn't count as "bathing in Palestinian blood" cause where I'm from that's what that looks like
In general? Like, if Joe Biden became the Dark Brandon meme over night and started drone striking US Senators that didn't approve of climate change legislation and started packing SCOTUS with radical leftists you'd be against that?
you think the lives of a handful of the shittiest people on earth isn't a price to pay for averting the millions of deaths caused by those same shitty people blocking meaningful actions to undo the damage humanity has done to our environment?
Sweetie, it's not just their lives we'd be sacrificing, it'd be the nooooorms and the noooooance! We need to vooote climate regulations in, not use the same means of securing political goals we use every time a Latin American president nationalizes a natural resource!
lmao I thought you were OP replying for a hot second, you gotta spell it sweaty next time
So if he were to actually start being effective?
I read your entire response and appreciate your answer. I'm glad we can agree that Biden is at least shitty.
I also appreciate you taking personal ownership of your moral reasoning behind your vote. But I think the personal connections you have to your vote may be missing some broader context.
This stuck out to me:
I feel that 'authoritarianism' as a term feels reductive. It's a term used to describe a politician's behavior instead of specific actions that we can assign morality. Providing weapons in another country or withholding support during a domestic crisis are more specific and can better crystallize what is wrong with a government or politician. In media narratives, 'authoritarian' is used to criticize without looking at the material changes that happen.
I think if Biden used the full force of his legal executive powers to do things to undo the harm of trump's presidency, that would be considered authoritarian and would be an unprecedented display of political power. I also think that would be a welcome and appropriate action to take.
You also used the word 'blatant' and I thought that was significant too. Trump was blatant with a lot of the shit he pulled in office. Appointing people with awful track records and making speeches that threatened people were blatant. However, 'blatant' is subjective.
What was blatant to you with trump was a reality a lot of people experienced before 2016 and after 2021. For me, what changed was aesthetics. Biden didn't have to say anything to keep the cages open. He didn't have to do much to let Roe v Wade get overturned. He could say he condemned the decision and then not have to do anything because that would be authoritarian. He felt no strategic need to undo trump's actions and so he didn't. He's just not saying the quiet part out loud.
It's definitely a fucked up situation we're in, but Biden won't save it, nor will the party who props him up even now.
Also, the adherence to the rule of law seems like a shaky standard given the people in charge of making the laws. Shakier considering how often legal loopholes come out of the woodwork to prevent meaningful policies from happening, like the parliamentarian. I'd only be okay with the rule of law if US law was in any way fair or just.
when she used the safe word
Cool, so when Biden (or the next guy) loses because our electoral system is inherently flawed, I assume you have plans in place to deal with that right?
Word. They've been lesser eviling for fifty or sixty years, never having any conception of an off-ramp, and now they're swearing allegiance to the ultimate and final evil, knowingly, willingly.
As long as someone more effective and observably better than Trump is running and polling well they have your vote?
Edit: apparently the above question was in bad faith. I thought it was TOO charitable to the completely spineless sentiment in the comment I was replying to, but I guess I forgot that anything less than complete capitulation before the
bloo no matter whoo crowd is bad faith.
Why is Project 2025 a "death knell"?
It’s not. One of these days I need to do a post on why this whole Project 2025 thing is fake. It’s a “plan” that sounds like it was written up by a 15 year old that has no idea how government bureaucracy works. If it actually is a plan and not a DNC op to scare people into voting, it’s not going to actually work.
The idea that you can switch out bureaucrats with party loyalists is a joke. If the CPSU couldn’t do it, then the GOP sure as hell won’t pull it off. Bureaucracies just don’t work that way.
it'll work when the democrats do it five years later as a gesture of bipartisanship
Idk about the new crop of weirdos, but the old gop wanted to gut the federal government until it could no longer function as a regulatory enforcer. They made it like 85% of the way there before being mostly shut out by the evangelican fascists.