Can't have war if you genocide all races 
bumpusoot
joined 2 years ago
People have been making your argument for decades. Every single fucking election it's widely claimed we're on the "tipping point", people everywhere said it last time with Trump, and what did he do when he got into power? Largely just continued the status quo of making everything gradually worse.
If anyone thinks voting remotely matters and they want change, they should vote third party. But as always, I don't think voting will change anything no matter what.
Take half the fucking effort you put into this "Vote for genociders or get fascism" shit and put it into organising or direct action.
Thinking it's acceptable to use force to defend yourself and others from fascism? That's horseshoe tankie fascism.
The people with real morals sit and watch as fascism engulfs their entire society and engages in genocide while telling people to 
more.
Easy, press the button, and there's a 50% chance the Tesla will malfunction or explode into flames before it turns the corner.
I've eaten many, many canned goods that were years past their expiration date, and would never have been able to tell. Obviously depends on storage conditions, but I suspect it's perfectly good.
Correct. The coriander soap gene, that's real.
I mean, in fairness, conscription by threat of deadly violence is a thing that can and has been enforced throughout history (eg Ukraine right now). There's no reason to think it applies here, but it's not an impossible thing to happen.
The reddit front page is almost exclusively "Trump bad" posts, has been for weeks. I know we like preaching to the choir but this shit is a whole other level of just reassuring each other that doing nothing but supporting genocide is good (plus many many bots).
"There's such a definitive lack of evidence for god that one can and should reasonably conclude he doesn't exist." My belief in that statement is why I call myself an atheist to friends and family.
I don't use the label publically in spaces like these because most people have the take that you have. My honest impression is 1) Some famous "athiests" (whose past debates I still enjoy) have unrelated, shitty views, and 2) just that right-wing dinguses have somewhat hijacked the perception of the label (eg Peterson).
I really don't engage with the terminally online drama culture about atheism, so maybe I underestimate the scale. But in my mind, I am atheist, and I think that label has value because religious dogma is still so all-present, pervasive and generally negative.
It's definitely a silly way of enforcing it, I suspect he knows that, but I think the intention is good.
Lots of people think leftist is about seeing conspiracies, but I would argue Leftism is a lot more realising common class interests exist, and conspiracy stems from that. Classes (to begin with) don't really "conspire" so much as just, naturally work toward the same things (and by consequence, then conspire).
As well as just being a good realisation, I think it helps dispel myths to non-leftists. It also leads into one of the fundamental failures, which is how the Capitalists have freedom and time to conspire, and workers do not.
Trump did bad things. So have the Dems. And sincerely describing someone who actively supports genocide as "not perfect" just shows what a disingenuous lib you are. Your version of "harm reduction" has, for decades, done nothing but emphasize and prolong the harm.
I don't live in the US either. I just care about people's wellbeing in general. You should recognise that literally wherever on the planet you live, that organising and doing direct action would be more productive than telling people anywhere that voting matters. What a fucking waste of political energy.