Fuck Russia, fuck China, fuck the US too. I’m not going to gaslight myself in to thinking someone else is doing it right just because the West is also fucked.
Working class people all over the planet are getting fucked by billionaires who’ve purchased their governments, few places are exempt from that problem.
I think the military industrial complex will be the end of us all. Generally, I think military spending is fucking atrocious and is a huge contributor to the myriad problems we as people face on a daily basis.
While I agree, Russia has no right to annex territory in Ukraine or Georgia or anywhere else, and I agree, like any rational person will, that Ukraine has every right to defend itself to the fullest extent, including matching on Moscow and fucking up the place, that’s decidedly not our problem.
Ukraine found a fucking massive oil ans natural gas deposit, large enough it threatens Russia’s market dominance. Ukraine kicked out it’s Russian puppet. Russia wants control back and will bleed itself dry to obtain it. In so doing, they’re bleeding us too.
I wish Ukraine the best, I really do. But at the top, this isn’t about defending the freedom of a downtrodden underdog. That’s a convenient story to sell to the American public. It’s about resources, and resource wars will only become more common.
Disagree. The putin propaganda parties are fucking up every democracy possible - most importantly, or perhaps most relevantly to this topic, the US. And the invasion and destruction of Ukraine is the proof that it’s working. We’ve got to help Ukraine win, rebuild, and be a peaceful and prosperous democracy because russia will stop at nothing to bend everything to them.
trump and the Qult will stop at nothing to help putin destroy the US ideals and become a malleable Christofascist oligopoly like they are. If you think Ukraine is not our problem you’re not addressing our problem. Ukraine is the leading edge of the problem.
What’s funny is how frequently I get downvoted to oblivion for daring to suggest that genocide isn’t acceptable in any circumstances, including when voting for US presidents.
It’s you guys that seem to be ok with it when your guy is the one supporting it.
If we had STAR voting I could give these two guys a 1 and a 2 while progressives all get 8 to 10. Unfortunately, that isn’t a reality we exist in. In reality only one of these two guys will win.
There is no realistic scenario this year where a third party candidate receives enough EC votes to become president. Like both guys would have to die before the election and the third party would have to be a popular household name.
Given that these two are the only realistic candidates, my only option on this issue is throwing my vote in the trash (expressing that one doesn’t give a fuck how many Palestinians die, no preference either way) or voting for the person I think will kill fewer Palestinians.
When confronted with two evils, one must choose the lesser evil if there is no realistic alternative; as letting the greater evil in helps literally no one.
Is that too complex? Do I need to simplify it further?
“Genocide is good if ‘the lesser evil’ is doing it!”
You claim genocide is always evil yet you make excuses for it. What’s the difference between an authoritarian dictatorship carrying out genocide and a plutocracy giving you a Fisher-Price voting ballot that will result in genocide no matter which option you pick?
While I agree, Russia has no right to annex territory in Ukraine or Georgia or anywhere else, and I agree, like any rational person will, that Ukraine has every right to defend itself to the fullest extent, including matching on Moscow and fucking up the place, that’s decidedly not our problem.
How convenient that every time a moral issue comes up that we’re on the right side of, it’s not our problem.
Nation states largely exist to protect the power of their respective elites. No country is immune, but there are shining examples in the world, like the nordic model, that other nations choose to ignore because, unlike those nations, most nation’s decision maker’s goal isn’t to maximize the well being of their people, but to maximize their own individual power, which capital is a form of.
The problem with your analysis is that it views each country as an island and imagines that they have no effect on the world around them. The Nordic countries are indeed very good places to live for the people who live there, but they are also participants in the international system of unequal exchange that sees trillions of dollars in wealth siphoned away from the global south every year, contributing massively to unhappiness in those countries which are victims to it.
Is it worth keeping ten Africans in perpetual poverty for each European who gets to live a comfy life? I would say “no”, but…
Hey I’m a terminally online leftist.
Fuck Russia, fuck China, fuck the US too. I’m not going to gaslight myself in to thinking someone else is doing it right just because the West is also fucked.
Working class people all over the planet are getting fucked by billionaires who’ve purchased their governments, few places are exempt from that problem.
You are just a libtard with brainrot and not a proper tankie leftist!
Where is my main man Youghurt and OmegaHaxor at?! Gish galop that western ass.
Aneurism posting in real time!
Fuck all countries and their imaginary lines.
And double fuck Russia for starting a war.
Ukraine started the war, and the Donbas had been fighting it alone for eight years before Russia joined it.
Ukraine started the war by defending itself. Classic warmongering tactic.
Lol
What’s your opinion of the West lending aid to Ukraine to help it defend itself?
I think the military industrial complex will be the end of us all. Generally, I think military spending is fucking atrocious and is a huge contributor to the myriad problems we as people face on a daily basis.
While I agree, Russia has no right to annex territory in Ukraine or Georgia or anywhere else, and I agree, like any rational person will, that Ukraine has every right to defend itself to the fullest extent, including matching on Moscow and fucking up the place, that’s decidedly not our problem.
Ukraine found a fucking massive oil ans natural gas deposit, large enough it threatens Russia’s market dominance. Ukraine kicked out it’s Russian puppet. Russia wants control back and will bleed itself dry to obtain it. In so doing, they’re bleeding us too.
I wish Ukraine the best, I really do. But at the top, this isn’t about defending the freedom of a downtrodden underdog. That’s a convenient story to sell to the American public. It’s about resources, and resource wars will only become more common.
Disagree. The putin propaganda parties are fucking up every democracy possible - most importantly, or perhaps most relevantly to this topic, the US. And the invasion and destruction of Ukraine is the proof that it’s working. We’ve got to help Ukraine win, rebuild, and be a peaceful and prosperous democracy because russia will stop at nothing to bend everything to them.
trump and the Qult will stop at nothing to help putin destroy the US ideals and become a malleable Christofascist oligopoly like they are. If you think Ukraine is not our problem you’re not addressing our problem. Ukraine is the leading edge of the problem.
How is this bleeding the US? I thought we were giving them cast-offs the military had no interest in using anyway.
It’s whatever rhetoric needs to be used in order to discourage US support for Ukraine. But they’re definitely not pro-genocide, honest.
What’s funny is how frequently I get downvoted to oblivion for daring to suggest that genocide isn’t acceptable in any circumstances, including when voting for US presidents.
It’s you guys that seem to be ok with it when your guy is the one supporting it.
If we had STAR voting I could give these two guys a 1 and a 2 while progressives all get 8 to 10. Unfortunately, that isn’t a reality we exist in. In reality only one of these two guys will win.
There is no realistic scenario this year where a third party candidate receives enough EC votes to become president. Like both guys would have to die before the election and the third party would have to be a popular household name.
Given that these two are the only realistic candidates, my only option on this issue is throwing my vote in the trash (expressing that one doesn’t give a fuck how many Palestinians die, no preference either way) or voting for the person I think will kill fewer Palestinians.
Genocide is always evil.
When confronted with two evils, one must choose the lesser evil if there is no realistic alternative; as letting the greater evil in helps literally no one.
Is that too complex? Do I need to simplify it further?
“Genocide is good if ‘the lesser evil’ is doing it!”
You claim genocide is always evil yet you make excuses for it. What’s the difference between an authoritarian dictatorship carrying out genocide and a plutocracy giving you a Fisher-Price voting ballot that will result in genocide no matter which option you pick?
Military industrial complex is relatively tiny.
If you want to see who will be the end of us, follow the bigger fish.
Oil companies will destroy the environment.
Agrochemical companies will destroy biodiversity.
Food companies will make us obese.
Social media companies will misinform and divide us.
How convenient that every time a moral issue comes up that we’re on the right side of, it’s not our problem.
I think the last time this happened was World War 2.
and even then internment camps happened
No, don’t worry, MLs advocated us staying out of the ‘Capitalist Imperialist War’ there too, until their favorite Nazi-allied country got betrayed.
Unsurprising that you find preventing the genocide of Ukrainians to be the ‘wrong side’ of this war.
This is seeing the wood for the trees.
Nation states largely exist to protect the power of their respective elites. No country is immune, but there are shining examples in the world, like the nordic model, that other nations choose to ignore because, unlike those nations, most nation’s decision maker’s goal isn’t to maximize the well being of their people, but to maximize their own individual power, which capital is a form of.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report
The problem with your analysis is that it views each country as an island and imagines that they have no effect on the world around them. The Nordic countries are indeed very good places to live for the people who live there, but they are also participants in the international system of unequal exchange that sees trillions of dollars in wealth siphoned away from the global south every year, contributing massively to unhappiness in those countries which are victims to it.
Is it worth keeping ten Africans in perpetual poverty for each European who gets to live a comfy life? I would say “no”, but…
Please provide examples
No