KillingTimeItself

To which I say that is not an excuse. People were anti-racist back then too, and people had been calling out police violence against people of color since the 19th century and the white supremacist origins of the modern american militarized police. Also we’re talking moreso 60 years of continual support for these institutions, not merely 20 years ago.

it’s not an excuse, depending on what it was as well as the fact that things can change, someone may have had a negative view at a certain point, but that can change. Unless of course doing a single bad action is always constituted as a negative thing, which doesn’t seem beneficial for society to me.

Yes, and liberalism has historically resisted fascist takeovers so well.

fascist governments are opportunistic by design, and liberal democracies don’t necessarily have native defenses against them, it’s one of the biggest challenges in a democracy.

Neoliberalism prioritizes the mass hoarding of wealth of the capitalist ruling class above everything else. Neoliberalism has been the dominant ideology of western electoral democracy since the time of Ronald Reagan. This is especially true of America and Great Britain. Neoliberalism does not create a functional government.

if you operate on your definition of neoliberalism sure, but i’m not a neoliberal. The irony could be that these problems are inherent to any capitalist society, arguably any society ever, because inflation is a bitch. The only trivial way to work against it is population increase, in which the US has stagnated heavily.

But the mere fact that you have phrased it as a “functional model of government” is absolutely indicative of your own ignorance as to what workers rights even are and what leftism is. There are many extent leftist nations today. Social Democracy is a leftist ideology, and I find it pretty unlikely that you view the Social Democracies of Scandinavia in a negative light.

yeah, and a lot of the existing left leaning governments are based on liberalism, even china to some degree has a significant amount of liberalism. It’s just that they’re mostly authoritarian. You can implement leftist ideologies in a liberal government. It’s not hard or even impossible. Most of these places are already using some form of liberal government, that or authoritarian, which is less popular.

the USSR was really only successful during it’s period of industrialization, past that they didn’t advance much and really only coasted on oil until that started to crash and basically killed them. Stalin also had some, interesting ideas of leadership.

China is an authoritarian state, has been for a long time, mao was, arguably one of the worst leaders ever. Created a massive famine that killed millions just so he could make a single nuclear bomb.

I’m not particularly familiar with the rest, so i can’t really comment. I guess you could argue that the US has done bad things, but so has basically every super power. It’s not really anything new. The primary thing is that the US still exists, china also does, but they’re also having domestic issues as well.

China has a 90% rate of home ownership https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_in_China

china also recommends you invest like, the majority of all of your wealth into housing, which is a currently crashing market right now. So that’s for better or for worse.

anyway, these are all liberal based ideologies. I have nothing against any of them, except maybe nationalizing banking, but i’m not strictly against it, i just don’t know what that entails.

and yes, it can be done, with or without them, but we already have the structure of a liberal democracy, and the experience and knowledge required to make it work. I don’t know why so many lefties are hell bent and destroying it all in favor of a more unstable governance structure. Especially one that doesn’t seem to exist.

Maybe it’s all just yapping, and nobody believes anything they say, but that seems like a silly argument on it’s face imo.

yeah no i did a meme, i think the kids refer to these as a “funny”

the joke here being that “liberals did this” just a bit of banter.

but yeah, where the fuck is everybody?

i try, what can i say.

there is some truth here, but this is also effectively a strawman argument.

There is really poor social governance in america, both under republicans and democrats, because nobody knows how to construct it properly. Whether this is a conceited class war effort from the left, idk.

you mean like the communists? And japanese internment camps?

There’s definitely bad things in there, don’t get me wrong. But my original statement is still true.

You’re just wrong on this one. Palestine existed way before the Zionist movement. If a group of people move into your ancestral home and tell you,

i believe this argument is supported in religious texts from both sides, which is part of the funny thing. Though it is true that israel sort of just appeared recently, that is a genuine thing that did happen.

But going through texts, palestine and israel are one in the same. They occupy the same land, granted i’m not an expert, obviously so take this with a grain of salt, but that seems to be the ultimate starting point of this conflict.

i’m neither for or against it, personally i’m ambivalent, because i’m not middle eastern, jewish, nor do i live in the middle east, nor anywhere near it. It’s literally a waste of brain power to think about it.

Of course, arguing that i think killing people is good, is fucking stupid, obviously that’s bad. But there are reasons people are being killed, and i’m not delegating that problem to myself, considering i have literally no relation. You would have to find a genuinely insane person to agree with that fact, so there’s no point in even entertaining it on a factual basis.

Would it be nice if israel stopped bombing palestine? Yeah, would it be nice if the US stopped arming them? Yeah, does that ultimately make a difference in regards to the conflict? No. I don’t think anything you did today, even if you managed a complete ceasefire on good terms, would make a good faith effort to stop this conflict. It’s a brutal conflict, there is no easy to solve it.

Reverse ethnic cleansing of israel is not really a good solution either, for several reasons. Notably morals. Likewise yeeting palestine off the map isn’t productive either.

Ultimately though, both of the parties are willing to fight, and one of them just keeps losing, over and over. At some point they did this to themselves, and i’m not sure where that point is. (granted, israel has committed numerous war crimes throughout this conflict, i’m not absolving them of that one either, don’t worry) neither party is particularly intelligent here.

and a lot of it is also 20 years old, because not everything happened yesterday, it’s almost like shit happens in the past or something.

He spent decades campaigning on anti-crime discourse that prioritized higher budgets for police to spend targeting minority communities, a fact he was absolutely aware of.

this was during the 90s crime wave? Right?

Let his failure be a galvanizing lesson about all the failures of American liberalism. Leftism is the only true political opposition to fascism.

i have yet to see a single lefty produce a functional model of government. Liberals base their entire ideology off of a functional governmental model. You have an uphill battle in this regard.

legitimately biden admin has been the most productive admin in the US government since like, FDR maybe. There are probably a few others, but most have been rather boring.

judging by the results from the election, yeah no. Nothing would’ve changed it.

but liberal regulation is to try to maintain capitalist markets against their own failures.

wow you discovered why governments exist! Good job, do you want a gold star sticker? If the markets and economies didn’t fail, you wouldn’t need government, ever, for anything. The entire point of the government is to fix problems like this.

A homeless guy can’t just immediately become a billionaire by saying that there should be a competitor of genetic testing with 23andMe.

no, but if he’s a good public speaker, he might be able to get large investment rounds for a competitor to them, and then if the engineers and experts at that company, do a good job, he technically could become a billionaire, though that’s unlikely from just one success.

wow look another facetious argument.

I’m not pro “oligarchy” i’m pro liberal governance, oligarchy is by definition, not liberal. It gives excised power to people with money, that is by definition not liberal.

I’m pro capitalism because i think capitalism as a decentralized method of controlling the markets and businesses (i also think that regulation is important, because i don’t have brain damage like libertarians seem to, but for some reason anytime someone on the left hears that someone is a capitalist, they assume they must be anti-regulation also), is the best way to go about it. State controlled markets simply cannot work, unless someone proposes a white paper disproving me, i will maintain that point. But if you can deterministically create an economy, that supports the needs of everyone in that economy, feel free to disprove me. The problem is that you can’t because it’s such an incredibly complex problem.

pro market economy isn’t really a bad thing? I like people being able to buy and sell things, it’s good. It’s problematic sometimes, and rough other times, but that’s just how it is. The market will generally bring itself to a normalized position over time.

i am literally against elon musk being in the government, people in the government having and owning investments, i think it’s corruption plain and simple, i’m against corruption because it obviously leads to a negative outcome for the people the system is supposed to work for, again, liberalism does not like that.

Maybe it isn’t a failure of the goal, but that willing yourself into power isn’t going to magically make it happen.

it certainly won’t be the left doesn’t even have a plan of what to do when they get into power, the liberals don’t really either, but we at least know what we want governance to look like, and that’s a great start.

The left hates the current form of US government, and the things they want that they can clearly spell out, are not forms of governance, merely policy, so i’m not sure how they plan to get from step 2, to step 5 without falling in a hole somewhere.

yeah, and it created it because we were the ones voting lmao. We voted idiots into power, they stayed in power because we liked them, and they fucked up the government irreversibly.

It’s not that complicated, we did this to ourselves at the end of the day.

these are all great ideas. But it doesn’t make a functional government.

I’m not sure how anybody here is expecting to implement these if they hate liberal governance (the entire structure the US is based on) if you can’t even begin to theorize a functional structure of governance including those things.

hi, liberal here, we’ve been wondering this same thing since day one.

Curious why nobody is questioning it in the media.

We have no leftwing party in the United States

probably because the left is so dysfunctional they cant form a cohesive group that people want to vote for.

I no longer have the slightest hope of ever “winning” a prosocial government here. We’re too oligarch captured.

perhaps join the liberal fight, and fight against things like oligarchy, which liberals are not for, because it’s obviously bad for institutions. The better the institution is at helping the people, the better the people are.

I talk and comment to maintain my sanity in an insane capitalist hellscape I lack the power to change.

Liberalism is basically the only option you have here, realistically. Anything you can do to change the political tide and get people to care about the importance of good governance, is a good thing.

You could plot a coup and overthrow the government, but we’re not delusional, and that’s obviously not happening anytime soon so, might as well explore other routes.

neither did you apparently lol