The duality of man
-
Well, America wasn't America yet exactly 100 years ago (being a young country and all)
Huh? What are you talking about?
In the context of aggressive foreign policy where we bomb the shit out of people... They are probably referring to how in the 1910s USA was stumbling through an incursion into Mexico to fight rebels / raiders. As we joined WW1, some saw us as a rowdy militia, like cowboys. We had to borrow materiel because we weren't yet a proper war-machine like European countries were. Exactly 100 years ago that wasn't the case though. Yet there would still be quite a ways to go until the era of "top 3 air forces" and super carriers patrolling the globe while drones blow 'terrorists' to smithereens.
-
Seriously. Tired of folks trying to act like they’re on the same level of shitiness. Magats are in a league of their own.
Accepting either presented level of shittiness is what got us here in the first place.
Trump couldn't have done it without Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or Kamala Harris. The House Reps would struggle more, if it wasn't for people like Schumer. If Democrats had called out AIPAC over the past twenty years instead of drooling over the opportunity to aid and abet war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide for them, we'd never had the whole "yeah i am voting for the slow genocide" argumentation being somehow "acceptable".
And the most important thing is that the current Democrats are not going to be a driver for positive change. They are still fighting against moderate progressives like Mamdani and pushing for neoliberal reactionaries like Newsom instead.
-
Accepting either presented level of shittiness is what got us here in the first place.
Trump couldn't have done it without Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or Kamala Harris. The House Reps would struggle more, if it wasn't for people like Schumer. If Democrats had called out AIPAC over the past twenty years instead of drooling over the opportunity to aid and abet war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide for them, we'd never had the whole "yeah i am voting for the slow genocide" argumentation being somehow "acceptable".
And the most important thing is that the current Democrats are not going to be a driver for positive change. They are still fighting against moderate progressives like Mamdani and pushing for neoliberal reactionaries like Newsom instead.
Maybe, but they're not helping Republicans as much as people like you
-
This post did not contain any content.
The democrat would be too scared of their own shadow to even leave their house
-
This is propaganda enabling the far right to win future elections.
What's worse, bombing the middle east, or calling the Democrats out for bombing the middle east?
-
This is propaganda enabling the far right to win future elections.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Ah yes the checks notes
propaganda of admitting that the opposition also bombs the middle east, marginally less so than the far right.(Although some dems are doing all they can to edge closer to the far right)
-
Maybe, but they're not helping Republicans as much as people like you
-
In the context of aggressive foreign policy where we bomb the shit out of people... They are probably referring to how in the 1910s USA was stumbling through an incursion into Mexico to fight rebels / raiders. As we joined WW1, some saw us as a rowdy militia, like cowboys. We had to borrow materiel because we weren't yet a proper war-machine like European countries were. Exactly 100 years ago that wasn't the case though. Yet there would still be quite a ways to go until the era of "top 3 air forces" and super carriers patrolling the globe while drones blow 'terrorists' to smithereens.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I'd say 1898 was the point USA stepped up into the big leagues after their victory in the Spanish-American War. But that's arguable, I also like your point.
However, "exactly 100 years" was 1925, so 7 years after WW1 and unquestionable when USA was absolutely a very serious global power.
-
What's worse, bombing the middle east, or calling the Democrats out for bombing the middle east?
Calling the Dems out for bombing the middle East while it is not a partisan issue.
-
You understand that doesn't contradict my point in any way right?
-
This is propaganda enabling the far right to win future elections.
When you look into the history of this country it's fucking horrific. And not just in the obvious "we used to have slaves" or the "we bombed the Vietnamese" way.
-
Seriously. Tired of folks trying to act like they’re on the same level of shitiness. Magats are in a league of their own.
This country has been going to shit since Ronald fucking Reagan. Yes, that means Republicans are terrible. That also means the Democrats are either complicit or powerless to stop it.
-
When you look into the history of this country it's fucking horrific. And not just in the obvious "we used to have slaves" or the "we bombed the Vietnamese" way.
This is not related to the post. And pointless.
-
Republican today should say “four, and let’s bomb the Middle East twice!”
"Let's bomb the middle east and also blue states!"
-
You understand that doesn't contradict my point in any way right?
You don't understand how Democratic politicians that have directly funded trump and normalized right-wing positions (immigration is a great example of such) are far more responsible for Trump winning the election than online commenters who criticize the Democratic Party due to it's proximity to the Republican Party?
Capitalists are responsible for the rise of fascism. Both parties are beholden to the interests of their capital donors, they simply play different roles to uphold that interest.
Progressives who criticize the Democratic party for failing to represent their constituents, who are supposed to be working class Americans, not billionaire donors, are the ones applying pressure on the Democratic party to actually fight against fascism instead of against progressive candidates and policies. The Democratic Establishment will not change without overwhelming pressure from working class Americans
-
This is not related to the post. And pointless.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yes it is, the "reality" for 100 years ago was a lie.
Literally 100 years ago was the build up to the great depression. The side was "workers should be able to eat" versus "the workers shouldn't have rights"
Fast forward 40 years and it was "it's okay to sit next to black people" vs. "Races should not mix and any attempt to do so should be met with extreme violence"
-
This post did not contain any content.
Too not American to understand
-
This post did not contain any content.
Electrolytes are what plants crave.
-
This is not related to the post. And pointless.
It isn’t possible to have a coherent political discussion without knowledge of the history that got us here. Dismissing it as pointless only ensures it will be repeated.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Why would you pick the issue they both agree on for the bottom panel?
