I don't like Biden either, but anyone with half a brain knows there are two choices in the 2020 election. If we had a sane voting system, voting third party might be worth it, but as it stands, no one but you knows your favorite candidate exists and unless you want to become their campaign manager that will still be true in November. Even if you did, and even if you convinced two thirds of the people who would otherwise have voted for Biden to vote for your chosen candidate instead, Trump would still win because half the country voted for him and your guy only got a third. If you vote third party you might as well stay home.
Not voting isn't going to stop the genocide in Gaza. The US will continue to funnel them arms no matter which candidate wins this November. Trump practically campaigns on how much he hates the Jews and he's publicly told Israel to "finish up their war". He'll also make life a living hell for anyone who isn't a straight cisgender male back here at home.
A vote for a candidate is not an endorsement of them or their policies, it's a statement that you like their policies more than the other guy's, and "sticking it to liberals" and "refusing to support genocide" (that's not what voting for Biden is doing, by the way -- a vote for either candidate is a vote for genocide and a vote for neither is an endorsement of both) is not more important than keeping the furthest right politician America has ever seen out of office.
How incredibly privileged do you have to be to see an entire national election as what will happen in the Middle East and ignore Trump's campaign promises to wipe transgender Americans off the map, and further, to not realize that the same thing will happen in the Middle East regardless of which candidate wins?
I hate Biden as much as every other leftist here. But I'll still vote for him because Trump is worse. If there's a single bone in your body that cares about the lives of your trans friends you will too.
Who here is talking about the economy?
oh dont play coy
your "say vague implications, then backtrack when called out because you never used those exact words" shtick is almost as good as jordan peterson's.
no, you didn't talk specifically about economy, but it was implied I should not be cheering for amerikkka's fall because I probably live in a western country and would end up worse than I am - economically. Which is probably true. But also, both amerikkka's as well as my country's wealth is built on extreme exploitation of the third world, and the world at large would be better if we didn't exist.
not exactly true. don't discount europe's contributions to medicine, science, physics, chemistry, etc.
but yeah, the western world has been exploitative as fuck. we learned it from the romans, who colonized the shit out of us. it's a vicious cycle, but i think if we can just beat the fascists and corporations, we are the verge of a new enlightenment.
ROMANS? "colonized" by ROMANS????? lmao
nationalism and the concept of countries didn't truly exist until like 1700s. Sure, there were some special cases like Poland which has been a "country" (or rather, a united kingdom) since the 10th century, but even for these outliers, the idea of a nation comes waaaaaay after the fucking romans have existed, please stop embarassing yourself.
And europe's contributions to... "medicine, science, phycics, chemistry, etc", even if we discount the ones that were straight up stolen, is a non-sequitir when we are talking about what europe at large has done to its subjects. Do you think that advances in, for example, electric power production, are worth the countless colonial deaths in middle africa? Europe is pretty fascist still, living on the blood of the third world
and, just to send this one home: fuck you, western chauvinist, I hope your life mirrors that of the global lumpenproles, who have no choice but to take your country's neoliberal "fixes"
Listen here, you little shit. why don't you get back to me when you finish reading the history book instead of commenting when you're only halfway through? in case you missed it, the ENTIRE HISTORY of civilization is a long, continuous story of lesser peoples being conquered by larger peoples (whether in size or technological superiority). every tribe of people, at some point in their history, had a moment of 'first contact' with a larger, more 'advanced' civilization, and it almost ALWAYS ends with the underdog getting the shaft. europe is no exception. germanic tribes, prior to contact with the romans, were not so different from any other 'primitive' people. the romans colonized most of europe, which in turn spread roman technology and culture (hence the term 'romance' languages).
I never used the term country because the concept is bigger than the idea of the modern country. you really need to stop going on the offensive until you calm down some, junior.
first of all, the romans themselves learned a lot of what they knew from the near east, which were actually the first conquering city states - persian, babylonian, achaemenid, etc. history makes no attempt to hide the fact that most western society was greatly influenced by the near east and arab cultures, so using the term 'stolen' is dishonest, (along with calling europe out as being the worst colonizers). any actual scholar understands that the entire history of technology is the concept of 'standing on the shoulders of giants', meaning owing their achievements to the great minds that came before them, no matter where they came from.
fuck you too, kid. i guarantee you wouldn't say that shit to my face and walk away with all your teeth still in your skull. i'm just as radical as you are, son. i'm trying to tear down capitalism just like everyone that understands what the fuck is going on. you need to watch your mouth and pick up on who your allies are. just because i'm not grossly misinformed about world history doesn't mean we're not on the same side.
lmao tough guy, go back to watching your tv shows where you can pretend you are the cool muscle dude, punching whoever disagrees with you
you are an embarrassing loser, I feel second hand shame just reading your post, and I am the one arguing against you
that's not tough guy shit, loser. that's just regular old 'this is what happens when you disrespect someone' shit. it's just a statement of fact. would you let someone talk like that to your face? you're a feckless little twat if you would.
oh, and great way of sidestepping the acknowledgement of my history lesson, punk. can't even own up to being wrong about something? you're spineless, kid. walk away.