There’s a concept true. Just not an example. Technically it’s possible for sub atomic particles in deep space to randomly coaless as a Ruben sandwich. But you’re far more likely to see the evaporation of a super massive black hole.
Power corrupts. And sometimes there really is no point to arguing which shitty person is slightly less shitty than the other shitty person. The only true answer is not play, and that there shouldn’t be such positions of power. Anything else is calvinball.
You’ll notice that there are no real arguments that he isn’t a authoritarian/dictator. Just justification that certain people identify with him, so it’s okay. Or that because one cringe group of privileged people criticize him. All criticism against him is from similar cringe groups of people. The meme in a nutshell. A non sequitur.
Maduro absolutely is an authoritarian. As is Trump. I don’t agree with either one of them. But Trump absolutely means to fuck all the way off when it comes to continuing to meddle in South America. Argentina and Venezuela have enough problems of their own. They don’t need ours.
A meaningless platitude; as baseless as saying that lightning never strikes the same place twice. Liberals just think it’s true because they’ve created a system where people who were already corrupt gain power.
The only true answer is not play,
Yeah man, people should just “not play” real life. Fuck me, Western liberals really are the most privileged fuckers: all just a game to them.
You’ll notice that there are no real arguments that he isn’t a authoritarian/dictator.
???.
Other than the arguments people are making that he was democratically elected. Those are objectively arguments, regardless of your feelings on them.
Maduro absolutely is an authoritarian
Name one country that is oppositional to the West that you don’t “consider” authoritarian.
Nope. This is the problem I expected and received in spades. Saying that people are corrupt or easily corruptible. Is not saying equally corrupt. Pointing out that two individuals have behaved in authoritarian ways. Is not saying they’re equally authoritarian. Hell, I even called out Trump at the end. Mentioning leaving Maduro alone. Basically defending Maduro against him. But it was never what was actually said. It was what people needed to be said in their minds to defend people they identify with. All very entertaining. Like trying to have any sort of meaningful discussion with liberals.
“Calling out Trump” is clearly a rhetorical tactic to distract from your incorrect assessment of Maduro. It should be noted that you’re aligned with Trump when you say that, and it should give you pause.
You don’t seem to remember your own comment. You used the most extreme straw man, adorned with sarcasm, to asses Maduro…there was no reality in your reply.
Meh, the fact that you think you’re talking to liberals is pretty amusing. Why defend an argument when you can attack the messenger, right?
It isn’t groundbreaking to say that people can be corrupt to different degrees. What you failed to do is provide any meaningful explanation for why you believe Maduro to be corrupt, authoritarian, a dictator, etc. We gave ample evidence pointing to his popular support, the robust system of democracy in Venezuela, the rising commune movement and participatory economy, etc, while you called us bad-faith.
To me, it looks like you think yourself above having to back up your claims and as outside of the conversation looking in, rather than actually communicating with us. This is compounded by your commenting both here and on the MWoG threads, a known cryptofash gathering spot. Is this behavior of yours “good faith” in your eyes?
What makes Maduro an dictator? He’s popularly supported, was democratically elected, and is setting up participatory systems in the economy. I can agree that he’s “authoritarian” against capitalists and fascists, but that’s absolutely a good use of authority.
Secondly, there’s no evidence to the notion that “power corrupts,” just correlation. In systems like capitalism, corrupt leaders are pushed upwards because that’s profitable, it wasn’t the power that corrupted them but a system that selects for corruption.
Tell the cryptofash on MeanwhileOnGrad that they’re a hoot, btw.
Authoritarian is when you don’t capitulate to the imperial core’s will, and the less you capitulate the more authoritarian you are. If you’re genuinely democratic then you need a color revolution for sure, because the demos doesn’t want to be vassalized by imperialists.
I mean, we try to be patient but there’s a limit. You regurgitate imperial core hegemonic “common sense,” believing that you don’t need to back any of it up with evidence because it is knownit is knownit is known, while we bring bookshelves of evidence & arguments for our positions, which you won’t engage with.
I was absolutely good-faith. I don’t agree with describing Maduro as a dictator, and I gave my reasoning. Are you referring to the bit at the end, where GrammarPolice made a couple of posts on MWoG that you commented on? I think it’s fair to call that out.
Bad faith is when you put an ounce of critical thinking towards the thought-terminating cliches that a bunch of rich pedophiles use to demonize anyone who resists their compulsion to own the world
There’s a concept true. Just not an example. Technically it’s possible for sub atomic particles in deep space to randomly coaless as a Ruben sandwich. But you’re far more likely to see the evaporation of a super massive black hole.
Power corrupts. And sometimes there really is no point to arguing which shitty person is slightly less shitty than the other shitty person. The only true answer is not play, and that there shouldn’t be such positions of power. Anything else is calvinball.
You’ll notice that there are no real arguments that he isn’t a authoritarian/dictator. Just justification that certain people identify with him, so it’s okay. Or that because one cringe group of privileged people criticize him. All criticism against him is from similar cringe groups of people. The meme in a nutshell. A non sequitur.
Maduro absolutely is an authoritarian. As is Trump. I don’t agree with either one of them. But Trump absolutely means to fuck all the way off when it comes to continuing to meddle in South America. Argentina and Venezuela have enough problems of their own. They don’t need ours.
A meaningless platitude; as baseless as saying that lightning never strikes the same place twice. Liberals just think it’s true because they’ve created a system where people who were already corrupt gain power.
Yeah man, people should just “not play” real life. Fuck me, Western liberals really are the most privileged fuckers: all just a game to them.
???.
Other than the arguments people are making that he was democratically elected. Those are objectively arguments, regardless of your feelings on them.
Name one country that is oppositional to the West that you don’t “consider” authoritarian.
Your position is there has never been a benevolent leader? Power corrupts universally and equally? That’s nuts, quite frankly.
It’s absurd to suggest that Trump and Maduro are equivalent. They’re not equal in a single way, even if you believe they’re both bad.
Nope. This is the problem I expected and received in spades. Saying that people are corrupt or easily corruptible. Is not saying equally corrupt. Pointing out that two individuals have behaved in authoritarian ways. Is not saying they’re equally authoritarian. Hell, I even called out Trump at the end. Mentioning leaving Maduro alone. Basically defending Maduro against him. But it was never what was actually said. It was what people needed to be said in their minds to defend people they identify with. All very entertaining. Like trying to have any sort of meaningful discussion with liberals.
“Calling out Trump” is clearly a rhetorical tactic to distract from your incorrect assessment of Maduro. It should be noted that you’re aligned with Trump when you say that, and it should give you pause.
You don’t seem to remember your own comment. You used the most extreme straw man, adorned with sarcasm, to asses Maduro…there was no reality in your reply.
Meh, the fact that you think you’re talking to liberals is pretty amusing. Why defend an argument when you can attack the messenger, right?
It isn’t groundbreaking to say that people can be corrupt to different degrees. What you failed to do is provide any meaningful explanation for why you believe Maduro to be corrupt, authoritarian, a dictator, etc. We gave ample evidence pointing to his popular support, the robust system of democracy in Venezuela, the rising commune movement and participatory economy, etc, while you called us bad-faith.
To me, it looks like you think yourself above having to back up your claims and as outside of the conversation looking in, rather than actually communicating with us. This is compounded by your commenting both here and on the MWoG threads, a known cryptofash gathering spot. Is this behavior of yours “good faith” in your eyes?
What makes Maduro an dictator? He’s popularly supported, was democratically elected, and is setting up participatory systems in the economy. I can agree that he’s “authoritarian” against capitalists and fascists, but that’s absolutely a good use of authority.
Secondly, there’s no evidence to the notion that “power corrupts,” just correlation. In systems like capitalism, corrupt leaders are pushed upwards because that’s profitable, it wasn’t the power that corrupted them but a system that selects for corruption.
Tell the cryptofash on MeanwhileOnGrad that they’re a hoot, btw.
Authoritarian is when you don’t capitulate to the imperial core’s will, and the less you capitulate the more authoritarian you are. If you’re genuinely democratic then you need a color revolution for sure, because the demos doesn’t want to be vassalized by imperialists.
Bad faith responses from both of you. Bravo!
As opposed to your “no response”. You’ve got nothing because you know they’re right
I mean, we try to be patient but there’s a limit. You regurgitate imperial core hegemonic “common sense,” believing that you don’t need to back any of it up with evidence because it is knownit is knownit is known, while we bring bookshelves of evidence & arguments for our positions, which you won’t engage with.
I don’t think you deserve anything else, tbh
I was absolutely good-faith. I don’t agree with describing Maduro as a dictator, and I gave my reasoning. Are you referring to the bit at the end, where GrammarPolice made a couple of posts on MWoG that you commented on? I think it’s fair to call that out.
so many threads come with a call to action too, makes it impossible to take these losers seriously when they complain about brigading
Yep, it’s kinda funny when they get upset at getting called out for it too.
Bad faith is when you put an ounce of critical thinking towards the thought-terminating cliches that a bunch of rich pedophiles use to demonize anyone who resists their compulsion to own the world