queermunist she/her

Isn’t it more like how a rock is immune to being puked on?

It’s still covered in vomit and can make other people sick, it just can’t get sick from it.

You can’t dismantle systems of oppression without liquidating the oppressors.

We didn’t end slavery by asking nicely, it took a civil war. Then, because we didn’t kill every slave owner and seize all of their wealth, they just reconstituted themselves as landlords. They defeated Reconstruction, regained power, rehired all their old slaves back as sharecroppers, and the oppression continued. The old slave catchers just became police, and they rounded up Black people and then put them on chain-gangs to be slaves for the State. Even today we have prison slaves working the fields.

If every slave owner was hanged and their family’s wealth redistributed to their former slaves, none of this would have happened.

If you don’t oppress the oppressors they just come back and resume their oppression. You have enemies. Start acting like it.

Our ends require oppressing the bourgeoisie.

Well yeah they’re haunted.

<to the tune of the song of the same name by the Red Hot Chili Peppers>

This thread picked a fight with me, the OP is literally calling me evil.

Then you continued the fight, with "uncompromising shrieks” and “absurd” and “childish.”

Then I fight back and you cry about me picking fights.

Talking to you is self harm. Blocked.

Your employer already governs your livelihood through your paycheck.

That’s why employers should be elected, not just be rich people that can afford to hire workers.

Libya was once the most prosperous country in Africa, after the murder of Gaddafi it collapsed into ruin and now has an open slave market. It’s basically in an ongoing low-level civil war, with two different governments claiming control over the country. This is why there are people dying in the Mediterranean trying to escape.

I really hope you just didn’t know.

I call people fascists when they support genocide, and I am not willing to compromise on it.

I’m honestly a little baffled

Oh look at that, you’re talking down to me again. It’s fine when you do it, though. It’s only a problem when I respond.

“venezuela should NOT be run by nicolas maduro”

Is Libya better off without Qaddafi?

This conversation started with you calling people like me “uncompromising shrieks” and it has continued with you calling people like me “absurd” and “childish.” But, when I push back, it’s all “we don’t need that” and “I don’t appreciate it”.

If you can beat up on me but I have to be nice back, I don’t really see the point of this conversation. Very .world behavior.

Calm down? I have no idea what you mean.

I gave the example of felony murder to show that this isn’t just some exaggerated, non-standard way to judge crimes. It’s not just a US thing, it comes from common law. There’s similar law in Australia and Canada as well, and though it’s no longer practiced officially in the UK there’s the concept of “joint enterprise” whereby being involved in a murder still imputes criminal liability with similar legal outcomes.

It’s not a world-wide way to conceive of crime, but it’s pretty normal. Hardly an exaggeration.

Besides, is it so unreasonable to apply legal standards from the US to Parties within the US?

If I give a gun to someone and they kill someone knowing their intent beforehand, I’m guilty by association. Why is that not enough?

Because if you didn’t give them a gun, they wouldn’t have been able to kill as many people.

If the number of people they can kill on their own is X, and the number of people they can kill with your help is X+1, then you killed that +1 even if you didn’t pull the trigger. They only died because you helped, which means you killed them

If you knowingly help plan and facilitate a murder by your actions, you are a murderer. This is how most people view murder.

You’re the odd one out.

Fascinating. You realize no one thinks this way, right? There’s a reason for that.

If you facilitate the murder weapon and then protect the murderer from consequences so they can keep killing, you are just as guilty of murder as if you held the gun yourself. That’s how felony murder charges work. If there’s a shootout during a robbery and someone dies, the getaway driver still gets a murder charge despite not holding one of the guns. Where’s the exaggeration?

Would you say the same thing about Republicans and Trump? They’re not the ones firing the guns either.

Democrats have a really important role in supporting the Palestinian genocide, what are you even talking about?

Do you think Biden was actually working tirelessly for a ceasefire? Come on. It’s a bipartisan project!

So, what’s the non-authoritarian alternative that you support? Because Democrats, Labour, etc are all pro-surveillance, pro-incarceration, pro-war, and pro-genocide. But when I point this out I’m doing purity tests! Isn’t that funny? I think it’s funny. Not like ha-ha funny, but like, there’s an absurdity to the fact that my criticisms are purity testing but yours are “reasonable.”

You haven’t had a problem because your politics align with .world - it’s a good match. You’re allowed criticism within a set of safe boundaries that do not challenge power. If you start talking about not voting for Democrats, though, they get a lot more hostile.

Same.

Now, explain why a “tankie” isn’t merely a leftist that failed one of your purity test.

Meanwhile, Rule #2 for this community seemingly doesn’t exist.

Why did you even leave Reddit?