Pick a lane already!

People really don’t like it when I do.

That is not the same as me wanting trans people to have no rights at all.

And what I said was that you wanted to take away rights, not have trans people have no rights at all.

You called me a liberal. That must mean you’re talking through the American lens

Lmao, wtf?

And you can’t abbreviate it because SAM is already taken by surface-to-air missiles.

First off, you again frame this entirely around “expanding the coalition” to include the perpetrators while ignoring how it excuses (practically speaking) their victims. This is pure chauvanism, it’s failing to recognize both the inherent humanity of the victims of imperialism, and their ability to contribute to a cause. I’d rather come across as a “preachy weirdo” to war profiteers than as an imperialist to the victims. When you describe this as “anyone who doesn’t share [your] exact lifestyle and worldview” you are minimizing what’s going on and trying to make it a subjective issue when it’s not. That makes it clear that you don’t actually share any kind of moral outrage at them, that you don’t share my goals at all, and you’re just trying to pretend that it’s an issue of “tactics” because you don’t want to openly voice what you actually think.

Second, this babying, whitewashing shit doesn’t really work to achieve anything. At best, you might get them to vote for a more polite warmongerer, while continuing to do real, tangible harm on a daily basis - but most likely it won’t even do that. The way to change people’s minds is not through that kind of nonsense, it is by directly confronting them and bringing the conflict directly into the open. This is exactly what MLK said:

Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation.

Your passive, whitewashing, can’t we all just get along approach is counterproductive and flies in the face of creating the necessary tension required to change people’s behavior. Which again, I don’t think you mind, because you’re not actually opposed to what they’re doing.

Second of all, where did I ever claim to want to take trans people’s rights away? Please stop putting words in my mouth

Do you think trans people should continue to have the right to participate in sports in accordance with the gender they identify as, yes or no?

Third of all, I am not a liberal and I’m not American. You couldn’t know that, but not every person on the internet is American nor do they live their lives through the American lens.

Where on earth did I imply you’re American? Stop putting words in my mouth.

It is tactically useful to point out their personal culpability, though. Very much so. Guilt is an incredibly powerful weapon. You just don’t want to wield it because you care more about protecting their feelings than you do about getting them to change.

Look at how much influence the Catholic Church has been able to wield in history by using guilt, and theirs wasn’t even based on the truth. What do you mean it’s “not tactically useful?”

Even if that were true, you’re simultaneously claiming that these people are willing to sabotage their company, and that they’d be alienated by saying that the work their company does is evil. That doesn’t make any sense.

Just because they don’t literally make guns and bomb doesn’t make them any less evil.

It actually does.

I’m not “locking anyone out of the movement” by calling them evil war profiteers. If they want to join the movement, they can simply stop being evil war profiteers. I am simply telling the truth.

On the other hand, by welcoming and babying such people, you are alienating their victims. It makes it abundantly clear where your priorities lie. Why would a victim of these war profiteers want to be a part of a movement that whitewashes those who perpetrate or enable the violence they’ve suffered?

What is your vision for what “being part of the movement” would even look like for these people? Unless they’re taking direct action to sabotage and support their industry (in which case they will likely be caught and fired), they are undoubtedly doing far more harm there than they could possibly offset by voting or attending some protest.

War profiteers aren’t generally interested in fighting the state. But even to your point, obviously if you want to convince such people to fight the state, you should be criticizing their role as war profiteers. If you don’t call out what they’re doing for the evil that it is, then why would you expect them to “throw sand in the gears?”

Bold of you to assume they don’t see France as an enemy.

I’d rather have solidarity with the people the bombs get dropped on than with the people building the bombs. Include war profiteers in your “solidarity” and shifts it away from class lines and into nationalism.

>post complaining about lack of tolerance for different political views

>looks inside

>“Why do people get so mad when I just want to take trans people’s rights away”

I am begging liberals to understand that this “trans people in sports issue” is not about sports. It’s being pushed with tons of money by far-right groups as a wedge issue and it’s not going to stop there. You are doing their work for them. Stop looking at this as some far off, philosophical abstraction, and start looking at it in terms of what it is: a war.

He shall judge between the nations, and shall arbitrate for many peoples; they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

But what about the jobs??

In what universe? As shitty as Amazon is, it’s still way better than being a war profiteer.

I want it to keep falling just because it’d be really funny if “The DOW is over 50 thou” goes down in history as the moment it began falling into oblivion.

That sounds like a good reason to preemptively shift criticism to Vance.

Driving requires you to be constantly alert, and if you screw up or don’t react fast enough, you can straight up die because of it. On a bus, you can be on your phone, read a book, take a nap, whatever. Driving is a much worse experience and even if public transit takes more time, that’s time that can be used doing things. That’s before factoring the cost (the car itself, gas, insurance), the environmental impact, parking, etc.

Lots of people treating the Torah as exclusively Christian in here.

The first thing you said that was false was that the US is democratic. Now you’re trying to imply that the poll I mentioned was not objective or based on reality.

The poll does not break things down by ethnicity, as far as I’m aware. But you’re once again trying to move the goalposts because I never claimed it did. Uighurs make up less than 1% of their population, so a “sampling bias” that excluded them wouldn’t move the needle much, even if it existed.