Damn, beat me to it. Needs a shot of the bug, though. Those bugs are a great metaphor for our current ruling class.
Verhoeven: make these protagonists as fascist as possible. Even make them from Argentina. Make it as obvious as possible
Average viewer: They just really wanna kill bugs, man. Is that so bad?
What does being from Argentina have to do with being a fascist?
A lot of Italians and Germans went there after WW2 (to hide from their war crimes). You’ll see a lot of Italian and German last names down there.
That’s a stereotype, and complete misinformation.
Most germans in Argentina were Volga germans, regular Germans, Jewish Germans and antinazi Germans who arrived in different waves before WW2. The nazis who fled to Argentina are estimated to be 5,000 vs 1.6 million who moved there between 1919 and 1932. Argentina was chosen so a tiny number could hide among a large preexisting population of the same ethnicity, they are not the origin of that large number.
It’s the same story with Italians: 2 million arrived between 1880 and 1920, before WW2. When fascism arose in Italy, immigration slowed down to a trickle. After the war only 380,000 arrived, a smaller number than the original wave and their descendants.
He’s right, though. America does need to take this seriously. And elect all of them. To save the Republic.
Save the republic from… AFFORDABLE CHILDCARE!!!
Please pray for the business models in this dire time.
Back in my day we licked insurance boot and sucked billionaire cock. Who wants to live in a world of affordable healthcare? THE DANGER IS RAEL!
Ohhh noooes, he’s coming to lower your grocery bills!!! Hide yo kids, hide yo wife!
From literally the guy posting the tweet. Fuck off with your “protection program”.
I love how upset they get about Mandani. His crime, not been corrupt. Oh, the horror.
They will quite literally lock up socialist political dissenters before they allow any sort of socialist foothold to take.
How quaint that you think they will just lock them up.
“Ya know they murdered X and tried to blame it on Islam” “You know they went after King when he spoke out on Vietnam”
No, actually they got rid of King after he started speaking about socialist/redistribution policies.
Good point
It’s okay, MAGAs. When we get free health care for ALL Americans, you’ll get it too.
When we have free day care, you’ll get it, too.
When we have free college or trade school, you’ll get it, too.
No thanks necessary, not that we were expecting any. Clearly you weren’t raised properly.
They don’t care. They will starve their own children if they think even more colored children will starve.
Didn’t they rally to get rid of Obama care, then cry foul when it turned out it was the same as the ACA?
Even if Americans achieve these things, the next Republican government would slogan them out of existence
Obamacare and Medicare are wildly different.
I think what you’re surely referencing is that the so-called Obamacare was the ACA, and somehow some of the benefits of the ACA got through to their awareness - so they supported the ACA but were against Obamacare, which was… the nickname for the ACA.
Oh I didn’t realize they were different! Thanks for the correction
<3 I was pretty sure I knew what you were talking about though, so at least your argument was clear and salient :)
I hate the MAGACHUD CHUDSERVATIVES
Save the Republic from what, Mike?
Fulfilling our moral obligations to one another as Americans? Our duty to the sick, to the elderly, to the poor, as commanded by your God? Honoring the sacrifices of our soldiers by actually living up to the Constitution?
I am a Mamdani!
I don’t ever hear why the left leaning policies are bad, just that they are & should be hated. All I see is right leaning policies result in a reduction of liberties. What liberties would I be trading for left leaning policies? Which one isn’t a nanny state that tells me what I can and can’t do in situations that do not interfere with the liberty and health of another person? I’d prefer my tax dollars go to PSAs about good responsible parenting instead of having to prove my age to join a social media site. Parental control technology already exists. Tell people to use it.
This • 1000.
People gotta start getting Socratic about everything, but especially their news and politicians.
We’ve lost many critical thinkers in our time, with clickbait titles (many don’t really read the articles), “talking points” instead of substantive conversations, and lack of reading good literature (which I believe help to spur creative thought and can lead people to question things more often).
Obey!
Yeah! If anyone’s thinking of answering my questions, don’t. Ask your own. Separate opinions, facts, and feelings.
Pedophile protector says what?
Will America finally get a proper left wing?
Anytime soon? Probably not.
But as someone who is decently US-left, I think that’s not so important. If we can get people to the point of fighting for equal rights, human rights, universal health care, wealth equality, and social safety nets, we can worry about what’s next after that.
For fuck’s sake, we’re dealing with fascism. Just getting us back to merely right-wing-centric politics would be a magickal feat.
Don’t we typically stop once educated white liberals are happy, and go to brunch? I’m worried that’s what’s next without a change in how democracy works.
I feel like we should know better than getting our hopes up, but fuck… this actually feels promising!
Not if tankies have anything to say about it!
(Please vote.)
Even if they get it, there’s still the two party system. DSA would have to wipe the floor with the Dems nationwide, correct?
The only wings it needs are B-52 wings and lots of bombs, brother! yeehaw!
Other than the woman in Colorado and Mamdani, who else is there? I keep hearing about this wave of democratic socialists, but 2 people are not a trend.
When has Republican fear mongering literally ever been based in truth or reality?
Do bear in mind that the root of the problem in the US is our oligarchs. We must deal with them FIRST, or it doesn’t matter what else we do. That’s why half (give or take) of the Democratic party is useless - because they have been corrupted by the oligarchs as well.
I don’t care the terms people use - we’re now calling it Democratic Socialism. Whatever we call it, we need to drive support for that until that part of the party can take over. But it will not happen if we don’t remove the corrupting pressure from the oligarchs.
I would argue the root of the problem is the systems and institutions that enable these oligarchs to exist in the first place and give them the perceived social authority over this country.
The French Revolution didn’t start after they removed the nobility, it started when the people began to unite and build alternatives to the systems they were living under which helped to establish mutual aid and other community networks of support that allowed them to eventually abandon their reliance on the systems of their oppressors.
My only counter is that the tools were put in place by the people with the money. So I have no disagreement with you - I see that distinction as unimportant because I believe we must deal with the rich and their tools already, so… I agree with you :)
Technically oligarchy means rule by the few, but I think it helps to specify how they became the “few”: divine title, descendance, or money? It’s money so they should be called plutocrats.
Part of the benefit of “oligarch” is to point out how common this problem really is, just with different flavors. After this batch is gone, we’ll need to remain vigilant against future oligarchs from any source.
Yes, for about a generation, then it becomes a boring footnote in high school history class… and human nature re-asserts itself.
Human nature is where material conditions and social values intersect. A society that places mutual responsibility and collective wellbeing over wealth and status would likely regard greed, domination, and hedonism as character flaws rather than virtues. Those who exploit others for personal gain would be held with the same contempt as other kinds of antisocial behavior. In short, self-serving opportunists would be seen as criminals rather than as being especially clever or successful. The traits a culture rewards are the traits it reproduces.
The common belief that human beings are naturally selfish and chaotic says more about our own values than it does about human psychology. In reality, the overwhelming majority of people are deeply prosocial; we seek belonging, reciprocity, and meaningful community. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, we have an opportunity to outgrow the tribalism and rigid hierarchies that has characterized our species’ infancy, and foster cultures that reward cooperation instead of competition as the highest expression of human nature.
If we keep trying the same thing and keep failing in the same way, then it’s not bad evil humans having a terrible nature, it’s that the thing we keep trying is a poor design given human nature.
Who or what is this Republic these clowns are always talking about?
545 people
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The president does.
You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? They are the leader of the majority party. They and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted – by present facts – of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can’t think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red.
If the Marines are in IRAN , it’s because they want them in IRAN .
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it’s because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like “the economy,” “inflation,” or “politics” that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
In June, Mamdani said:
“For far too long our party has seen its job as managing decline instead of delivering material change for working people. It has seen its job as explaining why we cannot instead of showing how we can.”
I think the problem is systemic. These representatives are vulnerable not just to bribery, but to threats as well. The core concept of giving your political power to another person introduces a principal-agent problem.
Campaign Finance Reform is the issue from which ALL other issues flow. It should be the absolute top priority for our entire government, starting with ending the legal bribery of Lobbying. Any excuses they offer for keeping it need to be instantly dismissed. It is the main cancer in our government, and has to be ruthlessly carved out and destroyed.
Yes, Representative Republics are designed to be that way, which is why they won’t solve their inherent systemic issues unless you manage to get a candidate in that replaces the whole thing with either a modernized Democracy (as in people have power instead of representatives) or rips out the least democratic aspects out of the system and replaces them with something more democratic.
How Money Works notes there are about 100,000 lobbyists in Washington defining reality for all these elected representatives. And that’s just the ones with Lobbyist on their business card. Plenty more are unofficial but have the occupation of bribing government officers.
This is one of the reasons we see so many Let them eat cake moments.
Uhm… Gross oversimplification.
The complexities of decision-making and reasoning seem to be utterly lost in your view. Politicians are often extremely incompetent and the decisions are still difficult and will never make everyone happy, even if they were competent.
And stuff like: “the all don’t want taxes” is just plainly stupid as a statement. In a stable society taxes are simply a way of financing society and community. They are not optional unless you afe asking for anarchy which would be even worse than the shit we have now.
Who’s paying the taxes is optional. That burden should fall on the wealthy, not the lower middle class.
I would argue that the central issue is not which class bears the greater tax burden, but the persistence of the class system itself. I am not advocating for abolishing cash or personal property, but am questioning an economic order with declining social mobility and where the circumstances of one’s birth increasingly determines the opportunities available throughout life. I think it’s more accurate to say that we have castes instead of classes.
As wealth compounds across generations, so too does access to property, capital, education, and influence. The result is that assets become concentrated within a relatively small portion of society, while others find it increasingly difficult to establish any foundations for security and prosperity. Every person should begin from a place where opportunity is genuinely shared rather than inherited.
Whatever you want to call it. The point was that the wealthy should be the ones paying for the public good. Not those who are unfairly burdened by it.
I think you missed the point that there shouldn’t be a class of wealthy who exist separately from the rest of society in the first place. Arguing over what their responsibility to the public is only serves to legitimize their existence when the focus should be on the elimination of it.
That could be achieved by taxing them sufficiently.
Taxing the owning class doesn’t remove the owning class. It does nothing to dismantle the unjust systems of ownership and the governance which maintains its continued exploitation of the working class.
