Varysblackfyre321

I think maybe republicans were working under the “we are the silent majority” delusion with regards to RFK. That since they liked him, that people they like him, a lot of democrats will like him. That democrats, liberals, the left when pushed, pressured, or given license to they’d back conservative ideals so long as a more liberal or at least non-conservative aesthetic is utilized.

It’s probably not just leadership we don’t have to make Palestinians less reactionary than what data on their views suggests to acknowledge unfair treatment of them by Israel is unfair and should be stopped. Yeah this is all just some grand suicide bombing by Hamas.

That’s dangerous, this forsaking of truth for a perceived social utility will always be to the detriment to human survival and progression ultimately especially right now where we’re facing a climate catastrophe that’d be recognized as just a signal of the end times by many white American evangelicals I’m not saying attack everyone whose religious as primitive and reactionary. Many an atheist have been more intolerable to me than a theist. but fostering good faith debate, honest dialogue, about the validity of a religion or a supernatural or what have you is healthy and necessary to avoid accepting some really bad modes of thinking and dogma as absolutely true.

Yeah if you’d mentioned reading Ben Shapiro—who is probably the best incarnation of what Jewish person can be without going full Hitler was good— he still gets a ton of hate on the far right because he is Jewish. Hell during the Dailywire’s beef with Crowder, one of Crowder’s lackeys just flat out said during by tim pool(another far right media personality) something to the tune of at least Crowder wouldn’t be working for a Jew. the person you were engaging would have gone to the same route even though they and Shapiro probably agree on 99% of stuff with the biggest disagreement being whether Shapiro should killed for being Jewish. Even when they don’t when actually having to give specifics such as who they’re against and why their opposition is doing what they’re it’ll usually be the Jews who want their civilization through the spread of degeneracy(socially liberal values). Sometimes it is really is just a vibe though a vibe that’ll be more easily exploited by more ideologically coherent actors. I was watching a debate between a progressive and an Andrew Tate fan(a teenager, obvi), and when grilled on who the “Matrix” was he was unsure but when questioned if he believed the Jewish question and explained what that meant he was really receptive to the premise of it.

This rhetoric means absolutely nothing. Though actually can you explain why the uniparty, who in your mind got rid of trump, rigged the midterm elections, didn’t just maneuver to keep McCarthy(someone you’ve assigned as also a part of it) on as speaker and/or simply rigged it so democrats kept the house anyway and let republicans like McCarthy the excuse to purge Maga? The uniparty seems incredibly hyper competent and all powerful—except for the times they aren’t

I don’t think so. generally how I see it used it’s meant to castigate republicans for not being fascist enough, or just showing Trump enough fealty. The latter especially since it allows trump to be framed still as an outsider, a rabble rouser who needs to upend the entirety of American democracy in order to save the essence of America. Also the far right isn’t original, the funding or identity of what people comprise the uniparty will inevitably lead to many just going Jew and/or satanists who want an end to “western civilization”.

It can mean anything and nothing it’s a nebulous term to give some ethereal entity for right wing populists to rally against. In the end in many cases it’ll mean the Jews or people controlled by Jews

True. Hard times lead people to do truly stupid things

This would be compelling if Mcarthy didn’t constantly capitulate to the freedom cactus’s lunacy and break his promises to democrats.

Probably—but it’s funny to about for the time being.

An actual material reason to hate and attack a megacorp.

No. They just have a fundamentally different interpretation on what those teaching are. Matt Diualinity, a professional atheist debator and radio host was asked if fundamentalist Christian could be moved over by climate activism through some allusions to the idea of god wanting humanity to be Shepards of the earth. He put forward that a fundamentalist can and often do believe climate change simply isn’t an issue, god will usher in paradise before humans goes extinct and remarked how he’d be disgusted if an atheist tried to utilize what he’d perceived as a misinformed view of Christianity against an actual devout believer. A decent bit. Eh. I’m Not a Christian, not even a theist, just a secular humanist wary of attacking people on perceived authenticity towards a religious ideal.

Eh, I don’t like debating what x religious figure would see as appropriate or good especially one like Jesus where things can be muddied and one’s interpretations on what to do for a religion can be genuine even if destructive. Though I’ve seen a Christian nationalist just flat out say even if there wasn’t a god he’d still push for a Christian oriented theocracy and a number of people(lot of times fans of Jorden Peterson) just remark on the instrumental use of religion(completely giving up the game of caring for truth)

This needs to recognized—the framing by reactionaries is that they are merely expressing the will of local parents and/or that it’s primarily about the parents of a local district deciding what material is appropriate for their children. Like the states right argument for abortion it is a lie, a trick or rhetoric meant to placate moderates. I also reminded of people just making cross country trips to rant about local election commissions rigging things for democrats.

Constant coddling of the extreme right.

I’m just curious on how this will affect the senate judiciary

His defense is literally of course he lied—what did you expect?

https://news.sky.com/story/home-secretary-suella-braverman-to-question-if-refugee-convention-is-fit-for-our-modern-age-in-us-think-tank-speech-12970029 Actual demon I believe.

Oh you did the exact same thing as the interviewer and hyperfixated on her expressing frustration at the significant increase of barriers of even getting simple goods from countries in the EU(an actual material reason to be opposed to Brexit), and ignore her expressed desire for her grandchildren to enjoy the fruits of Europe, through being able to travel and prosper. If she had given a more flowery answer to the tune of “muh culture” like Brexiteers tend to do would you find it more respectable? If you think yes or no I don’t know what would be worse. Oh another thing she could have done that Brexiteers tend to do is declare she has a right to do something without explaining why she’s doing it.

I respect this woman’s efforts to try to help make her country stronger and a better place to be citizen even though she recognizes it’s an uphill battle. A really tough battle.

Is this guy seriously going to turn traitor to republicans? This shit rhetoric and excuse is only appealing to them

It’s probable this guy just got drunk off of airport liquor and when he saw the bill blamed Biden.

Or like Hunger games villains

Truthfully I don’t care if he dresses casual. But I hate the combo of a long hoodie and shorts. Too long on the top, too short below. Wear a hoodie and sweatpants or shorts with a tank top.