US Politics: Wondering the Acosta

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

Does anyone honestly believe that any of the Dems are actually advocating for no oversight, no regulation, no management open borders?????????  Really??????????????

In this very thread we see posters declare support for the idea of open boarders, and I don’t think they’re disgenuine. You’re kinda painting yourself in a corner by taking on the stance no Democrat wants open boarders instead of just saying such thoughts aren’t that popular in the party.

29 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Welcome to Earth? There will be massive famines and droughts when global warming starts to really bite. The U.S. is in pretty good position to survive (can't wait until we start pumping the oceans to the inland seas that poor people are gonna dig in exchange for a food and water ration) but if you think a fucking ounce of wheat will go to India or China or Africa or South then you've never met an American. 

 

My point was that your belief of there being a lack of resources for even current population of the world is simply wrong.  Your snark is needless and comes across as petulant. 

What you just described in the bolded  only strengthens my point-that is the greed/selfishness of those in power choose to allocate resources, how to use resources  that is the problem and not a lack of resources. 

29 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Sure, if we have the surplus there will be broad support for humanitarian aide where needed. And the other party will adopt a stance against it. Then gridlock. Then no humanitarian aide.

Again, what’re your describing is Capitalist greed/selfishness causing easily preventable misery. It has nothing to do with a lack of resources. We’ve had a global surplus of food for literally decades now:https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/the-global-food-surplus/a-15452289

You were wrong in pointing any stock in this idea of the world suffering overpopulation. 

[Jace, Extat]

1 minute ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 

My point was that your belief of there being a lack of resources for even current population of the world is simply wrong.  Your snark is needless and comes across as petulant. 

What you just described in the bolded  only strengthens my point-that is the greed/selfishness of those in power choose to allocate resources, how to use resources  that is the problem and not a lack of resources. 

Again, what’re your describing is Capitalist greed/selfishness causing easily preventable misery. It has nothing to do with a lack of resources. We’ve had a global surplus of food for literally decades now:https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/the-global-food-surplus/a-15452289

You were wrong in pointing any stock in this idea of the world suffering overpopulation. 

Nah, not gonna let this go. Vast regions of the Earth already can't support their human populations. They don't have water in Indian hospitals right now.

Nations that do have access to surplus resources will hoard them. That is a fact. Billions of people in areas that will be ravaged by unlivable heat and drought will starve to death because their environments cannot support the population. That is a fact-based projection.

People will die because there are too many humans in their locality to spread water and food rations in a manner that does not lead to mass deaths. Ergo, death due to overpopulation in their regions.

I completely agree that we have all the tools we need to support life on this planet in a sustainable way indefinitely. Climate change shouldn't even be more than a moderate global concern to recognize and address the sins of the past.

But again, welcome to Earth.

[Bonnot OG]

Just want to put it out there. Willem Van Spronsen is the dead name of Emma Durutti. Looks like she was trans. 

 

 

[Jace, Extat]

1 minute ago, Bonnot OG said:

Just want to put it out there. Willem Van Spronsen is the dead name of Emma Durutti. Looks like she was trans. 

 

 

Who is Emma Drurtti?

[Zorral]

18 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

In this very thread we see posters declare support for the idea of open boarders, and I don’t think they’re disgenuine. You’re kinda painting yourself in a corner by taking on the stance no Democrat wants open boarders instead of just saying such thoughts aren’t that popular in the party.

That's not a word in English or any other language. Do you mean "disingenuous" -- not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does." That doesn't seem right for what you are trying to say either.

If these people are saying that we don't need systems, processing and programs for immigration, that's not intelligent either.  I don't leave my doors open for just anybody to walk into my home either.  And neither does anybody else.  Which is why I have been believing that most people who say 'open borders' who are not republicans mean really, let's have a method and systems to process people in a humane way, hire more lawyers, open more court rooms, and not put people in prisons that will kill them during the process.  Republicans call that open borders.

[Bonnot OG]

54 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Who is Emma Drurtti?

The woman that was shot and killed by Tacoma police for trying to sabotage all of the GEO vehicles outside of the ICE concentration camps in Tacoma. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

52 minutes ago, Triskele said:

For the longest time I avoided right wing sites but for some reason today wondered what they were on about.  Both Daily Caller and Brietbart seem excited about this poll/story on Axios presumably because they really don't like AOC and Omar but also because it hints at growing divisions within the party.   

And I assume because people recognizing these two as the face of the Democratic Party only hurts it given their immense unpopularity with groups needed to keep Democratic control of the house. But who cares about those groups apparently besides people who want to win. Progressive! 

54 minutes ago, Zorral said:

That's not a word in English or any other language. Do you mean "disingenuous" -- not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does." That doesn't seem right for what you are trying to say either.

Sigh, look you clearly got the message of my post, so it seems juvenile to quibble over errors in grammar. 

56 minutes ago, Zorral said:

If these people are saying that we don't need systems, processing and programs for immigration, that's not intelligent either.  I don't leave my doors open for just anybody to walk into my home either.  And neither does anybody else.  Which is why I have been believing that most people who say 'open borders' who are not republicans mean really, let's have a method and systems to process people in a humane way, hire more lawyers, open more court rooms, and not put people in prisons that will kill them during the process.  Republicans call that open borders.

I get the impression most  just mean what @Bonnot OG meant when he said “free-movement for all.” You know actual open-boarders. If currency isn’t bound by boarders why should people be, is a question I have seen in advocation of it. 

[felice]

So, Trumperdoo has some self-awareness* after all: https://imgflip.com/i/35npbt

* Nah, he just doesn't realise what he's saying when he talks about where "“Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen" originally came from.

[Raja]

Axios gonna Axios with that poll, it's hot garbage.

[Bonnot OG]

Yup. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

11 minutes ago, Raja said:

Axios gonna Axios with that poll, it's hot garbage.

Do actually have a problem with the methodology used to take the poll? 

Because, if not the findings shouldn’t be simply ignored

[Jace, Extat]

31 minutes ago, Bonnot OG said:

The woman that was shot and killed by Tacoma police for trying to sabotage all of the GEO vehicles outside of the ICE concentration camps in Tacoma. 

Ah... the one who it seems was throwing around explosive devices? I fucking hate police of all stripes, but I can't condemn ICE for shooting someone armed with bombs and actively deploying said weapons.

Cutting the fuel or brake lines, fuck yeah. Slash the tires to your heart's content. Chaining yourselves to the wheels, risky but badass. Throwing bombs at federal property? Things that cause (by definition) unstable reactions? That's a no-go for Jace unless you have the active backing of an armed revolution that consists of the oppressed majority.

 

[The Anti-Targ]

On 7/14/2019 at 6:16 AM, Jace, Basilissa said:

 

I think it's sick and disgustingly selfish to have children and subject to them to lives that will be... just not particularly nice. But lots of humans can't overcome the most basic impulse inherent to every living organism so I'm not worried about the survivability of the species at all.

As a species, we can't afford not to keep having some children. There may be some sustaintability issues with reproducing at this time because we haven't transitioned to a low-impact civilization yet, but continue reproducing we must. Unless you are advocating an extinction policy, which it doesn't seem you are.

Also ultimately the only resource that limits us is energy, how much we produce and how we produce it. Once we crack the energy nut we're pretty much golden.

 

[Jace, Extat]

6 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

As a species, we can't afford not to keep having some children. There may be some sustaintability issues with reproducing at this time because we haven't transitioned to a low-impact civilization yet, but continue reproducing we must. Unless you are advocating an extinction policy, which it doesn't seem you are.

Also ultimately the only resource that limits us is energy, how much we produce and how we produce it. Once we crack the energy nut we're pretty much golden.

 

Yeah, like I said I don't worry about the species because people will keep fucking and reproducing. The implication was meant to be that far too many think their genes must be passed down, as opposed to advocating universal sterilization.

[DMC]

38 minutes ago, Triskele said:

Why?  Was it badly written / conducted?   But then if it is it's probably more an issue with the Dems who were pushing it. 

I haven't seen the poll, but let's remember how all this started:

Quote

The tweet was sent in response to something Chakrabarti [AOC's CoS] had tweeted two weeks prior about Democrats accepting the Senate’s $4.59 billion emergency border funding bill in late June, a bill progressives argued did not go far enough to address conditions at the detention centers at the border. 

At the time, Chakrabarti referred to moderate Democrats who advocated for the Senate plan the “New Southern Democrats,” and said they were “hell bent to do to black and brown people today what the old Southern Democrats did in the 40s.” (Southern Democrats in the 1940s were on the whole conservative, and were opponents of civil rights efforts, including early attempts at desegregation.) Chakrabarti eventually deleted the original tweet, clarifying he didn’t see those members as racist, but as enablers of a racist system.

Now I didn't like supporting that Senate bill, but comparing Dem MCs - and specificallly Sharice Davids, who is a LGBT Native American that just got elected in a R+4 district in fucking Kansas - to segregationists is exactly the type of invective that invites this infighting.  Nobody looks good in my book right now.

[Jace, Extat]

2 minutes ago, DMC said:

I haven't seen the poll, but let's remember how all this started:

Now I didn't like supporting that Senate bill, but comparing Dem MCs - and specificallly Sharice Davids, who is a LGBT Native American that just got elected in a R+4 district in fucking Kansas - to segregationists is exactly the type of invective that invites this infighting.  Nobody looks good in my book right now.

As an aside, I couldn't take some of the dissenters seriously when they kept bringing up "lack of guard rails". Like, that's totally something that should be provided. But how inept is your messaging that you're citing lack of guard rails as a sticking point when little girls are being raped, folks can't bathe, and children are sleeping on the ground.

It makes me roll my eyes and I'm on their side on this.

[Darzin]

5 hours ago, Zorral said:

Does anyone honestly believe that any of the Dems are actually advocating for no oversight, no regulation, no management open borders?????????  Really??????????????

We have to begin creating the many programs and systems to handle what is coming due to climate change, warlordism and capitalism's violence, to handle this humanely, with decency and some order.  Not to mention that this nation needs immigrants.

Handling it the way this criminal, deranged, ugly, disgusting insane, sadist and his enablers, the republicans, are handling it, is equally criminal, deranged, ugly, disgusting insane, and sadistic.  You know the end to this story -- it will be gas chambers and war.  And nobody gets out alive (relative speaking) from this one, not even North Americans.

So such questions are filled with the air of flatulence and bad breath, utterly lacking signification.

That is my point right now a lot of democrats that are playing Schrodinger's border patrol. Of course when they are in the government there will be regulation and management, but right now such things are being criticized. Both on the campaign trail and here. when @Triskele   suggested the dems cosmetically tack right on immigration, say I dunno... advocate for better regulation and management, there was an uproar that if we compromise we will be giving into racism. My whole point is sense we know dems are going to enforce immigration law acting like they won't or doing so is racist is stupid and an unforced error, in addition to being somewhat hypocritical. 

[The Anti-Targ]

54 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Yeah, like I said I don't worry about the species because people will keep fucking and reproducing. The implication was meant to be that far too many think their genes must be passed down, as opposed to advocating universal sterilization.

What you are writing doesn't make sense to me. But I am a bear with a very small brain.

[Jace, Extat]

3 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

What you are writing doesn't make sense to me. But I am a bear with a very small brain.

Less people should have babies, but most won't do the responsible thing anyway so my opinions on this subject are moot.

[The Anti-Targ]

55 minutes ago, DMC said:

I haven't seen the poll, but let's remember how all this started:

Now I didn't like supporting that Senate bill, but comparing Dem MCs - and specificallly Sharice Davids, who is a LGBT Native American that just got elected in a R+4 district in fucking Kansas - to segregationists is exactly the type of invective that invites this infighting.  Nobody looks good in my book right now.

In other words, they are a very earnest lot, but so very politically naive. I can understand why Pelosi gets very frustrated with these rookies. But instead of Mary Poppinsing them into competent, wily politicians she seems to be evil step-mothering them and trying to kill them off.