#political analysis | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

is-the-fire-real · 10 days

Note

'Reminder that "punch a nazi uwu" leftists utilize Nazi rhetoric to justify punching Jews.

It was never about punching Nazis; it was about getting social permission to punch.'

It was this very mentality that drove me away from considering myself a liberal anymore (I AM VERY MUCH LEFT LEANING, I DIDN'T DECIDE TO BECOME CONSERVATIVE JUST TO BE CLEAR. I just don't feel like those spaces have any intrinsic safety any longer). It feels like so much of western leftism has become about "punching up". I don't think it's about compassion or concern anymore, it's about finding the "right" targets. And so often that was just used as a way to excuse bigotry. I'm a goy but I noticed this on a personal level plenty with people identifying as feminists, they'd be perfectly okay saying something unquestionably sexist, as long as "white women" was attached onto the front. It's very much the same with shaming people over physical features that others may have, as long as the individual person is "bad enough" it doesn't matter if wide foreheads or big noses or acne are features many people have and would feel hurt by seeing them used as an insult, because they're only "really" directing it at "one of the bad ones"

So, I'm going to link to this piece again because it's been embarrassingly useful, and explains why I say things like "pretending to believe" despite their clunkiness. For new material, I hope you don't mind that you have accidentally triggered a massive unskippable cutscene, but you tapped into a few things I have been pondering and I'd like to take advantage of your observances to add my own.

Part of what you're discussing here, which I agree with, is that toxic slacktivists pretend to believe that they are Good People Doing Good Work. They are Bad People and their work is Bad Work, but if they all get in a group and pretend together that it's Good, then that's almost the same as being Good, right?

Another worthwhile aspect of what you're discussing is something I became aware of in the aftermath of the collapse of Occupy Wall Street. One commenter on a liberal blog I still follow lamented that mass protest never seems to accomplish anything, and how the millions of people who turned out for OWS protests should have affected more political change. Considering most of them could also vote, write to representatives, etc., something other than littering and arrests could've been done.

Another commenter pointed out that he had personally been at most of the anti-Iraq War protests, including the largest worldwide protest on 15 February 2003 (6-10 million estimated participants). But most of those protesters did not agree with each other. There were at least four major coalitions of antiwar protesters showing up then and thereafter. The ones he listed were:

"Just war" advocates who believed the Iraq War was unjust.

Total pacifists who believed all armed conflicts are unjust, and therefore the Iraq War is as well.

Right-wing bigots who believed a war might potentially benefit those they thought of as religiously or ethnically inferior and subhuman.

Xenophobes, both left- and right-wing, who believed "the US can't be the police of the world" and that any action taken outside USian borders was immoral.

Imagine four people with these beliefs in a room talking about the Iraq War... then bring up the war in Ukraine to them and see how fast the coalition falls apart.

"Well, the war for Ukrainian liberation is a just war," says the just-war advocate. The pacifist starts to scream "HOW COULD YOU DEFEND ANY ACTION THAT MIGHT LEAD TO CHILDREN DYING, YOU MONSTER!". The right-wing bigot says they support the war, too--on the side of the ethnically and religiously superior Russians. And then a left-wing xenophobe says we're wasting money that should be supporting American workers and uplifting Americans out of poverty instead of buying new bombs for Ukraine.

And your "antiwar" coalition collapses, with the pacifist wandering off to agree with the xenophobe while the just-war liberal and the right-wing bigot scream at each other pointlessly and without resolution.

This is one of the wisest breakdowns of human behavior I have ever discovered:

Any coalition of people is made up of many sub-coalitions who only temporarily agree on a single aspect of a single issue. Making sure the group does not collapse prematurely is the true, unsung labor of movement maintenance.

To be real, it's much easier to let one's coalition collapse and scream about how The Menz, or The CIA, or Greedy Capitalists, or The Jews artificially forced your group's collapse than it is to admit that one might just suck a big one at coalition building. This is especially true among leftists, who are sometimes anti-hierarchy and frequently fall for populist, anti-expert nonsense. Having a leader means you're suggesting someone should have authority, and a lot of leftists are allergic to that suggestion.

Moreover, though, a lot of "leftists" are "leftists" but only agree with one or two aspects of leftism.

To use your feminism example: I have absolutely seen feminists who think they can be misogynists so long as they say "white" before they say "woman". I mean, who can even argue? I have also seen feminists who think they can be gender bioessentialists so long as they're doing it towards "men" (a category which includes a lot of people who neither look like men, nor live as men, nor benefit from male privilege). I have seen feminists who think they can call themselves "trans allies" while consistently ignoring, degrading, and dismissing the concerns of anyone who isn't a binary trans woman. Etc.

The thing is, they are all feminists. What makes someone a feminist, at bottom, is the acceptance of and opposition to patriarchy. That's it. It's similar to how what makes a person a Protestant Christian is the acceptance of Jesus as their Lord and Savior--you might need to do one or two things to be considered a part of a specific branch of Christianity, but all you need is that one specific belief about that one specific idea. There's a lot of bunk about how "you can't be a REAL Christian unless you do X" just like there's bunk about how "you can't be a REAL feminist unless you do Y", and it's all bunk.

There are people who might be really bad feminists or Christians, but that's not the same as not being feminists or Christians.

So, the coalition of leftism has several sub-coalitions who actually despise each other. Here is my proposal for the sub-coalitions. (Please keep in mind that I am not defining groups by how they define themselves, but by the far more useful metric of their actions.)

Liberals who agree with leftist economic thought, but strongly disagree with leftist conclusions regarding violent revolution. Liberals do not have time for online arguments and superficial action. They are generally participating in protests, running for office, writing postcards to advocate for candidates, informing voters, and working within the system for positive change that alleviates suffering. They are pro-expert but opposed to a vanguard party due to its inherent authoritarianism.

Tankies, whose primary interest in leftism is authoritarian. They oppose capitalism and support violent revolution because they imagine themselves as the vanguard party who gets to control everything when the revolution comes.

Anarchists, whose primary interest is opposing hierarchy. They want to burn down the system because it is a system, and frequently become angry and defensive if you try to ask them any questions about what would be built out of the ashes.

Progressives, whose primary interest is opposing liberals. They also oppose capitalism; they are, like tankies, positioning themselves as the vanguard party because they are already in political power. What makes them Not Tankies is that they care more about sticking it to "the Dems" than they do about actually being the vanguard, opposing capitalism, or achieving anything of worth or meaning politically.

"Red fash", who used to be called "beefsteak Nazis". They say all the right things regarding violent revolution and economics/capitalism, but they only believe what they believe for the sake of their specific ethnic group and nation (frequently, white and USian, but this is extremely popular in Europe too). IOW a red fash wants the vanguard party to only have whites of a specific ethnicity in control of the revolution; they only want universal health care for "their" people, that sort of thing. Some red fash are actual Nazis cosplaying as leftists, but some are just really, really, REALLY bigoted leftists.

Whether we like it or note, the acceptance of armed, violent revolution as a Good Thing means that leftism has always regarded punching up and violence as a necessary component of leftist thought. This is not a perversion of Real Leftism. This is leftism. If you think revolution is good and necessary instead of a terrifying possibility, then you also think punching up is okay; it's just a matter of who is Up and who gets to punch.

Of the five sub-coalitions I described, only one has rejected violent revolution--and it's the one all the other leftists accuse of being right-wing. And interestingly enough, only liberals are habitually accused of secretly colluding with the right... when red fash are natural allies to the right, and when all other forms of leftists openly ally with right-wingers so long as they say the right things about economics. (See under: "After Hitler, us" leftists, left-wing Trumpistas who think they'll rule the ashes after Trump burns down the current system.)

And if you believe in violent revolution, then (let me be facetious for a second) what's the problem with making fun of your political enemies for being ugly? If we believe Steve Bannon is a Nazi, aren't we obligated to stop him by any means necessary, and doesn't that include mocking him for his alcoholism? Isn't mocking someone for their appearance and intrinsic characteristics mild compared to, say, threatening them with exploding cars covered with hammers? Or retweeting pictures of pitchforks and guillotines?

If we believe Ben Shapiro is an opponent to the revolution we accept is necessary and vital to the movement, then what's a little antisemitism in the name of the people? Don't we have to be bigots to oppose bigots? And--

--oh. There's that horseshoe bending round to the right again.

#leftist antisemitism #horseshoe theory #coalition failure #political analysis #from someone who never attended college but who is old and has seen and read a lot. to be fair #the people most likely to die in your violent revolution are the people most likely to die under capitalism #the people who advocate the hardest for violent revolution are those most convinced they will live through it #as for me. well. i already live under threat of constant violence and kind of don't look forward to it #so a political philosophy that fetishizes violence was never going to fit me very well

24 notes · View notes

rodaportal · 1 month

Text

Donald Trump: Leading the Charge for America's Renewal

Join the conversation about the resurgence of support for Donald Trump and the compelling reasons behind the call for his return to leadership in America. 🇺🇸 Our latest YouTube video dives deep into Trump's unwavering dedication, remarkable achievements, and broad appeal across diverse demographics. Don't miss out on this insightful analysis! Click the link below to watch now:

📽️ Watch Now: https://youtu.be/0J3bws4c0aY

Let's discuss the future of American politics together! 🗣️ #donaldtrump #uspolitics #uselection

youtube

21 notes · View notes

potuzzz · 22 days

Note

I’m not trying to start a fight/argue, but Ukraine has always supported Palestine. I think it’s important to know that since they themselves are getting invaded, Ukraine isn’t really in a position to put too much involvement in other countries affairs at the moment. But historically, the two have always had good relations

Ukraine doesn’t like Israel, if that’s not obvious.

But Ukraine and Palestine have long recognized each other’s independence. The two are more similar than people realize.

(Again, I’m not trying to be disrespectful, I just want to clarify some Information.)

I promise I won't fight or argue 😉 I'm only occasionally a horrid asshole when people attack me personally, but I love talking kindly with people I disagree with <3

I definitely think things are a little more complicated between Ukraine's support of Israel than, say, the United State's support of Israel, but there is still support-- allow me to state my case why. Bear with me, it requires some context.

I think the most important thing to point out first is that that this support was historic. The state of Ukraine supported Palestine as a Soviet Republic, just as all communists support liberation and oppose apartheid and genocide everywhere. I'm not sure what would have happened after 1991 following the dissolution of the socialist project, but even after the capitalist coup of the Union, these post-socialist societies retained much of their Soviet values ideologically and morally, as well as their international relationships; it would not have surprised me if Ukraine from 1991 to 2014 maintained support of Palestine.

However, the neutral Ukrainian government in 2014, which had good relations with both Westerners in Europe as well as their sibling nation Russia, was couped by the Westerners. What then began was a process of liberalization, militarization, and Nazification of the political and military body.

The Banderites are a group of Ukranian Neo Nazis who are directly and descended without interruption from the original Ukranian Nazi collaborators--as the Nazis raped and pillaged and slaughtered their way eastward in the opening days of WW2, many Eastern Europeans joined their ranks, both fascist individuals happily joining in the destruction of their Jewish, Slavic, etc. neighbors, and also those who were fearful, or just opportunists. Banderites remained a fringe political movement in the underground of Ukrainian politics for a century--while the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 made their anticommunist, fascist, white supremacist ideology a little freer to stretch its legs, it wasn't until the 2014 coup and its aftermath that they were truly enabled. And enabled they were: Western weapons, ammo, armor, vehicles, intel, military trainers, mercenaries, political favors, and vast sums of money helped the Banderite movement take power in Ukraine. For 8 years, children began being taught Nazi ideology in public schools, groups that were previously underground Neo Nazi paramilitary groups were integrated formally into the military and political body, and those deemed ethnically inferior such as African or Arab immigrants and their more Slavic Russian-speaking neighbors at the east end of Ukraine were harassed, assaulted, killed--bombed, sniped, burned alive.

America and NATO purposefully provoked Russia to invade Ukraine in 2022 as part of their geopolitical strategy since the end of WW2 to contain, weaken, and, eventually, balkanize and colonize Russia.

I won't dig into the details of this conflict, but, suffice to say, it is only through the billions and billions of American dollars that this war didn't end in a few short months.

Likewise, if it wasn't for the billions and billions of American dollars that Israel receives, Israel would have been destroyed by its Arab neighbors generations ago.

Here arises a conflict that the Ukrainian government shares with the Israelis: they both compete to be USA's #1 vassal and to be granted massive subsidies to continue their fascist projects. A dollar sent to Ukraine is a dollar that could have been sent to the IDF, and vice versa.

There is other small geopolitical kinks: Israel and Russia occasionally collaborate in Syria to fight ISIS. Many of the Jews that immigrated to the newly formed Israel came from both Ukraine and Russia.

Now, besides these kinks, including the two UN resolutions you cited, there is no indication that post-2014 Ukraine and Israel are anything but amicable, and support each others respective fascist ideologies, even with the seeming paradox that one is explicitly antisemitic and the other proclaims itself to be the sole voice of Judaism.

Zelensky and Netanyahu have amicable diplomatic relations. They have visited each other's countries many times, and taken turns denouncing Hamas and Russia, respectively. They each publicly support each others sovereignty, urge continued cooperation, and have taken small steps to strengthening political, economic, and militaristic ties, including the exchange of intel, weapons, and training.

The situation is complicated, but the final tally is clear: they are both vassals of the United States, they are both embroiled in hot wars that rely heavily on the approval and charity of American and European citizens and institutions, and whatever feelings they may share privately are secondary to that fact. Perhaps they secretly don't like each other, and see each other as competitors, and only work together under the duress of the United States. Perhaps they love each other, greatly admire each other, and things like the UN resolution are a lover's spat, and reluctance to fully cosign each other is the result of the petty game of necessary geopolitical posturing for their ultimate goals. Perhaps it is a bit of both. But, the end result is the same: they are both minions subordinate to the United States, and thus in this 3rd World War, they are allies, however strange bedfellows they may appear.

18 notes · View notes

racefortheironthrone · 3 months

Text

Arya XII is DONE!

It'll be up on Monday noon for the general public, but you can read it right now on the Patreon...

#asoiaf #asoiaf meta #race for the iron throne #arya stark #sandor clegane #a storm of swords #chapter-by-chapter analysis #political analysis #historical analysis

24 notes · View notes

workersolidarity · 5 months

Text

🇺🇦🇮🇱 It is noted that before the events of October 7th, 2023, the United States had spent the last year and a half giving Ukraine the vast majority of its reserve munitions, which have since been largely emptied.

However, since October, Israel has been obtaining America's personal war stockpiles to bomb and shell Gaza.

If the US wishes to continue arming both Israel and Ukraine, it will require a major increase in shell production, which US claims it cannot do until 2025.

One wonders how the US intends to continue arming both countries while ALSO instigating war with China over its island province of Taiwan?

How would such a war be fought? Where would the funding come from? Where would the shells come from? How quickly can the US really scale up production after four decades of deindustrialization?

@WorkerSolidarityNews

22 notes · View notes

anonymousaccount1015 · 1 month

Text

If you’re thinking about sitting out the Presidential election because you’re unsatisfied with the major party options OR because you think you have principled philosophical reasons to not like Biden, please keep in mind what is at stake.

- Trump being in office again and having the power of the executive broadly (this is bad enough, also kind of my catch-all for things unlisted that you might think up)

- Trump seeking revenge, retribution, and repression of political freedoms of those who don’t support him, you can imagine for yourself how this might manifest, including through promoting political violence from his followers, which he hasn’t pledged to not allow

- Trump attacking the opposition party as part of his “revenge,” perhaps in ways that are more substantive than before, possibly through weaponizing the DOJ against political enemies

- Trump actually following through on his promise that in his first day in office that he would be a dictator, but only on day one, you can see him speak about this when he was on Fox News

- Trump attempting and/or succeeding at implementing Project 2025 (the playbook for a fascist takeover which, very oversimplified, looks to centralize political power in the hands of the executive)

- Trump possibly appointing two new Supreme Court justices, assuming the two older justices (Alito and Thomas) leave early to get replaced by ideologically similar judges, the history books will say we allowed him five Supreme Court appointments (three in his first term + two replacements)

- Trump possibly appointing more conservative justices across the lower courts, there are many vacancies at present (including on the U.S. District Courts), Trump appointed many judges on these lower courts in his first term after the Republican Senate prevented Obama from appointing any, arguably these were even worse for the longterm health of the country than the Supreme Court appointments

- Trump probably appoints an even crazier second Presidential cabinet filled with his allies (people who are subservient to his whims and support him fanatically, something like Giuliani as Attorney General or something, Vivek anywhere in his administration is scary)

- Trump pardoning himself from the majority of his crimes (unsure how many he can succeed with pardoning himself from, not a legal expert, IIRC he can’t pardon himself out of Georgia at least)

- Trump procuring 91 criminal charges across four separate cases (the Washington D.C. Jack Smith case, the Georgia election interference case, the classified documents case, the Stormy Daniels case), you can watch a quick recap here, this should immediately make him unqualified for public office

- Trump potentially using the Insurrection Act of 1807 which allows the President with very little oversight to order “U.S military and federalized national guard troops within the United States in particular circumstances, such as to suppress civil disorder, insurrection, or rebellion” (per Wikipedia), something which he may use as soon as his first day in office to support protests

- Trump pardoning some/all of his associates and acolytes that have helped him over the years, assuring that they’ll never face justice (Giuliani comes to mind, others who have been loyal, Gaetz will never face justice for unlawfully trafficking minors)

- Trump possibly working to free the January 6th participants, who he’s repeatedly labeled as “hostages,” as in freeing the people who tried to assist him in overthrowing the government, danced around it as recently as his 03/20 rally

Trump has also on multiple occasions had a “January 6th prison choir” at his rallies that perform live songs as recently as his 03/20 rally, this is ongoing (side note)

- Trump possibly getting full control of the federal government just like the 115th Congress (Trump winning the White House makes it very statistically likely even with an overperformance on our side that he also wins the Senate, the House is still a tossup, anybody’s game)

- Trump possibly trying to sign some sort of federal abortion ban, Trump prided himself on killing Roe vs Wade and then said it was up to the states, though privately, reports have come out that Trump is proposing a federal abortion ban to mirror those in various states

- Trump trying once again to build a border wall/trying to do other horrible things to “illegal” undocumented immigrants (he promised tighter border security + Republicans have been focusing a lot on immigration recently), called migrants “animals” at a 03/20 rally

- Trump promised a mass deportation of “illegal” undocumented immigrants, this is a pretty standard Republican talking point nowadays but still absolutely unacceptable

- Trump potentially using the military against foreign drug cartels in their own sovereign territory, something that was also promoted by fellow Republicans that ran in the primary

- Trump signing KOSA into law (a far right backed bill to “protect kids on the Internet”), which will also likely overturn Section 230 (very oversimplified, the law that states what happens on these platforms, say Tumblr, is not Tumblr’s responsibility, they can’t be sued as if they were a participant, if this was overturned, it would lead to severe content restrictions since now Tumblr, and others, can be sued for everything)

- Trump signing federal age restriction mandates similar to those that have been passed recently in several states (Texas and seven others, with more than a dozen states with similar bills in the legislature), making it so you have to provide identification to access pornographic material

- Trump pulling us out of various international agreements (among them the Paris Climate Accord, which he pulled out of in his first term, for example), the U.S. will never be trusted internationally again

- Trump pulling out of NATO (an important international strategic alliance we’ve had since the 1950s that has safeguarded our spot as the superpower of the world), something he teased repeatedly in his first term

- Trump threatening nuclear war or some similarly large military escalation when he tries to intimidate our perceived enemies about how vast our military capabilities are

- Trump possibly withholding aid from Ukraine/strongarming them to accept a peace deal which will mean they have to cede major territory to Putin (we’ve seen already that Trump is willing to strongarm Ukraine for political purposes, see his first impeachment trial, plus Trump says that he can end the war in less than a day, about the only way this is feasible is Ukraine ceding ground)

- Trump possibly ignoring the Palestine genocide in terms of offering any humanitarian assistance/allowing Israel to have their way unrestricted (you can criticize our President on Israel for very fair reasons but Trump would be significantly worse if your goal is to save Palestine)

- Trump possibly inflaming tensions with Iran (either intentionally by attacking first or indirectly through proxy via involvement vs Hamas or Hezbollah/support of Israel), a war that neither side needs

- Trump provoking tensions with China which may lead to a more substantive lapse in the relationship that won't help either of us (another trade war or unlikely on the ground war), the Republicans have been very rabid about China lately in their efforts to ban TikTok

- Trump potentially encouraging China to try to invade Taiwan like they've been posturing about for over half a century, sensing weakness from Trump or that he won't support Taiwan like the Americans had previously pledged

- Trump promised to reinstate the previous travel bans imposed on several Muslim-majority countries, something which originally happened in his first Presidential term

- Trump promises to promote oil drilling once again (he promised his first day in office when he's a dictator), possibly offshore fracking (judging by the position of the party), setting us behind in switching away from oil + harming the planet

- Trump probably slashes the subsidies for electric vehicles, setting us behind in switching over (optimistic outlooks say 10-15 years for electric vehicles once they've reached their full potential to phase out gas vehicles from the market), recently at a campaign event he spoke very negatively about them (the "bloodbath" speech)

- Trump promised a “100% tariff” on all vehicles that are imported by Chinese run factories that they’re building in Mexico, which is absolutely ludicrous in terms of a policy proposal

- Trump stating there will be a “bloodbath” at an 03/16 rally assuming he’s not elected President once again, when pushed back, Trump suggested he was talking about what will happen to the auto industry, though many think he was making some kind of veiled threat

- Trump promises to use the National Guard in major cities struggling with violent crime and problems with drugs, something that would be a significant overreach and very displacing for their populations

This list will be added to as more becomes available about what Trump plans to/is likely to do.

Though these things seem horrible, and might even make you feel hopeless, through the mobilization of voters, we’re stronger than we think we are, even at the sunset of democracy.

#politics #political analysis #fuck the gop #fuck trump

8 notes · View notes

troythecatfish · 5 months

Text

Here’s my personal recommendation of a YouTube video to check out:

youtube

7 notes · View notes

uboat53 · 3 months

Text

“Almost half of the base of the Republican Party showing up for this caucus tonight voted against Donald Trump. Think about that. I think that is telling. It tells you the weakness of Donald Trump and also the opportunity for Democrats because in the end, look, if the base doesn’t turn out for Donald Trump in the general election enthusiastically and Democrats turn out its base, this is all about, you know, independents, and independents don’t like Donald Trump." -- Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D-IL)

"Caucuses tend to draw the most die-hard supporters, Pritzker argued, and if about half of them won’t back Trump, it’s a good sign for Biden."

That's… not the worst political analysis I've seen. Granted, he's a politician from the opposing party and has an incentive to make Trump look bad, but even with that grain of salt that's a reasonable statement.

Source

#politics #us politics #jb pritzker #trump #2024 elections #political analysis

5 notes · View notes

science-fiction-is-real · 4 months

Text

The truly evil thing about settler colonialism is that ordinary people are weaponized, so that their physical bodies become tools of oppression.

You are kicked from your home. A new family moves into your home, and because that new family lives there, it is now practically impossible to get your home back.

Does the new family bear the guilt of you getting kicked from your home? Will they have to answer for your displacement when they die and it must be decided if they go to heaven or hell? (I don't believe in the afterlife but i'm using it to help explain my point, anyway...)

Maybe they do, maybe they don't. Maybe the dad of the new family is a raving lunatic who threatens to kill you if you come back, who thinks you and everyone like you are subhuman. But the family also has small children who didn't choose to be brought there or be born there. And multiply this out over the course of multiple generations and any personal guilt becomes thoroughly more confusing.

It is extremely UNinteresting and extremely UNimportant to me whether these settler individuals are personally guilty or not. Because I don't think a personal, individualistic model of morality is capable of solving social problems.

And then you and your fellow displaced people do the rational thing, and you attempt to retake your home by force. The propagandists of the settler regime see this and they say "look! Look at these barbarians who would attack regular families with children. Families whose only crime was just physically living there!"

True guilt at the end of the day lies with the settler state, who created this regime of displacement and CHOSE to use their citizens as the physical means of seizing land from the original population. This is the very definition of using human shields.

Does this justify violence against the individual members of the settler population who are just going about their lives? I would say no. But it does make violence against them extremely likely.

Leon Trotsky, a communist Jew and Russian revolutionary, was thoroughly against Zionism. In an interview toward the end of his life, he stated that he feared that Jews who immigrated into Palestine were walking into a bloody trap. And while most of the blood spilled thus far has been Palestinian, Trotsky was not exactly wrong.

#israel #palestine #socialism #communism #zionism #political analysis

3 notes · View notes

kneedeepincynade · 5 months

Text

My first article on multipolar reports is finally out! Go give it some love please

#sov posting #multipolar reports #multipolar world #multipolarity #geopolitica #geopolitics #palestine #israel #news #political analysis

3 notes · View notes

mywitchcultblr · 2 years

Text

Getting real tired of Americans defending atrocities that other nations committed so they can complain about 'America bad' and 'America/NATO is worse'

Is America and other western nations bad? Yeah no shit, they committed a lot of wrong doings. But blindly defending any nations they perceived as the enemies of United States just for the sake of their hate boner is just disgusting. Because at the end of the day they don't care about the suffering of real people, they just want to feel good for complaining about USA and for being 'right' because they are on the side that is against USA.

When you say "Hey this x regime is not actually good, they are hurting my people. Can you stop glorifying them? Please? It's offensive."

And then some American will be like:

"PFFTT I'm not gonna listen to what you said, even though you are the local of x nation and directly impacted by x regime! You are brainwashed by western propaganda! Wake up sheeple! Damn it's feels good that I'm chipping away western power with my 'great understanding' of this issue. Feels good man."

It's all about their ego, and it can't be any more typical privilaged American than that.

( I'm not saying all USA people are like that nor am I saying that nation is beyond hope )

#usa #politics #america #political analysis #analysis #thoughts

88 notes · View notes

pilloclock · 6 months

Text

🚨PLEASE WATCH🚨

Credit: Erin Raimondi

FREE PALESTINE FREE CONGO FREE SUDAN

Free all oppressed people

6 notes · View notes

dunilefra · 3 months

Text

Admirable Articles of Malta's Constitution

8. Promotion of culture, etc

The State shall promote the development of culture and scientific and technical research.

9. Safeguarding of landscape and historical and artistic patrimony

The State shall safeguard the landscape and the historical and artistic patrimony of the Nation.

10. Compulsory and free primary education

Primary education shall be compulsory and in State schools shall be free of charge.

13. Hours of work

The maximum number of hours of work per day shall be fixed by law.

The worker is entitled to a weekly day of rest and to annual holidays with pay; he cannot renounce this right.

17. Social assistance and insurance

Every citizen incapable of work and unprovided with the resources necessary for subsistence is entitled to maintenance and social assistance.

Workers are entitled to reasonable insurance on a contributory basis for their requirements in case of accident, illness, disability, old-age and involuntary unemployment.

Disabled persons and persons incapable of work are entitled to education and vocational training.

34. Protection from arbitrary arrest or detention (Part of it)

No person shall be deprived of his personal liberty save as may be authorised by law in the following cases, that is to say -

for the purpose of bringing him before a court in execution of the order of a court or before the House of Representatives in execution of the order of that House;

in the case of a person who has not attained the age of eighteen years, for the purpose of his education or welfare;

for the purpose of preventing the spread of an infectious or contagious disease;

Any person who is arrested or detained shall be informed at the time of his arrest or detention, in a language that he understands, of the reasons for his arrest or detention: Provided that if an interpreter is necessary and is not readily available or if it is otherwise impracticable to comply with the provisions of this sub-article at the time of the person’s arrest or detention, such provisions shall be complied with as soon as practicable.

Any person who is unlawfully arrested or detained by any other person shall be entitled to compensation therefor from that person.

35. Protection from forced labour

No person shall be required to perform forced labour.

For the purposes of this article, the expression "forced labour" does not include -

any labour required in consequence of the sentence or order of a court;

labour required of any person while he is lawfully detained by sentence or order of a court that, though not required in consequence of such sentence or order, is reasonably necessary in the interests of hygiene or for the maintenance of the place at which he is detained or, if he is detained for the purpose of his care, treatment, education or welfare, is reasonably required for that purpose;

any labour required of a member of a disciplined force in pursuance of his duties as such or, in the case of a person who has conscientious objections to service as a member of a naval, military or air force, any labour that that person is required by law to perform in place of such service;

any labour required during a period of public emergency or in the event of any other emergency or calamity that threatens the life or well-being of the community.

37. Protection from deprivation of property without compensation (Part of it)

No property of any description shall be compulsorily taken possession of, and no interest in or right over property of any description shall be compulsorily acquired, except where provision is made by a law applicable to that taking of possession or acquisition -

for the payment of adequate compensation;

securing to any person claiming such compensation a right of access to an independent and impartial court or tribunal established by law for the purpose of determining his interest in or right over the property and the amount of any compensation to which he may be entitled, and for the purpose of obtaining payment of that compensation; and

securing to any party to proceedings in that court or tribunal relating to such a claim a right of appeal from its determination to the Court of Appeal in Malta:

Provided that in special cases Parliament may, if it deems it appropriate so to act in the national interest, by law establish the criteria which are to be followed, including the factors and other circumstances to be taken into account, in the determination of the compensation payable in respect of property compulsorily taken possession of or acquired; and in any such case the compensation shall be determined and shall be payable accordingly.

Nothing in this article shall be construed as affecting the making or operation of any law so far as it provides for the taking of possession or acquisition of property -

in satisfaction of any tax, rate or due;

by way of penalty for, or as a consequence of, breach of the law, whether under civil process or after conviction of a criminal offence;

by way of the taking of a sample for the purposes of any law;

where the property consists of an animal upon its being found trespassing or straying;

as an incident of a lease, tenancy, licence, privilege or hypothec, mortgage, charge, bill of sale, pledge or other contract;

by way of the vesting or administration of property on behalf and for the benefit of the person entitled to the beneficial interest therein, trust property, enemy property or the property of persons adjudged bankrupt or otherwise declared bankrupt or insolvent, persons of unsound mind, deceased persons, or bodies corporate or unincorporate in the course of being wound up or liquidated;

in the execution of judgments or orders of courts;

by reason of its being in a dangerous state or injurious to the health of human beings, animals or plants;

in consequence of any law with respect to the limitation of actions, acquisitive prescription, derelict land, treasure trove, mortmain or the rights of succession competent to the Government of Malta; or

for so long only as may be necessary for the purposes of any examination, investigation, trial or inquiry or, in the case of land, the carrying out thereon -

of work of soil conservation or the conservation of other natural resources of any description or of war damage reconstruction; or

of agricultural development or improvement which the owner or occupier of the land has been required and has without reasonable and lawful excuse refused or failed to carry out.

Nothing in this article shall be construed as affecting the making or operation of any law so far as it provides for vesting in the Government of Malta the ownership of any underground minerals, water or antiquities.

Nothing in this article shall be construed as affecting the making or operation of any law for the compulsory taking of possession in the public interest of any property, or the compulsory acquisition in the public interest of any interest in or right over property, where that property, interest or right is held by a body corporate which is established for public purposes by any law and in which no monies have been invested other than monies provided by any legislature in Malta.

97. Tenure of office of judges

Subject to the provisions of this article, a judge of the Superior Courts shall vacate his office when he attains the age of sixty-five years.

A judge of the Superior Courts shall not be removed from his office except by the President upon an address by the House of Representatives supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the members thereof and praying for such removal on the ground of proved inability to perform the functions of his office (whether arising from infirmity of body or mind or any other cause) or proved misbehaviour.

by Dunilefra, working for State Policy

#Malta #Dunilefra #Politics #Political Reform #World Politics #World Order #Fundamental Rights #Human Rights #Economy #Religion #State Policy #Political Analysis #Constitution #Constitutional Law

2 notes · View notes

spar-kie · 10 months

Text

That DeSantis Ad

So, Twitter's up in flames, I wanna start posting more original stuff here rather than just reblogging, so why not do some political analysis? Starting with That DeSantis Ad. If you don't know the one I'll post it here under the cut along with some thoughts on why this is hurting DeSantis

CW: Homophobia, Transphobia, Donald Trump, and Ron DeSantis

Basically, this ad is causing DeSantis one hell of a headache for a lot of reasons. Chief among them being, the Republican party has banked on being plausibly deniably homophobic for a while now (or, implausibly, really, but that doesn't stop some people from falling for it).

These kinds of videos worked for Trump because, truthfully even though they're important, I think Trump only has a vague grasp on what Reddit is, and doesn't really know what 4chan is. So if you saw a video like this for Trump you know it would just be some shitposter and he couldn't really be attacked on it. But thing is, this was posted on an official DeSantis campaign account, meaning that this kind of rhetoric is officially tied to his campaign, which is making groups that are like sheep among packs of wolves like Log Cabin Republicans go "WAIT A MINUTE, YOU'RE ANTI-GAY! I AS A PROUD REPUBLICAN CAN'T SUPPORT THIS!". Which you think would sound obvious, but in a primary where the rest of the candidates are "plausibly" deniably homophobic puts him at a disadvantage.

Also, while your average voter doesn't hold a lot of strong convictions, saying "SIKE!!!" to being positive on gay rights and then comparing yourself to a character who kills hookers generally doesn't play well with the average voter.

#politics #political analysis #not a republican but I just cannot look away from the trainwreck that is this years RNC

5 notes · View notes

racefortheironthrone · 9 months

Note

Hello. I was recently reading your "People's History of the Marvel Universe" series (an excellent read btw).

You made reference to critiques of Xavier and his political strategies, which got me thinking. Has anyone ever brought up the idea of a mutant advocacy group in the comics? Something akin to a NAACP, or an NGO? It feels like something that should exist, but I genuinely can't remember a writer ever attempting to create one.

This is an excellent question!

So I have certainly mentioned the issue in the past. If we think of the Marvel Universe as being roughly co-terminous in time with our own universe, as it was before the invention of the sliding timescale in the 90s, there should have been a mutant rights movement founded in the 70s during the "movement of movements" that saw the explosion of gay rights movements, women's liberation movements, environmental movements, etc. coming out of the 60s civil rights movement and New Left/anti-war movement. (I certainly would have been fascinated by how the All-New X-Men would have wrestled with the concept of "intersectionality" when it was brand-new coming out of the Combahee River Collective.)

In the comics, there have been sporadic mentions of mutant advocacy groups and NGOs - mostly in the context of campus organizations - but often very sporadically. Grant Morrison really changed the game completely by making X-Corp (a global mutant rights NGO) a significant element of his celebrated New X-Men run, and creators who followed their work have gone on to invent new groups with examples like Super Trans (a support group for trans mutants), Mutantes Sans Frontières (a mutant medical NGO), MUSE (a mutant rescue and shelter NGO), and Magnetic North (a pro-Magneto radical student group).

Whether the Krakoan Response Team (disaster relief) or the Marauders (refugee and black market pharmaceuticals) count as social movements or NGOs probably depends more on your theoretical perspective on social movements. Both organizations are state-sponsored, but aren't formal state institutions, but then again Krakoa doesn't have a well-developed political system. Most theorists insist that social movements have to be outside the political system, but I tend to agree with those who argue that social movements and political movements overlap, and that a lot of social movement work historically and today is done within the system of electoral politics.

#xmen #xmen meta #sliding timescale #political analysis #historical analysis #mutant metaphor #social movements #krakoa #people's history of the marvel universe

43 notes · View notes