We have entire political dynasties of families happening just fine under capitalism pillaging national stockpiles for personal gain, but the real problem is the specter of communism.
Funny events in anti-woke world
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
Hey it's the same logic.
As I pointed out using the term female was deemed offensive because it depersonalises women or something so yeh using people also would do that.
Cause under capitalism they can still lose. Under Communism you can make it so you can't.
This is just an observation, but Joe Biden actually does care about the American people, but he does so at the expense of people in other countries. Because Joe Biden is not a foreign policy neoliberal, he is a realist who is against immigration and refugees. By definition adding more people(Unless a larger portion of them start businesses vs the locals) in the US means fewer jobs for the locals, even if they take jobs that are less desirable, immigrants have children, and their children will compete for the same office jobs you compete for. I am conflicted, fewer people in the US means a less relevant US in geopolitics and foreign policy, but for me who still has to compete with others for jobs in the public, and private sector. it's helpful, and suspect a lower labor supply due to various things including less immigration is why wages are shooting up, and it's a worker's market not an employer's market for labor.
Edit: More observations
I literally can't find one thing about Joe Biden where he wasn't ruthless, pragmatic(Not being a moderate pragmatic, but more being efficient), or realist.
His foreign policy is nothing but using a realist, ruthless, and pragmatic approach. Think about his withdraw from Afganstan. The media was going to scream bloody murder no matter what he did, he was willing to exchange the freedom of liberal Afgan citizens like educated women for example in exchange for more US resources like US troops, money, and so fore to deal with China, and Russia. His generals begged(One literally cried) him not to do so, and he say no, I don't think my most ruthless day could be more ruthless than that. He was willing to form the Quad and oust French, and German involvement in East Asia due to his mistrust of both. (Germany using Huawei for 5G for example, and France trying to make a third way EU which is a third faction against the US-led order, and China/Russia) He looked at somewhat lefty Canada, and New Zealand(social-democratic generally means more peaceful) vs the conservative-dominated UK, and Australia, and picked the latter. Even something as small as vaccines where he donated the UK J&J like vaccines to Mexico, and Canada vs the more precious Pfizer, and Moderna one. He is also willing to abuse the media's hatred of Putinist Russia but doesn't commit to more troops to Europe vs Asia where Asia is more important. He has unlike Obama met China's military arm's race with his own arms-buildup, something neoliberals like Clinton, and Obama don't do. He's even forced Taiwan to send semiconductor fabs to the US. The Quad where he teamed up with Fascist Modi which is like something out of the Cold War. (Against China of course)
Now let's go to his domestic policy. He has forced Mitch Obstruction McConnell to sign on to his 1.2 trillion dollar infrastructure deal, could Trump, or Obama do the same thing? He has adopted Trump's stances on trade, and immigration, but has remained unscathed by the media, and in doing so he has made a play for the Midwest. He's handled the pandemic piecemeal by piecemeal so that Americans don't get mad at him all at once with an early vaccine mandate; very ruthless. He has deflected the border over to his VP who he has instructed to stay in the background defacto which means as her polling decreases she just needs to fade away, and her polling goes up, but the same can't be said of a sitting US president. He forced Sinema, and Manchin to vote for the first 1400 dollar check stimulus bill, while Obama couldn't get his own mentor Lieberman on board for his public option in the ACA.
I can't find any weaknesses to Joe Biden, I can't. You don't think during the 2024 presidential primaries he won't just call Clyburn or Obama to torpedo a progressive bid towards the democratic nomination. And I don't know how the progressives can win against that. You just can't. And if let's say AOC called out Biden for insert woke failure like the border or don't come, or whatever. Biden and the American people will shrug it off by saying we did this instead of what Trump did, then counterattack by saying AOC supports defund the police, and given the crime rates right now, there goes AOC's campaign.
Edit 2: I am not the only one that thinks this.
www.foreignaffairs.com
nationalinterest.org
Edit3: I can't find a source for Biden's domestic policy that was unbiased, and told of Biden's realism compared to everyone vs just progressives like Bernie Sanders.
Edit: More observations
I literally can't find one thing about Joe Biden where he wasn't ruthless, pragmatic(Not being a moderate pragmatic, but more being efficient), or realist.
His foreign policy is nothing but using a realist, ruthless, and pragmatic approach. Think about his withdraw from Afganstan. The media was going to scream bloody murder no matter what he did, he was willing to exchange the freedom of liberal Afgan citizens like educated women for example in exchange for more US resources like US troops, money, and so fore to deal with China, and Russia. His generals begged(One literally cried) him not to do so, and he say no, I don't think my most ruthless day could be more ruthless than that. He was willing to form the Quad and oust French, and German involvement in East Asia due to his mistrust of both. (Germany using Huawei for 5G for example, and France trying to make a third way EU which is a third faction against the US-led order, and China/Russia) He looked at somewhat lefty Canada, and New Zealand(social-democratic generally means more peaceful) vs the conservative-dominated UK, and Australia, and picked the latter. Even something as small as vaccines where he donated the UK J&J like vaccines to Mexico, and Canada vs the more precious Pfizer, and Moderna one. He is also willing to abuse the media's hatred of Putinist Russia but doesn't commit to more troops to Europe vs Asia where Asia is more important. He has unlike Obama met China's military arm's race with his own arms-buildup, something neoliberals like Clinton, and Obama don't do. He's even forced Taiwan to send semiconductor fabs to the US. The Quad where he teamed up with Fascist Modi which is like something out of the Cold War. (Against China of course)
Now let's go to his domestic policy. He has forced Mitch Obstruction McConnell to sign on to his 1.2 trillion dollar infrastructure deal, could Trump, or Obama do the same thing? He has adopted Trump's stances on trade, and immigration, but has remained unscathed by the media, and in doing so he has made a play for the Midwest. He's handled the pandemic piecemeal by piecemeal so that Americans don't get mad at him all at once with an early vaccine mandate; very ruthless. He has deflected the border over to his VP who he has instructed to stay in the background defacto which means as her polling decreases she just needs to fade away, and her polling goes up, but the same can't be said of a sitting US president. He forced Sinema, and Manchin to vote for the first 1400 dollar check stimulus bill, while Obama couldn't get his own mentor Lieberman on board for his public option in the ACA.
I can't find any weaknesses to Joe Biden, I can't. You don't think during the 2024 presidential primaries he won't just call Clyburn or Obama to torpedo a progressive bid towards the democratic nomination. And I don't know how the progressives can win against that. You just can't. And if let's say AOC called out Biden for insert woke failure like the border or don't come, or whatever. Biden and the American people will shrug it off by saying we did this instead of what Trump did, then counterattack by saying AOC supports defund the police, and given the crime rates right now, there goes AOC's campaign.
Edit 2: I am not the only one that thinks this.
Biden the Realist
The president’s foreign policy doctrine has been hiding in plain sight.
Joe Biden, The Realist, For President?
"Only one candidate would continue the realism that has marked President Obama’s term, and avoid the kind of blunders that inevitably follow interventionist foreign policies."
Edit3: I can't find a source for Biden's domestic policy that was unbiased, and told of Biden's realism compared to everyone vs just progressives like Bernie Sanders.
Last edited:
Well, I didn't want to shock him with the fact that the CURRENT system of economics has lead to plenty of tyrannical rulers.... that he has constantly complained about. The worst part.... those political dynasties are the only thing stopping CEOs from controlling our lives. Capitalism is great
HAHHAHAHAHA. That's funny
Well, I suppose the Sackler family were removed from their companies... but got to keep billions of dollars. So you're right... that sure is a loss
Got to keep their billions, got to keep their investments, got an active shield against prosecution...
Yeah, they fucking lost everything due to the immense suffering they directly caused. Communism would've been much softer on them.
Like, imagine if we dared execute a billionaire for massive financial crimes.
China sentences top banker to death for corruption and bigamy
Former head of China Huarong Asset Management given no option for reprieve
www.theguardian.com
Last edited:
Yes, I can see how saying "women aren't people" defends a woman's humanity. Makes perfect sense.
Does the gluten free stuff not sit right next to the normal stuff in the UK?
Anyway, gluten free stuff being in the store IS the world accommodating for Gluten Free stuff. A store doesn't have to stock it, and as you've just demonstrated, its not as popular as most stuff. You've been accommodated for. Because most people are nice
You're analogy was that we as a society, didn't accommodate for you. This is false. If it was true, we would never have any gluten free products
Cool. Conservative arguments about gender has been 2 + 2 = 5. It hasn't ever made sense. That's why its changing. THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS. It's just them that's been pretending there is 5
No. You don't. That's been the problem with what you are saying. You don't even have to believe in what something thinks is gender to you their preferred pronoun. It's called not being a jerk. Not doing it is just about you forcing your ideology onto others. And requires far less effort, as a society, than providing gluten intolerant people food. And again, even if you think they're coming out with the wrong answer, you're not the one coming out with the right answer either. It doesn't fit reality
One bad trans make them all bad right? TERFs were ALWAYS going to use this tactic. They did it before Yaniv. And Yaniv was doing inappropriate activities irrelevant of the gender she was. As you've already stated, its really stupid to give into edge cases. So... just stop listening to them.
It's the "it's not safe to let gay people into locker rooms" argument of my youth, and the "it's not safe to let black people into locker rooms" arguments of my parent's and grandparent's life, backed up by all the lists of individual transgressions that ultimately didn't prove anything.
Only with some stuff. Mostly it's a section on it's own.
Oh but you see not every place accommodates and I can't eat every option so it's only very partial accommodation of acknowledging I exist.
Well there's 107 wanting to be recognised so far. It's a bit more than 5
Ok but a preferred pronoun can be anything so are you truly prepared to call people anything they ask you to call them?
And yet that's what's happening with Yaniv. The rules being applied to edge cases to facilitate her actions. That's the problem. It's not being seen as the out there frivolous petty set of cases it is. There is a limit to how accommodating people can be expected to be.
So, your typical American paranoia brought on by cold war era propaganda then.
And there's a guy running around suing every place that has a "lady's night" for sex discrimination. Difference between him and Yaniv is that he wins
It is being seen as a frivolous petty set of cases. That's why she's not winning. But you can't, you know, legally prohibit somebody from filing a lawsuit. And you don't want the government to be allowed to stop somebody from filing a lawsuit, for obvious reasons.
So yeah, one trans person being a nuisance, one MRA being a nuisance, a bunch of sovereign citizens being nuisances, it happens.
Meatspace isn't the internet. In meatspace, meeting the odd person here or there isn't a huge inconvenience. In meatspace, nobody is confused by the odd "they" as a first person pronoun. I should know, I've been using it for years in a face-to-face customer service role. If you say "pregnant people should get vaccinated", you won't get people shouting that you're dehumanizing women.
It's brain rot
Last edited:
Except it's not a lawsuit it's a human rights court abuse case being brought by Yaniv.
I wonder if where a lot of certain women feel uncomfortable is that the word "woman" gets replaced with terms like "people who menstruate", yet there seems to be substantially less replacement of "men" with terms like "people with prostates". My wife recently read an article which replaced "women" but not "men" in this fashion. It's an inconsistency that sticks out like a sore thumb.
That is annoying and should change, yes. Though I wonder if it changes more often or if people are just more sensitive to it
I wonder whether it should change at all, and we shouldn't just be expected to understand the relevant context of sex as opposed to gender.
Well, we do that with names, don't we? Unless you try to force people to use names you designate for them.
I don't think it is really practical to have a massive profusion of individual pronouns in the same way we have individual names. It sort of defeats part of the purpose of a pronoun, if nothing else.
There are currently a lot of neologisms out there, but chances are it will settle down to just the one in order to represent neither male nor female. (Of course, arguably we already have one in the form of they/them, but I understand why we might prefer a new one).
But those most distressed about a great reset don't like the devil they know. They have proven willing to sell their souls to every cartoonishly corrupt demagogue offering to fight the devil they know.