What’s your definition of “immediately”

That vote was a month after the insurrection

Now imagine someone heading toward eviction and homelessness standing in line waiting to make this choice.

Americans have more immediate needs than what anyone not in the ‘thermonuclear war’ camp is offering

Your average American would be wrong, too.

You’re justifying their executions

Only if you’re incapable of holding two thoughts in your head at the same time.

If your perspective on international anti-government protests is seriously challenged by the involvement of clandestine CIA support, I have really bad news for you

Arming oppositional forces of our foreign adversaries is possibly the most consistent function of the CIA, and yet im supposed to doubt their involvement in the violent outbreak in Iran that happened just as the US was planning to start a war?

Nevermind how untrustworthy Trump is as a messenger - i would be surprised if we weren’t

Unironically the funniest post he’s had since getting banned from Twitter

Praise be to Allah

The important part, though, is that establishment democrats and the consultant class over-value the type of media that participates in this derangement.

So we’ll (again) end up with a democratic establishment that turns their shoulder to leftist independent creators and they will (again) lose and blame those same people

You’re thinking of actual Joe Rogan

If I fast forward through commercials on my dvr, am I stealing from media broadcasters too?

If I close my eyes while riding the bus and never see the bus adverts, am I stealing from advertisers?

There’s never a guarantee advertisements are seen by target audiences - especially when they’re being shown on private devices. If more people than expected are able to avoid an advertisement, thats not theft, that’s just poor investment.

Make that 2 fighter jets downed and a blackhawk critically damaged

I think this makes at least 2 downed US jets today

April fools?

Might seem that way because the decay of late stage capitalism is only now becoming obvious, but they’ve always had this relationship with capital.

This is nothing new.

I will keep repeating this until the day I die: the democratic political machine cannot function as it exists today without it’s not-so-clandestine marriage with capital.

Piker being a massively-popular mobilizer of young voters does nothing to endear him to a party who’s entire political infrastructure is directly at odds with his political views on capital, labor, and anti-imperialist geopolitics.

The DNC will sooner drown in it’s own piss, shit, and vomit than adopt or promote a political commentator that seeks to rip the party away from its funding apparatus by holding them accountable to their increasingly socialist voting base.

The most you can say about democrats is that they passively object to fascist ideology, but they never do more than throw procedural obstructions to fascist momentum and legitimize reactionary grievances by repeatedly affirming xenophobic anxieties about immigrants and minorities.

The reason leftists argue that both parties operate under the same fascist framework is that they both prioritize a failing capitalistic system over radical socialist reform, and so will (either by choice or because trying to preserve failing capitalist systems leaves them without a choice) bend to reactionary populism and abandon socialist populism.

“democrats are better than republicans because they oppose fascism” is really only true if you ignore the common consensus among political theorists that fascism is the end product of deteriorating material conditions and the tendency of capitalist systems toward self-preservation. So long as democrats deny the demand for popular socialist reform, they are nothing more than the moderate wing of the same fascist uni-party. To be truly oppositional to fascism they need to address the contradictions in their own political framework, or else be constantly pulled rightward by the same reactionary forces acting on the right.

No amount of circling the wagons after the primaries will make an unpopular candidate palatable to an apathetic voting base.

The point of agitating now is to prevent an establishment candidate from taking the nomination to begin with or to force the establishment to embrace populist positions and control the campaign narrative.

Because reactionary movements offer an alternative explanation to systemic failures that are easier than challenging systemic forces that create them

Most people can see that their choices result in little to no change without anyone having to point to it, and will sit out elections regardless.

Democrats refusing to address that apathy is the problem, not people making it known.

No, the point is to agitate you against an establishment that wants to prevent you from having a better choice.

Liberals who are passionately defending lesser evil electoralism before primaries have even started are either idiots in denial or moderates who don’t want to talk about why their party is nearly as unpopular as Trump.

“All Cops Are Bastards” doesnt mean they cant be nice to you, sometimes.

I thought i was on c/shitposting for a second