*advancing her career
https://bsky.app/profile/aoc.bsky.social/post/3ldhxclo4wk2c
This is about AOC losing her bid for the Oversight committee to a geriatric Dem lifer. Sure she has systematically shredded any last bit of credibility with her triangulation, but hey, at least all the 5D polítical chess is paying off! She’s changing the system from the inside! It’s working this time!
Girl, you abandoned any pretense of doing working-class mass politics when you decided to do insider politics! Why are you tweeting like Bernie Sanders circa 2012? There’s no we! There’s no mass movement behind you! It’s just NYC DSA and some Warren libs (but I repeat myself)
i remember her being on a livestream a few weeks before the election saying she didn’t want trump to win because four more years of the activist schtick would be annoying and tiresome for her. straight up annoyed that she would have to pretend to care again. that was her only concern. I hope she rots.
found it: https://xcancel.com/TeamAOC/status/1850657033642504618
There’s shit going on now. And by shit i mean genocide she denies
really digusting for her to say that after a year of (expanded) genocide she ran cover for
“wOrKiNg TiReLeSsLy fOr A cEaSeFiRe”
Yeeeeeah no, people actually expect me to work when there’s a Republican president, I’d rather be grillpilled and brunch maxing.
Um, ah SHIT, I MEAN WE WILL BE AT BRUNCH. We’re in this career together right everyone?
here’s the archived livestream where AOC goes to the mat to defend Biden if anyone wants to laugh at how badly it aged
Congresswoman AOC Spills The Tea And Unloads on Democratic Cowards On Instagram Live
[was looking for the one you were talking about and found this first]
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Wow you’re an ass. Someone exhausted by having to constantly push for positive outcomes against a hateful, murdering group of people (yes both parties) and your response is to shit on the lady.
AOC was not pushing for positive outcomes, she only cares about being on the winning side. Remember how much she seemed to care about deportation and concentration camps at the border and kids in cages while Trump was president? Those policies all continued under Biden, deportations increased and AOC didn’t say a word. She didn’t care in the slightest.
Except she did
She absolutely said a word. you just didn’t hear it. which is a different issue and more about you than her.
Beep boop you have been banned from interacting with the lib, if you wish to post more at them, log in to bureaucrat
?
It’s a joke. I just think it would be funny if everyone logged in to bureaucrat and overwhelmed the lib with one common user
Ah gotcha. That would be a good bit
uh huh and? you realize her endorsement came before gaza right? I understand you struggle with sequencing timelines being a communist an all but man. and again for her there was no reason to remove that endorsement. there was no other candidate. why lose the bargaining position? it was the voters job to get rid of biden and we did that. sadly the replacement was black biden, who obviously also didn’t receive our support. 🤷 .
child, go through my post history. I firmly argued against harris and biden for precisely the reasons you’re alluding to. But I’m not sitting in congress, I don’t have to work with those idiots. AOC made the correct political calculus that supporting biden/harris would give her more pull if they won and no loss of pull if they lost. it was win/win for her.
If biden/harris lost, that reflects on their policies, not AOCs. if biden/harris won, she maintained a non-adversarial relations and could claim her support helped bring voters resulting in potentially more pull.
It was our job to fuck over harris/biden and we did. sadly that means dealing with trump again. oh well.
lol. “history started on Oct 7” clowning on full display
We all know once you endorse someone you can never ever withdraw it no matter how many kids they murder. I notice you didn’t answer the question about how many dead children would be a dealbreaker for you
What are you, goofy? Hyuck hyuck hyuck
It took you way too long to think of this response. Do you type using only your digit finger, looking for each letter every time?
deleted by creator
Just going to note again that you
Wait are they still going? It’s been five hours. We’re just feeding their humiliation fetish at this point.
They are still going. And they are still being extremely silly.
This time, they decided to go to the Literacy in China NATOpedia page.
What if they put half as much effort into educating themselves as they did into arguing with strangers online?
This would be a great tagline
Open season on this lib, nerds. Go hog wild until like 6pm EST.Lib hunting season is now closed. I’m taking him out behind the barn but I’ll leave all his loving messages up and untarnished for us to memorialize him.
RIO jatone.
P.s jatone,
if you feel like getting in the mud again over whatever post you see here on hexbear, feel free to DM me for a day pass to deliver the slop to all my little piggies. You played with them very well and very politely enough. hall pass revoked have a nice nightBut for now, adieu.
me when the sloptrough has a liberal in it
Aww
Awww haha
Great, GREAT shit. I love you kinda
Do i? or do I just recognize: republicans |gen DNC | | AOC | ME.
and that I’d rather be shitting on AOC as the worst rep than the best rep.
go ahead name some better reps in congress than AOC. bet you can’t make it to 10.
I can’t make it to 10, but you’re not making the point you think you are.
Actually I am. I think you twats are more moronic than AOC (shes actually accomplishing something more than bitching online) is but thats okay. no body is perfect.
what a shock, the liberal is a misogynist
Many such cases. If you scratch them deep enough, you’ll start finding Hugo Boss textile.
though it feels like the bar for what qualifies as a scratch gets lower by the second
bet you anything our friendly visitor self-IDs as a feminist
Like what? What has she accomplished?
Oops, you’ll never get a response now! You know specifics are hard for libs!
do I need to spoon feed you to? I assume you’re capable of typing into a computer.
You know the funny thing is you twits seem to struggle with reading comprehension. for example: accomplishments does not mean ‘has done things I agree with’.
So go ahead list yours then we’ll compare to AOC, then we can do trump vs you next!
HAHAHAHA.
Imagine linking a Wikipedia article as an argument.
But sure, let’s go ahead and look inside.
Oh. She literally acts in support of a genocide.
I have not taken part in a genocide, for example.
Notably, you have not listed any of her supposed achievements.
Ohohohoho, twice you have blundered
*You too
Considering that I am a due-paying member of a union and AOC helped Biden crush a strike, I’ll say I’ve done at least 2x the amount of labour rights accomplishments that she has
You mean ‘too’ not ‘to’ there. Don’t be a condescending prick about reading comprehension if you can’t spell.
Yeah she’s accomplishing genocide, border camps with kids in cages, increased fracking, more money for police and so much more. Personally I’d rather she did nothing instead. Action for the sake of action is the ideology of a fascist, but it’s pretty clear where you’re at so that’s not surprising.
None of those are her positions. those are the DNC. you’re very confused.
No it seems you are. She is a member of the DNC and did all she could to get the Democratic candidate elected. On top of that she defended Joe Biden and his regimes ongoing genocide. The way things work is that actions are linked to consequences, I know this is difficult to understand if your brain hasn’t developed fully yet.
Civility!! Where are you? HELP ME!
How can she accomplish anything when she has zero pull in congress? Which is it? Make up your fucking mind.
Please don’t ever leave us, you’re great.
So your argument is “the entire system is shit, therefore you cannot think a member of the system is shit”? I just want to be sure.
The entire mafia is bad, therefore you cannot prosecute any of its members for their individual crimes
Saudi Arabia is worse on queer rights than Iran, so you cannot critique the Ayatollah
That’s easy, provided you include dead representatives
What about Saddam? He’s worse than most representatives in congress, so that means you can’t critique them. The KKK are worse than the GOP so why don’t you critique them instead? My HOA president is an asshole, so you can’t critique Lindsay Graham because he’s nice about it. What about what about what about what about
Literally a meme
If you paid more attention you’d realise she’s a grifter, unfortunately
I’m aware of all this. but I have about 400 members of congress more worthy of shitting on than AOC.
you see I have a line of people:
SHITTY REP 0, SHITTY REP 1, … , AOC, PASSABLE REP 0, …,
I spend my efforts telling people about shitty REP 0 and use AOC as a model they could be more like.
Once we get here:
AOC, PASSABLE REP 0, …, PASSABLE REP N.
Then I’ll shit on AOC until then shes a reference point. You’re mistaking moving the norm left with AOC as support for AOC. common mistake dont worry you’ll get there eventually.
AOC doesn’t move right wingers left, she moves lefties right. She’s a dyed in the wool neolib and defends the interests of the bourgeoisie the same way that Tom Cotton does.
she doesn’t move voters anywhere. you’re giving her too much credit. she represents a region of the political sphere. one you’d likely be happier in than the one your in now.
sadly you’re too busy attacking her than going after biden/harris/trumps/schumers/ceos.
Calling him “Genocide Joe” literally originated here
Why would we attack those people in a thread about AOC? Do you think people are only mentally capable of holding one person in ill will? Is that the case for your mental capacity?
Imagine going to a pizza place and being mad they don’t have sushi
We were one of the first places online to be crossing our fingers that Trump had a heart attack lol. They’re not the topic of this thread.
It really doesn’t take that much browsing to find out that we attack all of those people constantly. It’s like our second favourite thing after dunking on libs.
If all members of the Reichstag are bad, who cares if some are less bad than the others
Everyone is making fun of you (which I was tempted to as well) but I’ll try to be genuine.
We shit on AOC because she is a perfect representation how trying to make change through official institutions like Congress is a dead end. AOC promised some radical ideas in her initial campaign and made it seem like she would be a genuine change from the Democratic party that only served the rich. But when Democrats got into power, she quickly folded into line and voted how the leadership wanted and defended the worst of the party (aka Biden). Of course she could have stuck to her guns (assuming she really believed in Democratic socialism), but that would have gotten her kicked from the party or not reelected.
So this is the eternal problem of trying to “push the Democrats left”, if you play their game you are beholden to their rules. Either conform to the mass murdering US empire or get kicked out of power. We criticize AOC heavily because she has largely chosen to stay in power by conforming to the evil US empire. And it’s even funnier when stuff like this happens and she isn’t offered powerful committee positions even though she compromised her supposed ideals.
Na, I’m just enjoying trolling you twits as much as you are me. =)
Yes.
No, she didn’t promise us shit. she said ‘these are the things I will push for’ and if you compare what shes put forward into congress and what she said they’re actually similar.
You’re making the classic mistake of blaming her for bills put forward by others. Personally when something is put forward that is better than the current situation I take it. you still moved the needle, maybe not as much as you’d like but you do it.
See above. again mistaking a vote for personal beliefs.
No, this is literally not what I’m telling you. I’m saying you’re going after one of 3 people who are even remotely similar to your positions (aka: anticapitalist, pro workers). Its not the same as saying shes ‘pushing dems to the left’ fuck that. they’re a lost cause as a party. What she does know how to do is manipulate a system, and shes good at it. thats why you idiots hate her so much, shes solo more effective than your entire community. Do you like what shes doing? nope. but shes doing it were you are powerless, she has a seat.
mmm, and yet you dont realize what she just demonstrated with that maneuver. sad really. AOC has probably done more to discredit the democrats than anyone in this thread just by fucking existing in the house. Shes literally doing exactly what you want to accomplish and you can’t even see it.
Okay moron, give me one example of her being effective at doing anything but voting to fund genocide. You keep saying she’s effective but she hasn’t effected any change. All she’s done is give pieces of shit like you an excuse to vote for genocide.
No, you idiots keep saying that. I’m saying shes the least harmful rep we have. very different statements. Its not my fault you lack basic read comprehension and confuse terms like ‘accomplishments’ and ‘effectiveness’. First, effectiveness requires a benchmark and we won’t agree on the benchmark metric so there is no point. secondly I’m not the one making claims about her that need refuting. they’re all basic facts about her that are common knowledge. You however are, like ‘she supports the genocide’ she clearly doesn’t. she literally voted against funding israel as a standalone bill. the omnibill version is not a vote for supporting genocide.
I can’t help the fact you’re misinformed. thats a you problem.
You really are a liberal if you think you can point to accomplishments that are not effective. Words are more important than actions, right?
We understand that’s what you’re saying. We’re saying “she’s still absolute shit”. Seems like you should wipe your own ass before you call out the stink in the room.
It’s not our fault you struggle with basic communication. I don’t know if this works in your high school debate club, but continually insisting that basic terms aren’t comprehensible to you because you normally have a slightly different interpretation of them, so as to not have to engage in the actual argument, isn’t really a good rhetorical strategy. It just makes you come off as someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
You were asked what change she has effected - ie. What has she accomplished?
You haven’t really made any claims apart from her being effective and accomplishing stuff, not bein supportive of a genocider and a lot of other claims, that’s true. I guess if you require specificity you can say you haven’t made any claims, but that’s why you’re being asked to be specific, so you can have an actual discussion.
You keep trying to tie this down to one single act for some reason, despite users referencing her entire tenure. I know being wrong can feel terrible, but it’s actually a great opportunity to learn something! It might also improve your grades in high school, since changing your attitude about learning to something less defensive would probably make your teachers despise you less.
So it doesn’t give money to Israel? Huh.
“I’m saying we should support the least harmful nazi we have” lmfao
Removed by mod
Libs and casual racism, name a more iconic duo
It took you this long to think of this response? SAD
https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/attractions/adventures-winnie-pooh/
this must mean some sort of animatronic bear based in Shanghai holds executive power in China
You remind me of the adage about how compulsive gamblers are, as much as anything else, addicted to losing
People responding to your arguments is in fact not trolling. The fact you take critique as a meanspirited thing is a you-issue.
So if you look at the responses you’ve already gotten, you know that’s a lie.
“Please don’t blame her for things she votes on” and other silly things liberals say to defend genocidal warmongering union breakers.
And the day that something comes along that moves things forward, I’ll be happy to move that needle. Until then I’ll continue to not support genocide.
<- You except you’re not cute.
You’ve literally just talked about moving the needle. Which is it?
You’ve been shown a bunch of times that those are not her positions. Do better.
You seem to be stuck on “the dems”. We are critiquing AOC and how she functions within the system.
+ + sephiroth posting lmao. “You cannot comprehend the depths of her mind maze” lol you just cannot comprehend the fact that you’re cool with throwing brown children in cages and murdering palestinians and other people aren’t. I’d say it’s okay, but it’s not.
Like how she helped crush strikes or like how she helped a genocide or like how she stopped giving a shit about border camps or etc?
You people always talk in vague terms because anything specific immediately makes it obvious what your actual politics are.
People should not, in fact, be like AOC.
People should, in fact, be more similar to AOC. see the difference there? its subtle i know. But you clearly prefer them to be similiar to trump/biden. 🤷
I prefer them to be more similar to Lenin actually
No, they shouldn’t be supporting genocides, invasions, incarceration and enslavement of black people, and so on, and so forth. So, no, they should not be more similar to AOC.
Those aren’t the only options. There are more than 3 people
Yeah we see the difference dumbass, we think supporting genocide and being a comprador for the american empire is bad actually
You shouldn’t need to use a math equation to explain your morals
I’m sorry you can’t grasp basic ordering by preference. i know, its very advanced for a corgi. you’ll get there eventually I’m sure. Though this inability is likely related to your worldview being perpetually shit on. In fact I shit on it because mathematically the concepts behind communism are inherently unstable and lead to authoritarians. but you probably know this.
This is excellent tagline material. Communism mathematically defeated.
Anyway please provide a mathematical proof that Communism bad and capitalism (or whatever it is you like) is good.
No, both are fucking horrible systems. Yes, mathematically, but for very different reasons. If you want to learn, look into distributed systems vs centralized systems. there is a reason comrade communists always fail into authoritarian dictatorships. now maybe you like that style of governance. thats a you thing. not an everyone thing.
If you want to learn why capitalism is mathematically bad well that’s even simpler. simple feedback systems analysis will do it. its why they continuously fail into oligarchies.
‘Both the system that massively improves people’s standards of living (including by providing them with guaranteed housing, universal healthcare, elimination of illiteracy, 60% improvements in life expectancy within the first 30 years, etc.) even without a complete achievement of its goals, and the system that enslaves and near-enslaves the vast majority of people, both at home and elsewhere are equally bad’.
Yeah, nah. You are just being silly. You can’t even provide any concrete criticism of communism and/or communist states. Just regurgitating baseless memes that your education in history began and ended with.
Show me this math
Lmao you cannot be older than 15
communists -->
Alright bears i think this one’s tapped.Straight-up repeating themselves now, booooooo.Everyone fill out their libby-bingo cards? DM me if you need more time otherwise I’m callin this 'd king in for the moderation they so desperately desire
Eddie: i was so, so wrong
What do you think math is?
Don’t worry I well know about various systems. So I guess it’s a you thing to think everything is bad and there’s no good solution? Mathematically we can either have evil oligarchy or evil authority? Or do you have a secret third option that mathematically is freedom or something?
I do agree it’s trivial to see the issues in capitalism mathematically or otherwise. Profit cannot grow forever. It will burn the world down.
Sorry that’s not a real thing. We don’t believe in CIA propaganda around here https://jacobin.com/author/marcie-smith
Unlike capitalism, which never exerts authoritarian control over anyone
No you see they said both systems are bad! So that means that despite them only critiquing communism, they definitely feel the same about capitalism, which is why they defend it so hard
I have a math PhD and actually communism is stable.
I have a degree in math, and I have also studied economics as part of my education. Your understanding of these topics is incredibly lacking.
Also, lol at ‘authoritarianism!!!’ coming from a person from a genocidal slaver settler-colony that is currently overtly carrying out a genocide, and which is the most prolific invader in the world.
Truly, that’s an antithesis of ‘authoritarianism’. /s
lmao check out this motherfucker…scolds us for not supporting zionism, then turns around and calls us authoritarians like it’s a bad thing. No leftist worth their salt supports the indiscriminate bombing of children or shooting up refugee camps. That means not supporting politicians like AOC who support supplying the weapons to commit war crimes.
It’s kind of silly to call our math wrong when we’re the ideology who focuses on using empiricism and the scientific method as much as possible when it comes to history, politics, and economics. The Democratic party is barely Keynesian anymore and has been moving towards Austrian economics since Clinton at the least.
Genocidal slavemaster-assed comment, don’t you have a plantation to be torturing folk on rather than running your mouth about things you clearly have a narrow settler’s scope on
Damn you must be really smart
I bet they almost passed 7th grade on the first try
AHAHAHAHAHAHA Oh my god ahhh that’s fantastic, great bit sir. Sorry I was preemptive with taking you seriously, you’re really nailing the “idiot redditor” tone here, it was really obvious. My bad for not getting the bit earlier
Dancing effortlessly between the mathematic and philosophical, failing spectacularly to connect either. Might as well say “Mathematically, blood transfusion is inherently sinful and leads to corruption of the soul”
Medieval grindset
Lib reinvents an even dumber version of Popperian or Randian anti-communist mathematical realism lmao
I await your proof
Removed by mod
VOLCEL POLICE!! THIS ONE RIGHT HERE!!! THREATENING TO SUCK OFF A LIB!
JOKES ON YOU I’M INTO BEING TAKEN AWAY
نحن شرطة VolCel.بناءا على تعليمات الهيئة لترويج لألعاب الفيديو و النهي عن الجنس نرجوا الإبتعاد عن أي أفكار جنسية و الحفاظ على حيواناتكم المنويَّة حتى يوم الحساب. اتقوا الله، إنك لا تراه لكنه يراك.
How many of those reps claim to be some form of socialist?
thats my point? shes closer to you twits than the rest. she never claimed to be communist. socialism is a broad category encompassing many groups. you’re literally fighting a person who is trying to get us closer to some version of socialism and you’re complaining about the games she playing. thats the problem with communists. they think their system is some perfect government vs recognizing its just as shitty as the ones they rail against.
What’s it defined by?
Oh god oh fuck this worked in my essay you’re not supposed to be able to respond
You cannot be this dense
We have the technology! We can make them denser!
I fear we might overburden their mind. They already struggle to respond
just obliviously showing your whole ass
This is unironically whataboutism lol. It’s a made up concept meant to deflect criticism of the USA, but insofar as it’s real, you’re doing it. If you want to see how it looks when dummies like you use it though, check the bot response
This is straight up false, since what you’re doing is defending AOC from valid critique and not talking about another rep. Stop lying and just admit you can’t handle your political avatar getting critique.
whataboutism
Thank you comrade
what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about
Okay that was a fun dunk, here’s the real response
detailed in-depth response to this argument
what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what
[fart noise]
10/10 this is the perfect response
Your mistake is thinking she’s outside that group and not inside it
I shit on people in hateful, murdering parties, that is correct
yeah thats why no likes you. even when a individual mostly aligns with your views you shit on them. oops. you have plenty of far shittier targets in the DNC to go after than AOC. spend your efforts on them. once AOC becomes the worst of the bunch then maybe people will take you seriously.
This is the funniest thing I’ve seen yet today
I’m getting the impression that you’re quite young, probably school-age, if you think this is some kind of banger
Sorry sweaty, you’re not allowed to oppose Hitler because Oskar Dirlewanger is currently the worst of the bunch
Also you can stop typing “people” when you just mean yourself, that kind of transparent “I speak for normal people” wishcasting doesn’t work when nobody agrees with you and you’re breathlessly defending a genocidiare.
The views of social democrats and the views of communists are not at all comparable. The point of social democrats is to provide an off ramp to leftist radicalization and create the appearance of change. Read State and Revolution to understand this effect more. There’s a reason why we say social democracy is the moderate wing of fascism.
And you’re arguing with a strawman idea of me. First, all views are comparable. thats literally how you’re making a distinction between social democrats and communists.
And I never said you had to like AOC, I’m saying shes literally one of the best you have in a very small group. if you want to move the window towards your world view you need to support people like her in order to acclimate the population your views. AKA: normalize shooting of CEOs.
Now once you do that and elect more and more in her region of the idea sphere, which we both know is closer to your wants than basically every other rep. Then undermining her is a great idea. Instead you shit on her and her positions which are demonstrably better than basically every other politician in play atm.
Sadly your too much of a ideologue to recognize the facets of human nature you need to leverage to actually get the outcome you desire.
You are quite literally the strawman personified. Do you have any idea how many times each one of us has seen and had to interact with your arguments? theres a lot more liberals like you than there are communists of us. We were born from your arguments, for many of us, these were our exact talking points. Many of us were once you, we just changed when we realized it was all evil.
If I wasn’t so lazy, I’d create a database of every lib talking point with a rebuttal to each one and a counter for every time it gets brought up. IIRC there was someone doing something similar for libertarians a few years ago. I think the guy working on it died or something though, never found out.
We have a few of those threads. I personally keep some articles bookmarked. You can start an effort to make a more comprehensive thread here on hexbear as well. It doesn’t have to be an individual operation. heres a thread for inspiration
Oh I’m aware. I shit on the liberals all the time too. go through my post history. I’m probably more fuck the DNC are than you twits. the difference is I also recognize communism as the shit system that it is. What is it the atheists say… oh right… I just believe in one less shitty god than you do. take it to heart when you think about your preferred system.
You are currently defending their members and strategies. You can’t try to defend whatever semblance of progressivism you have while simultaneously spouting reactionary drivel.
Lmao, why did you even leave reddit in the first place, that hellsite was literally made for you
You sound the most 15 years old anybody has ever sounded right now
Please educate yourself. Read a book, even Harry Potter would make you better.
“I’m a skeptic and a free thinker, that’s why I agree with the world superpower reigning in my part of the world about anything potentially rivaling its power.”
Yes it’s actually the people who know things who are blinded by ideology, not the subservient genocide apologists like you who are blind to their ideology
What’s human nature?
Cool. She’s one of the ‘best’ in a nazi government. Now what? In what way does that make her our ally when all she does is fight against us?
And you have what evidence to back up this claim, exactly?
Notably, the shooting of one CEO did much more to normalise that than everything that AOC has done.
You are making a lot of evidence-less claims.
I mean this earnestly when I say that part of the problem you’re having here, and will continue to have, is that you (like most liberals) have adopted a sort of gnosticism around politics and your theory of change that deals in intent, vague notions of ‘overton windows’, ‘marketplaces of ideas’, and even “her region of the idea sphere”. It’s abstraction that (conveniently for the systems that push it) can’t be properly identified, quantified, and tested.
Meanwhile, you’re trying to talk in these terms to a group of people who primarily come out of a discipline of materialist analysis. And because you so steadfastly refuse to point to concrete examples (facts, history, statistics, case studies, demonstrable social dynamics etc) even when repeatedly asked for them, it comes across as either deliberately evasive and bad faith, or like a mystic waving their arms in the air spouting rhetorical woo-woo claiming the opposite of demonstrable reality.
Does that make any sense to you? And if not, why not?
another scalpel of a comment that will be ignored by this high school debate wizard
and now they’ve responded, again completely obliquely while failing to engage with the points made
Sure, I can even respect the empirical aspects of the conversation. But what you’re all missing is the non-material aspects and thinking I’m a liberal is coloring your responses. Let me try to spell it out to you in a different way:
I’m saying you’re all assholes to a person who literally is very similar to you ideologically (worker owned means of production, strong safety net) and just trying to make her way in the world and is very likely a genuinely decent human being. One of the few we have. no one is perfect but dear god is she better than most, including many in this community. She’s also fairly talented in the political world regardless of how you feel about her positions. its why she gets so much flak, and personally like bernie I’d like to keep her around as long as possible even though I disagree with her on things.
As for facts… there are likely no ‘facts’ we’ll agree on as clearly demonstrated on the rampant disregard for what AOC has actually done vs what you’re all claiming shes done. Yes, I’ve repeatedly pointed out the false narrative you’re all spinning about her. We just fundamentally don’t agree here on the same information.
Lets take the rail strike for example, I’ll gladly lampoon biden for that because he had agency in that vote, he had a duty to represent the country, and part of that is ensuring workers have agency and an environment in which to strike. AOC per her own reports (which I’m happy to admit are biased) was acting on literally behalf of the workers in her constituency. she literally did her job she was elected to do. represent her constituents. do I agree with her vote? no. but if they did ask her to vote yes, I cant fault her for doing so. Its not like they asked her to vote no on passing a national paid sick leave policy. Would I gladly work with her to solve my countries problems? abso fucking lutely. do I fault her for working to build common ground with liberals? kinda, but I get it, shes outnumbered and marginalized and in those situations you compromise and get as much as you can.
But for those of you here what she did is an absolute betrayal. we. just. don’t. agree.
You want hard ‘numbers’ for metrics? I’ve literally cited sources for a couple of these and compared to china to highlight the absurdity. at the scale these countries operate you’re talking about marginal differences based on priorities of the ruling classes. While I’ve done a few examples here I havent bothered writing you all a dissertation because frankly your opinions of my opinions (and vis versa) don’t matter and the data is readily available and we’ve probably all looked at it. Why waste the time over nonsense numbers that are almost certainly doctored in various ways. Your responses? ‘you changed the definition of the term! CIA doctored the information!’ etc. See? waste of time to argue the numbers. they’re essentially meaningless when you’re going to waste time of the definition of the term ‘literacy’ I was literally using the most generous term and accepting china’s numbers essentially at face value. I did pick the value from the WHO as at least thats marginally independent source.
The primary difference is i’m happy to lampoon both capitalists and communists systems; both systems have historical and modern examples absolutely atrocious outcomes for people due to their tendency to collapse into centralized power structures leading to monocultures which always collapse. These are facts of nature and systems. While you can argue with me all you want about it, history has proven this result over and over and over across every centralized governance model, and all centralized systems suffer the same fate in basically every domain, technological, physical, biological, political.
The simple fact is I don’t have to prove these things to you, it will literally just happen. I suspect neither country will last the remainder of the century given current trajectories. Nor do I particular care if this group collectively pulls their heads out of their asses and recognizes a generally decent person when they see one. I’m simply enjoying my afternoon watching your entire community have a field day thinking ‘ah ha! another one! got em!’ plus you know, its nice to see that no new information has been missed due to my own information silos.
ignorant condescension from someone so politically illiterate they confuse social democracy with socialism
LiberalSocialist banned 2023, Jatone thread-spanning smug lib posting 2024
Welcome back LiberalSocialist
I’m not entirely sure you do, but ok, benefit of the doubt… Does it not strike you as strange that in a discussion around material political action and outcome it’s a stretch for you to “even consider” empirical evidence? Why does demonstrable material analysis play second fiddle these ill-defined and vibes based rhetorical ideas for you? I’m not even making a criticism here, I’m genuinely asking.
We’re not missing them (although people here are not a monolith), we’ve tried to explain that we do not see any value in them and why that is. Plenty of users have also tried to engage you on why these things matter, usually to a response of petulant insults.
As for thinking you’re a liberal; however you choose to define yourself is immaterial here. My point is that you’re trying to counter materialist analysis with rhetorical devices that both derived from and are relied upon by an ahistorical, immaterial strain of liberal idealism in order to defend a liberal politician in a liberal political party. You could call yourself a Stalinist for all I care; your frame of analysis, arguement, and purpose is entrenched in liberalism.
First of all, as brief aside, why is that you seem to continually run to insults, belittling people, misogyny, and misgendering people? Even when they’re not being hostile, as I’m not. Is it a defense mechanism? Or if you genuinely think we’re all idiots, assholes, and children then why are you so invested in this? But anyway, I digress…
The main point here is that you assert that our positions are very similar. They are fundamentally not. AOC is a capitalist politician who works to uphold and defend one of the most rampantly capitalist and reactionary states on the planet. She occasionally gestures in the direction of social democracy which, as others have attempted to explain to you and provided reading and sources for, is not socialism and is a release valve designed for the capital class to maintain the exploitative status quo against the threat of actual socialism / communism.
I suspect that your confusion around these definitions comes from simply absorbing the rhetoric of the American political two party spectrum rather than political theory.
Once again, people here aren’t interested in her intent (even if we all believed the way she’s presented). It’s simply not of any material concern. Doubly so for the idea that she’s “just making her way in the world”. Even ignoring the fact that everyone is doing that, and not usually as a member of the government of a massive global superpower, why is that relevant? As I asked in another comment, I’m not sure why we should be concerned with the continued career prospects of a capitalist, liberal politician in general, never mind doing so above and beyond the material effects of her actions, which often lead to appalling outcomes, mass death, and the strengthening of a status quo and political system that we see as entirely illegitimate and needs to be destroyed.
It’s this sort of stuff that makes many of your responses seem like simple ‘I like her and you’re all delusional assholes because you don’t’ parasocial stuff.
You don’t know anyone in this community, have no idea what actions they’ve taken in life, and as many have pointed out, no, on the basis of harm caused by her actions, she’s not. This, again, just feels like odd parasocial stan culture stuff so let’s move on shall we?
First of all, it would appear not given her inability to extract meaningful change, secure the positions she aspires to, and the fact that you yourself have used her inability to do these things as a defense of her throughout this thread.
Secondly, given that we have established that AOC does not share my values, politics, or worldview, why exactly would I want her to be politically talented anyway? Why would I want an agent of a system I oppose to be good at it?
That’s a very convenient way to sidestep the material concerns people have brought up all over this thread. People have repeatedly asked you in this thread for examples of the sort of positive achievements that you’re insisting we should recognise as beneficial to our political viewpoint and you’ve continually dodged, hedged, and ignored them. You do at least bring up the rail strike as an example here though, and I give you credit for that, so we’ll get to that in a moment.
Could you give any examples of what you mean by people here spinning false narratives or the things we’re “all claiming she’s done” which she has not? I’m honestly not sure what you’re referring to here.
I’m going to try and take all of this together because I think it’s another example talking at completely cross purposes.
As a communist I fundamentally don’t care if she accurately or admirably represented her constituents or even the interests of a particular union. Why would I? She doesn’t share my politics, and many of them won’t either. Similarly to the way I don’t care if some Texan evangelical accurately represents his constituents. You could argue there’s a difference of degrees there, sure, but they’re both working to uphold the same political system which is one I fundamentally oppose.
Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, the point that has been made again and again by people here is that she has done more material harm than good. A handful of minor concessions gained, that also strengthen an illegitimate system, simply do not outweigh the impact of the her other actions.
As for hypothetical about whether I’d work with her to solve America’s problems, that’s completely immaterial because; a) I’d never be in a position to do so for a multitude of reasons, and b) America’s construction as a state and by extension her role in it is the problem.
I’m not sure it is. I don’t think most people here have this sort of parasocial attachment to AOC either way. Most of us understand that she acts in accordance with the fact that she’s a liberal capitalist working to uphold the American system. We criticise her for that, because we oppose it, it’s against our material interests and political philosophy.
If there are people here who take that emotional tack of betrayal, it’s probably either because they were once a liberal who supported her positions before they became socialists.
For others I expect it’s not betrayal, but disgust at liberal cooption of traditionally leftist language in order to hypocritaclly uphold the reactionary, oppressive system.
I tend to prefer empirical evidence and material analysis yes.
I assume you’re referring to your discussion, such as it was, over literacy rates here? I’m not going to retread everything other commenters have said, instead I’d encourage you to engage further with them, but there too you either missed or deliberately sidestepped some important details.
Firstly, marginal differences matter, especially when you’re talking about talking about a country with a population of almost 1.5 billion people.
Secondly, the relative starting positions and speed at which these gains happened is also relevant to the discussion if you’re trying to contrast the relative merit of the two systems.
Thirdly, the direction of travel and progress also matters beyond just the snapshot of the numbers today. There’s plenty of evidence that US literacy rates are declining and will likely continue to do so as the state deprioritises education and cuts funding. Meanwhile, literacy rates in China continue to climb and are expected to continue to do so.
(Continued in next comment)
This is what @MolotovHalfEmpty@hexbear.net was getting at. You’re judging her (or at least you think we should judge her? Idk I just got here lol) based on the ideas she says she has in her head (assuming she ever said the words “worker-owned means of production” lol) and we are judging her based on her actual position and actions within the political system of the American empire, where she is tolerated by that system (until she’s no longer convenient ofc) mainly cuz, like Bernie, she is incredible at getting libs like you to literally idolize her in your head and continue to engage with that system despite the fact that… where have her principles and convictions been during anything that fucking mattered? Sure, she can introduce PROGRESSIVE bills into the US Congress that have 0 change of actually getting passed but she can’t take even a rhetorical/vote-based stand against genocide or crushing rail strikes? I know her (and yours) argument if it ever even comes up is “political pragmatism” (“she couldn’t vote like that because of the darn evil DNC which she has no power over whatsoever!!”) but all pragmatism and no politics or exercising power is just opportunism lol. If you care at all about shit actually getting better I am begging you to raise your standards lol, otherwise if you’re just here to tone-police us about hypocrisy or something uhhhh keep doing your civic duty and vote! But also shut the fuck up
too bad I can’t respect you, liberal
“hEr ReGiOn oF tHe iDeA sPhErE”
lmao. the ideology expert has logged on
Comparable doesn’t mean similar you dolt
HOLY FUCK WHERE IS YOUR SELF-AWARENESS. “No one likes you because you shit on hateful murderers” DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF YOU SETTLER WINDBAG
My god your posts get worse and worse the further down this thread I go
enjoy =)
Imagine thinking that people who actively support the genocide of Palestinians ‘mostly align with [our] views’.
imagine thinking AOC supports genocide. woosh.
She does. She has - as a politician - supported action to declareanti-genocide speech as ‘antisemitism’.
She literally went to bat for Joe Biden. Imagine thinking a person has to say the words “I support genocide” to support an ongoing genocide.
Yes. and? it was literally win/win for her.
first if biden/harris lost she can point out their shitty policies as the reason. if they won she can claim she helped bring the critical left vote.
for her and her role it was the correct call. my role was to fuck over harris in biden. which I happily did. see situation 1.
But you see that requires being able to understand cause, effect, and complex interactions within dynamic environments.
yes, she and bernie endorsed him. they also were critical of the admin’s israel policies the entire time. I dont have a problem with this.
Unless of course your advocating the she should have supported trump, or literally any of the useful idiots with zero chance of winning. that literally would have been a waste of political capital. I was happy to support jill over harris because that was my role in the situation took all of 5 minutes to check a few box. oi the burden!
deleted by creator
one can only wonder if the “iDeA sPhErE” is as smooth as your brain
You can’t claim to be critical of a policy then vote in favor of that policy with no conditions lmao
“Yea so I disagree with eating babies and we shouldn’t eat babies, but here’s $293,774,009,123,976 trillion zillion in baby eating subsidies.”
And she went to bat for a genocidal warmongering unionbreaking racist misogynist, which I think is bad and should be critiqued. I don’t see what it is you don’t understand.
I thought the dems couldn’t be pushed left? Then this argument doesn’t matter.
It’s really sad when you just repeat an insult back at the insulter. At least have some originiality.
:doubt: I know your types think words have meaning, but they don’t when the actions don’t line up. However the words were still very much in favor of genocide. She was ride or die for Biden.
“There’s only two possibilities! Only two things to do! She was completely powerless and also what she does doesn’t matter and she has no pull so doing anything wouldn’t have mattered, but she also couldn’t have done anything else.” You’re constantly moving your position throughout this thread buddy. If she has no pull and nothing she does really has any significance, then she could have chosen to support the uncommitted movement, and that’s at the very least.
Oh my god paradox gamers are the thickest goons around. Those games and their consequences are just… Such a shame really.
Liberals and thinking voting is activism, name a more iconic duo.
didn’t have to imagine it since she demonstrably has, so I had extra imagination left over for this:
this… Is amazing
I didn’t actually make it but I did imagine posting it
I still don’t get what she’s supposed to be doing in that second picture
I drew a picture of you
still falling for the ‘rotating villain’ routine, amazing
Telling on yourself lol. Good thing I don’t want hateful murderers to like me
And you have much more productive things to do than argue with leftists online about how we should be nicer to AOC, yet here you are. Why is it that your criteria for “better targets” only goes one way? Why do you think this is acceptable, when you have far shittier sites to visit and far worse people to argue with, but our critique of is somehow… wrong? In some way I can’t even grasp.
Yes, your critique of AOC is wrong, essentially because its not based on reality. but hey. who am I to tell you what reality is. you do you. =)
“Not based on reality” in that I am pointing to actual things she has done, and your defensive is based in reality in that you can’t mention anything she’s done? Great stuff.
Yes, things you think shes done. I understand why you think that, you’re a idealist. your ideals are flawed but I get it. I’ve also pointed out the literal things she done that point to that she doesn’t support the positions you assert she does. she literally voted against aid for israel and then voted for aid that helped the ukraine and taiwan and israel. those are two very different situations. she absolutely critiqued biden for his border policies. policies she can’t change.
Thats living in reality, understanding why she did things. just saying ‘OH NO SHE VOTED FOR A BILL WITH AID TO ISRAEL!!! SHE BAD’ isnt. its not recognizing the context shes operating in. instead of going after literally the 400 other people who did the exact same thing you’re wasting breath on one of the few people in congress who stands for literally 80% of what you want. worker owned production, better social systems, etc.
If you can’t recognize that well thats a you problem. Notice how you guys are stuck here on your little island shes out there bringing the ideas you supposedly want to the masses in a nice package and you’re pissed over compromise bills and lack of pointless agitation? I mean fuck child, you have so many other people to be upset about and you focus the purity tests on the only one remotely in your sphere? lol. no wonder you cant accomplish anything.
Let the girl do her thing in peace. go shoot some ceos or something.
This is hilarious
I don’t think the word means what you think it means. Me being an idealist would have no relation to me experiencing material reality. People have cited your own sources back at you, yet for some weird reason you haven’t responded to it. Hmmm.
“Genocide is bad” is a flawed ideal and other deranged statements bade by democrats
And people have pointed out the literal things she has done that does support the positions I assert she does. You don’t engage with them because you’re a big baby.
Yeah. She did those things because she’s a liberal like the rest of them.
No actually saying “oh no she supported genocide that’s bad” is a pretty consistent ideological stance to have.
It is though. It’s just not the conclusion you’d like it to be because you’re still at the stage in life where you think the DNC can save us or be saved or fixed or whatever. I was like that when I was a teenager too. I remember thinking Al Gore was good. Ah, those were the days, just a smooth brain.
Why would I waste my time discussing a bunch of people that aren’t AOC in a thread about AOC? Why would I waste my time critiquing [far right loon] on a leftist forum? There’s nothing to be gained or learned from that discussion. Yeah MTG is wacky, great. She’s not a sheepdog for the left. You keep arguing that this is not productive and then complain that we don’t do something even less productive. On top of that you behave as if this thread is the entirety of the site. Just go to one of the threads where we shitpost about Trump being moist or whatever if that’s what you’d rather want.
Furthermore you’ve still failed to point to one concrete example of AOC working towards any of those things you claim she’s working towards.
You’re here too, so I don’t really understand your point. Yeah this is just for fun, that’s what social media is? Good job? :congratulations: Other people have already gone through your inconsistency with “pointless” and “compromise” and you’ve ignored them every time, so I won’t waste my energy there. Her “bringing the ideas we want” is also something that has been explained a bunch, so I’ll just repeat myself: Genocide, border camps, union breaking, sheepdogging and so on are not things I want more of, therefore AOC is not working in my interests.
Again I ask you (again you will fail to answer) do you think we can only critique one person? Is that how your mind works, you only have mental capacity for one person to be disliked? “Purity tests” = “Not supporting genocide” lol. Yeah real high bar to clear there. I actually accomplish not committing a genocide every single day of my life and I intend to continue accomplishing that.
Also I thought you said she wasn’t effective? So she has no effective accomplishments? They’re all pointless? But I thought you were against pointless agitation? Which is it?
Liberals will say “shooting a CEO pales in comparison to my strategy: Winning an election” and then not win an election
Apparently, literally pointing to concrete things that she did is ‘not based on reality’, but hyping up her supposed ‘achievements’ while being unable to mention any is somehow not.
when you’re willfully ignoring how shes literally on the record as not supporting those things and the context of which those bills were passed, then yes, you’re ignoring reality. Supporting biden for reelection vs trump is not supporting his border policies. Supporting aid to the ukraine and Taiwan is not supporting genocide done by israel. not wasting every day bitching about bidens border policies on children is not the same as supporting it. As for the rail strike I disagree with her on that one but if her statement is true, then she was literally doing what she was elected to do, represent her constituents.
so whats left for me to fact check for you? yes, AOC is not a communist, but she sure hell is orders of magnitudes better than what we have and if you can’t recognize that well… thats a you problem.
So, your argument is that she said that she doesn’t support those things? Hahaha. By your logic, when I am accused of something, I can just say that I didn’t do that, and that will somehow become the actual truth.
Nobody should care what she says on record or thinks. What is important is what she does. And she has literally taken part in the genocide. That is supported by the article that you linked earlier.
Firstly, it’s not just the bills.
Secondly, what context justifies this sort of participation in a genocide?
Yeah, it is.
She has literally made effort to specifically facilitate the genocide of the Palestinian people.
Also: Supporting ‘aid’ to Ukraine is supporting a war that NATO caused, and where Ukraine is not on the correct side, at least on account of trying to become a NATO outpost.
Supporting ‘aid’ the province of Taiwan just means that she is in favour of NATO keeping its glorified military outpost and chip factory.
Both of those things are bad on their own.
Not taking any action against those while having promised to do so and while supporting the people who carry out those policies is very much supporting those policies.
Going to apply the standards that you have applied to the PRC and other socialist projects: she’s a Burgerlander. They always lie. We can’t trust them.
Also, even without that silliness, she has shown herself to be a massive liar.
Cool. You support her doing bad things because she was elected to do them.
And we are supposed to support her? Lol.
You are yet to point to any of her accomplishments, you are yet to point to any issues of communist projects, you have been demonstrated to have no knowledge of history, economics, etc., etc., etc. Hell, you didn’t know about the education efforts until I pointed them out to you.
In what way? You haven’t named any of her achievements that you claim her to have made. What are her actions that are supposed to be laudable?
‘If you don’t know about her achievements that I claim she has made but can’t actually name any, then it’s your problem’ says the person who is learning about the actual achievements of actual working-class movements in real time.
=) = I’m not mad
So she hasn’t defended Biden, helped break a strike, stopped agitating for the children thrown in cages, defended harsher border policies and so much more? Wow I guess I can’t trust the wikipedia article you linked anymore. Damn.
hey man dunno about you but I don’t spend every day bitching about shit. got things to do. And no she hasnt, she just doesn’t waste time on shit she can’t change beyond pointing it out. just because you’re intractable doesn’t mean everyone is.
deleted by creator
Liberals and casual misogyny, name a more iconic duo
the more iconic duo
Liberals and lack of all introspection
Buddy you are literally arguing with a bunch of people online that they aren’t sufficiently appreciative of AOC. You’ve spent hours writing pages of responses. I do not believe you at all.
I find that hard to believe too.
Fantastic retort, argh I am debunked.
She’s not going to write you back pal.
If it were me I wouldn’t have been ride or die for biden, voted for genocide, used immigrant camps as a photo op, shamed people for wanting action on palestine, voted for giving more aid to Israel, stopped agitating against border camps, but I’m just built different.
For someone who acts so smug and condescending, you’re really bad at exhibiting any valid reason for that attitude. You’re pretty obviously an ideological coward who flees when tasked with any interrogation of their own worldview.
I could go on, but I won’t.
You are deficient.
First of all, we don’t go for that sort of casual misogynistic language round here.
Secondly, your dedication to dozens of replies, saying nothing, calling people names, and refusing to engage on any particular point would seem to indicate otherwise.
If she can’t change it, while having to actively support (in money, votes, PR, volunteer time etc) a collosal amount of destructive, regressive, and downright evil policy, what exactly is her worth?
Why is it that liberals always frame ‘everything that could be done’ so narrowly that it’s actually ‘everything that could be done without the possibility of them recieving any kind of consequence or hinderence their advancement in that very system’? Why are your expectations so low that the possibility of damage to politicians continual professional success and ladder climbing (in a system you say is corrupt and they can’t effect change in) is somehow beyond the bounds of what’s possible? Why do you place a politician’s career progression beyond the important of the policies you supposedly believe in?
Mods, please do not ban this guy. We need to play with our food and this is great for that purpose.
OrcasTossingSealion.mp4
You ever get the urge to do the opposite of what you’re asked to not do?
I demand that you do NOT dunk on the lib personally
What I’m hearing when told not to dunk on the lib
You could do something really funny that would have long term not funny consequences.
If you could only time it so you knew they were banned right before writing a response
Sometimes I miss liberalsocialist
Me too. They seemed to have perfect little sibling energy.
This one kinda has the same, though more distant. Call it younger cousin energy
Show me where she has pushed against the Dems
Lol. Like what?
But but but…she doesn’t have any pull in congress! She’s just a smol beanis congressional rep! Definitely not one of the most powerful people in the US, let alone the world!
Fuckin comedy gold right here
It was not constant, the point in her phrasing was that she “took a break” for four years while it was her team of murderers in power. “Ah man, if Trump wins we need it ‘resist’ again…”
gasp she didnt have to constantly fight with people who would gladly murder her for a change! the horror! seriously get some perspective.
So you agree that she stopped standing up for minorities as soon as her team of murderers were in power
No, I think she focused her efforts on persuadable individuals instead of trying to shank them at the first opportunity.
I’m glad you agree shes one of maybe 10 members of congress who are actually worth anything though. sad that instead of protecting her and helping elect people more like yourself you’re shitting all over the one most closely aligned with you.
So does she have to fight or not? Moving the battleground to individuals doesn’t mean it’s not a fight - either she’s stopped, or she’s still fighting. It sounds to me that you’re not actually considering what you’ve already said, and are just grasping for any argument that will help you “win” in the moment.
I think you have a misunderstanding on what ‘fighting’ means. unlike you, she doesn’t lash out at everyone like a hurt animal. that literally gets you no where. She doesn’t waste her time persuading those who are not persuadable. (i.e. you, republicans, capitalists.)
So tell me: you get into office, you’re essentially solo in your views, how would you deal with the bills being proposed? beyond getting nothing by essentially refusing to vote for anything. Yes you’re very principled; we get it.
Muh civility!
Okay, let’s say she doesn’t (she does, against anti-genocide protestors, by the way). What good does that do anybody?
Seems like lashing out gets people a lot more than not lashing out.
How about you tell us what good are politicians like your whitewashed and idealised version of AOC, then, if the system makes it impossible to legally act against it from within?
Won’t somebody PLEASE think of poor AOCs feelings
She’s not gonna text you back
No, I’m using the same toothless definition you’re using - publicly supporting a political stance. Or are you saying she never fought for minorities in any sense?
Wow you’re correct the system itself is shit and cannot be reformed, no matter how many sheepdogs try to herd us into the democratic fold. Thank you for convincing me of being a militant communist! I will now go murder [redacted]
Whatever it is she tried to do did not achieve the supposed goals of helping vulnerable people.
Sounds like trying to persuade individual nazis is not a fruitful tactic.
And that’s ignoring the fact that she has always been one of them, starting her career as a CIA asset.
Why would we protect people who actively do stuff like support (or, rather, directly participate in, given her position) a highly-televised genocide?
Firstly, the USian state is never going to allow that to happen.
Secondly, we have several centuries of electoral politics to look back on, and we can plainly see that electoral politics are useless when it comes to improving the lives of working-class people in general. So why should we care about electing anybody in the US?
A nazi that is the closest to either of us in their views is still a nazi whose views are incompatible with ours.
You’re expectations of her are not couched in reality. You’re blaming her for the actions of others. She literally has zero pull in congress.
Let me know when you do something actually effective. last I checked you havent murdered any CEOs or won any political office. Of the two of you, AOC is far more effective at accomplishing her goals. sucks to suck I guess. Too bad that history you’re trying to flout is worth less than the bits its encoded by.
If she has zero pull in congress, then why does it matter how she uses her position? If the rest of congress can ignore her votes, why not vote against zionism, genocide, or the military industrial complex?
You’re contradicting yourself.
So, she’s not accomplishing anything is what you are saying now? Cool.
I disagree, however. She has the same interests as your Bidens, your Trumps, your Sinemas, etc., and she acts on them, and not on the interests of the working class - in the US or elsewhere.
Let me know when she does something actually effective for the working class. She couldn’t even keep Dementia Biden as the nominee so that he could disassemble your empire.
Neither has she. And she hasn’t acted against their interests as of yet in general.
Why is winning an office in a nazi government good?
So would be people like Hitler, Washington, Leopold II. Do you want us to celebrate those genocidal slavers as well?
I agree AOC is relatively effective at accomplishing her goals which is why we shit on her. Because her goals seem to be only to empower the Democrats to do evil things and provide them some cover. She is pretty good at that.
However I don’t think merely accomplishing things is a good enough reason to support someone. The things they are trying to accomplish need to be worth accomplishing. I’m not just on whatever team I think is currently winning. what is something she has accomplished that I, or other communists, would like?
Mhm, hm, hm, hh, he, hehehehehehe Ha HAHAHAHA AHAHAHHA AHAH AHAHA
*Your
If you stop responding then we know it’s because it’s your bedtime
Then her goals are bad
deleted by creator
And so far they’ve mentioned 0 actual things AOC has done
and still pointedly failing to respond to comments with the most devastating evidence against AOC
I was wondering why this thread had so many comments
That’s a rare variant PPB!
Okay everyone please log in to bureaucrat if you wish to respond to the silly lib.
The last one definitely didn’t understand they were talking to like 5 of us because they were mad that we were replying to every one of their comments across the whole thread lol
The last one? So we’ve already managed to do it once before? That’s fantastic!
Will do, cornrads!
once again one of the worst people Ive seen around here in a while comes from that instance
That’s why I like to keep them around. Gives us perspective and some juice. Besides they almost didn’t say any slurs!