You are the one making shit up. I am taking the, albeit misguided effort, to correct you and your misinformation. That is the problem with liberals, they love Dezinformatsia just as much as right-wingers. They just use more high-brow words while doing it.

Trump is very incoherent and contradictory, but his anti-NATO positions are just that he thinks that the US should be isolationist. The liberal opposition is that, lacking a positive position or vision, liberalism needs a new Cold War to define themselves purely in opposition to other nations. Russia and China are not formally aligned, but they are willing to work together and increase trade with each other out of mutual ostracization and opposition to US demonization. Same reason Iran and North Korea are in the same axis of opposition, purely allied out of mutual interest in resisting US opposition, than any other mutual ideology or interest.

The Tariffs are still harmful to China, it is an export economy. Yes the US firms pay it, but it drives up the cost and therefore reduces sales of the products, so it is still harmful to China, even if it is still not how Trump implied it works, with the Chinese government just paying money out of their treasury or whatever. Trump started the banning of TikTok in his first term. Again, he is really incoherent and stupid, and probably backing off due to his supposed support amongst internet media.

Ah yes, cutting social spending and (Bill Clinton actually did do) deregulation means that Bill Clinton “empowered” government. Republicans would never reduce social spending and regulations. Even if it reduced the deficit, and increased the police and military. That is totally different that what Republicans would support.

Donald Trump is very anti-China and Russia post-shock therapy is a far-right neoliberal hell hole. Your worldview is flipped and twisted.

Oh, reversing the federal deficit by cutting social spending, totally progressive and not far-right Reaganism. Totally opposing the Republicans rather than being right-wing and simple enough to buy into the Republican kayfabe about the deficit…

“THERE were two “Reigns of Terror,” if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the “horrors” of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.” - Mark Twain

It is a socialist publication, MBFC still has to give it high credibility because it publishes good stuff. NJR probably voted for Hillary in the 2016 general, but was pro-Sanders and obviously, because he is leftist and “tankie” hates Trump. You are entirely delusional for saying that socialists are more likely to side with Trump than liberals. The Democrat messaging, because of their lack of positive case for themselves just relies on equating anything less than unconditional support for the party with helping Trump.

I was literally talking about Bill Clinton and centrist Democrats. Depending on the specific time, literally either the most amount of lawmakers and congressional voters or second most.

The problem is that there is no alternative. The two parties are just this same process at two different speeds and slight amount of decorum. People forget that Jimmy Carter was our first neoliberal president and Clinton cemented this all being bipartisan and passed the things that were seen as too far right for Reagan (NAFTA, the crime bill, was going to SS privatization until Monica Lewinsky distracted from it…). Liberals hate Trump because he is being too crass and clumsy while doing this. Democrats would rather do the same thing more slowly and with more excuses and obfuscation.

The US is already an oligarchy. The difference between “oligarch” and “billionaire” is whether they are from Eastern Europe or Western.

Dude, this is a socialist publication and “tankies” have hated Musk before he explicitly tied himself to Trump and made liberals hate him. What are you talking about? After Clinton, the liberal orthodoxy had been that Reagan had a point with small government and deregulation.

It is not satire, it is usually just that the blood sacrifices are usually more obfuscated and hidden.

“The Bourgeois are not human animal”. Though calling them vegetables is still too demeaning to the celery and carrot, who never did anything wrong. Maybe they are mineral? Lead and mercury caused a lot of suffering, and I don’t feel bad about insulting them.

This is the only reason I accept to refusing to call cops “pigs”. The humble swine does not deserve such a comparison.

But we are capitalists, chasing profit is the highest morality and human calling. It is killing without direct investor profit that is immoral.

There wouldn’t be any outrage outside of 100s of the wealthy donors. Liberals would completely be more outraged because of norms and civility. The entire point of “drain the swamp” was that most people hate oligarchs, the point of Republicans is to redirect this off into racist and unproductive channels, where nothing ever comes of this hate for corporate and wealthy overlords.

These god-damn violent tankies. Vietnam should have just fined her a much smaller amount than the corrupt practices made them, like how the West handles corrupt oligarchs.

Purged the Anarchists? No you are the lying disingenuous person here. If we were talking about the Russian Civil War, you might have something approaching a point.

Edit: proving the point, hatred over “tankies” is just that you don’t want your own positions or viewpoints challenged or questioned

yes they are, Tankie has become so abused and meaningless as now only means anything to the left of Dick Cheney or not going along with US foreign policy.

Spanish Civil War, where the Soviet Union was the only foreign power to give large amounts of aid to the Republicans and France and Britain sat out, and US oil and other business interests backed Franco. Where there were divisions over tactics and priorities but where communists fought with the Republicans, and it is largely after the defeat and popularizers like Orwell that a stabbed in the back myths about communists came to prominence. Yes, the liberals were not a complete monolith, so there were some liberals with the Republicans.

Also, in an underdeveloped, still mostly feudal society, liberalism can still be a progressive force.

I am being short and glib since I was just responding to an epically dumb post. but if you want to know how fascism is a necessary outgrowth of liberalism and the need to protect and serve capitalism leads liberalism towards fascism in crisis.

https://www.amazon.com/Apprentices-Sorcerer-Tradition-Critical-Sciences/dp/1608462021

Damn, 55% of Brits are tankies

Unless you are a diehard right-winger, Liberals will always be more likely to betray you than anyone on the left. The causality is backwards here, liberals will always side with fascists over the left, thus they are identified as moderate-fascists. Just like how the Democrats want nothing more than to just be polite Republicans.

The Winnie the Pooh stuff is just completely made up by Western propaganda. Also, how hard is “yellow face is racist”, when saying an Asian looks like a cartoon with yellow skin?

Free speechers on .world can’t handle interacting with any dissenting opinions to the left of the Bush Administration.

Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar drastically outperformed Harris.