nevermind that hillary clinton sponsored legislation for a kinder, gentler separation wall on the us/mexico border--that will likely be installed by israeli security companies, nonetheless--if you don't vote for trump you're telling muslims and blacks in our country to fend for themselves.
another liberal defense i've heard is that they care about the scotus and keeping future nominees to the court on the "left"--just why in the fuck does that matter? they invoke scotus as if nothing more needs to be said. it's a talking point that's taken on a life of its own in their minds.
they cannot step outside of the simulacra of political reality that they have been conditioned to believe exists. this isn't new, of course, but it's astonishing to see it in technicolor.
"Trump wishes to normalize relations and increase security cooperation with Russia because he's a liberal? What a dupe you are. Trump promotes that because his pockets are lined with their money. Why don't you think he releases his taxes? Trump had zero interest in the Republican platform until it came to Russia, when he pressed to make it favorable to Russia, at the Ukraine's expense. And Clinton opposes the TPP. And you think Trump speaks to the working class? Well yes, if you mean to their fears. Name one policy proposal that would help them? Is it his wanting to abolish the minimum rage? What foolishness you speak."
lol, the russia is power mad, the russia wants to eat us alive.
Keven posted:Why isn't this website viral yet
*80s montage music begins blaring*
wikileaks was "weird" and had a really off-color response to the Panama Papers, but weren't completely obviously in the tank for Putin (which was odd in retrospect because Assange literally had a thing on RT)
but i guess technolibertarians were still holding torches for wikileaks (despite them being irresponsible idiots the rest of the time--cf doxxing an entire Turkish political party roster's worth of women, and that's just the most recent example)
the main takeaway from the dnc infodump will be that nobody trusts wikileaks
http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3783785&pagenumber=236#post462505390
tpaine posted:le_nelson_mandela_face posted:hey is anyone here not a russian or CIA agent? asking for a friend
yeah, in fact my people have a word for that
is the word "goyim"
postposting posted:"If it's a really great coincidence," said Russia expert Fiona Hill, who directs the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution. "The Russians have a word — ne sluchaino. It means, not accidental. Not by chance."
just look at the inborn perfidy of these russkies? imagine if English had a word (two words actually) to mean 'not accidental'.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/26/putin-s-wicked-leaks-didn-t-start-with-the-dnc.html
Lord Byron once observed, in skewering one of his favorite poetic targets of derision, that while the English have no word so good as the French longueurs to describe tedious, uninterrupted stretches of writing, they nevertheless “have the thing.” Similarly, there is no proper American term for what Russian intelligence calls aktivniye meropriyatiye, or active measures, but by now most Americans really ought to be used to “the thing,” as it might well decide our next presidential election.
Keven posted:Why isn't this website viral yet
two words bud. failaids
thirdplace posted:I just think Donald Trump is Bad. I'm sorry but I really do!
You're a damn noob.
thirdplace posted:it's fucking idiotic to think that trump will kill fewer people in the third world than hildog. why? he doesn't give a shit about their lives or about anti-imperialism. he doesn't really give a shit about foreign policy beyond the way they implicate his catchphrases, and in the absence of conviction he would just acquiesce to the exact same material pressures that would drive HRC's wars. if he's actually a russian agent that's cool, but any detente with russia would be balanced out by getting more bellicose on china and possibly iran. if you want to support trump out of accellerationism or because he would hurt america then ganbatte, but don't tell me I should actually believe in his shitty, mealy-mouthed opportunistic critiques of imperial wars. i made the mistake of doing that in 2008 with the cool black guy, i'm sure as fuck not going to do it with the orange billionaire who all the fascists love
Neither do communists, idiot.
thirdplace posted:it's fucking idiotic to think that
...
i made the mistake of doing that in 2008 with the cool black guy, i'm sure as fuck not going to do it with the orange billionaire who all the fascists love
hhhhmmm
thirdplace posted:it's fucking idiotic to think that trump will kill fewer people in the third world than hildog. why? he doesn't give a shit about their lives or about anti-imperialism. he doesn't really give a shit about foreign policy beyond the way they implicate his catchphrases, and in the absence of conviction he would just acquiesce to the exact same material pressures that would drive HRC's wars. if he's actually a russian agent that's cool, but any detente with russia would be balanced out by getting more bellicose on china and possibly iran. if you want to support trump out of accellerationism or because he would hurt america then ganbatte, but don't tell me I should actually believe in his shitty, mealy-mouthed opportunistic critiques of imperial wars. i made the mistake of doing that in 2008 with the cool black guy, i'm sure as fuck not going to do it with the orange billionaire who all the fascists love
the black guy. the orange guy. what is it with you and skin color. it's what in the heart that counts
EmanuelaBrolandi posted:hhhhmmm
my personal mantra is: Paradol Ex Was Right and I Was Wrong and I Need To Deal With That
ilmdge posted:i dont think insta_Gramsci implied they were buying into anything from what trump was saying, but was only noting that clinton was allowing her republican opponent ot be ostensibly less for neoliberal trade deals and less for sabre-rattling against russia among other things which i take more as criticism of hillary clinton than any sort of buy-in on don trumps.
this is more of what i meant, i apologize for not being clear. in terms of surface politics hrc is basically allowing trump to (appear to) position himself to the left of her issues related to neoliberalism and us-russia cooperation. the latter one is especially funny because of its historical irony.
trump is doing this for entirely self-serving and conceptually wrong reasons, of course, but the way that the left/right polarity has shifted within the paradigm of us electoral politics is kind of surreal
insta_gramsci posted:this is more of what i meant, i apologize for not being clear. in terms of surface politics hrc is basically allowing trump to (appear to) position himself to the left of her issues related to neoliberalism and us-russia cooperation. the latter one is especially funny because of its historical irony.
trump is doing this for entirely self-serving and conceptually wrong reasons, of course, but the way that the left/right polarity has shifted within the paradigm of us electoral politics is kind of surreal
sorry for misunderstanding. but: if we deny trump's anti-war pretensions--and to be clear, i'm not just saying they're there for the wrong reasons, i'm saying they're totally meaningless and will not be honored in even the most trivial way--doesn't the kernel of truth in the liberal "you're just hatin hildog b/c of ur white manlet privilege" argument stand unrebutted?
thirdplace posted:doesn't the kernel of truth in the liberal "you're just hatin hildog b/c of ur white manlet privilege" argument stand unrebutted?
Are you having an attack