violent rhetoric on the left
violent rhetoric on the left
i have no patience for people talking about violent rhetoric on the left really because every day i read the news and every politician in this country and in most others is saying 'we gotta kill more people'. they use different words to say it. obviously you're not supposed to just say 'we gotta kill more people'. but there's all kinds of polite and okay ways to say it.
'we need to control our borders' is a phrase which here means 'we gotta kill more people, we gotta drown more refugees in boats, we gotta send more people back to warzones and governments that want them dead, we gotta make more camps and we gotta make the camps more fatal'.
'we need to be tougher on welfare fraud' is a phrase which here means 'we gotta kill more people, we gotta make disabled people do more song and dance routines to convince some indifferent bureaucrat that they deserve to eat and we gotta make sure that the bureaucrats say 'no', we gotta starve those kids more, we gotta make sure families and kids and old people are freezing in the winter'.
'we need to tackle violent crime' is a phrase which here means 'we gotta kill more people, specifically Black people, unless we said Terrorism instead of Crime, in which case it's specifically muslims, shoot them, imprison them, surveil them, disappear them, brutalize them, whatever.'
and of course none of this is Violent Speech. this is Sensible Political Discourse. these are Common-Sense Policy Goals. we gotta kill more people: that's an electable policy. you can always count on we gotta kill more people as a platform. we gotta kill more people is gonna sweep the nation baby. we gotta kill more people 2024 -- vote now on your phones. now slow down. hold your horses. did that guy just say we gotta kill more people? well that just wont do. thats why im running on a platform of we gotta kill more people for cheaper, to stop this wasteful madness. and the people just keep dying but seems like there's still some of them left so i guess we're just circling back around to our main thing which is: we gotta kill more people
A lot of being a leftist means spelling out just how grotesque and violent libs are to their faces because they can't connect the dots by themselves. There are no constellations to these people, only twinkling lights.
yep. nothing has ever been associated with something else, history doesn't cause the present day, material reality isn't real
Material reality is a whataboutism. Also, if you don't agree the economy is doing great, it's a personal failing and you're probably a loser.If you can't adhere to the topic at hand in a vacuum, and not bring up other things that make your case, then I have nothing left to say to you. You're helping trump
a lot of the rest of is is libs getting mad at you and yelling at you red in the face OH YEAH WELL WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION HUH WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT IM WAITING IM WAITING YOU HAVE NOTHING SO I GUESS OUR CURRENT IDEOLOGY OF DEATH IS WHAT YOU GET
there will never be a moment of reckoning for them, never a moment of self reflection on any scale until the last moment when they realize that the people with power now absolutely hate them and they are the enemy and then they will flee to another country and talk about how awesome they were and how bad it actually was that they had to stop killing more people in their country and they better start killing more people in this country they are in now or they risk becoming like the country they fled who are worse than them, of course
tale as old as time
I remember talking to my dad about defunding the police and citing how one time simply not policing reduced crime reports. I noted things like giving people money, social workers, and addiction rehabilitation all lowered crime rates and kept people safer. I even conceded that sometimes you did need someone with a gun to arrest people but far less than the norm. His ass still did the talking point "what are we gonna do instead?" Cause I remember feeling so frustrated about how I had given him 3 or 4 things to do instead and with a budget the size of a police force, I'm sure you could get some neat programs going. This joker likes to do the "appeal to cinema" fallacy so I don't know what I expected.
Liberalism is structured around a visual occlusion of violence from the people it is done on behalf of.
The market is upheld by force. "Law and order" are maintained by police. That shirt you bought is not a product of someone working 2 hours in a sweatshop under coercive conditions, it is merely $25 and 100% cotton and that is all there is to know about it.
Engels concept of social murder remains one of the most underutilized terms on the left despite its rhetorical potency.
I've read The Condition of the Working Class in England, but was too stupid to remember the title when I saw this post so thanks for the refresher lol
I've said it elsewhere a few times, but this is a real problem a lot of liberals have, separating civility of language from civility of action, and it's part of why they despise people like Trump so much.
Yes, they may desire the same goals, but from a politician they expect a certain veil of plausible deniability, like what Obama provided; delivering laws and actions about deporting people and blowing up others in dull, 'professional' terms, rather then being so crass and bombastic about it.
They venerate this sanctity of civil speech above all else, but they'll never really admit to it. This worship of it I think is partly why you see so many bazinga brains being needlessly verbose.
Impact over intent is something they've yet to learn
ever talked to a liberal "pacifist" who supports the troops and the police?
@Civility@hexbear.net this u?
🥰
the empire is a machine of blood, destruction, and death. The libs may be too naive to recognize it, but leftists cannot afford such luxury
“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.”
Death to America means hunting down and mercing every current American citizen, not dismantling the structures that enforce American hegemony like the CIA or US Military (or internally, like the DEA, FBI, or border force)
Honestly I do want to slab out some of the most egregious settler peckerwoods as warnings to the rest to not get buck. The structures and supports are the primary target, but... I'm not weeping over individual settlers getting their cards pulled at this point.
I'm over here saying we need less violence, but the violence we have has to be surgical and overwhelming.
One of the easiest ways to counter this rhetoric is to point out that the violence is never gone in whatever state system exists. Any threat, from a historical pov, is met with real violence and the liberal idea of truly free speech only exists in a state where there exists little to no current threat to the underlying power structure.
For conservatives (especially the kind that believe that socialist/etc will concentrate too much power in the state, whi h will result in state violence) you need only dig down a bit to get them to admit that they believe that violence is appropriate so long as it targets the right people. At which point you can let them know you don't give a shit about their opinions on it at all
And, it's like, what. Joe Pooptickler in the comments can tell me that I should be institutionalized, thrown out of a helicopter, or institutionalized then thrown out of a helicopter and suddenly i'm the bad one for wanting to sling some shit back at them?
You see, you have to kill more people to make the divine line go up every day!
Reads like a Carlin bit
I was gonna say
i want to treat the US ruling class exactly like they treat the rulers of other nations
Babs Johnson Thought becomes the bipartisan consensus
Babs Johnson Thought becomes the bipartisan consensusi have no patience for people talking about violent rhetoric on the left
What violent left rhetoric is she’s even talking about?
Refuses to elaborate further.
Leaves.And anyway, what leftist response to fascism does she have patience for?
Wait, is she even talking about the left at all, or about liberals?
no she's pro-violent rhetoric on the left, she's against people who go "ahh the violence on the left... truly both sides are too radical"
i mean you can technically read the sentence like that in a vaccuum but the rest of the post makes it clear "talking about" meant 'liberals condemning the left for violent rhetoric', not that the author has no patience for plain violent leftist language.
What violent left rhetoric is she’s even talking about?
Probably the idea that you can't just politely ask for or
a dramatic change in the status quo. In this case it's liberals or social democrats that think revolutionary thought is icky.These dumb fuckers act like there wasn't violence done to establish current status quo. Did Robespierre
King Louis out of France? 
She's talking about liberals who decry the "violent rhetoric" of the left while openly praising the everyday violence of capitalism
You have her intentions backwards
Surely they're taking about how we celebrate the death of our political opponents, how we have critical support for the bad guys with red lasers, and how we'd love to reeducate the people who don't get the wall. We're not exactly chill about landlords, police, troops, and billionaires.
Not the person in the picture, I meant generally
The rich should pay their fair share
Nah, he could do a back-flip with a sixty pound sword in scene one. That is already so far into the realm of superhuman that he gets a pass. For context in the real world an unreasonably giant sword is 12 pounds. His sword is ast least five times that. Probably more actually. And he can do one handed flourishes with it. That is above Olympian level strength and control. So that goes a long way to establishing he is a super soldier.
I wish this Tumblr user was less annoying about other day-to-day topics--I generally enjoyed reading her political posts. She had a whole AI phase a while back that was pretty cringe-inducing to watch.
she's cool and has good opinions. ai art isn't ontologically evil, and the genie will not go back in the bottle. also don't soft misgender her please!