For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
Dunking on r/neoliberal.
Not a low hanging fruit, but a root vegetable.
Still, comments on this relatively divided. Of course, some quite abysmal takes in there about how a prospective dem president should basically lie to the electorate and increase military spending after the campaign without saying so on the trail.
Basically, fuck democracy, we need the war machine rolling for ... (the purpose is unclear)
Dems shouldn’t frame it as anything because they shouldn’t campaign on it. They should support it, but there’s plenty of things they should support without making them a centerpiece of their campaign messaging.
One of the top comments for example.
These people often lament that trust in their beloved institutions is so low (blaming it on social media). But in reality, these bourgeois lapdog are completely lacking in integrity. This is the real source of the crisis of legitimacy.
I find it funny how there is a comment chain down there were one guy actually calls out how doing this would further erode trust in institutions and the dems, only for everyone else to go
"Yeah America can't be improved" and basically "we're at rock bottom anyways".
Liberals don't even try to defend America anymore, they just look at you like this
Bonus slop (refers to Obama the dronie king):
God I hated that meme so much. The reason he was "president drone strike" is because drones became a viable technology when he happened to be in office. Any other president would likely have done the same, and probably a lot worse if it they were Republican.
Yes, we all know that drones just happened to naturally appear during obama's term and naturally found their way into battlefields. Kind of like migratory birds.
I sort of get it in the march of progress lib sense but even then most heads of state, that all also have access to drones, somehow managed to not bomb doctors without borders
I do think that was a failure of rhetoric cause I remember thinking "why do people care about the fact that they're drones do much". I think it would have been now effective to focus on the missiles they used since those are pretty much the same, but it wouldn't have made a distance besides disapproval polling at 5 more percent anyway.
I think, at the time, the idea was how someone in an air-conditioned room thousands of miles away was carrying out killing strikes. It was a further removal from humanity. Not that having a pilot inside would have made a difference. To them everyone would look like ants, its not like they ever looked in the face of anyone they were shooting. If I remember right there was some controversy over a helicopter pilot gunning down civilians during W's Iraq War, so kind of a moot point aside fromt the fact that the person in the room isn't themselves at risk.
The main problem with drones was always that they were used to kill civilians and insurgents for the sake of propagating capitalist interests. Every thing else (including the pr) was downstream of the fact that the purpose they were used for just fucking sucked.
classic UAV drones, maybe less-so modern quadcopter shit, were used with impunity because they didn't put american soldiers at risk several years into what had become unpopular military adventures when a government that cared about civility and optics was in power.
between that and whatever absurdly high collateral damage rate that whistleblower leaked, drone strikes resulted in way more wanton death and destruction than if dronebama had to commit boots to get the murder done.
Exactly. Caring about the fact that so many people were killed by drone strikes was (and still is) the woke radical left position. Most Americans care more about American troops' lives than about thousands of innocents having fire rained upon them.
Everyone who argues for more military funding (or indeed any military budget above $250 per citizen) is making conclusions from counterfactual propositions.
The last time the USA was attacked on its own soil by a ragtag group of foreign nationals was blowback 25 years ago; the last time it was attacked on its own soil by any remotely comparable foreign army was 85 years ago; the last time it was invaded and occupied by a foreign army was 210 years ago; all of these had a death toll much lower than when the USA split and fought itself.
No American sovereignty, nor any American's freedoms are jeopardized by a foreign power. In this world, all you really need to do to maintain self-rule is to make it prohibitively expensive for someone to invade (and possibly occupy) you. The world is about to witness yet another data point to this truth.
If the next election is won on the grounds of increasing military spending even further it's fucking
healthcare please
Kinda what you'd expect from a sub dedicated to the political ideology made famous by Reagan. That sub is for neoliberals in the literal sense, not in the "neoliberal must be the counterpart to neoconservative because the words look similar" sense.
They were never okay