Damn when did all the nukes disappear?

This is complete bullshit. Unhinged stupidity.

Id try it out for sure. Do I need to get a new Huawei phone?

“Sending”

You took Trump at his word about NATO. Do you also believe he is anti-war? You gonna block me?

He is a Zionist and engages in partisan discourse within zionism. He is only critical of who is empowering the Zionist state. He still supports the project, and you agree he does. Being accepting of it absolutely makes him a Zionist. Isreal does not have the right to exist.

Bernie is a Zionist.

Not sure if this is what you mean but I tend to spend a lot of time online responding to right wingers. I usually target when they are attempting to be critical of liberalism and frustrate the narrative. I usually take a hard stance and am ruthless in exposing their ignorance of, for example, feminist discourse. I want them to know why I think they are worse than fools. Part of how I left being a reactionary is realising that much of the narrative was based on disengenous interpretations so I double down on that.

So if someone is bemoaning that everything bad that happens to women is their fault, and that it is not studied that women hurt each other because of feminist propaganda and obsession with patriarchy, I explain that feminists have been talking about the role of women in patriarchy for decades. Litterally, every waking moment of their life has been an opportunity to learn this, yet they prefer to shit in their hand and smear it all over instead of taking their education seriously. It is wildly undignified, completely unworthy of respect to say something so demonstrably false just to demonize women. There is no excuse. My hope is that it may illuminate that they think with ideology too much and that their ridiculous conservative identity might be holding them back and making them a fool.

Honestly, however, I don’t think it’s very effective and is sort of a gamble. Potentially, it is an information hazard. The right has been coopting “left wing” talking points at a higher clip than they were 10 years ago and I feel like using discourse can end up hurting more than it helps. We need something more than discourse to go along with it imo. When I turned, I also had lost faith in everything I knew. It was more than just persuasive talking points or stirn instructions.

Sometimes Indigenous groups were better armed than colonizers.

I have loved Tampa Bay Rays baseball for a long time. They are my corporate currated identity. I watch as many games as I possibly can. I also try to catch local minor league games when I have the chance.

Why wouldn’t it lead to more cohesion? The discourse becomes more entrenched and settler nightmares become easier to wield making action easier to mobilize or imagine. The future becomes more and more certain. This is how American history has always worked and it’s how American politics has developed. I wish more people understood this place before speaking on it.

for all the “blue state, red state” divisions- both sides’ spread across the country know no borders; the comparison of the “slave state, free state” does not exist.

In other words, things aren’t really that dire for the empire, like I said. (Although if you look at oil backed attempts to dictate how shadow banks invest you will find some striking geographic, class divisions brewing even if they are not like the mid 19th century) Furthermore, the slave-free question was not about the merrits of slavery, it was about unified expansion. Your fixation on industry in the Civil War misses the point that the Civil War marks the most rapid expansionary period in US history all despite the turmoil of speculation driven depression and political polarity.

I don’t care about your country, actually

You flatter me

that same industry has been gutted into a shadow

This is an exhausting narrative that is rarely wielded correctly. I’ll just say one thing to blow it up. Oil.

As for the apparent victims of “globalization,” none of this is new to US history. We blow up our economic systems pretty routinely. There are dead mines and ghost towns dating back nearly 200 years yet it hasn’t truly harmed the empire yet and it’s not clear that the overplayed narrative about the rust belt, or rural communities, will be anything more than more of the same. It’s not like those regions are not being actively gentrified as we speak anyway.

Further, the tensions of the civil war are not the only tense moment in US history that led to massive expansion. So was the great depression. Gee now how did that turn out? Roll the war footage, Jerry.

one side happens to be overwhelmingly representing US industry and production- agriculture, domestic industry, etc… and the other side is the financier/managerial class which has been starving out the former, or exporting it overseas for its own profit

Its not that simple. We literally mined all the best iron already. The steel industry died of natural causes and that shit isn’t coming back regardless of how nefarious finance is or isn’t. Golden ages don’t last forever, especially when they are inherently extractive and imperial, this is something the US “working class” doesn’t seem to understand and it’s partially because this false bourgeoisie narrative that coddles industrialists can only breed reaction. US prosperity cannot and never will be legitimate and looking to the past is meant to breed nostalgia for a reset, which is exactly the cohesion the US seeks and it’s exactly where we are headed.

Unless by “cohesion” you mean jackboots on the ground, not beyond the official borders of the empire, but within the continental USA…

This has already been the case for literally centuries.

I’d go so far as to describe it as the likely “great filter” humanity must overcome, lest we face extinction.

Yet, unsurprisingly, it’s structure and history has evaded you.

facts as I’ve seen them

Indeed.

without further mutilations of the justice system as it exists, and a further collapse of their ability to manufacture consent

The imperial narrative is discursive and inherently contested. It is not simply created and enforced by conscious state agents, but is also an inherent part of the social relations and characteristics of the public. It is a result of contradictions and relations, not mere top down hegemony. However, the divide doesn’t necessarily inhibit imperial hegemony nor does it necessarily signal a decline, only development, which may actually end up invigorating imperial power.

There have always been massive contradictions in the American system and now is not even close to as dire as past struggles have been. In fact when internal contradictions really got hairy for the US leading up to the Civil War, it eventually allowed for massive expansion at the cost of breaking the enslaver plantation class. There was no intial intention to pay such a price but they did it anyway and it got them a continent once the dust settled. The US is not as rigid as many believe.

anyone with enough sense to see the writing on the wall IMO

Like all the people that know Trump tried to incite a coup, even if it was carried out by incompetent people that have no clue about anything at all? The idea that prosecuting Trump will choke the US seems to be a massive stretch. If anything it will bring it more cohesion and make it easier to achieve the consent you are concerned about.

The question is how will it actually play out? Has Trump played his role already? Is he necessary for legitimizing the already popular democracy vs tyranny narrative or is Putin/Xi enough? Is he still needed to solidify the Democratic Party and the Republican Party? Maybe they decide he is better to keep around so they can inflate fears over project 2025 or maybe he is booted off more ballets anyway and they roll with it. I don’t see a bad option. Even a Trump win has imperial benifits discursivley and materially.

I think saying Trump is not complicit in the Jan 6th event is foolishness and accomplishes nothing. What are you trying to prove? If someone commits a crime with little competence they are still guilty by definition. Of course, in an outrage driven political environment, people will blow it out of proportion for their own ends, but this doesn’t change that Trump routinely attempts to rile up his base into committing acts of violence, including sedition, which is a crime.

I don’t think you read the link.

You can also not

Seems a bit reactionary don’t you think

Quite disturbing to see open support for our own dispossession rationalized this way.

The two state solution isn’t a “solution.” If a solution legitimizes Israel it is not a solution by any standard. It is not a long term plan. It just legitimizes the status quo by leaning on the inherently problematic society of states and its lie that states have equal sovereignty. You mistake the pragmatism of the PRC as a robust form of global problem solving when it is actually just doubling down on making space for their own interests within a faulty system they have elected to participate in. The PRC is not a global savior and it does not dignify the Chinese project to treat them as all knowing problem solvers. They are trying to survive and thrive in an insanely violent geopolitical environment as many nations are, they are absolutely not an unquestionable, infallible sovereign, even if they are more interesting than other projects in the world.

The dismantlment of the occupation and its backers is the only solution to the problem and any other direction is a red herring that benifits the international order. This is not some dogmatic idealism, it is literally true. Could a 2 state reality be a first step in achieving the actual solution? Maybe if it isn’t immediately frustrated by interference and if a Palestinian state can magically have the capacity for governance and defense that it needs and the IDF magically drowns itself in the dead sea (in other words, a bunch of things that will never happen and have never happened). Is it a solution in itself? Absolutely not, it is just more of the same but the international community will wash its hands of the situation and call it resolved while pretending Israel is a legitimate entity. We may as well woke-scold people for not being realistic and refusing to vote for Joe Biden.

Exactly. But the problem is that zionism isn’t going to be addressed and if the Palestinian state is recognized it will likley not be properly supported, which will create neocolonial relations. Colonial relations develop this way routinely. So it must be asked, who is going to deal with zionism and when?

The two state solution per se isn’t the problem, nor is a plan for phases of decolonization. Rather it is the asymmetric power being tilted to the zionists largely because of decades of international and US support. The fallacy we risk in seeing this in stages is that we imagine an ideal transition despite history showing how quickly it can just develop into neocolonialism with all options exhausted. The occupiers will inevitably be back in control of Palestine with new justifications and the international community will support it yet again.

We can’t “undo” history, but we absolutely can and must undo settler-colonial relations and structures for a two state solution to even be tenable. But at that point, what really is the point of sticking to a two state solution? Other solutions may present themselves as these toxic relations are excised.

Ultimately, it not our decision what is done with those who occupy Palestinian land but it is worth noting that expelling settlers is no more a genocide than any other form of decolonization is(nt). Framing it this way only gives credibility to zionism and makes settlers out to have no agency or self awareness. If we can’t stomach the thought of erasing zionist structures like the state of Isreal and the settler-colonial structures that reproduce it, then we should exit the discussion altogether.

I believe a two state solution can be a good “non-reformist reform” that puts Palestine in, hopefully, a better position. But only if everyone wants to continue going further. If a Palestinian state is recognized, how long will it be before this state is labeled a failed state and reoccupied with little to no pushback from the international community?

For a two state solution to be viable, there must be reperations for the Palestinian state to build its capacity and there must be a reckoning among the occupiers. Given the conditions the world is in, how likley is it that both of these things will play out in a healthy, coordinated way? Probably not likley at all. Most just want the reform for political reasons and will just stop there until the genocide gets bad enough to start finger wagging again, which is all they will be able to do because they already “tried everything.”