- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
At first, I didn’t see why this was even newsworthy. “We need to extinguish the Left” just sounds like typical right-wing motivational crap to me. Then I actually read the article:
“The only thing that’s good enough is completely and totally destroying the political left in this country. Destroy it,” Sabatini said.
"I’m talking about defunding government agencies, defunding bureaucrats, defunding government schools and going 100 percent private school like Florida’s making gestures at right now.”
So, he’s talking about gutting the country. This isn’t just some moron shooting his mouth off at the bar, either. That’s not great.
This is why I’m constantly getting involved in politics, local and national…We need to counter this shit before it becomes a reality forced upon all Americans. We need to bring back consequences for saying such out of pocket shit.
Yup. I used to vote for people based on their opinions regarding the issues, regardless of party. I’m afraid to do that anymore. I’m not willing to further the career of some spineless, unprincipled tool who will ignore their own judgment and just vote along party lines. I still pay attention to people’s opinions, but if they’ve got an R next to their name, I can’t risk voting for them.
It’s not the way the system is supposed to work, and it frustrates me, but I don’t feel like I have any other ethical choice.
I feel the same way. I’m very left leaning to the point that I’m probably Progressive, but I recognize the need for an opposition party - as long as that party operates in good faith. I wouldn’t want the Republican party to vanish and have nothing take its place. Having only Democratic party candidates to choose from would be bad. Maybe we’d see a lot of progress in the short term, but corruption would intensify and it would end really badly.
However, the key part of this is “operates in good faith.” I don’t think the Republicans do this anymore. They prioritize attacking people living their lives and culture war stuff over everything. With every issue, they don’t ask “how can we help people.” Instead they ask “how can I turn this into a culture war/battle against woke in order to get more political power?” They’ll shatter every norm and rule to gain slightly more power and it’s tearing the foundations of this country apart.
At this point, a great Republican with sane positions could emerge (don’t ask me from where or why they’d still be in the Republican party) and I wouldn’t vote for them.
So I’m going to take issue with a few things here. Progressive is not left. Socialist is left capitalist is right. It’s very frustrating to hear people keep making this claim. But it’s absolutely understandable considering the propaganda and indoctrination many of us in the United States go through. Now as far as progressive goes. The better term to describe it is pro-social democracy. Social democracy is inclusive. The only real difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Democrats are loosely pro-social democracy and Republicans are authoritarian or anti-social democracy. Though they are both solidly right-wing.
If Republicans disappeared tomorrow we would not have to worry about finding an opposition party. The lot of us pro-social democracy socialists would instantly split off and form a party that represents us. And between the two of us. Both pro social democracy parties. We could stand to fix a lot of the problems capitalists have made. Not mistakes, problems. They did this shit on purpose. Just some food for thought and perhaps something you had not thought about or been aware of before.
I wouldn’t want the Republican party to vanish and have nothing take its place. Having only Democratic party candidates to choose from would be bad.
I agree with the spirit of where you’re coming from, but I don’t think this is a realistic risk. More than two major political ideologies effectively exist already, but their coalitions are the parties themselves due to the limitations inherent in the US voting system.
The Democrat party already encompasses a broad spectrum of political philosophies, and they’re not in the same party because they want to be. They are a de facto coalition of whatever the Republican party isn’t. This is because the US leans to the right on the Overton window, and the two-party government of the US forces the role of the leftist party into being the kitchen sink coalition. This regretfully gets wallpapered over by the “radical left” narrative talking point that Republican media chestbeats over relentlessly, to the point where the average American never makes this connection.
If I were to wave my magic wand and enact voting reform that doesn’t empower a two-party system, we have at least four parties worth of politicians in play:
- establishment liberals, neoliberals, etc.
- everyone in the democrat party who is to the left of them (who would realistically form more than just one party)
- non-MAGA conservatives (Republicans who jumped ship to Democrat already/are too indoctrinated to consider it, conservative politicians who don’t agree with party leadership but maintain status quo for their careers)
- Far-right Freedom Caucus types. McCarthy would already backstab these guys in a heartbeat if his speakership was politically viable without them. The fact that Republican leadership cares more about ego than principles is what put them into this predicament. (largely a consequence of what safe primaries have done to political strategies, but that’s another rant)
You can split this up even further by pointing out libertarians (ones that aren’t really just conservatives who don’t want to be Republicans anymore) and others, but it’s enough to make the point. Let the Republican party collapse. Something else will immediately take its place, and as long as their replacement recognizes that the Freedom Caucus is what sank them, maybe they can steal enough of the right leaning Democrats to where they no longer need the far right crazies to be politically viable. A system that accommodates more than two parties would be better still, but congress critters are never going to vote in favor of something that weakens their own power. Voting reform will have to happen at the state level.
I’m very left leaning but I don’t think we as a society are necessarily ready for the optimal societal structure, and I know I don’t know what the best path to getting us there is.
I’m not against opposition parties, I think that we ideally need a bunch of distinct viewpoints at the table, but all of those distinct viewpoints should meet some minimum bar of human decency and respect.
Right now I think some of the stuff the GOP fights for is demonstrably below that bar, and I am not referring to the quiet and unheard constituents, I’m referring to the people with the loudspeaker.
Some examples of viewpoints that don’t get a seat at the table are pro-slavery, pro-genocide, pro-sexual abuse, pro-fake medicine, pro-corporate ownership, etc. An opposition party is not a party that supports these things, an opposition party would be one that says “hey rather than letting X company corner the market and have a de facto monopoly, we break them up so they have less control”, or “hey instead of invading another country militarily, we offer humanitarian aid instead”, or “hey if we’re going to rework the economy to have more freedom and respect for the consumer, instead of socializing production of resources we adopt more competition-oriented free-market regulations”. The thing is, this isn’t what any opposition party is doing.
(I’ll also admit that I was a fool for thinking that big tech hate by the right was ever going to lead stronger regulation of the big tech corporate empires, it’s just hollow and blind hatred, all bark and literally no useful bite.)
but I don’t think we as a society are necessarily ready
So, I’ve two thoughts on this. The first is that yeah, a good chunk of people have been propaganda-ized into thinking things that will help them are magically bad because the “other team” wants them. And I agree that there’s a hell of a fight that has to happen to get through this brokenness in the system.
The second thought is that “waiting for the most opportune time” because you’re afraid of how rough the fight/struggle will be is how you sit idly by and LET the rot continue to spread.
I wanted to call the second bit out because it’s pretty common for people to see a battle is going to be hard, and think it’s better to wait for a “better” time.
It’s kind of a form of tone policing, almost? Like–“If you’re weren’t SO ANGRY about these things THEN I’d support you?” Except in slightly a different context, a slightly different form. So instead it’s, “If it wouldn’t be SO HARD to do right now, THEN I’d help you do it–but things better calm down first before I’m willing to lift a finger!”
Same energy as tone-policing…basically, other things being emotional/hard to deal with makes someone opt-out of trying, and makes them say they want to wait until a “better” time, even if it’s unlikely that better time will ever come.
tl;dr: I don’t think we can shift to an optimal societal structure overnight, but there are already concrete steps to take along that path that we could and should have already taken yesterday. None of my judgements are based on “is it too hard?” just “will it work, and if it won’t work yet what can we do to get to a situation where it will be possible?” Under no circumstances do I think sitting around doing nothing and waiting is the correct decision.
I was sort of masking my thoughts so they may have come out unclear, so I will be more clear:
I think that the future of humanity requires us to become space-faring. Our current ownership model is fundamentally incompatible with us being space-faring and successful at it. We can’t transition all of society to a space-compatible structure overnight, it would end in failure since it would cause immediate mass revolt.
I don’t think we should wait to make changes to society though. I just think we need a transition and I’m willing to work with anyone who has good-faith proposals on steps we can take now to eventually get there.
From my point of view there’s never going to be a time where we can shift overnight because we can’t handle that extreme of a shift.
One concession of a space-compatible society unfortunately is the “complete” freedom we have today and the concept of ownership. In a space-compatible society every person must play their part. Only after essentials are covered would people have freedom and ownership, but even still both would be restricted and it would be semi-meritocratic. Security would also become paramount.
Things like single-payer health care and education are relatively basic and realistically speaking should be inoffensive short-term steps that we take. The best time for those steps was yesterday, the second best time is now. Things like UBI would be the step after that, and role-optimization would come after even UBI because that’s when we begin to lose some freedom. I think role-optimization is something we can’t even implement yet but would cause riots and it would take a generation or two with the previously mentioned things before it could be applied society-wide (it’s already something that will be required for early space colonization).
The ethical choice is to vote Democrat. The alternatives are Republican, which is not gonna happen for most of us here, and Independent, which in a 2 party system means you’re wasting your vote. The metaphorical choice is “do you want COVID or do you want cancer?” I think I know which one I want.
How does someone get involved?
Vote, remind others to vote, share factual political information, promote union activity, promote media literacy, talk about history.
If we go private schools I will fully be unable to afford to live with my family in this country. If I start seeing this pushed for I am burning down private schools in the dead of night. They want us broke and dead and to have no choice. Society is supposed to help people live easier. This is absolute bullshit and nefarious.
I am burning down private schools in the dead of night.
Be the change you want to see in the world, don’t let your dreams stay dreams.
Hahahaha. You won’t be going to private schools silly. That’s for the gilded children of the neonobility. No. You won’t go to school. It’s only a life as a poorly paided overworked labourer for you. You’ll start when you’re 5 years old. Gotta pull yourself up by your bootstraps.
That’s their plan.
Private in this context means charter, which is still state funded. Furthermore with more market share there would be enough demand for affordable private schools, as seen in India where government schools are infamous.
I mean, there have been examples of government funded vouchers ending up going to scam charter schools because Republicans are also deregulating private schools. There are lots of horror stories about charter schools.
I’m sure there are, personally I prefer decentralized schooling and ending mandatory schooling. My experience in public school was terrible for me, by far the worst experiences of my life.
“I personally prefer the united states become an uneducated backwater because I didn’t like public school”
I simplified it for you.
Stop strawmanning what I said, it’s not a discussion or argument- it’s just insulting. And, no, saying people shouldn’t be forced to do unpaid labor for 13 years of their lives forced to sit in desks when their body is built to move and learning things that honestly are not, and will not be useful for the vast majority of them. If it were about basic knowledge there would just be one test and when you pass it you don’t have to go to school anymore. But it’s not.
I’m not saying people shouldn’t have the choice, I do support the choice. I just don’t support false imprisonment
Wow, you’re actually insane.
Edit: also it sounds to me like you straight up don’t understand the point of education.
one test and when you pass it you don’t have to go to school anymore.
In America it’s called the GED. I know this because a friend of mine took it at 15 and started community college immediately.
Cool, have fun trying to compete economically with China and Europe with optional education in math and science. Your idea sounds nice in theory, but it’s completely divorced from reality.
Can you read this? Thank your elementary school teacher for their effort.
My parents taught me to read. In elementary school my teachers told me I wasn’t allowed to ask questions.
May I ask, Did all your teachers do this, or one in specific? Did your teachers refuse to teach you to read and the burden of literacy was solely on your parents?
You’re personal life aside, cause I understand middle/high school is the worst, what do you mean by “decentralized schooling” and what does that mean in your view? Is it curriculum or who “runs” the building?
I think there should not be a centralized curriculum and instead schools can choose to teach different things and students choose what schools they go to(which is partially how it worked in my city). Also, it would be great if students could choose to enroll in classes that they thought were interesting and useful to them- and not enroll in others. But, the most fundamental thing, if you think schooling is about basic education than you should just be able to test out of it. My mom and grandma are both public school teachers, and both have agreed with me that the top performing academically in 9th grade know more of the curriculum than the bottom 20% of 12th grade graduates.
Also, the worst for me was actually elementary school.
As a public school teacher, from the bottom of my heart, fuck you!
Also, please follow rule 3 and rule 6.
My mom and grandma are both public school teachers. I had a few good public school teachers throughout my education. One of my good friends is a public school teacher. I never said people working in public schools were evil. I said it is immoral to trap students there against their will.
Charter schools are hell for educators and students don’t benefit. The reason why conservatives push for charter schools is because then they don’t have to worry about the separation of church and state. Basically they want public schools, but with Christian nationalism. This means they’d strip schools of scientific rigor, tell us Teachers to teach that God made the heavens and earth a couple thousand years ago, people rode dinosaurs like cowboys, and we’re all either going to heaven or hell. I have parents who push for this already. Their agenda is more of the same, anti intellectual, Christian nationalism.
Charter schools are hell for educators and students don’t benefit.
Charter schools are not a monolithic entity, I’m sure some are terrible- but I’ve also seen some that seem to be good, obviously I’ve never been enrolled in one but at least in the public school district I went to it was terrible for a lot of teachers- and harmful to my education and mental health.
The reason why conservatives push for charter schools is because then they don’t have to worry about the separation of church and state.
There are a lot of non-religious charter schools, I am not a fan of religious schools- but it is not my place to impose my beliefs on other people’s children.
This means they’d strip schools of scientific rigor, tell us Teachers to teach that God made the heavens and earth a couple thousand years ago, people rode dinosaurs like cowboys, and we’re all either going to heaven or hell.
Do you think people should be able to homeschool or pay for their children to go to a private school?
Charter schools are not a monolithic entity, I’m sure some are terrible- but I’ve also seen some that seem to be good, obviously I’ve never been enrolled in one but at least in the public school district I went to it was terrible for a lot of teachers- and harmful to my education and mental health.
No reason to speculate. Charter schools have been studied extensively:
https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20104029/
To summarize the conclusions of the study:
- It makes no fucking difference if the school is charter or not unless you’re a Black or Latino kid in a big city. At least from the perspective of test scores.
This suggests that there’s really no advantage to charter schools unless you’re using them as a means to limit class sizes in big cities (which is where that measured effect of improved scores for Black and Latino students comes from). In other words, 30+ years of studying charter schools has once again proved that the biggest factor in improving test scores is smaller class sizes. Every other factor from curriculum to “good teachers VS bad teachers” to teaching styles to how many hours kids spend in classrooms is all nothing in comparison.
Having said that, charter schools have some major statistical advantages over regular (funded via socialism) schools:
- They don’t have to take all students. In any given year a regular school has to adjust the number of teachers and classes based on enrollment. If there was a single-year baby boom (e.g. a big storm came through ~6 years ago) they’ll have to hire teachers and somehow “find room” for kids they weren’t sized to handle. This makes the logistics of a charter school much simpler than a regular one and has an enormous impact on measurements of “efficiency”.
- It’s far too easy for charter schools to force out kids they don’t like (e.g. underperforming or special needs).
- Charter schools don’t have to follow the same curriculum as regular schools. This means they can “teach to the test” far more than regular schools can. This gives them a huge statistical advantage over regular schools that have to give kids a more well-rounded education.
…but forget all that for a moment: The fact that even after 30+ years of evolution charter schools still aren’t outperforming regular schools indicates that they’re a waste of time. If we actually wanted to improve education in this country there’s a few simple changes we can make that would have vastly more impact than charter schools:
- Reduce class sizes. The fewer students per teacher the better they do!
- Start school later for older children. High school kids should not be waking up at 5AM to go to school! Study after study has shown this has a great big negative impact on academics!
That’s it! Do those two things and the science says our kids will be better educated. Everything else is just shifting the deck chairs around or just wishful thinking (“let’s make all teachers great teachers!”).
BTW: If we want teaching (as a profession) to improve over time we should probably start by paying them more and making it a more stable career. You know, to keep them around instead of having them get so dissatisfied that the majority leave the profession after a few years. Other things like not passing idiotic “Don’t say Gay” laws would also help in this regards.
If you went to a charter school they’re just gonna let you go wandering around willy nilly?
I’ve been a teacher in various countries around the world. Some, mainly third world countries, do just let kids go do whatever if they don’t want to learn. These kids usually end up pumping gas, working a cash register, or some other low skill low wage job.
If you went to a charter school they’re just gonna let you go wandering around willy nilly?
No of course not. I think both public and charter schools should allow it however.
These kids usually end up pumping gas, working a cash register, or some other low skill low wage job.
It’s not my place or your place to tell other people what’s best for them. They should have the right to choose to do what they want. There is nothing demeaning about working in a low skill or low wage job obviously it is a bad situation if the wage is too low- but it isn’t always. One of the jobs I’ve had that I enjoyed the most was delivery, my other jobs have been “skilled”.
They should have the right to choose to do what they want.
Wait you are telling me that, at the age of 7 you were ready to make decisions that affect your entire life? If sitting at a desk for 10 years and learning basic life skills for free is abuse and gave you PTSD… As you said… Just how would you feel sitting at a gas station for 40 years, inhaling carcinogen fumes, and living at a very basic level as a result of the decisions you made as a young child? You basically had a bad experience, and I understand. I hated school as well. It’s actually why I became a teacher. I don’t want to be an abusive dick like my teachers were. But what you are saying is that a young child, who has no basic life skills, should just be able to leave school because it sucks. But the repercussions are that the rest of their life might suck and they’re not gonna blame themselves. They’re going to blame circumstances. In all honesty, aquiring an education is a privilege, and it is a recent development in society that we universally get a basic education. If it seemed like a horrible experience, well it’s behind you. All I am saying is you should have a bit of gratitude for the education you received. If not that, gratitude for the education your mother received, so that she could teach you to read. You seem very intelligent, but you’d not be able to use your intelligence if you didn’t have basic literacy… And consider if your mother, herself, was illiterate and couldn’t teach you. Wouldn’t school be such a gift?
It’s not my place or your place to tell other people what’s best for them.
Actually, it is! It is our place to tell people what’s best for them because some things are objectively better and we can back up our positions with science. If you want to disagree with me that’s totally fine. Just know that by taking the opposite position here you’re arguing that it’s not our “place” to tell people things like:
- Wash your hands after using the restroom.
- Install smoke detectors in your home and replace the batteries when they beep (don’t just disable them).
- Mixing chlorine and bleach can kill you.
- Don’t drive like a maniac.
- Get a science-backed education or you’re going to be useless/a drain on society.
Society has a duty to tell people things like this. Especially children! We have to teach them “what’s best for them” because that’s how society works (“we live in a society”).
When you say things like, “it’s not your place to tell other people what’s best for them” you’re basically making an argument that’s pro-disease at the very least and pro-death at worst.
When a cop pulls you over for driving like a maniac are you going to argue with them, “it’s not your place to tell me how to drive!”?
Progress marches on as we learn more about ourselves and the world. As our collective knowledge grows domains of knowledge become more specialized. So when a body of such specialists agree on something it is then their duty to tell us all “what’s best”.
And charter schools (at least by me) means “a business running the school for profit.” Yes, they get public funds, but they then pocket as much of those funds as possible in profits and give the students as little as possible.
They also will turn away special needs kids because those kids tend to require more dollars per student and thus aren’t as profitable to educate.
So the public schools are left with less money and more special needs kids per capita to take care of. The public schools fail more leading to more charter schools. Which leads to more public schools failing. Repeat as businesses profit and kids suffer.
A lot of charter schools are non-profit. But yeah there are plenty that are also for-profit.
They also will turn away special needs kids because those kids tend to require more dollars per student and thus aren’t as profitable to educate.
I saw a lot of accusations of that, but at least for the one most accused of that in New York- they base admissions on a lottery. Although, some students really can’t be in a normal school safely or effectively.
So the public schools are left with less money and more special needs kids per capita to take care of. The public schools fail more leading to more charter schools. Which leads to more public schools failing. Repeat as businesses profit and kids suffer.
The thing is public schools have had increasing funds, I went to public schools with a good amount of funds and it didn’t really in my experience change anything for the better. But, I think the best way to save money is allowing students to opt-out if they don’t want to take certain classes- or go to school at all.
I saw a lot of accusations of that, but at least for the one most accused of that in New York- they base admissions on a lottery. Although, some students really can’t be in a normal school safely or effectively.
Whether you know schools that do it or not, the fact is that they have the right to not allow special needs kids to go to their school. And that would be true if all schools were private. You would just have to hope your area had a school that would take your child if they have special needs or move to somewhere that does. That’s not right.
Whether you know schools that do it or not, the fact is that they have the right to not allow special needs kids to go to their school.
As do public schools at least in my district, the severely handicapped students are put specifically in schools for special needs.
And that would be true if all schools were private.
I didn’t say all should be private.
You would just have to hope your area had a school that would take your child if they have special needs or move to somewhere that does.
I think it would be pretty easy in a charter system to offer incentives for taking special needs students.
There are a lot of things you have claimed about your district which doesn’t fit any other district I’ve heard of. Maybe the problem is not public schools, maybe the problem is the way people run them where you live.
I have never heard of a public school that doesn’t have special education.
Well I think we should extinguish the right, and defund billionaires and corporations, i.e reclaim their money (and fascists in arkham asylum)
Current inmates in Arkham: Whoa, whoa, whoa! There’s criminally insane, and there’s Republicans! We don’t want their kind here!
There’s a DC version of Red Skull?
Nah, this was a crossover.
I’m libertarian and I (unfortunately) have to vote rep. Every election day and tbh, I say both parties need to go! They’re both shitholes full of shit people who just want money, just by provoking different audiences, and before you say “b-but mah lesser of to evils!” SHUT THE FUCK UP AND USE YOUR BRAIN! They don’t give a FUCK about what YOU WANT! only what they want! What they want is total power. “The left” wants “The right” gone and vice versa! Then we end up having a one party system and you know what that means coughs Hitler, Stalin coughs and again, there is no “lesser of two evils” just some ideas you agree with, and some ya don’t. As my father says, “We all bleed red, why can’t we all just get along?”
No one is holding a gun to your head making you vote R. You can vote D. You just choose not to. What an incredibly idiotic comment.
Why would you vote for a party trying to tell you how to raise kids and what you can do in your own bedroom and what medications you can have etc etc etc if you are actually libertarian lol
Actual libertarians only vote for libertarians, the dude above who said they are, is just your standard Republican lol
I’m getting more of an enlightened centrist vibe tbh.
If you vote Republican, you’re Republican, it’s not that deep bro
Exactly, why would you vote for a party that is telling you how to raise your kids and what you can do in your own bedroom, i.e. why vote for the GOP, who do exactly that?
If the GOP doesn’t outright restrict you, they let their corporate sponsors do it directly.
The first two words were pretty terrible and then it just sort of got worse.
How? Please explain how me not choosing to vote for a few policies I don’t agree with is idiotic? OK from you’re perspective you. Can’t see how someone could have a differing option but that’s fine. I do dem on a few issues but only because they share my views but for the majority, its the reps. that hold the most of em. I would vote for the libertarian Party but it would be useless. Still I wanna hear why you think I’m an idiot? is it because you think I’m agians human rights? Or immigration, or abortion? Let’s talk!
You first preemptively chastise others for “mah lesser evil”. Then openly admit you don’t vote for your “party” because they wouldn’t win, and instead vote for the one of two likely winners based on “close enough”. That’s literally choosing the lesser of two evils.
I mean only one of the two main parties is pretty clearly against abortion and it definitely isn’t the dems. So like, yeah. I’d think by voting repliblican you’re probably against abortion. What opinions exactly do you share with republicans?
I mean only one of the two main parties is pretty clearly against abortion and it definitely isn’t the dems.
This is incorrect but an understandable interpretation because dems suck at messaging.
Dems really need to pivot to the mother’s health rather than choice. For starters, abortions are serious medical procedures and shouldn’t be taken lightly. As a result, part of the more health focused platform would be to reduce abortions as well as all the other issues facing pregnant women. They should avoid letting the argument be framed as if they “want” abortions. No one wants abortions. Dems just don’t want to restrict anyone with regards to their personal healthcare decisions.
Edit: some people need to accept that dems suck at messaging or work on their reading comprehension or both.
Uh people who get raped want abortions.
No one wants abortions for /funsies/, you mean.It was moreso meant for people prior to getting pregnant. No one is sitting there trying to get pregnant just to have an abortion. No one is longing for that. But yes in other words no one is doing it for fun.
Edit: Jesus some of you salty fucks are worse than the usuals on reddit. Clearly not reading and comprehending the comment. Just downvotes.
I feel like people see abortions as bitlrth control. You have unsafe sex and get pregnant? Well I can just have an abortions and not deal with the consequences! I also feel like abusive relationship will take a massive spike as guys no longer feel like they have to be careful, and can just fuck her as many times as he likes all the while thinking “I’m not gonna get in trouble for this, I’m not gonna have to worry about a kid cuz I can make her abort it!” Ik that sounds retarded but I kid you not when abortions are made legal (where I live anyway) we will see a huge wave of young kids coming to get them as a form of birth control. Now, if the mothers life is in jepordy, as well as the babies then why not abort it and save the mothers life? Well there is a thing called c section. What about rape? Silently putting the kid up for adoption is an option, no one has know and there are couples waiting to take kids in. Well what about women’s rights!? Well, what if I told you I don’t care. I only care about the babies right to life, if he/she wants to off themselves later on (which they shouldn’t and should seek help) then that’s their choice. We have systems in place to help these children after birth.
Lemme tell you a story: I was born at 24 weeks, a micro preemy. During my mothers pregnancy, her doctor told them that getting an abortion might be a good choice as I might not make it once I was delivered. They gave me a few weeks to live, a month at best and told me that I would prolly come out not breathing. Despite those horrible odds, my parents talked about it and decided to bring into this world, even if it was for a short while. When I was born however, I defied the expectations of the doctors, and came out screaming! Fist balled up like I was gonna punch em in the face! Of course it didnt get easier, my dad told me I was to small I fit into the palm of his had and he told that at that moment, he was so grateful he didnt kill me. They rushed me to the nicu, and hooked me up to all these monitors and tubes. I spent months in there and as a result I now have a paralyzed vocal cord and due to all the drugs, terrible tooth enamel. When they brought me home I had to stay on oxygen for a few weeks but I made it, I survived and now here I am, 24 years later healthy as I can be! Sure it hasn’t been easy, and I’ve lost my hearing and have had to wear glasses and my mouth is one big filling lol. But I did it and I’m grateful to be alive! THAT! my friends, is truly why I’m anti abortion. To other kids like me a chance, to give them a shot at life! Because only through pain and suffering do we grow stronger as people. So don’t give up on that tiny life, give it a shot and who knows? It might be the best thing you ever did!
Thank you.
I will delete this account in a few cuz apparently this isn’t the instance for me, I think I might make my own!
Oh neat, this is a divisive rhetorical device. Don’t actually constructively argue for a policy you prefer, just attack how people talk about it. It’s fascinating to notice bad faith republican techniques you’ve only read about.
@meco03211 is pretty squarely presenting the difference between “pro-choice” and “pro-abortion” branding. No harm in pointing out that some debates aren’t worth wasting energy on until they’re properly framed.
You misunderstood.
abortions are serious medical procedures
This is a myth. In the first trimester an abortion is the medical equivalent of repairing a dent in a car with a suction cup. It takes anywhere from 30 seconds to two minutes and the side effects are the same as a miscarriage (e.g. cramping and bleeding).
Science VS made an excellent podcast about the science behind abortion and talked extensively about the various procedures, fetal states of development, etc: https://gimletmedia.com/shows/science-vs/n8h7aag
You can just read the transcript if you don’t want to listen to it. Search for this string: “
Lisa explained the process to reporter Heather Rogers”abortions are serious medical procedures
This is a myth.
Perhaps that statement was a bit broad. There are serious abortion procedures depending on many factors even if not all abortions would be called serious. The point I was making is that even the least serious options are not some desired thing. So continuing as “pro abortion” opens dems up to the idiots on the right that think normal people are relying on them as birth control. Just pivot to mother’s health as the framing and then you can point to the statistics of how contraceptive access and sex ed improve all aspects of the mother’s health including fewer abortions. Then point to red states and their higher abortion rates.
SHUT THE FUCK UP AND USE YOUR BRAIN!
My brain tells me R wants to genocide lgbt people, while the dems do not.
there is no “lesser of two evils” just some ideas you agree with, and some ya don’t.
And some ideas are less evil then others.
As my father says, “We all bleed red, why can’t we all just get along?”
Then stop trying to strip people of their rights, and we’ll get along a lot better.
And jews, don’t forget us. Their rhetoric is identical to the early nazi party right now, that “LGBTism” is being “forced” on America by a nebulous “them.” And funded by George Soros.
Just wait, when they finish with their anti trans panic and start arresting trans people for existing in public the gloves will come off and the nebulous “them” will become “the jews.”
We desperately need to properly teach how the Nazis came to power. They didn’t start out at “kill the jews” they started at “we need to protect children from this dangerous Jewish ideology of homozexuality being taught in schools” and “cultural bolsheviks want to brai wash their kids into their globalist agenda” and “women are too promiscuous and it’s destroying children in out country.”
Ah, but you’ve got those space lasers you can use for defense!
You value your own personal gain over the human rights of the majority of the country. No one makes you vote for them, you choose to because you’re selfish and greedy and don’t care about things that don’t effect you. Any other reason you give is a rationalization.
You don’t know their motivations, don’t use speculation as an excuse to insult and attack them as a person.
What motivation could one have for voting for a party that is desperately trying to institute christofascism that doesn’t imply a myopic, selfish worldview?
deleted by creator
What does christofascism mean? And would you say all members of the GOP are trying to enforce it, such as: Rand Paul, Chris Christie, and Thomas Massie?
Chris Christie, the politician famous for using his office to punish entire cities for not endorsing his re-election campaign? That one? The same one famous for being an advisor to former president Trump? The one who doesn’t support reproductive rights for women, a position famously inspired by Christian morality? Yeah, he’s a Christofascist.
Christofascism is a far right political ideology that seeks to install Christian fascism. They are famous for advocating political violence against minorities, using weasel words to mask their intentions, and more. Whether or not ALL GOP members are christofascist is irrelevant, as the party platform is christofascist. Meaning, regardless of what you claim to believe, by supporting the GOP you are supporting the rise of fascism in America.
Except voting for an individual candidate is not voting for the party- its voting for one candidate! That candidate may or may not vote with the majority of their party. And there are many prominent examples of congress members of all parties not voting with the majority of their party. Also, what is Christian fascism?
There definitely is a lesser of two evils lol. One party takes corporate funding and shit but actually makes and passes legislation for stuff like drug decriminalization andgreen energy. The other party is just blatantly taking away people’s rights and blaming everything on “wokeness.”
Also if you think they’re equally bad why are you even voting republican at all.
Have you ever noticed that the people who say that both sides are the same split into two groups: the liberal side that doesn’t vote, and the conservative side that always votes Republican?
It seems like there are fewer and fewer in that second group lately.
Sort of like how anti vaxxers used to be a fringe group of crunchy granola lefties but took a hard right turn a couple years back.
What a bunch of bullshit
Yeah, I think they made that pretty clear awhile ago. In the interest of keeping their broader coalition together–every last piece of it–they’ve largely abandoned any pretext at compromise and co-existence.
Pushing the moderates away with this was inevitable, so they’ve pivoted to pushing radicalization to try to compensate for that in the long-term. Bolster recruitment with passionate, divisive rhetoric and all. It’s pretty hard not to see some similarities with historical precedent, if you’ve any serious study in history, so this has done a little more than merely raise eyebrows.
The issue is largely that these idiots are a mob and the casual US citizen keeps saying “It’s all talk, nothing bad is going to happen, etc.” When in reality this is exactly how fascism and nationalism began it’s rise to power in Germany, Italy, etc. In the past the Constitution and legal system shutdown these agendas in the US. However, in the last 20-30 years the Republicans have done a lot to weaken and undermine the legal system and set in motion incremental phases that have slowly made this more acceptable to the average person.
In short money in politics through lobbying has allowed a lot of greasing of the wheels to undermine our govt and the average person doesn’t want to be jobless/homeless so they say “not my problem” until it is too late.
💀
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
— German pastor Martin Niemöller
While I would never suggest, nor condone this man being forced to deepthroat a live flamethrower on live stream, I would jerk off to it.
(Tastefully and with respect, of course.)
Fuck each and every Nazi puke. Fuck each and every GOP member and fans that supports them. Fuck the fucking rich bastards who fund them, and profit from them.
My friend, I laughed my ass off to the first half of this then pumped my fist in the air for the second. Thank you, sincerely.
Lmfao. Y’all both need to grow up.
My dad used to talk about how democrats were evil and should be put in camps to be exterminated. And the worst thing the country ever did was allow women to vote.
I used to think he was an insane person. Now I realize he simply was a republican ahead of his time. He died in 2012.
Removed by mod
To be fair, dude didn’t write that until it was actually true…
He was all about the Nazis in the beginning, he was an active supporter of them up thru the Holocaust.
The thing was he hated the Jewish people because of their religion, and the nazis hated them by their genetics.
So Niemoller thought if they crossed over to his brand of Christianity then the nazis should leave them alone, but he was still a self avowed anti-semite. His views eventually led to him being imprisoned in Dachu.
Yes, that was the whole point. He went on a lecture tour through Germany after the war which was all about how he was complicit (like many Germans) for not speaking out after the war. His intended audience were other Germans who he wanted to accept personal responsibility as well. Because way too many Germans washed their hands off the Nazis atrocities after the war claiming to have been ignorant of their crimes.
Removed by mod
You’re the first comment on Lemmy that made me realize I need to turn off image preview in the comments.
“caught” on camera. this is a dogwhistle, just like moms for liberty “accidentally” quoting hitler or donald trump calling white supremacists “very fine people” and telling them to “stand by” for post-election violence if republicans lose. They say some shit like this, and the people who need to hear it hear it loud and clear, then our lapdog media, owned by the people who fund the campaigns of these violent right-wingers, runs the segment where they walk it back and tell everyone that everything is fine.
“Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?”
Stochastic terrorism.
I wish these people would stop getting fucking passes by claiming they only accidentally memorized Mein Kampf.
What left?
America’s left wing is more right wing than Britain’s Conservative Party…
This is by design.
The true left has no representation or is ineffectual. Bernie Sanders is a moderate.
As is tradition.
I call them Republicrats.
Some of these people need an enemy so bad they can’t see past their own clenched fist. I also believe they’ve put so much effort into clenching they think it would be a waste to unclench it before hitting something. You could offer then a lifetime of peace and prosperity and they’d turn it down. The worst part is that they’re dragging good folk down with them.
I think it’s more so that Rs don’t have any popular policy proposals whatsoever. Fuck up your kids’ access to education and healthcare? Strip you of every last dollar and funnel it all to the billionaire ruler class?
These are incredibly unpopular positions, so instead they galvanize support by strawmanning “the others” as some kind of threat which must be stopped.
Once again, the Right sees this as a WAR. Not a figurative war, but a literal war - with weapons and victims and actual physical attacks.
Once again, the Left sees this as just a damn game which they never take seriously and can’t be bothered to see Republicans as a very serious threat to this country and our way of live. While the Left posts stupid memes online thinking they eviscerated the other side through humor, the Right is stockpiling supplies, forming militias and training with assault rifles.
Even when we catch these right wing nuts attacking the capitol, the best we can do it give them a slap on the wrists.
The Democrats are playing politics, the Republicans are fighting a war of extermination.
This is a very nice concise way of saying it, but I will add one more layer.
Elected Republican politicians are fighting a war, Republican voters are fighting a war, elected Democratic politicians are playing politics, all while Democratic voters are sitting home and playing games and thinking this is all a meme.
This is a very nice concise way of saying it
No it’s not. It’s a facile, extremely disingenuous interpretation of people you disagree with.
Don’t be an intellectual stooge of extreme and dishonest rhetoric.
Some right-wing people see it as war, some left-wing people also definitely see it as war. There are also plenty of left and right wing people who don’t. It’s not exactly fair to generalize either.
Yes, the wings aren’t cohesive things. The far right seems to have a more armed presence tho.
He goes on and on about defunding the government, like dude, aren’t you running for a government position??
My favorite part is when elected officials talk about how the election was rigged or otherwise fraudulent. Like, you were literally voted in by that same system. Are you saying your election is just fine but somebody else’s in the same state wasn’t?
Freaking shitheads, the lot of 'em.
I mean, yes. That’s exactly what they’re saying. What they’re also saying is that they tried their hardest to rig the election, so they expect the other side to have done the same instead of realizing that most non-brainwashed people don’t vote for pedophiles and fascists.
Yes their goal is to destroy the government from the inside out. Which they are currently doing.
And also make sure funding is appropriated in budgets that line the pockets of him and his cronies.
caught? this is his open rhetoric, caught lol
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
None of these are real problems that impact real people, and you are 100% lying if you claim to have cared about this even 5 years ago.
There’s been some strange bot like transphobic comments making their way into Lemmy threads lately.
The person you’re responding to isn’t the first I’ve seen today
these are your priorities? lmao you’re a complete dork
Do you have an example of that happening or is this a figment of one’s imagination? I’d be interested in how you would support your claim.
It’s a one day old account, and has basically only posted anti-trans content.
Consider it a troll until proven otherwise. Do we have user tags like RES on Lemmy yet?
That is why you pry into their comment. Are they just repeating deranged talking points or do they actually have something to add to the conversation? It appears that they have nothing to add so that equals a downvote in my opinion as they can not support their argument. We will have the modtools addon very soon and thus those with massive downvotes will find it difficult to post.
As for his post, since it doesn’t violate the rules or TOS it can stay so that others can view it in the user’s history to better understand the legitimacy of their posts, which appears to be zero.
Probably not a troll specifically, right wing media focuses on those points specifically and then repeats them ad infinitum so the person watching feels like they’re under constant assault and they need to fight. It’s just a constant poke at emotion to agitate them into action. So they probably only bother to comment on those topics when otherwise they would just lurk.
Removed by mod
So you do not have anything to back your argument up? That looks poorly on you and makes your comment invalid.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
If you are lesbian, gay, or bi then you’re a damn fool. Do you really think the bigots will stop at demonizing trans people if they manage to eradicate them? No. You will absolutely be next. Then after you it’ll be another group. Fascists always need a boogey man to rail against. You’re participating in a moral panic no different than the satanic panic of the 1980s. Get your head out of your ass.
Yes, that’s sort of why latearrival LGBs are now also getting on board with #droptheT movements. What many thought was a show for solidarity, and many were well intentioned, but, did not know the evil that was hiding in their midst under the guise of illness and victimhood, on the platform of equality.
In short, it’s exactly because we know “they’re coming for us next,” that many gay people no longer want to be associated with transactivism or trans people, period. They are seeing how the effects of transactivist populations are UNDOING decades of civil rights struggles by LGBs. And though you will undoubtedly try to present some mitigating factor, gay rights were secure and becoming more accepted even in places that held long religious bans. That is, until transactivism and groomer madness arrived.
So yes. We about droppin that T.
Yeah, nobody here is dumb enough to fall for your bullshit.
Removed by mod
You could say that about the LGBQ side, too which invalidates your comment. Conservatives will criminalize all of LGBTQ if given the chance so that is why we support the entire movement and don’t isolate one segment. People should be allowed to be who they are, that is the American way!
No. And I know that isn’t the case because I was a part of that conversation when that was the focus of the conversation. Yes we had rightful pushback from conservatives. And you know what? We understood. We got that marriage was their institution, but gays wanted the benefits that other married couples got to enjoy too, without imposing on their religious beliefs. It was a tough fight all over the world, and fair minded conservatives did see reason enough to draw distinctions between general marriage, civil unions, partnerships and a host of other kinds of relationships that fall outside of normative Christian values.
In many of the places and states in which such legal unions were secured, there were over a subsequent number of years more and more public support for just legalizing gay marriage altogether. For conservatives this was sort of a slap because many thought they had made it clear that marriage was their institution, and in some ways they were right to feel that way, but also they needed to recognize the ways in which marriage had evolved outside of their institution.
This is not the same thing happening with transactivism today. They are using the guise of equality and compassion to mask a much more sinister agenda. And if you aren’t capable of seeing that yet, then we are not on the same page.
I’ve not seen anyone else on that page either as it is quite the extreme. I’m going to go watch RuPaul’s Drag Race again as a result because your perspective is quite different than the vast majority of the population. I would not suggest making such bold statements in public forums as you will not find support for it.
there is no “we”, only you. checking your post history, you’re not at all part of the queer movement. you’re a shill. fuck off.
High-octane unleaded pick-me shit.
The sooner you get what you want, the sooner you go against the wall. No amount of appeasement for fascists will be enough. If you are not white, straight, and the correct flavor of Christian you will be labelled an undesirable and, if you’re lucky, given a quick end.
So… what’s your opinion on the church?
Awful. What with them covering up heinous acts of child sex abuse too. See how easy it is to denounce madness on all sides when you’re willing to be objective about facts?
You got it half right, I’ll give you that.
Removed by mod
It’s a shame to live with so much misguided hate in your heart, I hope you find the help you desperately need
No hate, just facts. BEST WISHES. 🤡
- that’s not what grooming is. 2) you’re repeating the same tired anti-gay hysteria Anita Bryant was toting around in the 70s and 80s. 3) I don’t think you’re well educated on this topic, or history, or… well anything.
Oh just fuck off back to Truth, nobody wants to hear your bullshit
No, LGBs are not turning against Ts. It only looks that way inside your echo chamber.
fuck entirely off. no LGB without the T, trans rights are human rights, more republican senators than trans have been arrested for sexual misconduct in bathrooms and if you actually cared about child rape you’d outlaw churches.
deleted by creator
They’ve gone full
maskwhite hood off now.FTFY
Ah, good old Christian values. WWJD.
deleted by creator