Yeah I mean at that point Christianity was all about bombing people and hating LGBT people and those were big factors for me in rejecting it but it turns out there were also people who rejected it for some other reason and then realized that they’d accidentally undermined their justifications for bombing people and hating LGBT people and had to scramble to come up with new ones.
Just call them nationalists
Honestly this guy just seems like he was looking for a way to get sent to prison, or suicide by cop. What else can you make from someone running a checkpoint at a political rally claiming his water bottle was C-4 and randomly throwing around a bunch of fertilizer? It’s either gotta be that or he was just completely out of his mind and didn’t know what he was doing.
I’m sorry, but that just sounds like a rebrand of the same old, right vs left politics we’ve been stuck with for generations. Everyone should check out my blog, where I’ve invented an entirely new ideology, unlike anything that’s ever been tried before, which is a third way that takes the best parts of both sides. Everyone in the country puts aside their differences and works together to make the nation as strong and powerful as it can be. No more of this divisive and archaic “class conflict” stuff, everyone can come together and unify against the real bad guys who are trying to destroy our beautiful country.
I’m happy to come on to any platform to talk about it. Any open-minded left-leaning person should be happy to have me (unless they’re some of crazy extremist who just calls everyone a Nazi), because I’ve deradicalized a lot of far-right people by selling them on my ideology, Social Nationalism.
Windshield-involved collision
Part of the reason for the election spectacle is to make people feel invested in their decision to vote for whoever they do. If you vote for someone and they get elected, then any criticism of that person is a criticism of you and your decision making.
People were fine with criticizing both Biden and Kamala during the 2020 primaries, because they weren’t invested in defending their decision, but the moment he became the nominee, he became a shining pillar of perfection, and as soon as he was no longer the nominee, he lost that. It almost gives you whiplash how quickly they switch back and forth between stanning everything he does. I’ve also seen the bullshit talking point of, “Congress controls weapons sales to Israel, Biden would love to stop it but can’t because he’s just a smol bean” (ignoring all the times he bypassed Congress to send more weapons) suddenly disappear from liberals’ mouths. Seamlessly, they’ve switched over to BlueAnon conspiracy theories about how Kamala is secretly pro-Palestinian and is just pretending not to be to fool the deep state Zionist voters, or just willfully misinterpreting her statements as pro-Palestinian.
No propaganda could ever compete with what voting does to people’s brains.
deleted by creator
Every question like this should have an option like this tbh.
For when senpai just will not notice you
What’s it like for him being in Egypt? Are people welcoming? Has he been able to find community with other Palestinians? Does he feel safe?
I thought the senator from the other time was Tom Cotton?
It reminds me of the time a senator repeatedly accused the Tiktok CEO if being Chinese while he repeatedly told him he’s Singaporean. American politicians are a bunch of racist clowns.
Is that in cash or is it the equivalent value in Afghan fighters?
As far as US liberals go I think it’s driven more by ideology than material interests. Unless you actually work in the military industrial complex, you’re unlikely to get any benefit from supporting the war in Ukraine, for instance.
In the US, there are basically two acceptable positions with regard to foreign policy:
The US is magnanimous and aims to be a force for good in the world, and apart from a couple hiccups and honest mistakes (mostly caused by the other side), it generally succeeds at that. We must fund the military as much as possible and oppose anyone who could challenge our hegemony so that we can keep bringing democracy and freedom to the backwards, uncivilized people of the world.
The US is magnanimous and aims to be a force for good in the world, and this is a bad thing on the basis that the lives of non-Americans are worthless. Trying to do good things abroad is even worse than trying to do good things at home, which is bad because it’s communism. We should fund the military as much as possible so that we can take whatever we want from anyone who can’t defend themselves and other people can’t take stuff from us.
These positions can track directly with the two prevailing historical perspectives regarding settler-colonialism. The “progressive” perspective was that the natives were only backwards, evil savages because their backwards, evil, savage culture taught them to be. You could remove a native child from their culture and raise them as a Westerner, and they could be just as civilized as any other Westerner, and their aim was to do this and seek to eradicate cultures in order to bring people into the fold of civilization. The “less progressive” perspective was that the reason they were “uncivilized” was not because of their upbringing but an inherent quality of their race. The perspective that the culture and way of life of native people is worth preserving and that Western culture is not inherently superior was not present in the discourse at all, as that would imply full-on opposition to the entire settler-colonial project.
Liberals will never restrain themselves in supporting imperialism because they believe that any opposition to their project must be grounded in racism or nationalism. They haven’t fundamentally changed or questioned their assumptions from the old times when they were eradicating native cultures, and the idea that someone could be opposed to their whole entire project on a non-self-centered basis just doesn’t compute.
Conservatives sometimes, occasionally, rarely restrain themselves because they don’t believe in that project and just want to take people’s stuff, and when you just want to take people’s stuff, then you have to consider whether their stuff is worth taking and how well defended the stuff is. There’s the most basic possible level of cost-benefit analysis, which still somehow beats liberal takes sometimes just because liberals don’t even bother with that at all.
“Suppose I’m a worker in a Retreat factory and my latest batch is behind schedule and desperately needed on the front lines…”
Time to learn how to say “I surrender” in Mandarin and start practicing yelling it as loud as I can.
I’m not in a rush, I’m just checking in on my retirement plan.
Hey news nerds, just a quick check in, are we within five years of me fragging my officer after getting drafted into WWIII, or no?
When you put the they live glasses on 
Don’t let the morally acceptable be the enemy of the morally unacceptable.