Neither of these are the original takes you made; nice revisions though. At least my revisions are up-front and indicated by a marker on the post; you do yours skullduggerously, after-the-fact to cover for already-committed fuckshit. For the original take of #1, why won't you endorse the any-means-necessary driving out of colonizers? Why can you only critically support it, and why does it walk hand in hand with your chauvinism? For the original take of #2, you were not fucking arguing for the support of class traitors, you were whelping about how our use of "cracker" wasn't "coalition-building behavior". Own your bullshit with your whole chest, thank you.
Further, when you put an objectively bad take out there and someone addresses you on it, doesn't your instance specifically have a rule about walking out on good faith dialogue? That one I'll allow it might be Lemmygrad specific; but I'd swear Hexbear had something like that on the books too, and in ignoring it, you come off as just another haughty-assed settler trying to set conditions on the field when your walk-off comment is running defense for crackers.
You can absolutely leave it here, but just understand that you radiate a certain look at this point; and for someone as obsessed with optics politics with how you've tried debating QueerCommie down, it amazes me that you can't tell. Like I said before: do better.
This coming from the person who edited both of their comments after I responded to them.
Someone can't read timestamps, apparently.
What I mean by critical support
There is a time and a place for 'critical support'; and a war against colonizers is not it.
Debatelord shit
I could call your repetitive lying and backpedaling settler shit, couldn't I? Only reason I hadn't til now was I was still trying to be civil; but I guess that's out the window.
I was criticizing the comment “I don’t trust a white person unless they have a biracial kid, and even then maybe not.”
Wrong, you posted a top-level comment to a thread OP that had NOTHING TO SAY about biracial kids "Lots of normal comments, very conducive to building a mass movement". You were whelping about the whole thread at that top-level point, and then tried to move goalposts to a convenient other comment after you caught pushback. Lies, damn lies, and settler shit. You might as well have that be your last reply to me; it perfectly encapsulates everything you're about.
You’re right that our support should be critical, but in the previous discussion you constantly implied there is something wrong with hamas, playing into liberal Zionism.
On the referenced link, as a cracker, I get why people don’t trust us. We have not been great organizationally in the past. We have to earn trust. You mention that race isn’t real and just there to divide us, but you don’t realize it was made to protect a colonial system. You don’t appear to recognize the national oppression of the black nation, instead falling into the patsoc error of think we must simply unite to make a socialist us. That’s impossible.
Of course there are things wrong with Hamas. It endorses some reactionary social views and is not a socialist organization, but a national liberation one. I support them where they fight against imperialism but disagree with them where they're reactionary or hostile to socialism. This is the best take for Iran and Russia, too. It only plays into liberal imperialism if you use it as an excuse for supporting the U.S. or its client states, which I'm not doing.
On the referenced link, as a cracker, I get why people don’t trust us. We have not been great organizationally in the past. We have to earn trust.
There's a big difference between "white people have to work more to earn trust" and “I don’t trust a white person unless they have a biracial kid, and even then maybe not.” As I said in that comment, there is no AES state that approaches racism and discrimination that way, and it's a dead end in terms of building a mass movement in the U.S.
I didn’t say hamas is perfect, but they’re not anti-communist and I’d give them as much support as China. Support for anything should be critical, but the way you talk around it makes it sounds like your apologizing for Hamas as if they are some lesser evil.
I agree it’s extreme, but I understand why they are jaded.
We agree that critical support is the best position, we agree on how crucial Hamas is in Palestine's anti-imperialist struggle, we agree that Hamas is not perfect.
I don't know how a concept this familiar to leftists, that we agree on, that I've plainly stated multiple times, is interpreted negatively by other leftists.
Idk I agree with you, it just came off on the negative side about Hamas. “Saying they’re good is a bad take” sounds like you think they’re bad, but you accept that there is no alternative.
Removed by mod
Neither of these are the original takes you made; nice revisions though. At least my revisions are up-front and indicated by a marker on the post; you do yours skullduggerously, after-the-fact to cover for already-committed fuckshit. For the original take of #1, why won't you endorse the any-means-necessary driving out of colonizers? Why can you only critically support it, and why does it walk hand in hand with your chauvinism? For the original take of #2, you were not fucking arguing for the support of class traitors, you were whelping about how our use of "cracker" wasn't "coalition-building behavior". Own your bullshit with your whole chest, thank you.
Further, when you put an objectively bad take out there and someone addresses you on it, doesn't your instance specifically have a rule about walking out on good faith dialogue? That one I'll allow it might be Lemmygrad specific; but I'd swear Hexbear had something like that on the books too, and in ignoring it, you come off as just another haughty-assed settler trying to set conditions on the field when your walk-off comment is running defense for crackers.
You can absolutely leave it here, but just understand that you radiate a certain look at this point; and for someone as obsessed with optics politics with how you've tried debating QueerCommie down, it amazes me that you can't tell. Like I said before: do better.
Removed by mod
Someone can't read timestamps, apparently.
There is a time and a place for 'critical support'; and a war against colonizers is not it.
I could call your repetitive lying and backpedaling settler shit, couldn't I? Only reason I hadn't til now was I was still trying to be civil; but I guess that's out the window.
Wrong, you posted a top-level comment to a thread OP that had NOTHING TO SAY about biracial kids "Lots of normal comments, very conducive to building a mass movement". You were whelping about the whole thread at that top-level point, and then tried to move goalposts to a convenient other comment after you caught pushback. Lies, damn lies, and settler shit. You might as well have that be your last reply to me; it perfectly encapsulates everything you're about.
You’re right that our support should be critical, but in the previous discussion you constantly implied there is something wrong with hamas, playing into liberal Zionism.
On the referenced link, as a cracker, I get why people don’t trust us. We have not been great organizationally in the past. We have to earn trust. You mention that race isn’t real and just there to divide us, but you don’t realize it was made to protect a colonial system. You don’t appear to recognize the national oppression of the black nation, instead falling into the patsoc error of think we must simply unite to make a socialist us. That’s impossible.
Of course there are things wrong with Hamas. It endorses some reactionary social views and is not a socialist organization, but a national liberation one. I support them where they fight against imperialism but disagree with them where they're reactionary or hostile to socialism. This is the best take for Iran and Russia, too. It only plays into liberal imperialism if you use it as an excuse for supporting the U.S. or its client states, which I'm not doing.
There's a big difference between "white people have to work more to earn trust" and “I don’t trust a white person unless they have a biracial kid, and even then maybe not.” As I said in that comment, there is no AES state that approaches racism and discrimination that way, and it's a dead end in terms of building a mass movement in the U.S.
I didn’t say hamas is perfect, but they’re not anti-communist and I’d give them as much support as China. Support for anything should be critical, but the way you talk around it makes it sounds like your apologizing for Hamas as if they are some lesser evil.
I agree it’s extreme, but I understand why they are jaded.
We agree that critical support is the best position, we agree on how crucial Hamas is in Palestine's anti-imperialist struggle, we agree that Hamas is not perfect.
I don't know how a concept this familiar to leftists, that we agree on, that I've plainly stated multiple times, is interpreted negatively by other leftists.
Idk I agree with you, it just came off on the negative side about Hamas. “Saying they’re good is a bad take” sounds like you think they’re bad, but you accept that there is no alternative.
deleted by creator