*advancing her career
https://bsky.app/profile/aoc.bsky.social/post/3ldhxclo4wk2c
This is about AOC losing her bid for the Oversight committee to a geriatric Dem lifer. Sure she has systematically shredded any last bit of credibility with her triangulation, but hey, at least all the 5D polítical chess is paying off! She's changing the system from the inside! It's working this time!
Girl, you abandoned any pretense of doing working-class mass politics when you decided to do insider politics! Why are you tweeting like Bernie Sanders circa 2012? There's no we! There's no mass movement behind you! It's just NYC DSA and some Warren libs (but I repeat myself)
I'm aware of all this. but I have about 400 members of congress more worthy of shitting on than AOC.
you see I have a line of people:
SHITTY REP 0, SHITTY REP 1, .... , AOC, PASSABLE REP 0, ....,
I spend my efforts telling people about shitty REP 0 and use AOC as a model they could be more like.
Once we get here:
AOC, PASSABLE REP 0, ...., PASSABLE REP N.
Then I'll shit on AOC until then shes a reference point. You're mistaking moving the norm left with AOC as support for AOC. common mistake dont worry you'll get there eventually.
Everyone is making fun of you (which I was tempted to as well) but I'll try to be genuine.
We shit on AOC because she is a perfect representation how trying to make change through official institutions like Congress is a dead end. AOC promised some radical ideas in her initial campaign and made it seem like she would be a genuine change from the Democratic party that only served the rich. But when Democrats got into power, she quickly folded into line and voted how the leadership wanted and defended the worst of the party (aka Biden). Of course she could have stuck to her guns (assuming she really believed in Democratic socialism), but that would have gotten her kicked from the party or not reelected.
So this is the eternal problem of trying to "push the Democrats left", if you play their game you are beholden to their rules. Either conform to the mass murdering US empire or get kicked out of power. We criticize AOC heavily because she has largely chosen to stay in power by conforming to the evil US empire. And it's even funnier when stuff like this happens and she isn't offered powerful committee positions even though she compromised her supposed ideals.
Na, I'm just enjoying trolling you twits as much as you are me. =)
Yes.
No, she didn't promise us shit. she said 'these are the things I will push for' and if you compare what shes put forward into congress and what she said they're actually similar.
You're making the classic mistake of blaming her for bills put forward by others. Personally when something is put forward that is better than the current situation I take it. you still moved the needle, maybe not as much as you'd like but you do it.
See above. again mistaking a vote for personal beliefs.
No, this is literally not what I'm telling you. I'm saying you're going after one of 3 people who are even remotely similar to your positions (aka: anticapitalist, pro workers). Its not the same as saying shes 'pushing dems to the left' fuck that. they're a lost cause as a party. What she does know how to do is manipulate a system, and shes good at it. thats why you idiots hate her so much, shes solo more effective than your entire community. Do you like what shes doing? nope. but shes doing it were you are powerless, she has a seat.
mmm, and yet you dont realize what she just demonstrated with that maneuver. sad really. AOC has probably done more to discredit the democrats than anyone in this thread just by fucking existing in the house. Shes literally doing exactly what you want to accomplish and you can't even see it.
Okay moron, give me one example of her being effective at doing anything but voting to fund genocide. You keep saying she's effective but she hasn't effected any change. All she's done is give pieces of shit like you an excuse to vote for genocide.
No, you idiots keep saying that. I'm saying shes the least harmful rep we have. very different statements. Its not my fault you lack basic read comprehension and confuse terms like 'accomplishments' and 'effectiveness'. First, effectiveness requires a benchmark and we won't agree on the benchmark metric so there is no point. secondly I'm not the one making claims about her that need refuting. they're all basic facts about her that are common knowledge. You however are, like 'she supports the genocide' she clearly doesn't. she literally voted against funding israel as a standalone bill. the omnibill version is not a vote for supporting genocide.
I can't help the fact you're misinformed. thats a you problem.
"I'm saying we should support the least harmful nazi we have" lmfao
You really are a liberal if you think you can point to accomplishments that are not effective. Words are more important than actions, right?
We understand that's what you're saying. We're saying "she's still absolute shit". Seems like you should wipe your own ass before you call out the stink in the room.
It's not our fault you struggle with basic communication. I don't know if this works in your high school debate club, but continually insisting that basic terms aren't comprehensible to you because you normally have a slightly different interpretation of them, so as to not have to engage in the actual argument, isn't really a good rhetorical strategy. It just makes you come off as someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.
You were asked what change she has effected - ie. What has she accomplished?
You haven't really made any claims apart from her being effective and accomplishing stuff, not bein supportive of a genocider and a lot of other claims, that's true. I guess if you require specificity you can say you haven't made any claims, but that's why you're being asked to be specific, so you can have an actual discussion.
You keep trying to tie this down to one single act for some reason, despite users referencing her entire tenure. I know being wrong can feel terrible, but it's actually a great opportunity to learn something! It might also improve your grades in high school, since changing your attitude about learning to something less defensive would probably make your teachers despise you less.
So it doesn't give money to Israel? Huh.
Removed by mod
Libs and casual racism, name a more iconic duo
https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/attractions/adventures-winnie-pooh/
this must mean some sort of animatronic bear based in Shanghai holds executive power in China
It took you this long to think of this response? SAD
You remind me of the adage about how compulsive gamblers are, as much as anything else, addicted to losing
People responding to your arguments is in fact not trolling. The fact you take critique as a meanspirited thing is a you-issue.
So if you look at the responses you've already gotten, you know that's a lie.
"Please don't blame her for things she votes on" and other silly things liberals say to defend genocidal warmongering union breakers.
And the day that something comes along that moves things forward, I'll be happy to move that needle. Until then I'll continue to not support genocide.
You've literally just talked about moving the needle. Which is it?
You've been shown a bunch of times that those are not her positions. Do better.
You seem to be stuck on "the dems". We are critiquing AOC and how she functions within the system.
Like how she helped crush strikes or like how she helped a genocide or like how she stopped giving a shit about border camps or etc?
You people always talk in vague terms because anything specific immediately makes it obvious what your actual politics are.
How many of those reps claim to be some form of socialist?
thats my point? shes closer to you twits than the rest. she never claimed to be communist. socialism is a broad category encompassing many groups. you're literally fighting a person who is trying to get us closer to some version of socialism and you're complaining about the games she playing. thats the problem with communists. they think their system is some perfect government vs recognizing its just as shitty as the ones they rail against.
What's it defined by?
Oh god oh fuck this worked in my essay you're not supposed to be able to respond
You cannot be this dense
We have the technology! We can make them denser!
I fear we might overburden their mind. They already struggle to respond
just obliviously showing your whole ass
AOC doesn't move right wingers left, she moves lefties right. She's a dyed in the wool neolib and defends the interests of the bourgeoisie the same way that Tom Cotton does.
she doesn't move voters anywhere. you're giving her too much credit. she represents a region of the political sphere. one you'd likely be happier in than the one your in now.
sadly you're too busy attacking her than going after biden/harris/trumps/schumers/ceos.
Calling him "Genocide Joe" literally originated here
It really doesn't take that much browsing to find out that we attack all of those people constantly. It's like our second favourite thing after dunking on libs.
Why would we attack those people in a thread about AOC? Do you think people are only mentally capable of holding one person in ill will? Is that the case for your mental capacity?
Imagine going to a pizza place and being mad they don't have sushi
We were one of the first places online to be crossing our fingers that Trump had a heart attack lol. They're not the topic of this thread.
If all members of the Reichstag are bad, who cares if some are less bad than the others
People should not, in fact, be like AOC.
People should, in fact, be more similar to AOC. see the difference there? its subtle i know. But you clearly prefer them to be similiar to trump/biden. 🤷
I prefer them to be more similar to Lenin actually
Those aren't the only options. There are more than 3 people
No, they shouldn't be supporting genocides, invasions, incarceration and enslavement of black people, and so on, and so forth. So, no, they should not be more similar to AOC.
Yeah we see the difference dumbass, we think supporting genocide and being a comprador for the american empire is bad actually
You shouldn't need to use a math equation to explain your morals
I'm sorry you can't grasp basic ordering by preference. i know, its very advanced for a corgi. you'll get there eventually I'm sure. Though this inability is likely related to your worldview being perpetually shit on. In fact I shit on it because mathematically the concepts behind communism are inherently unstable and lead to authoritarians. but you probably know this.
I have a math PhD and actually communism is stable.
Unlike capitalism, which never exerts authoritarian control over anyone
No you see they said both systems are bad! So that means that despite them only critiquing communism, they definitely feel the same about capitalism, which is why they defend it so hard
Lib reinvents an even dumber version of Popperian or Randian anti-communist mathematical realism lmao
I await your proof
This is excellent tagline material. Communism mathematically defeated.
Anyway please provide a mathematical proof that Communism bad and capitalism (or whatever it is you like) is good.
No, both are fucking horrible systems. Yes, mathematically, but for very different reasons. If you want to learn, look into distributed systems vs centralized systems. there is a reason comrade communists always fail into authoritarian dictatorships. now maybe you like that style of governance. thats a you thing. not an everyone thing.
If you want to learn why capitalism is mathematically bad well that's even simpler. simple feedback systems analysis will do it. its why they continuously fail into oligarchies.
What do you think math is?
'Both the system that massively improves people's standards of living (including by providing them with guaranteed housing, universal healthcare, elimination of illiteracy, 60% improvements in life expectancy within the first 30 years, etc.) even without a complete achievement of its goals, and the system that enslaves and near-enslaves the vast majority of people, both at home and elsewhere are equally bad'.
Yeah, nah. You are just being silly. You can't even provide any concrete criticism of communism and/or communist states. Just regurgitating baseless memes that your education in history began and ended with.
lol. child. neither governance model can achieve those goals. I can literally pick every single one of those metrics and a quick search will debunk claims to each one for both systems. some are trivially debunked. for example: you can't eliminate illiteracy. there is a little thing called genetic defects, and brain damage which both can result in a person literally becoming incapable of literacy. but you know that'd require you having more than a 5 graders level of knowledge of the world.
So, yes. both systems are equally bad. communism requires a slave class just as much as capitalism does.
Before you get banned I need you to acknowledge how bad this argument is. This is some of the dumbest shit I've ever read and I need to know you are aware of what you wrote.
Unlike you, I have already finished education, and I did so a long while ago.
The USSR did. The PRC did (remarkably similar in this regard, down to the 60% life expectancy increase figure). Freed Korea did. Cuba did. Angola did. Mozambique did. Vietnam did.
If you know basic macroeconomics, you know why a state that maintains a planned economy (which, by the way, is not synonymous with 'communism') not only can but is also interested in implementing things like guaranteed housing (which is impossible under capitalism in the long term, as are the other things on this list), universal healthcare, elimination of illiteracy, developed public transportation, elimination of unemployment, etc.
Both history and (orthodox liberal) economics are against you here. The fact that you didn't even bother looking up if you were correct is hilarious.
Cool. Why didn't you?
I know that you didn't because I have studied this topic and I know that you are being extremely overconfident for somebody so wrong.
I do not know of a communist revolution that succeeded and then did not implement programmes for elimination of illiteracy.
The RSFSR/the USSR's one was even called 'Ликбез'/'Ликвидация Безграмотности'/'Elimination of Illiteracy', and it brought literacy rates from 15-40% in the late Russian Empire (I have seen a few estimations, but they are all in that pathetic range) up to about 100% by 1939, and managed to produce one of the most educated population on the planet in the previous century. I reiterate, the USSR started with a mostly illiterate population but became the first state to launch a space satellite, to launch an animal, a man, a woman into space, to build a space station, to make (an unmanned and, most importantly, repeatable and actually scientifically useful) landing on the moon with the rover, etc within less than a century.
I don't think I need to elaborate on stuff with the PRC, Cuba, and the others. They also carried out such initiatives to educate their people.
You seem to be a gold medalist in mental gymnastics. What an incredible way to not understand that people can be provided an education for.
Again, this is hilarious. 'Housing people and helping anti-colonial movements around the world is somehow just as bad as torturing and killing people by denying them housing and invading other countries to put them in a colonial yoke'.
If anything, the USSR and other socialist states have had actual accomplishments, unlike AOC. By your standards, you should be singing them praises.
You forgot to add "because some people are genetically incapable of being educated somehow"
Rofl, yes lets ignore all the harm they have and continued to do. I'm not going to rehash communist/capitalism history with you. its been done to death. none of them solved homeless, healthcare, food issues, or having a slave class.
this is so fucking stupid goddamn
Haha it's good shit right? Its that sweet flavor of "gotcha" you might get from a precocious teen planning to take a debate class next semester.
yeah i can see why facts are hard for you to grasp. but you know, I definitely trust the numbers from the USSR and China.... they havent been caught lying about their metrics at all..... oh and huh I guess they havent quite nixed it in the bud yet either... surprise. I also find it hilarious when you start digging into the numbers that detail in which the distinction between literate and illiterate between US and china is hilarious. they're measuring completely different things, the US is focusing of complex language analysis and china just publishes 'yeah they can read and write'. But lets do it anyway using china's metric.
china is vastly superior with its 97% literacy vs the US's 95.8%. damn. communism is definitely the superior system. you got me. I'm totally convinced one system definitely isnt shit. I definitely can't think of any policies in china that would have potentially influenced this...... oh whats this? the US information has a breakdown on the illiterate group....
huh, go figure. exactly my assertion that you can't hit 100%.
So remind me again what was your point? Dont get me wrong I admire some outcomes communist countries achieve just not at the cost. Just as I admire some things capitalist countries have achieved, just not at the cost. Essentially both systems are fundamentally flawed, both systems are capable of massive outputs at the expense absolutely abhorrent treatment of people just in different ways.
And remember, I think both systems are shit. I've looked into both. found both wanting on purely human decency grounds. They both trend towards hierarchical societies that shit on an underclass. and yes, this by design. both systems are underpinned by an economic policies based on mathematical principles to achieve some particular set of goals. both are unstable. capitalism for its need to grow uncontrollably and lack of a strong guardrails towards positive feedback loops for individuals economic power, which leads to subversion by dictators. Communism because of its economic centralization is easily subverted and dismantled by dictators. One just takes longer depending on the starting point but both trend to the same end result.
There's a real chance a lot of us here are old enough to be your parents, but go off I guess.
wow, you're dumb as shit
It's incredible that they think they're cooking.
One of them actually did.
Funny how you haven't done it.
Oh okay, you're stupid stupid. This isn't even
this is someone thinking they're on the level of Shapiro
"Because I decide to misinterpret what 'eliminate illiteracy' means, communism is just as bad as capitalism"
It's a terrible argument, but considering you being... you, you don't understand why. So let me put it in terms you can understand.
You fool! You absolute little baby! You have failed to consider certain aspects of the argument, which is unsurprising given your proclivities. Let me debunk your retort real quick: You assume "illiterate" means "unable to read or write" while it can easily just mean "uneducated". Silly goose.
Don't stay up past your bedtime!
Show me this math
Lmao you cannot be older than 15
communists -->
Alright bears i think this one's tapped.Straight-up repeating themselves now, booooooo.Everyone fill out their libby-bingo cards? DM me if you need more time otherwise I'm callin this
'd king in for the moderation they so desperately desire
Eddie: i was so, so wrong
I want to give them 24 hours tbh. I want to see what happens if they get to sleep on it
Don't worry I well know about various systems. So I guess it's a you thing to think everything is bad and there's no good solution? Mathematically we can either have evil oligarchy or evil authority? Or do you have a secret third option that mathematically is freedom or something?
I do agree it's trivial to see the issues in capitalism mathematically or otherwise. Profit cannot grow forever. It will burn the world down.
Sorry that's not a real thing. We don't believe in CIA propaganda around here https://jacobin.com/author/marcie-smith
is that the link you were intending?
No not at all lol. It seems my bookmarks are messed up
I'm looking through them and can't find the article I'm looking for. I'm not going to put in more effort and I am also not going to change it, since this doofus won't click the link anyway
quack quack =)
I have a degree in math, and I have also studied economics as part of my education. Your understanding of these topics is incredibly lacking.
Also, lol at 'authoritarianism!!!' coming from a person from a genocidal slaver settler-colony that is currently overtly carrying out a genocide, and which is the most prolific invader in the world.
Truly, that's an antithesis of 'authoritarianism'. /s
Genocidal slavemaster-assed comment, don't you have a plantation to be torturing folk on rather than running your mouth about things you clearly have a narrow settler's scope on
lmao check out this motherfucker....scolds us for not supporting zionism, then turns around and calls us authoritarians like it's a bad thing. No leftist worth their salt supports the indiscriminate bombing of children or shooting up refugee camps. That means not supporting politicians like AOC who support supplying the weapons to commit war crimes.
It's kind of silly to call our math wrong when we're the ideology who focuses on using empiricism and the scientific method as much as possible when it comes to history, politics, and economics. The Democratic party is barely Keynesian anymore and has been moving towards Austrian economics since Clinton at the least.
Wrong + math = still wrong
AHAHAHAHAHAHA Oh my god ahhh that's fantastic, great bit sir. Sorry I was preemptive with taking you seriously, you're really nailing the "idiot redditor" tone here, it was really obvious. My bad for not getting the bit earlier
Dancing effortlessly between the mathematic and philosophical, failing spectacularly to connect either. Might as well say "Mathematically, blood transfusion is inherently sinful and leads to corruption of the soul"
Medieval grindset
Damn you must be really smart
I bet they almost passed 7th grade on the first try
Removed by mod
VOLCEL POLICE!! THIS ONE RIGHT HERE!!!! THREATENING TO SUCK OFF A LIB!
JOKES ON YOU I'M INTO BEING TAKEN AWAY
Stop it or the libs will think they're cool!
What if I'm terrible at mouth stuff?
remember to use your teeth
نحن شرطة VolCel.بناءا على تعليمات الهيئة لترويج لألعاب الفيديو و النهي عن الجنس نرجوا الإبتعاد عن أي أفكار جنسية و الحفاظ على حيواناتكم المنويَّة حتى يوم الحساب. اتقوا الله، إنك لا تراه لكنه يراك.
This is unironically whataboutism lol. It's a made up concept meant to deflect criticism of the USA, but insofar as it's real, you're doing it. If you want to see how it looks when dummies like you use it though, check the bot response
This is straight up false, since what you're doing is defending AOC from valid critique and not talking about another rep. Stop lying and just admit you can't handle your political avatar getting critique.
Thank you comrade
what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about
Okay that was a fun dunk, here's the real response
detailed in-depth response to this argument
what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what about what