get your fucking head on straight
I'm not ridin with Biden, and I don't think people should vote for him. I've made no effort to hide the fact that I did vote for him, but that was for very particular reasons to due with my familial relationships, and I wouldn't waste a fucking second advocating anybody else do the same.
I made a callout thread because people were saying "Trump is better", which you'll recognize as support for Trump.
There is a serious case to be made for Trump being better as the "harm reduction" candidate for the world at large. I'm not voting for either because fuck 'em, but it's not an outlandish idea by any stretch of the imagination.
There kinda isn't. While I have previously made the point that Trump is the only president in my lifetime that hasn't started a war as far as I know, he has also stepped up bombing, and has only been stopped from causing more destruction by a combination of incompetence and his complete lack of an attention span.
But that's exactly the point! Trump's incompetence and complete lack of an attention span is the reason why he's better on foreign policy than somebody like Hillary or Biden, who would absolutely pursue those plots to their conclusions. I don't think Trump is like ideologically better, but if we're serious about Marxism it doesn't matter whether he's ideologically better, it's all about material outcomes. And the material outcomes of a bumbling idiot as the head of the American imperial apparatus are very good comparatively speaking.
If we're Marxists we should understand that the enormous blood machine of US imperialism will not be, and has not been, held back in any way by the figurehead's mental decline.
Agreed, this is only a stop gap measure. But if "harm reduction" is really the name of the game here, materially Trump causes less "harm" abroad than a standard President.
Yo, your argument makes some sense and I can’t say I really know which presidency might be marginally preferable to the other, but for the love of god, stop pretending that using the word “materially” transforms your argument into Marxist analysis.
You’re just doing a sort of rough cost/benefit analysis based on observation of the personalities involved, you’re not applying any sort of dialectical logic and you’re not grounding your analysis in the class forces at play or the material conditions in the Marxist sense of the term.
I'm not trying to do a Marxist analysis in the sense of dialectical analysis or anything like that, but Marx takes particular care to specify that we have to look at real world conditions, not ideology to analyze events. Marx states himself, "As in private life one differentiates between what a man thinks and says of himself and what he really is and does, so in historical struggles one must distinguish still more the phrases and fancies of parties from their real organism and their real interests, their conception of themselves from their reality." Ideology can be distracting, especially in this sense, for we can't look at what Trump or Biden say but what they do. The real interests of the Biden camp are different than the Trump camp, as they represent different wings of the bourgeoisie (something I have elaborated on previously). That's the point I'm trying to make here, and that's why I say "material" to clue folks in that this is indeed a materialist way to look at the world.
for the love of god, stop pretending that using the word “materially” transforms your argument into Marxist analysis.
Amazing how it gives their game away. The other is "blame capitalism for everything."
But are they? Have more or less bombs been dropped under Trump? I believe the answer is that Trump has stepped up bombing campaigns in multiple countries, and that happens regardless of his ability to focus.
Trump has definitely stepped up drone strikes, but a lot of that is because of the war in Yemen, which the Americans would have supported regardless of who was President. The drone strikes started by Bush and expanded by Obama will expand forever, unless we get an actual anti-imperialist President (lol). That said, Trump hasn't bombed a country back to the Stone Age like Obama did, nor has he entangled the United States in more wars and coup attempts.
I mean, the Bolivian coup was "successful" in that they took over the government and carried out massacres for around a year or so before getting smoked by MAS in the elections. Operation Gideon was a hilarious failure though, and perhaps the most emblematic event of Trump's foreign policy - he's not any more peaceful on the world stage, but he and his administration really suck at regime change.
"Number of bombs dropped" isn't the definitive way of measuring US Imperial power projection lol. Biden would've dropped all of those same bombs, but also wouldn't have flinched on major operations in Venezuela. Yes, Trump's goons went through with the coup in Bolivia, but the stakes were lower there. The left in Bolivia is mostly unarmed and the police/military are right wing. Yes, there were massacres in the bolivian coup, but nothing like a full scale civil war. In Venezuela, the military and police support Maduro and there are left wing paramilitaries all over the country. Trump going through with the less destructive coup but not the devastating one is likely a product of his disinterest in expanding US Empire abroad.
Under Trump US Empire has mainly pursued failed strategies like unarmed color revolutions, which haven't really been successful lately. It worked in Ukraine and other countries before it but the governments of the world have studied these cases and adjusted accordingly. Competent and dedicated Imperialists would realize that a more "muscular" approach is needed. I think Biden would put people in charge that would make those changes, while Trump gets annoyed by them for trying to push for war and fires them.
Biden would’ve dropped all of those same bombs, but also wouldn’t have flinched on major operations in Venezuela.
Obama didn't take military action against Venezuela; Trump tried a Bay of Pigs-style coup.
It's absurd to portray Obama's VP as someone who would absolutely put boots on the ground while arguing that Trump isn't really that bad. If this sort of logic came from a chud we'd have a dozen threads dunking on it in an hour.
Obama didn’t take military action against Venezuela; Trump tried a Bay of Pigs-style coup.
Trump allowed some fawning chud to attempt a right wing version of the Cuban Revolution that was immediately thwarted by fishermen with machetes. Biden isn't the same as Obama. Obama was coming in after years of widespread antiwar sentiment. That has died out and Democrats had gotten a lot more "muscular" on foreign policy by the end of Obama's presidency. Politicians respond to changing conditions, and I have no doubt Hillary would've been worse than Trump abroad. Biden apparently wants to focus on Latin America, btw.
It’s absurd to portray Obama’s VP as someone who would absolutely put boots on the ground while arguing that Trump isn’t really that bad. If this sort of logic came from a chud we’d have a dozen threads dunking on it in an hour.
I mean I'm pretty sure we would be divided on that post if it was made, just like we are on this one. If you think Biden has done sort of ideological commitment to keeping troops home idk what to tell you. The Biden administration isn't going to be Obama admin 2.0 because conditions are different and they're not idiots.
The Biden administration isn’t going to be Obama admin 2.0
That's all he's ever ran on, and that's all Hillary ever ran on.
Do you think it really matters what politicians say they're going to do when campaigning for the votes of us rubes?
I think Biden is proud of what he did with Obama and wants to broadly continue it.
Idk what to tell you homie, you have a very naive understanding of how political power works if you think the Biden administration will look exactly like an Obama administration despite different conditions and demands from the Bourgeois faction the Democrats represent. Biden is very obviously nothing but an empty vessel for the interests of the Haute Bourgeoisie.
different conditions
Different conditions like a Republican Party that will reflexively criticize everything Biden does, or different conditions like a growing anti-imperialist left that's far more organized now than from 2008-2016?
Do you think either of those things matter to US foreign policy? Also, what anti-imperialist left in America? The only major anti-imperialist demonstration I've seen lately was the occupation of the Venezuelan embassy which was a couple dozen hardcore activists.
The conditions I'm talking about are the political and economic conditions around the globe. Their strategy of unarmed color revolutions have been failing left and right and left wing/anti-imperialist sentiment is on the rise in many places in the global south, especially in LATAM.
It is clear that imperial projects need to be more bloody in order to succeed and the cosmopolitan bourgeoisie wants someone in power who is willing to do the dirty work. Trump is less beholden to this faction of Capital, as his nationalist diet isolationist movement is backed by the provincial/national bourgeoisie who mostly extracts their profits domestically and is more concerned with domestic issues.
Putting all our eggs in the basket of hoping that Trump keeps getting bored before his aides finishes setting up the nuclear football is not viable. I'm not endorsing Biden for foreign policy here mind, but the idea that we can consistently rely on Trump going off to watch TV for 4 more years is optimistic to the point of nearly being delusional.
But Trump ALSO signed off on such appointments. Elliot Abrams is officially "United States Special Representative for Venezuela" (And also for Iran)
whereas in the biden admin, we're looking at either a jill biden or kamala harris controlled white house and neither will balk at managing the empire the way trump has.
The people who would otherwise be invaded are reliant on Trump not getting his shit together.
Trump is the only president in my lifetime that hasn’t started a war
It's difficult to imagine what definition of"war" would make this true. It also glosses over the vast difference (in destruction and lives lost) between invading Iraq and something like bombing Libya, and seemingly assumes the U.S. is the only aggressor in any given situation.
The keyword here is started. He has continued prosecuting existing aggressions yes (and any President would), but to my knowledge he hasn't started anything new.
That's not accurate at all. We bombed Libya and imposed a no-fly zone, but we (officially) didn't put anyone on the ground. At most we might have put a few special forces teams in, but that's reasonable speculation without any real evidence to support it. We certainly didn't come anywhere close to a "full-scale invasion."
There is " a serious case" that can't stand up to scrutiny by someone with 5 brain cells. Just because the guy hasn't invaded Iran yet, doesn't mean he wasn't the one who tore up the nuclear deal or killed Solemani.
Most of his actions haven't generated an enhanced strategic position for the US rulers, though. If you're gonna 5D brain hoping Biden wins, it just makes more sense to say, hey, should the collapse of the global empire be regulated by cynical technocrats, or managed by a weak-willed babyman at the controls.
Check out this. And peep Trump on North Korea, not invading Iran when somebody like Hillary absolutely would've, not doing any crazy shit in Venezuela and shitting on Guaido, etc.
North Korea is the only thing I'll give you. But if you're going to give him credit for that, then you need to do the same for Obama with Cuba and Iran. Saying that Hillary would've invaded Iran is a counterfactual, and we have Trump carrying out by far the most direct escalation with Iran since the Jimmy Carter.
I'll absolutely give Obama credit for Cuba and Iran. Those were two great things he did. He also did shit like bombing Libya to the point where they now have literal slave markets, and helped create the power vacuum that led to ISIS in the Middle East. Trump hasn't started a war, and the blood on his hands is definitely less than Obama.
Trump hasn't started a war, but he has tried to start a war with Iran. And he has worsened every single war Obama inherited and started. More bombings, more drone strikes, more troops on the ground.
And then he backed down despite the advice of his generals. Trump is not beholden to the American imperial apparatus in the way that Obama et al were and will be, and that's partially why they hate him so much.
How the fuck is killing Soleimani backing down? Why is everyone in this thread ignoring that?
If Clinton or whoever were in that position
They wouldn't have tanked the Iran nuclear deal and then started a regional crisis on Twitter.
Whatever you think of the Iran deal, it sure as shit wasn't assassinating Iranians and nearly starting a war.
Watching so many otherwise sensible leftists bend over backwards to defend Trump is fucking embarrassing. Shit like this absolutely hurts the left because any ordinary person can see that going from peace to military exchanges is bad.
Okay, so he killed Soleimani.
Casually brushing off an escalation this enormous (and similarly minimizing the de-escalstion inherent in the previous nuclear deal) is a defense of Trump. Going back and saying "but don't vote for him" doesn't change the fact that the substance of the argument here and in other threads on the topic is "Trump would actually be better than Biden." Making that argument requires defending Trump, because on its face almost starting a war with Iran after inheriting a diplomatic agreement with the country shows that Trump has been worse on a major foreign policy issue.
I get that you don't want to defend Trump on the whole, but you are in fact defending him on this. It's a terrible take. If you want to make the (reasonable) case that they're both dogshit, leave it at that. Trying to sell people on "no Trump would actually be better" just ain't it.
Obama killed Gaddafi. Bush killed Saddam.
You can't just lump all this together under one big "America doing imperialism" umbrella. Some actions (the invasion of Iraq) cause exponentially more death and destruction than others (bombing Libya).
We killed a tenth of Iraq's pre-war population over the course of our invasion and occupation. That same ratio would mean about 8 million dead Iranians had the situation not cooled off. We killed maybe 8 million people in Iraq, Vietnam, and Korea combined. Even risking that (and the thing about brinksmanship is you don't always manage to stop short of the cliff) ranks just shy of actually invading and occupying a country, especially when you tear up a treaty and invent a crisis out of whole cloth to get there. It definitely doesn't fall into the category of "relatively normal" U.S. imperialism. A real chance of killing that many people is not just another fuckup on the pile.
He did not "puss out". He is currently actively antagonizing Iran, stealing their oil tankers and weapon shipments. He did that this week.
All we have to go on here is history. Obama de-escalated with Iran. Trump escalated more than any president since the coup.
Edit: can somebody please fucking refute this claim instead of just downvoting it?
A thing I wrote earlier about US relations with Iran under the Trump and Obama adminstrations:
It wasn’t a “diplomatic agreement” it was fucking extortion to get Iran to stop their nuclear program cos if they succeeded it would get a lot harder to coup them.
The USA broke their side of the “agreement” the month the deal was signed when they never halted sanctions like they’d agreed to.
Iran is in a bettter position now than at the end of Obama’s second term. Obama’s deal left Iran under moderate sanctions (a blatant violation of the deal as it was written) and under the threat that if UN inspectors weren’t satisfied their nuclear program wasn’t happening those sanctions would increase to cripping levels. The Trump administratoin increased US Sanctions on Iran but the loss of US soft power under his regime led to the UN declining to extend UN sanctions following the assasination despite the US pushing for those sanctions to be extended. As it stands the UN sactions on Iran are set to expire in October 2020, the US’ unilateral sanctions are increasingly inneffective as the US’ economic hegemony deteriorates and the Iranian nuclear program has more enriched fissible material stockpiled and is presumably closer to producing a nuclear deterrent than it ever has been.
The Trump regime has been a fucking gift to Ali Khamenei and the people of Iran.
I think this relies on the demonstrably false idea that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. That's imperial propaganda. The Obama Iran deal was definitely extortion, but I think there's a clear case that it gave Iran more room to operate than the previous relationship did; the intensive nuclear standards and inspections were restrictive and obviously unfair, but the deal as a whole was less restrictive than the previous status quo since Iran did not actually have any plans to make nukes.
Obviously, the collapse of US soft power has been a boon to the entire world, and I think you can partially attribute that to Trump. But I think the far, far more significant factors are the inevitable failure of every US institution due to late capitalist instability and, most importantly, the rise of China as the soon-to-be dominant economic power (military power is another story, unfortunately).
You do make some good points I'm definitely thinking about, though.
The USA broke their side of the “agreement” the month the deal was signed when they never halted sanctions like they’d agreed to.
Did Iran say this? If so, why did they remain a party to the deal?
McCain ran on "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" and 100 years in Iraq
And peep Trump on North Korea,
IIRC, he was all but trying to start a war via Twitter, then did a few photo ops after Kim flattered him, and didn't lift sanctions whatsoever.
What am I missing here?
I keep saying this, but he appointed Elliot Fucking Abrams, the butcher of Guatemala, to handle his LatAm relations. He supported the coup in Bolivia.
Yeah like I don't want Trump to win, but I also legitimately don't want Biden to win. I don't think there is a legitimate moral case that either one is harm reduction. I really do think that Trump and Biden are worse for different demographics. You don't have to support Trump to admit that he will be better for the global south. He will be worse for the domestic population, especially immigrants and leftists. I am a Communist in the US, my whole family lives here including some that are minorities. I obviously don't support Donald fucking Trump lol. Conflating acknowledging the potential outcomes of a Trump victory with support for Trump is pure lib shit.
The Obama/Biden administration started 3 new wars.
The Trump administration hasn't started any.
i'm not voting for trump but i honestly think he'd be better in a global sense. i feel like he's more anti-war than biden would be. i mean trump had the entire situation room telling him to escalate things with iran over that drone that got shot down and he didn't do it. biden's senile and he's just going to do whatever his advisors tell him to do.
He killed Soleimani! How the fuck is that not escalation? It's way more than anything Obama did.
it's not though. trump is shutting down military bases and criticizing his generals because they're getting into wars for profit. trump is detached from that entire blood machine in a way that obama wasn't and biden won't be
You don't think assassinating the top general of a sovereign nation, a man who was a literal war hero and one of the staunchest and most effective enemies of imperialism, is escalation?
i think trump has ignored advisors pleas to escalate, it's documented, and was particularly shocking to some of them like bolton. killing soleimani was stupid and wrong, but my argument is that trump would do fewer of those dumb and wrong things than his predecssors
He did not ignore please to escalate. If he did he would not have assassinated Soleimani. Do we not understand that that is the most aggressive action taken by the US against Iran since, I dunno, the coup?
It was definitely an aggressive action, but it wasn't one rooted in a coherent imperialist plan of action. I'm Trump's mind it was dick swinging, and he didn't follow up with major aggression. He didn't build up troops in Iraq and ships in the strait of Hormuz to threaten Iran. He likes to flex but not follow through with a fight. The flexing is disrespectful and he's not trying to improve relations with Iran in any way, but he's not planning on invading either. No one is saying Trump is a peacenik, he just doesn't have the stomach for major conflict which is what the imperial project kinda needs right now since it's softer instruments are failing.
I would argue that no US president has the stomach for war with Iran because they know we would lose. Everything is posturing and flexing to an extent. Trump has increased ships in the Hormuz (or at least aggression from the ships already there), with the seizing of oil tankers and weapons shipments.
Trump's incoherent plan is just as dangerous as it is helpful.
I would argue that no US president has the stomach for war with Iran because they know we would lose.
I don't think this is true. the military, intelligence community, etc. clearly believes they'd prevail (against a mountain of evidence over the last 60 years) and the neolibs defer to the military on these matters. american military superiority is practically a religious belief at this point. the empire won't survive another war but I'm not sure the democratic party actually knows that.
they're trying to encircle and starve Iran before actually mounting a ground war. that was the reasoning behind the invasion of Iraq, the continued presence in Afghanistan, the fuckery in Syria, etc.. it's a question of when the MIC tries the ground war, not if.
Certainly, yes, if they want to do a ground war they need to secure power in all the bordering countries, and that's of course a huge reason why the US is in those countries. But if you're saying it's a matter of when, not if, then the idea that Trump would somehow stand against it strikes me as preposterous on its face.
And I still don't agree the US would ever follow through with that threat of war. The US is extremely cowardly when it comes to war, and avoids anything but the weakest possible nations unless forced, like in WWII. Iran is not the soft target it was in the 80s, and everyone in DC is constantly furious at themselves for not following through back then when they had the chance. Iran is not going to get any weaker, because China (and Russia to a lesser extent) will keep supporting it, and the US is too weak to do anything about it. The international sanctions have failed.
then the idea that Trump would somehow stand against it strikes me as preposterous on its face.
I don't think anyone is saying that he'd stand against it. they're saying that the power in the executive branch has, over the past 60 years, been incredibly focused on the president himself. a weak president who's incapable of making and holding to decisions will fail to marshal the empire into a ground war with Iran.
that said, I think everyone in this discussion is being staked to more extreme positions than they actually hold. Trump or Biden... we're splitting hairs here and speculating on very little actual information.
Trump's incoherent plan is absolutely not as dangerous and harmful as a competent and dedicated imperialist project would be. Like nobody is saying Trump is an anti-imperialist lol. Just that he isnt completely submissive to a broader imperialist power structure like Biden would be. When people make this observation they aren't dating Trump is "good" for the world, just that by comparison he isn't as bad as people who have an ideological commitment to the Imperial project
Trump has surrounded himself with people who have that ideological commitment and the history of carrying it out.
Trump involves them because they have a lot of power in the right wing power structure but he is skeptical of them and will go against them from time to time. Just look at the fallout with Bolton. Everything Trump said about him was true, he's a bloodthirsty monster that wants to wage any war he can. Bolton accused Trump of being bad for US interests abroad and eroding the imperial relationships they have built over the last several decades.
Again, he's not an anti-imperialist and he is going to continue imperialism. He's just not the same materially as Biden will be
He's not the same, agreed, but I'm not convinced he's not as bad. I stand by that he is clearly worse for Iran and China. LatAm is more arguable; Biden has some weird opinions about LatAm relative to a lot of standard Dems because he's spent so much more time there than other US politicians, though he's not at all an anti-imperialist there either.
Honestly, I think a lot of this will prove to be irrelevant. I don't think the US really can do imperialism like it used to.
Trump has a weird obsession with Iran and China, and is definitely worse for them. China wants the US to be predictable so they can adjust their policies in a rational way to respond, and Iran wants things to go back to how they were under Obama because their situation was improving. Both have reportedly said they want Biden to win.
Maduro on the other hand, has said he doesn't give a shit who wins because the Democrats are bloodthirsty Imperialists as well, and KJU has called Biden a rabid dog while relatively amicable to Trump. Different specific countries have different interests, but if we are being honest, the LATAM perspective is the most important currently. A full scale war with Iran is very unlikely and one with China is never going to happen, but coups, fascism and war in LATAM are very real threats. Also, rising anti-imperialism and anti-capitalism need to be protected, and South America is the epicenter for both. The situation is precarious there.
Overall, I can't really say which I prefer because it's like choosing between people I love and care about getting fucked more or people I don't know but still care about getting fucked more.
The claim in this thread is that Hillary would've just marched the military into Iran, apparently unprovoked.
Take a look through and you will see plenty of "Hillary would've started a war with Iran." Which I'm sure she would've tried to, but she also would've failed, because Iran has the sense to do everything they can to avoid that.
Do what shit? I'm not buying the absolutely preposterous lie of Donald the Dove. Everyone here is ignoring Soleimani, ignoring the expansion of every single war and bombing campaign, ignoring the most anti-Palestinian administration in decades, ignoring the coup in Bolivia, ignoring the trade war with China, all so they can own the libs.
Someone literally said he's not a war hawk. And yeah, I'm feeling pretty agitated by the responses in this thread.
I made a callout thread because people were saying “Trump is better”, which you’ll recognize as support for Trump.
Eating dirt is better than eating shit. I don't support either.
This is of course directed at no one in particular, because it's actually quite a rare thing. So instead of getting mad that OP might be talking to or about you, instead imagine he's talking to someone who doesn't exist. Say, Ben Beanwald.
it’s actually quite a rare thing. So instead of getting mad that OP might be talking to or about you
The number of people upset at this suggests it's not that rare of a thing. The "Trump is actually better for the left/for the rest of the world" sentiment is fairly common.
Many a subreddit making fun of gamers stopped being ironic in the past
muh white ethnostate is just a joke bro! it was ironic bro! trust me im not a nazi bro!
They literally said blame someone who doesn't exist named "Ben Beanwald" it's obviously a joke.
I don't even know what you're arguing about, but I'm happy to help you through whatever it is.
"It's just a joke" isn't an excuse. It's an intentional pipelining tactic used by the right and by old Chapo. It works and it's why I'm here right now. I will leave if this site becomes pro-trump.
A joke with the punchline "this thread is subtweeting Glen Greenwald" is not a pipeline to Trump support and I'm epistemically closed to the possibility that it is.
Then why is it so upvoted? This post directed at an imaginary group of people? Why don't we have posts upvoted directing rage at communists who work for the CIA? Another imaginary group of people and surely if they existed deserving of more scorn than this. I could invent all kinds of more plausible but hardly of any significant number types of alleged communists who do bad thing. Ah ah, this isn't true. Posts don't get to over 100 upvotes here that make jokes about imaginary groups (not without a cool image meme attached anyways). Perhaps some of the people who upvoted it thought that but I think there might be a little problem with so many.
The answer of course is it is misrepresenting the group of people who hope for a Trump win over a Biden win to demonize them and mis-characterize their complex reasoning as simply "hur hur wanting to own the libs", it is soothing the minds of liberals here by assuring them that those people who claim to have principled, theory backed reasoning for hoping Trump wins over Biden (or understand neither is better and just thinking it funny if he did) is in fact just all a facade, that really they're just fools who have memed themselves into becoming reactionaries. What is in fact formally called a straw-man.
I defer to the top upvoted comment in reply to your comment here that mixes up the “Trump is actually better for the left/for the rest of the world” with "hur hur voting for Trump for the memes to own the libs" which you find in the actual post. People are clearly reading it as exactly that. And by the way Trump is better for the rest of the world or at least no worse than Biden with a cabinet full of war criminals and Pete Buttigieg could be.
I am completely unironic in believing Trump is better for the left. That doesn't mean I'd vote for him obviously. I'm voting Gloria La Riva as should all communists. But if we're to be honest with ourselves either Trump or Biden is going to win and be the next president. Having a preference for the funny imperialist running around breaking things and causing distraught to war criminals like John Bolton and former intelligence chiefs is hardly a crime.
It is however concerning how many people clinging to liberalism here who have probably for months insisted they didn't care are now panicking and insisting they're worried. Why the fuck should they care if someone who calls themselves socialist deigns to vote for Trump over Biden? To vote for anyone but a socialist party at all? Voting for either is about as bad in my book. They're both rapists, they're both imperialists, they're both racists, they're both sexists, they're both in favor of capitalism. In every way that matters they're the same and you should vote for neither. The only reasoning I can see is they are liberals who have accepted the liberal lie that Biden is not a fascist but Trump is and so are growing unreasonably upset at someone for voting for Trump while I assume they would not be as upset about someone voting for Biden.
Look, I came here to make a "stop subtweeting Glenn Greenwald" joke, and you either missed that fact or knew it and still thought it'd be a good idea to post your manifesto so I don't really know what to tell you.
that’s the only reason why he hasn’t poured troops into Iran or Venezuela
not the ONLY reason, but agreed on the larger point.
I agree that it’s stupid to call Trump harm reduction but
Go to a protest and explain [disagreeable thing]
is a really dumb argument. If a socially awkward leftist went to a protest and explained any view that deviated too strongly from mainstream liberalism they’d still get made fun of, yelled at, or ignored. Imagine a white leftist going to a BLM protest and explaining how Fred Hampton felt about black businesses. They’re not gonna get much support, but that doesn’t mean they’re wrong
Foreign policy has continued just fine under him.
Hasnt started a new major war
So fine John Bolton is voting blue and wrote a book advocating the same and been on loads of interviews the last few days saying the same
Hyped up a bunch of security contractors after putting $15m on Maduros head
Which results in a bunch of being shot point blank then having their passports and licenses aired by Maduro on live TV
European leaders are begging for a Biden presidency so American hegemony can reconsolidate
Asiatimes release an article a few days ago blaming specific key figures in the Trump admin for the decline of American hegemony 10-20 years earlier than it could have been
I dont think hes the harm reduction candidate i know he is.
Not that id advocate voting him - i would vote psl due to the fact their actuall communists
Assassinated Soleimani
Actively stealing Iranian oil tankers
Ramping up massive cold war push against China, manufacturing Uyghur bullshit
Increased sanctions on Venezuela, created the Guaido bullshit
Appointed Elliot Abrams to handle Venezuela
Moved American embassy to Jerusalem
Coerced a dozen+ countries to normalize relationships with Israel
Increased bombing campaigns in every active war
Supported lockdown of Kashmir by Modhi
Coup in Bolivia
Biggest global supporter of Bolsonaro
If you think any of those things are as bad as Biden as VP taking Bushs wars from 3 to 7 i have a bridge to sell you
Heres Biden scolding Trump for not being imperialist enough in Belarus
https://old.reddit.com/r/EuropeanSocialists/comments/jk7ile/biden_vows_to_fourther_aid_the_belarusian/
Biden is the more eeffective evil
You really think there's not an example of Trump scolding Biden for not being imperialist enough?
Look dawg u wanna ride with biden thats cool with me
You dont owe me anything
But Biden is a demonstrably more effective imperialist than Trump
And you can see this in all of the imperialist countries wanting a Biden win
Really the only thing he hasn't done that is out of step with the norm is start a war, and that's only because he hasn't found one that he knows we would win quickly. Also you could Yemen to the list.
Boltons new book basically has a scene where they're all ready for war in Venezuela and Trump changes his mind at the last minute saying he "doesnt want to be a bodybag president"
Bolton said it was the most dysfunctional thing hed ever seen
You think Biden would blink twice?
I am legitimately worried about Biden starting a war with Venezuela. At the same time I don't think that's a good enough of a reason to vote for Trump considering the rest of the nightmare his presidency entails, I can't honestly think of any reason to vote for Trump that could be justified. I will add that you shouldn't vote for Biden either though.
The entire reason for this thread is cos OP is ridin with Biden and voted for him (as no doubt a significant amount of chapos will do)
The counterpoint made against this liberalism is that the tired and worn out "voting for the lesser evil" is not even Biden this election its Trump
No one is actually advocating a vote for trump
Trump is still terrible for the global south. He helped do coups in Venezuela and Bolivia. He put brutal sanctions on Cuba and Iran. Also he is presiding over a genocide in Yemen is starting shit with China. Biden does have a danger of getting the machine back on track, but let's not pretend Trump is a dove abroad
Exactly, thank you. I don't get where this idiotic idea came from that Trump is remotely anti-imperial.
i too hate guys who carry around too many keys. i haven’t once in leftist circles seen someone say they’re voting trump as a bit or to own the dems, only people getting mad at them
This is the Stupidpol method of owning the libs. You emerge on the other side.
lol look how you smoked out the accelerationists. If they're not an op, they're just contrarian shitheels.
Hit the nail on the head so hard. Just like Trumpers are trying to "own the libs", so, too, are sadist leftists looking simply to hurt people for self-importance.
I agree with the post but I think a lot of us really really hate liberals. This in my view is because they are self righteous and arrogant as fuck in a way that conservatives don't tend to be. They say shit like "reality has a liberal bias" and "If you dont vote (particiapte in MY system) you opinon is invalid". When you find out the truth about liberalism, that is is responsible for mass murder, genocide, slavery etc. It becomes a huge joke.
You see these people who are just convinced that they are right, backed up by society, and yet know so little about the world and history. They don't even really see that something is wrong with the current system. They just think that orange man came along and dun goofed everthing and when biden is in everything will be fine again. To a communist its maddening.
At the end of the day, Trump represents a faction of the Bourgeoisie that is domestically focused for the most part. I'm not going to say there are no global interests for the capitalists that support him, there definitely are. But his opposition represents the cosmopolitan bourgeoisie which lives and dies by imperial expansion. The new neoliberal/neoconservative anti-Trump alliance is founded on Imperialist proclivities. They don't fucking care if Trump is crass and disrespectful of norms, they care that he's not doing enough to squeeze superprofits from the global south. Acknowledging this isn't "supporting Trump".
And my argument is that this is too much believing what Trump says and ignoring what his administration has actually done.
You're a fucking liberal if you think the majority of people who think Trump being re-elected would be better are doing it to "own the libs". (Their tears would be an incidental bonus as let's admit it, there are a lot of ghoulish people who would cry but won't shed a tear for Syrians or Libyans)
And that's what this post is about, it's about you (a western leftist gags) and probably a good number of the people who upvoted this thinking they're "owning" a real group of people instead of a phantom of their imagination they made up in the midst of their liberal ideology, mis-portraying theory-read communists who have arrived at a particular conclusion regarding relative harm reduction benefits of the two candidates (and a preference for who wins but not who they vote for). This straw-manning far from revealing something insightful about those favoring a Trump win, offers insight to your flawed thought process. Maybe you've just bought into the memes a bit too much, in which case I urge you to take them with a bit of salt. But if not, I'm afraid your thought process is all messed up.
Riddle me this. If Trump is so much better for American empire then why are so many imperialists of the highest order lining up behind Biden? Hmm? Why is John Bolton ridin with Biden? Why are all these former intel officials (awful war criminals and imperialists who've spent their lives committing heinous crimes against the world) sobbing about how Trump "doesn't love America" or is under some influence of a foreign power? The answer is simple of course. Of course he's an imperialist. Of course he's a murderous thug. You cannot be president of the imperialist core super power and not be an imperialist. But he is an ineffective one. He has this big brain of his, and he thinks he's this cool business guy who wants to do deals and he has this nationalist thought process that wars make America weak. And he has this internalized propaganda, he accepts fully the idea that communists like Kim are powerful dictators and he thinks that notion is cool as fuck because he lusts after that kind of power ideal and he thinks he's that type of man and that he can reason with them, dictator to dictator and get something out of it. And the people he has appointed to many roles are not that most competent, he's appointed ideological losers who more than past appointees have these glasses of propaganda on them and cannot act effectively because they're bought the empire's own lies.
Let's look at the scoreboard. Under Obama, with Hillary as secretary of state and Biden as VP, we have the Syria civil war, we have the toppling of Libya where there are now slave markets, we have the pivot to contain China, we have the setting up of camps that have now been used for children and families on the southern US border. And much more. And we have record approval of the US, we have no reporting outside of marginal publications of US atrocities at the southern border or abroad. Liberals react with rage to anyone who says Obama is being cruel.
Now remember that Biden was Obama's pick to satisfy people concerned he would be too radical, he was the conservative, to Obama's right, Democrat. The harassed Anita Hill Democrat. The racist Democrat whose championed crime bill killed hundreds if not thousands of black men and incarcerated tens of thousands.
Under Trump we have only the continuation of Obama's policies and wars. Yes he's more brutal with drones strikes but they were already brutal and don't pretend Biden is going to roll back cruelty. We have a failed coup in Venezuela, not only a failed one but a laughable one that made the coup plotters the laughing stock of the world and showed that the Venezuelan people support their government. We have a currently failing coup in Bolivia. We had the failed Iranian oil tanker incident (with Japanese owned tankers) that attempted to blame Iran but was rapidly debunked and became an embarrassment for the admin, we have Trump attempting to pull troops out of Afghanistan. We have Trump backing off from war with Iran after the tanker incident and drone shoot-down. We have Trump failing to muster alliances. We have the US about to leave (if Trump is re-elected) several international orgs, to leave its veto and power and just walk away from them harming American soft power. We have the global disgust with Trump who is a crude, rude imperialist unlike Biden. Remember how quickly Obama magicked away all the ill will from Bush? Same thing gonna happen fam.
I think Biden's brain is pudding. But I also think he will entirely defer his foreign policy and imperialism to his cabinet and the intelligence state, he'll appoint career war criminals to run the thing and nod approvingly at it. Oh I'm not saying he'll go to war with Iran (although the possibility exists as he is more hawkish than Obama and slurps on Israel's toes), I'm just saying having experienced war criminals around a guy who isn't going to stop them is inherently dangerous to the global proletariat.
You must be realistic. You live in the imperial core. In a nation steeped in anti-communist propaganda. If you truly care about the 3rd world, the global south. You will wish for America to collapse, for it to suffer indignities, for it's power to wane, for it to make ridiculous missteps, to anger and alienate its allies to allow socialism to flourish elsewhere. Incidentally but not of a deciding factor, those who care about trying to grow the movement in the US must acknowledge that it has grown more in 4 years under Trump than the combined 16 of Obama and Bush. Some of that is naturally a result of changing economic fortunes, of material conditions worsening for people. But a lot of it I believe is in addition to that, the naked ideology being exposed, the feckless nature of the opposition being exposed, the rhetoric growing heated and frantic but the actions remaining calm and business as normal. How many people think Trump's election just a bad fluke? How much worse will they think of their nation or of the US if they're a foreigner if he's re-elected?
America must be brought low. The question is who is better to do that. If you're a liberal (as I must suspect you are for making a post like this) of course you want America to hobble on, you think ignorantly that you can reform it or that you'll have more success under Biden in building a revolutionary movement. Let me tell you, Democrats hate communists far more than Republicans. They see us as a direct threat to their legitimacy as the party of "left" in America and they are as you can see whipping up a monster of a new red scare that is not going to magically go away.
This is utterly fucking moronic, and it's all based on the unsupported notion that A) a serious domestic collapse means that the 600 foreign military bases just suddenly disappear overnight, never to be used again, and following that B) you know how a deranged lunatic like Trump is going to respond to a domestic collapse, and that it means definitively that the rest of the world will be left out of this. What is this based on? Daft wishful thinking.
We really need to stop with this shit acting like we have any fucking remote clue how the next 4 years are going to play out. We have two dementia addled racist imperialists as options who both despise us. The potential outcomes for either candidate are overwhelmingly extremely fucking bad, and anyone doing this fucking stupid routine of "ohh well I know that we need to support Biden because of climate change and covid" as if this asshole has ANY fucking actual plan for either of those much less the desire to actually expend the political capital to do so, or "oh well you see I'M the clever guy in the room who knows that Trump is the right pick because he's bad at imperialism" as if there's not any possibility that this insecure narcissist won't decide in the next four years "everyone's saying I'm bad at war, I'll show them" and then starts raining fucking hell on everyone like every shithead like Eliot Abrams and John Bolton and Mike Pompeo and John Kelly and and a bunch of other known war criminals that HE FUCKING APPOINTED have wanted from the start. You don't have a crystal ball, you just sound like a jackass making these proclamations.
Ableism and boring liberal notions about Trump being a lunatic do not profit your position.
and it’s all based on the unsupported notion that A) a serious domestic collapse means that the 600 foreign military bases just suddenly disappear overnight, never to be used again, and following that
Oh wow imperialism is just having foreign bases, once those go away it's gone, you are so smart, you should have told Lenin that so he wouldn't have to write a long book. sigh liberalism and being upvoted, why am I not surprised. I'm not going to give you a basic class in imperialism and empire because I feel it would be an incredible waste of my time. So I instead urge you to self-educate.
B) you know how a deranged lunatic like Trump is going to respond to a domestic collapse, and that it means definitively that the rest of the world will be left out of this. What is this based on? Daft wishful thinking.
Trump is not a lunatic. He's a racist, a reactionary, his brain is not in the best of shape, he's narcissistic, he has an authoritarian personality and so on and so forth. He has acted for the most part rationally within his irrational framework of a worldview. That his worldview is irrational is not really the point as liberalism as a worldview is itself irrational and this can be applied to most American politicians and the mere fact we're facing climate catastrophe. Rational in the sense of self interest and little else.
Listen here. I never claimed the collapse would come during Trump's term. I tend to doubt it would, I just think is hastens things a little. If you're making that claim then I'm afraid you're the one with unsupported notions. As to the rest of the world being left out of it. So what if they aren't? What's your solution? Reformism? snort Just letting the hostage taker keep the world hostage for another century? Sometimes there are no clean ways to deal with something wrong, doesn't mean you don't need it done. Rip the band-aid off. The fact is America is headed for a bad place. This is not the doing of scheming ML's, this is an inherent result of capitalism and the rot of the empire. All that can happen with Biden or Trump is change the circumstances somewhat. So do you want a collapsing US with lots of alliances intact? Or one that has burned its bridges and driven many allies into a more neutral position because they no longer consider the US reliable and aren't willing to go in on its shenanigans? I'll take the latter.
What is this based on? Daft wishful thinking.
You seem to struggle to read. I outlined partially what my thinking is based on which is his behavior, that of his rival, certain contradictions, etc.
We really need to stop with this shit acting like we have any fucking remote clue how the next 4 years are going to play out.
Of course we have no idea how they're going to play out but we can make certain somewhat rational assumptions based on past actions, apparent ideology, etc. Did I lay out an exact plan?
Listen liberal. Deny to me that the US is leaving several UN and international organizations which are scheduled to take place in Trump's second term? Deny it to me. This is a fact. You are hamstrung by your ignorant, foolish, liberal ideology which has infected you with this notion that Trump is completely unpredictable. No one is completely predictable. It's not an argument.
“oh well you see I’M the clever guy in the room who knows that Trump is the right pick because he’s bad at imperialism”
He is demonstrably so. You haven't disputed any of my points. Like a petulant child without anything to turn to you throw insults and insinuations of ignorance while not debunking my analysis nor offering any of your own. Go fuck yourself.
as if there’s not any possibility that this insecure narcissist won’t decide in the next four years “everyone’s saying I’m bad at war, I’ll show them”
Liberals have said this for 4 fucking years. You can't just say "well it could happen" and count that as a logical debate point to past performance and demonstrated ideological aversion to war, e.g. his making fun of Bolton to his face about wanting to go to war, his statements to the press in interviews before he became a politician. Motherfucker please. Your ignorance is not a weapon nor a shield.
and then starts raining fucking hell on everyone like every shithead like Eliot Abrams and John Bolton and Mike Pompeo and John Kelly and and a bunch of other known war criminals that HE FUCKING APPOINTED have wanted from the start.
He made fun of John Bolton to his face over his desires for war with Iran. He fired him. He's hamstrung his war criminals all along. John Kelly is gone as well. Eliot Abrams did nothing for Trump's failed attempts in Venezuela and Bolivia. You lose again, you have no point, no evidence, nothing but emotional investment in ideology.
You don’t have a crystal ball, you just sound like a jackass making these proclamations.
What proclamations? You sound like a fucking tool calling reasonable predictions based on past behavior, statements, and so on proclamations. Who's the jackass? The one offering evidence and trying to reach logical conclusions in a situation that anyone knows cannot be predicted with 100% certainty? Or the person going around saying "woe is us we cannot know".
I don't claim to know. I never have. I just said given past performance and what we know it is reasonable to assume Trump is a bad imperialist and from that we can extrapolate his position relative to Biden.
Every decision in life is a gamble but we cannot sit here with analysis paralysis biting our fingernails like in a cartoon and nervously repeating how it would be irresponsible to speculate or act.
Come back another time if you'd ever like to actually address points instead of sputtering like an angry child. Because honestly I don't know where to start with your post, you seem to be failing to grasp so many concepts I take for granted that aren't just Marxist concepts that well I don't want to spend hours here replying to you.
Long post apparently to the wrong person. Good luck finding me saying that Biden is better than Trump or that I want the preservation of the American empire. All over this thread (and elsewhere) I discuss the inevitable collapse and cheer for it in the most straightforward sense.
Edit: literally in this thread
The actual decline of “the American brand” and (more importantly) US soft power is about the rise of China, who is demonstrating every day that they have the only sustainable model of any major nation today.
You admit you voted for Biden you piece of shit. Fuck off you western chauvinist tool. I wasn't going to judge you for your situation with your family but I'm convinced now that I realize you're the one who made that post that in fact this is a way to ease the guilt of your conscious, by being a fucking liberal.
