Working people want to see the Squad stand up to the establishment. Progressive leaders and leaders of major labor unions need to harness that desire and publicly urge that the Squad use their numerical balance & refuse to vote on the MUST PASS stimulus bill unless $15 is in it.— Kshama Sawant (@cmkshama) March 6, 2021
Lol get the fuck out of here with your three-day old account and your disingenuous criticism. She's pushed for raising the minimum wage to $15 as hard as anyone.
Do you have a specific criticism or just generalized "she's not a fighter!" horseshit?
i mean my accounts a little older and i kinda agree with him. i don't really think account age on chapo means anything, nor do i think the claim is disingenuous. you either believe in electoralism or you don't.
If a brand new account starts slinging vague shit like "this polarizing leftist never fights for anything!" that should set off your wrecker alarm. That's like the number one wrecker tactic -- dropping in and starting some pissing match that doesn't even have any firm criticism to latch onto.
It's not an issue of believing in electoralism. If your issue is with electoral politics you can make all sorts of specific criticisms of that. There's no specific criticism here. That should be discouraged for everyone, but especially people who just showed up.
we ban a lot of people here, way less lately actually, but it wouldn't be surprising to me if someone who has a point of view i disagree with has a fresh account. regardless, their opinion seemed pretty valid to me, and calling someone a wrecker for having an opinion you disagree with is not cool.
the specific criticism to me seems to be that AOC as a 'progressive' has made a lot of decisions that haven't exactly held up to what people expected of her.
i personally think she's just ok. i'd even go as far as saying she's the best chance we have as far as a progressive politician reaching the POTUSA. that is to say slim to none, since electoralism is garbage.
the specific criticism to me seems to be that AOC as a ‘progressive’ has made a lot of decisions that haven’t exactly held up to what people expected of her.
This isn't even a specific criticism -- what decisions? what were the expectations? -- but it's still far more substantive than driving by and yelling "AOC sucks, amirite?"
calling someone a wrecker for having an opinion you disagree with is not cool
That's not cool, but that's not what I did, either.
even if he did just say "AOC sucks amirite?" to me that would still be a valid opinion to have, because i've definitely had that thought at points in my life. if you want them to explain more why AOC sucks you could say stuff like "what makes you think AOC sucks?" rather than just accusing them right off the bat of being a wrecker.
specifically the expectations of not cozying up with pelosi when whoopi fuckin goldberg says "hey you need to fall in line." and then just cowering to 'mama bear's' political hierarchy.
usually i agree with you on a lot of points and think you're one of the better more frequent posters here and would like to not have a super souring experience with you on this, but i just think that you oughta give a little bit.
We will lose if we tear ourselves apart. One easy way to tear ourselves apart is by flinging vague accusations at people who are at least trying to move things in the right direction.
Criticism is fine, but it needs to be specific to avoid vague pissing matches where everyone is fighting on shifting ground. Point out something they actually did or something they actually said. Then we can have a conversation about real things instead getting bogged down in whether someone's characterization of those things is accurate.
rather than just accusing them right off the bat of being a wrecker
See, here's an example of a specific criticism. "You said X, in Y situation." This is useful because you can go back and see if I actually said that, and you can easily find whatever surrounding context is necessary. It's way more productive than "you suck" or "you're an asshole" or the like. This is how we should criticize people pulling in the same direction.
but that specific criticism is of you doing what you did. if you accept it as a legitimate criticism, and accept it as a decent example, please acknowledge the criticism itself.
Ah yes how could I forget to consider all the normal people who are not terminally online leftists on our Chapo Dot Chat website :michael-laugh: try another one
People wander in here, people take screenshots from here, and the stuff people post on here bleeds over into what they post elsewhere or how they talk to people in person.
We can't build a pipeline to the left by calling folks like AOC fascists. It does literally nothing positive and will push the "oh this person is living in fantasy land" button for everyone who doesn't already agree with you.
Liberalism is when you care so much about being edgy that you call one of the farthest-left politicians in the country a fascist even though that very obviously is counterproductive.
"They could theoretically be doing better" is a weak criticism to start, and far too many leftists run with that all the way to "they're bad, actually."
How the hell are we supposed to accomplish anything with that type of thinking?
the thing you want her to do is technically possible
It's not, though. AOC and company can't push a button and raise the minimum wage. The best they can do is push a button that gives them some small chance to raise the minimum wage in exchange for delayed stimulus checks and unemployment funding.
This is far from an obvious decision because it's so unlikely to work.
Expecting AOC to make a stand for something? Good one!
Cheap potshots at other leftists will surely bring the revolution any day now
So will *checks notes* not fighting for 15!
Lol get the fuck out of here with your three-day old account and your disingenuous criticism. She's pushed for raising the minimum wage to $15 as hard as anyone.
Do you have a specific criticism or just generalized "she's not a fighter!" horseshit?
i mean my accounts a little older and i kinda agree with him. i don't really think account age on chapo means anything, nor do i think the claim is disingenuous. you either believe in electoralism or you don't.
If a brand new account starts slinging vague shit like "this polarizing leftist never fights for anything!" that should set off your wrecker alarm. That's like the number one wrecker tactic -- dropping in and starting some pissing match that doesn't even have any firm criticism to latch onto.
It's not an issue of believing in electoralism. If your issue is with electoral politics you can make all sorts of specific criticisms of that. There's no specific criticism here. That should be discouraged for everyone, but especially people who just showed up.
we ban a lot of people here, way less lately actually, but it wouldn't be surprising to me if someone who has a point of view i disagree with has a fresh account. regardless, their opinion seemed pretty valid to me, and calling someone a wrecker for having an opinion you disagree with is not cool.
the specific criticism to me seems to be that AOC as a 'progressive' has made a lot of decisions that haven't exactly held up to what people expected of her.
i personally think she's just ok. i'd even go as far as saying she's the best chance we have as far as a progressive politician reaching the POTUSA. that is to say slim to none, since electoralism is garbage.
This isn't even a specific criticism -- what decisions? what were the expectations? -- but it's still far more substantive than driving by and yelling "AOC sucks, amirite?"
That's not cool, but that's not what I did, either.
even if he did just say "AOC sucks amirite?" to me that would still be a valid opinion to have, because i've definitely had that thought at points in my life. if you want them to explain more why AOC sucks you could say stuff like "what makes you think AOC sucks?" rather than just accusing them right off the bat of being a wrecker.
specifically the expectations of not cozying up with pelosi when whoopi fuckin goldberg says "hey you need to fall in line." and then just cowering to 'mama bear's' political hierarchy.
usually i agree with you on a lot of points and think you're one of the better more frequent posters here and would like to not have a super souring experience with you on this, but i just think that you oughta give a little bit.
We will lose if we tear ourselves apart. One easy way to tear ourselves apart is by flinging vague accusations at people who are at least trying to move things in the right direction.
Criticism is fine, but it needs to be specific to avoid vague pissing matches where everyone is fighting on shifting ground. Point out something they actually did or something they actually said. Then we can have a conversation about real things instead getting bogged down in whether someone's characterization of those things is accurate.
See, here's an example of a specific criticism. "You said X, in Y situation." This is useful because you can go back and see if I actually said that, and you can easily find whatever surrounding context is necessary. It's way more productive than "you suck" or "you're an asshole" or the like. This is how we should criticize people pulling in the same direction.
but that specific criticism is of you doing what you did. if you accept it as a legitimate criticism, and accept it as a decent example, please acknowledge the criticism itself.
No, I did not call them a wrecker right off the bat. Scroll up and read for yourself -- my initial reply to them was:
This is another benefit to specific criticisms: if they're mistaken or otherwise inaccurate, it's easy to go and check what was actually said or done.
Uh yes we should refuse to be critical of social fascists, that will surely help the revolution :lenin-pensive:
Calling AOC a fascist is the worst kind of terminally online leftist bullshit.
When any normal person hears that they think "lol this person doesn't have a fucking clue about anything," and they're right.
Ah yes how could I forget to consider all the normal people who are not terminally online leftists on our Chapo Dot Chat website :michael-laugh: try another one
People wander in here, people take screenshots from here, and the stuff people post on here bleeds over into what they post elsewhere or how they talk to people in person.
We can't build a pipeline to the left by calling folks like AOC fascists. It does literally nothing positive and will push the "oh this person is living in fantasy land" button for everyone who doesn't already agree with you.
When you know you lost an argument so you double down on tone policing :LIB:
Liberalism is when you care so much about being edgy that you call one of the farthest-left politicians in the country a fascist even though that very obviously is counterproductive.
Lmao when AOC has the Oathkeepers throw the rest of us into the Landwehr you'll still be logging on and arguing about how she's Good, Actually
This is the stupidest thing I've ever seen on here.
You should have been here yesterday then, I saw someone on here call AOC a leftist and jump on anyone who said she wasn't Good
:PIGPOOPBALLS:
:obama-drone:
"Social fascist" is a dumb term and I will die on this hill.
deleted by creator
Did I say the House is a leftist organization? Are we talking about all representatives here, or even all the Democrats in the House?
deleted by creator
"They could theoretically be doing better" is a weak criticism to start, and far too many leftists run with that all the way to "they're bad, actually."
How the hell are we supposed to accomplish anything with that type of thinking?
deleted by creator
It's not, though. AOC and company can't push a button and raise the minimum wage. The best they can do is push a button that gives them some small chance to raise the minimum wage in exchange for delayed stimulus checks and unemployment funding.
This is far from an obvious decision because it's so unlikely to work.