It's about growth. I'd argue that most folks either wind up embracing being libs or get more involved with what they can IRL. Too much cognitive dissonance otherwise.
Hard to listen to a bernie stump speech (social imperialist that he is) much less hang out here and not get motivated to find the shit on the ground around you where you can make an impact.
If you think these people are grifters then there's nothing I can say. It's a loaded question and you've already answered it for yourself. There's nothing useful because they are grifters. Not sure what you think you're getting away with there.
That doesn't change what I said. If you axiomatically define people as grifters then there's no point in anyone justifying them to you. You've already dismissed them.
I'm not crying about anything. You asked a loaded question. There's nothing to discuss. And you asked me rather than the people who are actually saying they stan the Bruenigs and like them, which is weird too.
Why does that have any bearing on people making up lies about them? It's okay to make up stuff about people unless they fill your definition of useful?
Gonna quote my first reply to this thread here just to show the contrast:
It always trips me out because part of the reason leftists today hate the leftists of the 60s is because they “sold out.” The CIA spent years getting shit published in magazines about how these leftist activists were selling out and making money. That was part of cointelpro. And of course social media is just a continuation of that. We never learned that lesson. I’m not saying the CIA has anything to do with this, just that social media is its own cointelpro operation. You don’t need agents doing this shit anymore, we do it to ourselves.
And this is you
Yeah I don’t care if people made up lies about Vaush or Shapiro lol
What is ur point here? Let's recap, I said socdems are grifters and not useful to communists. I don't care if the CIA paints socdems or even the useless hippies of the 60s as sellouts, they actually were useless.
No you asked, rhetorically, why should anyone care if leftists get canceled or targeted by the CIA
So what if leftist get cancelled or cointelprod? What do these grifters do that is even useful anyway?
If you meant to say what you just said, that's fine. But it sounded like you said something else earlier. And if you're disregarding dialectics to universally declare something useless then I can't reason with you anyways. It makes no sense to say that these people are always grifters or that grifters are always useless. It doesn't even make sense to say that grifters living today are useless because grifters from 60 years ago were useless.
I guess my point is that this has been a massive waste of time and I should have just stopped replying after the first reply when I realized where this was going. Gonna learn that lesson now.
So what if leftist get cancelled or cointelprod? What do these grifters do that is even useful anyway?
Preach. My least favorite part of this place is the obsession with milquetoast left media grifters. But that's part of pipelining.
At least you know someone like Zig Zag ain't getting rich/living the PMC dream running Warrior Up.
I agree, for many leftists, their politics consists of reacting to and absorbing ideas from these grifters and all the drama around them.
It's about growth. I'd argue that most folks either wind up embracing being libs or get more involved with what they can IRL. Too much cognitive dissonance otherwise.
Hard to listen to a bernie stump speech (social imperialist that he is) much less hang out here and not get motivated to find the shit on the ground around you where you can make an impact.
Maybe I'm being too charitable who knows.
If you think these people are grifters then there's nothing I can say. It's a loaded question and you've already answered it for yourself. There's nothing useful because they are grifters. Not sure what you think you're getting away with there.
I consider all social democrats grifters
That doesn't change what I said. If you axiomatically define people as grifters then there's no point in anyone justifying them to you. You've already dismissed them.
and why are you crying about this?
Crying about what?
I said he's a grifter then you started crying about my statement for some reason? You can talk in a direct fashion you know?
I'm not crying about anything. You asked a loaded question. There's nothing to discuss. And you asked me rather than the people who are actually saying they stan the Bruenigs and like them, which is weird too.
Or you could j ust answer the question, what it is that these people do that is useful?
Why does that have any bearing on people making up lies about them? It's okay to make up stuff about people unless they fill your definition of useful?
Yeah I don't care if people made up lies about Vaush or Shapiro lol
Gonna quote my first reply to this thread here just to show the contrast:
And this is you
Yep those are the same thing!
What is ur point here? Let's recap, I said socdems are grifters and not useful to communists. I don't care if the CIA paints socdems or even the useless hippies of the 60s as sellouts, they actually were useless.
No you asked, rhetorically, why should anyone care if leftists get canceled or targeted by the CIA
If you meant to say what you just said, that's fine. But it sounded like you said something else earlier. And if you're disregarding dialectics to universally declare something useless then I can't reason with you anyways. It makes no sense to say that these people are always grifters or that grifters are always useless. It doesn't even make sense to say that grifters living today are useless because grifters from 60 years ago were useless.
I guess my point is that this has been a massive waste of time and I should have just stopped replying after the first reply when I realized where this was going. Gonna learn that lesson now.