Permanently Deleted

54 points

This concept that women would be less violent world leaders is just such a bizarrely sexist take.

There is no innate feature of the female body that makes them less prone to geopolitical conflict, lmfao.

permalink
report
reply
34 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

Did somebody say…War?

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

:hillgasm: When you destroy Libya so you are the last Lib remaining.

:hillary-contempt: Next up: Liberia.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

The funniest part is that lib who lib claimed Boudicca was an example to support the point. Siri, are massacres justified/non-violent?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Oh yeah? What about England under Queen Victoria? Oh wait

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

It’s also very idealist and great person of history brained.

Executive leaders are just a cog in their nation state’s apparatus. Rarely do they have much ability to change anything, if they don’t go along with what the machine wants they get spit out. The entire structure and mechanisms of state and capital are much more powerful than any specific capitalist leader

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

Feminist international relations theory (specifically about how “war-like” leaders are) is not very compelling. We have historical evidence of a plenty of epic girlboss dictators who murdered their enemies. Indira Gandhi is one of my favorite examples. Fukuyama (yes the end of history guy) argues that in a democracy female voters are less likely to support war compared to men but even that has only shakey statistical evidence, plus the fact (that liberals won’t accept) that democracy has never mattered in foreign policy and probably never will barring world revolution.

Other Feminist IR theorists are doing great work though deconstructing the international patriarchy. The “only men can be warmongers” is just a like a pop science thing in the field

permalink
report
reply
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply

Let’s not go with the take that “women are alienated from the consequences of war”. It is a really, really bad take.

permalink
report
parent
reply

To be fair under a patriarchy, the only women that are going to be elected into any form of power are going to be those that have politics that appeal to the patriarchy. So to say that Thatcher is any indication of what female leadership looks like is naive

permalink
report
reply

hmm thats actually something i never really thought about…. really good point tbh

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

The capitalist state will spit out any leader that doesn’t inflict the necessary violence to suppress the growing contradictions. This is an irrelevant discussion under capitalism, it doesn’t matter what the personality of a leader is ultimately or whether the leadership is male of female dominated, it will have to violently wage class war or be toppled

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

top banter from putin

Death to America

permalink
report
reply
20 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
32 points
*

Counterpoint: Fuck the british including the 4.000 britons peacefully inhabiting those isles who just want to keep on with their peaceful lives herding sheep and drinking tea. If they could they would colonize and destroy your country.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Wrong, anglos deserve death

permalink
report
parent
reply

only in chapo chat would a stuggle session start up about the Falklands.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Oh the British empire defender has logged on?

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

And most importantly, the people living there actually wanted to be Br*tish.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Hence the need for the war

permalink
report
parent
reply

To eliminate the people you mentioned

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Wrong

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

falklands? i thought he was talking about russia and ukr**ne

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

I’m not necessarily defending this stance, but NATO installing themselves in Ukraine could definitely be seen as aggression onto “disputed” land that was very recently Russian

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

*Disagree with the nuke part but that was clearly hyperbole I hope

Do not apologize for outspoken critical support of Russia’s anti-imperialist action

permalink
report
parent
reply

Z

permalink
report
parent
reply