Boisterous [he/him]
I’m part of a food not Bombs chapter in one of our largest 20 cities. I’m not as familiar with these allegations but several members wanted us to keep our distance. However our organisation recently created and implemented a ‘Safer Spaces policy’ and I pushed for us to work with the CPC to implement it in our local chapter at least. When the vote finished I wanted to reach out and personally with with the CPC to write and implement one for them as I think it would be a fantastic tool to 1. Make sure it doesn’t happen again, and 2. Show the community they’ve taken things seriously. Unfortunately I got a new job out of town and don’t have extra time to do that right now.
My impression is that the CPC has a new, young membership that made this banishment happen as previously the party was older lifers. They’re eager, but unprepared and don’t know what to do as a political organization or an activist one. I think joining would be a benefit, especially if you have anyway to guide your local membership and make it feel safer to others in the community. Communist parties are successful only when they have communities behind them, as they will never receive any support from the state.
“Resigned voluntarily” due to pressure from the new membership and some outside pressure too I believe. The abuser was a known sex pest for a long time from what I’ve heard, and the only reason they stepped back now was because they were made to.
Sorry I didn’t respond earlier, I’m not on here as often as Reddit.
Initially I liked her for that. Leaving Christianity completely means (to me anyway) breaking through one’s automatic default of cognitive dissonance and actually accepting that you’ve believed lies for years. However it seems like so many people don’t fully break that grip and go back to Christianity once they get older. It’s like they live that Boomer phrase “you’ll grow out of it”/“it’s just a phase”. I guess her leaving Christianity was performative or just some youth rebel phase that getting money eventually reversed.
Anyway it sucks to see. Katy Perry was at best a super Lib, but I prefer super Lib Katy to fascist adjacent Katy.
Those are serious accusations they’re leveling, straight up accusing billionaires of fraud. They must be very confident in the evidence they have.
I hope they’re right. They worked hard to deliver an absolute gem of a game and I’d love to see where they go with it next. Fuck the :capitalist-woke: , I really hope they lose this.
Very true. I worked as a personal trainer for a time and part of what I had to learn was sales. My boss was teaching me. One day he comes to work with a new truck. I asked him about it and he was like “oh I didn’t want it, but the sales guy sold me on it. I knew all the techniques he was using, but I let him do his thing and I ended up buying it.” All I could think was ‘if you knew, why’d you let yourself get sold on something you don’t need?’ It’s honestly incredible how some people act.
It’s made so bleak because MAID is still such an important progression. Allowing people to choose when to die is a massive slap in the face to religious extremists who think people should be kept alive no matter how much suffering they must endure. MAID objectively gives people control over an inevitable part of their life, their death.
The problem is refusing to address the wealth inequality and using MAID to kill people in a bad economic position vs a bad medical position. It sucks because I fully support MAID as a concept, but what’s happening right now is horrifying.
I still think it’s good policy, but should stay heavily restricted until people have the right to live a good life regardless of who they are. MAID is still helping those with terminal conditions, but allowing people to use terminal, non life threatening conditions or just bullshit to justify this is bad.
Policy can still be good, but have bad elements. That’s what I’d argue is happening here.
No I get what you’re saying, I understand. I’m arguing that there’s still a benefit to MAID as there’s always people who need/deserve to choose to die in dignity. My argument is if this policy was restricted more instead of expanded to ensure it’s only used by people in pain who wish to end their life. We cannot allow this policy to be used for eugenics and it can easily be changed to suit the role it’s meant to and not to kill the poor. Bad policy can sometimes to modified and become good policy. I don’t want a full repeal of MAID, I just don’t want it used to genocide the poor and mentally ill.