AbsentBird
Please. You and I both know that’s a lie.
Do I sound like an expert? I’m genuinely trying to understand. I haven’t kept up on the most recent charter, that was useful information, thank you.
Gaza was started as a refugee camp for Palestinians after the Nakba in 1948…
Haven’t people been living in Gaza for centuries? Maybe it was called something else before. Did the Jewish families leave in 1948?
I am also against war. I guess I was confused when you implied the US are the bad guys in the invasion of Ukraine.
There is only one country that can stop this war, and that’s Russia. To me that makes it pretty clear that if anyone were considered the ‘bad guys’ of the situation it would be them.
It doesn’t help that you’re repeating a lot of ugly propaganda; “Slava Ukraini” has been a popular phrase since the Ukrainian war for independence in 1917, it’s not a Nazi expression, it predates the existence of Nazis. It’s a symbol of Ukrainian sovereignty and resistance to foreign aggression.
Russia has killed over 30,000 civilians during their invasion. How can you justify that volume of carnage?
I believe the Ukrainian people have a right to their land, and to defend themselves against foreign occupation.
Russia is the aggressor, they need to stop this war and remove their military from Ukraine.
It seems to me like the two versions aren’t mutually exclusive. A better voting system that allows for more parties would undoubtedly lead to more parties winning votes, but such a reform would also run against the interests of the ruling class.
I mean, there’s many nations with more than two parties, including progressive parties, but I don’t see a reason why that’s more in line with the ruling class there than here.
It’s not so much about blame to my mind than it is about the way systems feed into each other.
However you slice it, whatever prior conditions you see as most important, replacing the republican party with one left of democrats would be a huge improvement.
Frankly I’m not sure what the leadership would look like. It would start as the progressive caucus, but it would naturally evolve from there based on the voters.
I think the reason many current ‘progressive’ leaders abandon progressive policies has more to do with our current political paradigm than personal flaws of the leaders.
If there were a progressive party with a progressive base it would make progressive policies key to getting votes.
It does matter, even if you don’t view it as significant in the broader context. Even from the perspective of starting a communist revolution, the more fascist and conservative the government, the more brutal the suppression.
My personal position is not for one system of government over the other as much as it is for better outcomes for society. I have enough trans friends and relatives that I want as few conservative reactionaries in power as possible.
Since it seems unlikely for capitalism to be toppled before the republican party crumbles, I still think it’s worth working towards, especially when it just takes a single piece of paperwork every couple years to help.