Comments by "Matthew Ingerson" (@matthewingerson) on "Secular Talk"
channel.
-
Piers & Destiny are BOTH liberals from the wealthy-class. But the term "liberalism" has different meanings, depending on the context. Economic-liberalism and social-liberalism are not the same thing. It's very important for working-class people to understand this.
1a. Social-liberalism is the ABSENCE of an imposed social-hierarchy.
1b.Economic-liberalism is the PRESENCE of an imposed economic-hierarchy.
2a. Social-liberalism is a LW-ideology, based on a social-system that PROVIDES FREEDOM FROM OPPRESSION by others based on social-hierarchy.
2b.Economic-liberalism is a RW-ideology, based on an economic-system that ALLOWS FREEDOM TO OPPRESS others based on economic-hierarchy.
3a. Social-liberalism implies the freedom for ALL people to be free FROM the hierarchical-oppression of other people based on inborn, unchosen, and immutable social-characteristics. Such as race, sex, gender, ethnicity, nationality, physiology, physicality, and abilities/disabilities.
3b. Economic-liberalism implies the freedom for SOME people to be free TO commit hierarchical-oppression against others based upon inherited, unearned, and exploitative economic-positions. Such as wealth, property, possessions, status, caste, manipulation, and intelligence/ignorance. Pro-oppression and anti-inequality are RW-ideologies.
4a. Economic & Social equality are LW-ideologies.
4b. Economic & Social oppression are RW-idologies.
The RW-idealology of economic-liberalism has different economic-systems under its umbrella, each containing varying degrees of hierarchy, and each involving the wealthy-class enslaving the working-class. Some of those systems include: monarchism, feudalism, capitalism, and fascism.
Within economic-liberalism, there are two underlying terms: Classical-liberalism & Neo-liberalism.
5a. Classical-liberalism refers to the RW-economic system of Capitalism as it existed in the past, BEFORE the implementation of The New Deal.
5b. Neo-liberalism refers to the RW-economic system of Capitalism as it exists in the present, AFTER the implementation of New Deal.
6a. The New Deal was a LW-response by the working-class to DECONSTRUCT the oppressive & inequitable RW-hierarchies that were imposed by the wealthy-class under Classical-liberal Capitalism.
6b. And Neo-liberal Capitalism has been the RW-response by the wealthy-class, in which they have tried to undo The New Deal policies and RECONSTRUCT the oppressive & inequitable hierarchies that existed prior to The New Deal.
To make a long-story short:
1. Piers AND Destiny are BOTH economic-liberals (oppressive hierarchists).
2. Piers AND Destiny are BOTH neo-liberals (alive, now, after The New Deal).
3. Piers AND Destiny are BOTH capitalists (the prominent economic-system now).
4. Piers AND Destiny are BOTH neo-liberal capitalists.
And that brings us to the term "Conservative" as it relates to the broader socioeconomic-political landscape. In the realm of politics, "conservative" just means to "maintain" the current social and/or economic political-structures.
And, so, in that vein, Peirs AND Destiny are BOTH Conservatives:
1. Piers AND Destiny are BOTH trying to conserve economic-liberalism.
2. Piers AND Destiny are BOTH trying to conserve neo-liberalism.
3. Piers AND Destiny are BOTH trying to conserve Capitalism.
Piers AND Destiny are BOTH trying to conserve the oppressive & hierarchical RW-economic-system of Neo-Liberal Capitalism.
All that being said, as it relates to the broader political-landscape:
7a. BOTH the Repub&Dem parties are bought, owned, bribed, and controlled by the corrupt wealthy-class & their corrupt RW-politics.
7b. The Democrat-party is a moderate-RW economic party, and they are ALSO conservatives who are trying to conserve the oppressive & hierarchical economic-system of Neo-Liberal Capitalism.
7c. And, the Republc-party is a RW-extremist economic party. They would be okay with conserving the oppressive & hierarchical economic-system of Neo-Liberal Capitalism, but they really want to go further.
7d. But, the Republic-party would prefer to advance the oppressive & hierarchical economic-structures by implementing the system of Fascism. So, they aren't really conservatives.
Vote for the wealthy, RW-extremist Repubs, for the fast, open-road from RW-Capitalism to RW-Fascism, for the continued enslavement of the working-class by the wealthy-class.
Vote for the wealthy, moderate-RW Dems, for the slower, disguised-road from RW-Capitalism to RW-Fascism, for the continued enslavement of the working-class by the wealthy-class..
The corrupt wealthy-class will take whichever politically oppressive & hierarchical RW-system they can get, whether it be monarchism, feudalism, capitalism, or fascism.
But ALL RW-political-systems involve the corrupt wealthy-class enslaving the working-class.
And the corrupt wealthy-class will take whichever kinds of working-class slaves they can get, whether they be chattel-slaves, debt-slaves, or wage-slaves.
Piers AND Destiny, along with Biden AND Trump, are ALL members of the corrupt wealthy-class and they ALL promote corrupt RW-politics.
If you made it this far, I'm thankful for your attention.
✌🤟✊🙏
1
-
Bernie has family. He's more concerned with what could happen to them after he dies.
Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows what the right-wingers have done to working-class leftists through history.
Bernie sees the rhyming-nature of that history coming back around.
Bernie lived through the "Red Scare" and "McCarthyism."
Bernie doesn't want those kinds of things to happen to his family after he dies.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows that there are too many foolish, working-class, right-wing addicts.
Bernie knows that there are too many knavish, wealthy-class, right-wing addicts.
Bernie knows that there are too many right-wing addicts with mental illnesses.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Berne knows that NONE of the right-wing addicts will willingly give up their addictions.
Bernie knows that NONE of the right-wing addicts can cure their own mental illnesses.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows that, in order to maintain their addictive lifestyles, the mentally ill working-class fools will do whatever the mentally ill wealthy-class knaves tell them to do; just like they did during the Red Scare and McCarthyism.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie has now entered the phase known as, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
Bernie is MORE concerned with the quality of life his family will have when he dies.
Bernie is LESS concerned with the quality of life for the working-class.
Bernie is ONLY concerned with his own family-unit minority
Bernie is NOT concerned about the working-class majority.
Bernie is the perfect example of why any effective leader(s) on the left-wing will have to be someone(s) without family -- it's too easy for the wealthy-class right-wingers to corrupt left-wingers who have families, and Bernie is a prime example.
Bernie has exchanged his working-class principles to secure a wealthy-class standard of living for his family after he dies.
Bernie has given up on the anti-wealthy-class nature of left-wing politics.
Bernie has given up on the pro-working-class nature of left-wing politics.
Bernie has given in to the anti-working-class nature of right-wing politics.
Bernie has given in to the pro-wealthy-class nature of right-wing politics.
Bernie has given up.
It's only surprising/upsetting if one doesn't know the facts, or rhyming-nature, of history.
1
-
1
-
Some stupid people don't realize that they already have a mild or moderate broken leg. So they go out and mess around on the broken leg and end up with a severely broken leg, or they break their other leg.
Sometimes the stupid people need to end up immobile before they realize something is broken. But unfortunate people have no choice but to walk on a broken leg, even though they know it's already broken.
Some selfish people don't care that other unfortunate people have mild or moderate broken legs. So the selfish people let the unfortunate people suffer and limp around on a bad leg, and then unfortunate people end up with more severely broken legs, or they end up with two broken legs.
The unfortunate people are unfortunate whether they have two broken legs or no broken legs, and the selfish people don't care. Sometimes, selfish people need to end up with a couple of broken legs AND become part of the unfortunate before they start to care about other people.
I, for one, can't wait for more of the stupid people to realize they are also selfish people and to become part of the unfortunate people.
When you care more about broad equity than singular superiority, it becomes easier to care less if things get worse for selfish people.
When you care more about what comes after this "life" than you do about this life, it becomes easier to care less about what you can accumulate and more about what you can give to others in this life
For some people, this life can't get any worse. They don't see "the end" as anything but a sweet release.
I, for one, say bring on the broken legs.
Something like that.
1
-
1
-
@earwicker7 This didn't start as a "bigger-book" contest (what a childish endeavor you're turning this into), it started with @gregbutler's factual claim that, '...in the 1970's the MAJORITY of Americans were much more autodidactically educated and at a significantly higher level than people are today.'
Furthermore, back then, educational expectations & standards were more equally applied & held in high esteem. Of course, that all changed (in it's most-recent iteration) starting in the 1980s, with the support of BOTH corrupt right[wrong] polit-parties.
Since the 1980s, education expectations & standards have been segregated by socioeconomic-class (kind of like it was in a past iteration known as the Confedrate-south).
If you can't comprehend that more TV and video games has equated to [a]less reading and [b]more-ignorant citiznes, then you're the kind of product that the right[wrong] polit-parties have been striving to turn citizens into.
And if you think I'm going to waste my time writing out the titles of the thousands of non-fiction books I have in my possession, just to placate you and your child-brained, "bigger-book" contest, then you are EXACTLY the kind of product that the right[wrong] polit-parties have been striving to turn you into.
More time spent on TV and video games has resulted in less time spent reading, which has resulted in dumber citizens and more-ignorant society. Now, stop-moving the goal-posts, child. You're just wrong.
Take the "L" and move on.
1
-
Bernie has family. He's more concerned with what could happen to them after he dies.
Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows what the right-wingers have done to working-class leftists through history.
Bernie sees the rhyming-nature of that history coming back around.
Bernie lived through the "Red Scare" and "McCarthyism."
Bernie doesn't want those kinds of things to happen to his family after he dies.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows that there are too many foolish, working-class, right-wing addicts.
Bernie knows that there are too many knavish, wealthy-class, right-wing addicts.
Bernie knows that there are too many right-wing addicts with mental illnesses.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Berne knows that NONE of the right-wing addicts will willingly give up their addictions.
Bernie knows that NONE of the right-wing addicts can cure their own mental illnesses.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows that, in order to maintain their addictive lifestyles, the mentally ill working-class fools will do whatever the mentally ill wealthy-class knaves tell them to do; just like they did during the Red Scare and McCarthyism.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie has now entered the phase known as, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
Bernie is MORE concerned with the quality of life his family will have when he dies.
Bernie is LESS concerned with the quality of life for the working-class.
Bernie is ONLY concerned with his own family-unit minority
Bernie is NOT concerned about the working-class majority.
Bernie is the perfect example of why any effective leader(s) on the left-wing will have to be someone(s) without family -- it's too easy for the wealthy-class right-wingers to corrupt left-wingers who have families, and Bernie is a prime example.
Bernie has exchanged his working-class principles to secure a wealthy-class standard of living for his family after he dies.
Bernie has given up on the anti-wealthy-class nature of left-wing politics.
Bernie has given up on the pro-working-class nature of left-wing politics.
Bernie has given in to the anti-working-class nature of right-wing politics.
Bernie has given in to the pro-wealthy-class nature of right-wing politics.
Bernie has given up.
It's only surprising/upsetting if one doesn't know the facts, or rhyming-nature, of history.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is why the voting-age should be periodically adjusted, to account for the deficiencies of a generation that have been bred by wealthy-class, right-wing, fascist extremists and the propaganda they produce to confuse child-brains.
Those child-brains have obviously never heard, or they are incapable of comprehending, the history of the Republic-party over the past 100 years.
I say raise the voting age to 25 for the foreseeable future -- the average age when the consensus of medical professionals agree that the nervous system and the brain are mostly finished developing.
That will give the adults in the room/communities some time to remove the wealthy-class, right-wing, fascist extremists from their addictions and positions of power, without being hampered by the electoral-sabotage committed by child-brains who have been duped into becoming soldiers by and for those wealthy-class, right-wing, fascist extremists.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The whole American $ystem is corrupted by incestuously nepotistic right-winger$ from the wealthy-cla$$. Krystal and Kyle are BOTH part of the wealthy-cla$$ and, thus, are BOTH right-wingers. Hence, their unwillingness to truthfully and adequately explain the $ystem-corruption for their listeners and viewers.
Right-wing politics = Anti-working-class politics.
Right-wing politics = Pro-wealthy-class politics
Media businesses (Fox, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, PBS & YouTube) are ALL OWNED by wealthy right-wing stockholders.
Politicians (Repubs and Dems) are BRIBED by the SAME wealthy right-wing stockholders who also fund the campaigns of politicians.
Then, those bribed politicians pass laws to benefit the wealthy right-wing minority of business-stockholders and campaign-funders, all at the expense of the working-class majority.
Meanwhile, in this video, Krystal & Kyle (BOTH of whom are wealthy right-wingers), are complaining about ONE wealthy right-winger (Biden), instead of explaining the whole corrupt $ystem in detail for their listeners and viewers.
Krystal sold-out to the right-wing when they embarrassed her by leaking her college photos. And she sold-out even further when she teamed up with right-wing extremist, Saagar 'The saggy-brained Clown' Enjeti. Take notice of how she has toned down her critical rhetoric of corrupt, wealthy right-wingers.
Kyle sold-out to the right-wing when he allowed his subscriber-number dictate the context of his content. And he sold out even further when he succumbed to his mommy-issues and got into bed with right-wing Krystal. Take notice of how Kyle's show has devolved into a soap-opera/gossip-column, rather than the critical, educationally-informative program it once was.
F*kc 'em -- both right-wing Krystal and right-wing Kyle.
F*kc ALL the right-wingers -- the right-wing extremist Repubs and the right-wing moderate Dems.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
A community should be able to initiate the division of a couple/relationship, particularly if/when a couple/relationship becomes toxic to the community, especially for the sake of children.
Under a system like that, my parents could have been divorced for numerous reasons on countless occasions. For examples:
1. After the first of the many times that my mother literally begged my father to hit her. She tried goading him into hitting her for years. He never did hit her though.
But I had to watch her purposefully manipulate him for years, and no kid should have to watch that kind of mind-f*kcing .
2. After the first of many times that my mother tricked me and my siblings into not reporting her to Child Protective Services for abusing us.
She would say things like, "they're just going to come and take you away."
She said it that way on purpose, to make us think it was our fault. Because, as kids, most of us get taught that when bad people do the wrong things, the cops come and take the wrong-doers away.
So, by telling us that "they" were going to "take us away," she tricked us into believing that we were the ones in the wrong.
Then, there was another thing she started doing.
When we would threaten to call CPS on her, she would say the 1-800-number out loud, like she had it memorized. Or, she would write the number on a piece of paper and hand it to us. It was as if she was daring us to call.
Looking back, I don't know if she did that because she believed that we wouldn't call or because she wouldn't have cared if we did call. (It's difficult, and probably futile, to try deciphering the specific and primary motives of consumer-driven socio/psychopathic narcissists.)
But she knew we were more scared of being taken away than we were of her abuse because she had already implanted the fear of "them" taking us away into our minds.
We didn't want to get taken away -- we just wanted the abuse to stop. And we were only scared because we didn't know any better.
Like, sure, for argument's sake, the foster-care system is a gamble. But we didn't know that as young kids in the 1980s.
And, besides, also for the sake of argument, which scenario is actually worse: Staying in an abusive situation or gambling on being moved to a less abusive situation?
Staying in an abusive situation isn't ideal, but neither is gambling. And no kid should have to make that choice.
Anyway. My mother played these manipulative mind-games on us until we stopped threatening to report her abuse. Instead of reporting her, we "learned" to live with the unreasonable and illogical abuse by succumbing to it.
I often wonder what could've been different for me if I would've rolled the dice and made the call to CPS.
Oh, goodness. That was quite a digression from my main point. I'll get back to it and conclude.
Perhaps my parents should have been forced to get a divorce after my mother was provably neglecting me and after she rendered my father into a perception of powerlessness to do anything about it.
You might be asking yourself, "what, why, how?" Well, then, here are your answers.
3. After I almost lost my tongue was two years old.
I was in the garage alone. (WHAT?) Then I climbed up on the four-foot-tall workbench. (WHY?) Then I fell off the bench and slammed my chin onto the concrete floor, nearly biting my tongue in half. (HOW?)
4. Or, the time I ate mothballs.
5. Or, the time I ate rat poisoning.
6 Or, the time I drank ammonia.
7. Or, the time I drank bleach.
8. Or, the time I ate a bottle of children's aspirin. (Which didn't even happen, because I clearly remember pouring the pills down the drain. But I got caught with the empty bottle by my neglectful biatch-mother, so I got treated as if I had eaten the whole bottle).
9. Or, when I was 7 years old, my doctor admonished my mother for allowing me to become obese, at which point my mother stopped using that doctor to prevent the doctor from recording a paper trail of my mother's nutritional-negligence.
10. Or, when my relatives and neighbors started molesting me.
Perhaps my parents should have been forced to get a divorce after one of those instances. Or maybe their divorce should have been required after...
11. ...my mother's first year of doctor-enabled opioid addiction. Maybe that would be a good precursor, indicating that someone would turn into a sh!te-mother and wife.
She's now 40+ years into a doctor-enabled opioid addict. Maybe that's a good clue, explaining why she's still a sh!te-human today.
If you're still asking yourself, "what, why, and how?" The answers are all easy and the same -- because my mother was too busy getting high on opioids to take care of herself and the vulnerable humans she was supposed to protect.
Certainly, there must be something on my list that would incite more than questions, like, what, why, and how"?
Surely, there must be something on my list that would move the better, caring members of the community to seek action, to end my parent's relationship and the misery it brought upon me and others.
There has to be something that will compel the working-class drones into action to protect children.
But, as of today: Nope!
Children are left to suffer without escape.
And these ignorant working-class adults keep pumping out innocent working-class children to continue the suffering. As if there's some magic number of suffering children that, if reached, will make the suffering of working-class adults disappear.
I don't say all these things to get sympathy for me. I don't need it now. But I do say these things to incite empathy for the children who are suffering RIGHT NOW.
I wouldn't change my childhood. My suffering gave me the sense of perception to grasp who is at fault for my suffering. The people at fault are those like J.D. Vance.
And my opening point remains the same:
There should be a system in place whereby the people of a community can initiate the division of a couple/relationship, particularly if/when a couple/relationship becomes toxic to the community, especially for the sake of children.
Until better times, I'll be preaching antinatalism and celibacy.
1
-
1
-
@TheEclecticSinger I did not forget. A popular-advocate does not an effective-servant make. A comedian does not a statesman make. A proctologist is NOT a neurologist.
I've said the same thing about many of these people who haven't studied politics, government, and the intricacies that make up the few safeguards left on the modicum of government that still remains to protect the working-class from the wealthy-class.
Without an adequate understanding of The Office of the Presidency and The Executive Branch, the president is a puppet at best and road-cone to be steamrolled at worst.
Trump is exactly that, and they got barely anything done in his first term.
Executively, the ignorant staff he hired deregulated the wealthy-class, and broke safeguards that protected the working-class. They did as much harm as they could with the little knowledge they had, but it was a slop show.
Judicially, he nominated judges that were selected by the wealthy-class owners of The Heritage Foundation.
Legislatively, he signed tax cuts for the wealthy-class & COVID stuff. But the legislature confirmed the judges selected by the wealthy-class owners of the Heritage Foundation.
His term in office was a giveaway to the wealthy-class.
He got steamrolled by smarter members of the wealthy-class in his first term, and the only reason his second term will be worse is because he has found the most vile members of the wealthy-class and let them in the backdoor.
Jon Stewart will NOT be able to do anything but go along to get along.
We don't need another celebrity.
We need someone who already has a working & practical comprehension of the entrenched corruption of wealthy-class & their corrupt RW-politics.
We need someone with the knowledge to wield the power of The Constitution to combat the corrupt wealthy-class & their corrupt RW-politics.
We need someone who understands how to re-institute the working-class protections that were removed by the previous wealthy-class administration.
Maybe two or three people in the world have all the makings of a working-class President who is capable of meaningfully combating the wealthy-class.
The real choices are INCREDIBLY slim.
Jon Stewart is NOT it.
Grow up. Wise up.
1
-
1
-
Authoritarianism = gov't by Minority-rule = Right-wing politics
Democracy = gov't by Majority-rule = Left-wing politics
Right-wing politics = Pro-wealthy-class, pro-autocracy, pro-minority-rule.
Right-wing politics = Anti-working-class, anti-democracy, anti-majority-rule.
The working-class = the majority.
The wealthy-class = the minority.
YOU are a member of the working-class majority. But...
YOU'RE acting as a mouthpiece for the wealthy-class minority.
THAT makes you one of two things for speculation, and one thing for certain.
For speculation, you're either one of the two following things:
1. A fool;
(A) you don't comprehend the international & historical contexts of left-wing versus right-wing politics;
(B) you don't understand the inherent corruption in right-wing politics;
(C) you have no idea what you're saying or doing;
(D) any inkling of the ramifications thereof.
OR
2. A knave; a fraud. a liar, a deceiver, a pretender...
Perhaps you PRETEND not to understand a, b, c, and d from up above. Perhaps you DO know, but you PRETEND not to know.
And why would you PRETEND to be stupid? The easy answer is because you benefit from it.
You know, I don't think you're entirely foolish. In fact, maybe you DO indeed comprehend some of a, b, c, and d up above.
Maybe you understand some of the contrasts between left-right politics -- maybe not in historical and international contexts -- to some degree.
But there isn't much to gain by pretending you don't know those things. So, what else might you be pretending that you don't know?
Perhaps, with you, it is that you comprehend the corruption of right-wing politics. But why would you pretend not to comprehend that?
The easy answer is that you benefit from the corruption. That's what it is with many working-class dupes who shill for the wealthy-class and right-wing politics.
Perhaps you've been lucky enough to devise a way to benefit from the corruption of right-wing politics, and that's why you pretend not to comprehend the corruption therein.
Perhaps you comprehend the corruption, and you comprehend how you benefit from the corruption, and you don't want to give up the corruption.
So you stick with the right-wing political apparatus. And it is through that right-wing apparatus by which corrupt people like you perpetuate your authoritarian, minority-rule of corruption.
And let's just say that you DO indeed comprehend any of that, and let's just that, at the same time, you're simultaneously pretending that you DON'T comprehend any of it, then that would make you a knave.
BUT, whether you're an unknowing-fool or a knowing-knave, neither of those things is anything to be proud of.
That would make you exactly the kind of uneducated slave whom the wealthy right-wing owners would want you to be.
And no matter how shiny you lick their boots, and no matter how deep you can get the brown on your nose, they will never let you into their club.
To believe otherwise would make you the kind of working-class mark whom the wealthy-class aims for.
Because they will use you and anyone they can to satisfy their addictions, and they will never willingly give up their addictions, no matter how many working-class lives it costs.
And when you spew their corrupt right-wing vitriol, it makes it seem like you might be just like them -- that you'll use anyone else's suffering to satisfy your own addictions.
That wouldn't be anything to be proud of either.
But, if that's what you want to be like, then whether you're a fool or a knave, you're a saboteur AND a class-traitor.
Congratulations @MakeCaliGreatAgain
1
-
1
-
1
-
It will have to be someone who doesn't have any family -- having a family makes a leader more-easily corruptible by the wealthy-class right-wingers. Bernie has family, and he's been corrupted by the wealthy-class right-wingers. Bernie has given up on the working-class. And so will any other leader with a family to worry about.
Bernie is now more concerned with what could happen to his family after he dies.
Bernie knows what the right-wingers have done to working-class leftists through history.
Bernie sees the rhyming-nature of that history coming back around.
Bernie lived through the "Red Scare" and "McCarthyism."
Bernie doesn't want those kinds of things to happen to his family after he dies.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows that there are too many foolish, working-class, right-wing addicts.
Bernie knows that there are too many knavish, wealthy-class, right-wing addicts.
Bernie knows that there are too many right-wing addicts with mental illnesses.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Berne knows that NONE of the right-wing addicts will willingly give up their addictions.
Bernie knows that NONE of the right-wing addicts can cure their own mental illnesses.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows that, in order to maintain their addictive lifestyles, the mentally ill working-class fools will do whatever the mentally ill wealthy-class knaves tell them to do; just like they did during the Red Scare and McCarthyism.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie has now entered the phase known as, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
Bernie is MORE concerned with the quality of life his family will have when he dies.
Bernie is LESS concerned with the quality of life for the working-class.
Bernie is ONLY concerned with his own family-unit minority
Bernie is NOT concerned about the working-class majority.
Bernie is the perfect example of why any effective leader(s) on the left-wing will have to be someone(s) without family -- it's too easy for the wealthy-class right-wingers to corrupt left-wingers who have families, and Bernie is a prime example.
Bernie has exchanged his working-class principles to secure a wealthy-class standard of living for his family after he dies.
Bernie has given up on the anti-wealthy-class nature of left-wing politics.
Bernie has given up on the pro-working-class nature of left-wing politics.
Bernie has given in to the anti-working-class nature of right-wing politics.
Bernie has given in to the pro-wealthy-class nature of right-wing politics.
Bernie has given up.
It's only surprising/upsetting if one doesn't know the facts, or rhyming-nature, of history.
1
-
Vote RW-extremist Trump&Repubs, for the fast, open-road to fascism.
Vote moderate-RW Biden&Dems, for the slow, disguised-road to fascism.
Vote moderate-RW RFK, for the slower, more-disguised-road to fascism.
RW-politics are anti-working-class politics.
RW-politics are pro-wealthy-class-politics.
Trump, Biden, and RFK are ALL members of the wealthy-class, and, thus, ALL of them are RWers.
No thanks. 🤮
1
-
1
-
1
-
Bernie has family. He's more concerned with what could happen to them after he dies.
Saying he's been blindsided lets him off the hook as some kind of simpleton,. Bernie has knowingly, willingly given up on the working-class
Bernie knows what the right-wingers have done to working-class leftists through history.
Bernie sees the rhyming-nature of that history coming back around.
Bernie lived through the "Red Scare" and "McCarthyism."
Bernie doesn't want those kinds of things to happen to his family after he dies.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows that there are too many foolish, working-class, right-wing addicts.
Bernie knows that there are too many knavish, wealthy-class, right-wing addicts.
Bernie knows that there are too many right-wing addicts with mental illnesses.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Berne knows that NONE of the right-wing addicts will willingly give up their addictions.
Bernie knows that NONE of the right-wing addicts can cure their own mental illnesses.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie knows that, in order to maintain their addictive lifestyles, the mentally ill working-class fools will do whatever the mentally ill wealthy-class knaves tell them to do; just like they did during the Red Scare and McCarthyism.
And, so, Bernie has given up on the working-class.
Bernie has now entered the phase known as, "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."
Bernie is MORE concerned with the quality of life his family will have when he dies.
Bernie is LESS concerned with the quality of life for the working-class.
Bernie is ONLY concerned with his own family-unit minority
Bernie is NOT concerned about the working-class majority.
Bernie is the perfect example of why any effective leader(s) on the left-wing will have to be someone(s) without family -- it's too easy for the wealthy-class right-wingers to corrupt left-wingers who have families, and Bernie is a prime example.
Bernie has exchanged his working-class principles to secure a wealthy-class standard of living for his family after he dies.
Bernie has given up on the anti-wealthy-class nature of left-wing politics.
Bernie has given up on the pro-working-class nature of left-wing politics.
Bernie has given in to the anti-working-class nature of right-wing politics.
Bernie has given in to the pro-wealthy-class nature of right-wing politics.
Bernie has given up.
It's only surprising/upsetting if one doesn't know the facts, or rhyming-nature, of history.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nicholasholden1896 It would be better to have a transparent and accountable government, creating and regulating jobs that are needed, than it would be to have your unaccountable and non-transparent, right-wing, wealthy-class overlords creating jobs that aren't needed.
But, it was right-wing wealthy-class overlords who created the sh!tehole of American government, and the same brand of right-wing wealthy-class overlords still control that sh!tehole government today.
Working-class dupes like you, with brown-noses and blackened-tongues from sniffing wealthy-class butt'oles and licking wealthy-class boots, are the biggest part of the problems.
My greatest fears are for those of your friends, family members, and neighbors whom you will murder first when you wealthy-class overlords command you to.
You are the weakest link among the lowest common denominator of humans.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@zwicker5585 I can see how I may have misunderstood OP's comment, but I think there are much bigger problems, here. Such as:
(1)OP can't, didn't, and/or doesn't write more clearly, and probably won't ever learn to.
(2)OP hasn't set the record straight, because they are either [a]unwilling to respond, or [b]incapable of learning how to respond (that's like knowing how to get mail while being incapable of sending mail, or knowing how to take a phone-call but not being able to use the same phone to call anyone else).
But I'm not just going to take-back or delete my comment without contextual-clarification. There are a couple-few indecent, working-class dupes who have outed themselves by spewing RW-propaganda, and that compelled some decent working-class people to write retorts to the RW-propagandists.
In fact, I'll double-down on my comment with the following: Vulnerable, decent & intelligent working-class people need to avoid, and get away from, the indecent & ignorant working-class dupes who support the indecent & intelligent wealthy-class authoritarians & their corrupt RW-politics.
I appreciate you pointing out the possibility that I misunderstood OPs comment, but my reply-comment still stands. But I'll go back and edit it, a little.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheRogueEmpire Huh... In my life, the pro-lynching folks are the opposite of commies. Maybe I've misunderstood you, or perhaps you've miscommunicated.
And just for the sake of clarification for any wandering readers:
A "commie" is a communist, and a "cappie" would be a capitalist.
Communism is the opposite of capitalism.
Communism is on the left and capitalism on the right.
Communism is a democratic system of majority-rule, and capitalism is an autocratic system of minority-rule or mob-rule.
That being said:
The only people I've ever known to defend slavery/lynching with the "States' Rights" argument, have been authoritarian capitalist right-wingers. Not democratic communist left-wingers. Coincidentally, or not, all the "States' Rights" racists I know are capitalists -- the opposite of communists
The only people I've ever known to defend child abuse with the "Parental Rights" argument, have been authoritarian capitalist right-wingers. Not democratic communist left-wingers. Coincidentally, or not, the only "Parental Rights" child-abusers I know are capitalists -- the opposite of communists.
The only people I've ever known to defend unfettered exploitation and manipulation with the "Privacy Rights" argument, have been authoritarian capitalist right-wingers. Not communist left-wingers.
The only people who have ever abused and neglected me are authoritarian capitalist right-wingers.
The only people who have ever tortured and excluded me are authoritarian capitalist right-wingers.
The only people who have ever enslaved and disenfranchised me are authoritarian capitalist right-wingers.
The only people who have ever molested and r@p*d me are authoritarian capitalist right-wingers.
The only people who have ever starved and poisoned me are authoritarian capitalist right-wingers.
The only people who have ever slandered and defamed me are authoritarian capitalist right-wingers.
And those authoritarian capitalist right-wingers did all those things to me in private (except for the disenfranchisement, slander, and defamation -- that was all done in public).
Democratic communist left wingers have never done anything to me.
In fact, I don't think it's a coincidence, at all, that the only "groomers," "welfare-queens," and "thugs" I've ever known have all been straight, wh!te, cis-gendered, right-wing, authoritarian capitalists. The opposite of left-wing communists.
All of the worst, most vile, most heinous, infantile-brained adults who I know, are all authoritarian capitalist right-wingers. Not communist left wingers.
All of the walking-talking-breathing pieces of human-excrement who I know -- those whose mouths could win thespian awards for acting like ten-pound diapers trying to contain a hundred-pounds of sh!te -- are all authoritarian capitalist right-wingers. Not communist left wingers.
So, maybe you made a mistake when you said "these commies will string you up," or, perhaps, I've just misunderstood you.
Or, maybe, your mouth has a full ten-pound load and you're trying to win an award.
I'm not sure which, and I almost don't care.
The most important thing for any wandering readers to realize is this:
Right-wing politics are pro-wealthy-class politics.
Right-wing politics are anti-working-class politics.
And one of the ways that the wealthy-class right-wingers maintained chattel-slavery and capitalism in the past was through privacy -- by keeping their atrocities private.
And one of the ways the wealthy-class right-wingers maintain wage-slavery and capitalism in the present is through privacy -- by keeping their atrocities private.
The wealthy-class right-wingers want to maintain unfettered privacy so they can privately continue the human-manipulation and labor-exploitation that is necessary for capitalism to exist and persist.
The wealthy-class, right-wing, capitalist addicts are responsible for the world's problems.
And the only thing as bad as a wealthy-class right-winger is class-traitor.
A class traitor is a working-class fool who votes for, and spews the propaganda of, wealthy-class right-wingers.
A class traitor is a working-class fool who suffers from the same addictions as the wealthy-class right-wingers, although in smaller doses.
A class-traitor is a working-class fool who won't sacrifice their standard of living (just like the wealthy-class right-wingers won't), even if their sacrifice would help others with lower standards of living.
A working-class class-traitor is no better than an authoritarian wealthy-class right-winger.
Neither is anything to be proud of.
Good day.
**Edit**
To TheRogueEmpire:
If I've misunderstood your reply, then I do apologize. If you amend your reply to include more context, to make more sense, then I'll delete my retort seen above.
However, if I haven't misunderstood you, and you're just another foolish, working-class, right-wing tool, you can go have intercourse with a hobbit's pickle slicer and then jump in a pool of salt.
😊
1
-
Adorable. You people think Democrat-party leadership cares if you don't support them over a social agenda. They don't care.
If you don't support the Democrat-party, that will make it easier for the Republic-party to win, thus making it easier to push through the pro-wealthy-class and anti-working-class economic agenda on which the Republic&Democrat party-leadership both agree.
Both parties are bought, owned, bribed, and controlled by the wealthy-class.
Of course, the American sh!tehole was funded and founded by the wealthy-class, but in this most recent iteration of wealthy-class corruption and control, the Repubs have been owned for a century, and the Dems have been owned by the same wealthy-class since the Buckley v. Valeo SCOTUS ruling in 1976.
You've been living under the rule of two pro-wealthy-class, anti-working-class parties for nearly 40 years. If either party "goes down" there is still the other party to do the economic bidding of the wealthy-class.
I could go on, but it's as futile trying to explain the historical and international contexts of politics to right-wing Democrat-liberals as it is trying to explain it to right-wing Republican-liberals, neither of whom understand that liberalism is a right-wing political ideology.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1