Sure, but I think it undermines democrats who have been willing to go to bat for Mamdani like Jerry Nadler and Chris Van Hollen.

I’d like to see as much praise for these people as we see condemnation of people like Gillibrand. The democrats are genuinely split here and it would be valuable to see the correct side come out on top.

Is silicone toxic?

Yeah absolutely, I think it’s also important to remember dems aren’t a monolith and many have their own takes and opinions despite often being influenced by the same harmful forces.

For example, Jerry Nadler had a pretty strong endorsement of Mamdani despite being what I would perceive as a pretty standard democrat. I am hopeful that more democrats can be forced to support him and we can avoid this dem civil war narrative but we’ll have to see.

No this one’s him. The ones that sound kinda like a normal human are the interns.

No, they love slaves, which babies will become if we withhold from them the necessities of life for long enough.

The ones that live at least.

I truly lost the plot on this meme lol. How did this even start?

No, it’s happening everywhere. But I’ve also seen some significant resistance happening in other cities like NYC, Newark, Portland, Seattle, SF, etc.

It’s fairly obviously for rabid, bloodthirsty nationalists in both nations. These leaders build their power on fear and have a constant need to demonstrate social dominance over one another, lest their image as an invincible strong-man show any cracks. In reality they are scared shitless over the possibility of a real war which would threaten their continued rule. So they put on this puppet show so the useful idiots can think of ”hur dur America/Iran stronk, we beat those filthy heathens” with less risk of escalation.

I also use Reddit. My local sub can’t be replicated here, unfortunately, and it’s a very valuable resource to know what’s going on in the local community.

I wish I was so lucky.

Ah it’s been a while I may have misremembered the exact definition.

Caballo, yes. That’s specific to Costa Rica. I forget where I heard the goat one (cabron) but I think it was either Spain or Mexico.

Maybe we could get down to Chinese levels if we executed as many prisoners as they do.

In some Spanish-speaking regions, a goat is usually like a big dumb guy. And calling someone a horse is another way of saying they’re stupid.

Sure but they only want the bots they approve of. That way they can charge for the privilege of allowing someone’s preferred bots onto the platform.

I’ve thought of this years ago. Y’all are just lucky I’m not a terrorist.

I think we agree more than either of us realized. I am myself trying to refrain from criticizing allies in the movement directly. I find it much more useful and appropriate to condemn the much greater violence committed by the police, ICE, and similar paramilitary groups. Not to mention that many of the resistance tactics being used right now aren’t even what I would consider violence—destroying the tools and slowing the movements of violent, repressive forces without harming them is completely compatible with the principles of nonviolent struggle.

However, I think there is a place for tactical discussions like this where it is more theoretical. And I find memes like this suggesting that nonviolent struggle is ineffective to be ahistorical and counterproductive.

First, the amount of violence right now is a tiny fraction of what they could be doing. Look at Gaza for a more accurate picture of that scenario.

Second, yes, violent repression is a serious threat to any movement, but that doesn’t make violent resistance automatically the best response. Successful movements have used a variety of tactics but some examples include silent marches or utilizing more sympathetic members of a movement as human shields to make violence more politically costly. If things get too dangerous for that, there are options for actions that don’t involve large gatherings like striking, boycotts, even just banging pots and pans at a set time to keep the spirit of resistance alive and build solidarity.

That’s not to say that these tactics are guaranteed to work. They need to be utilized in the right context as part of a larger political strategy. But the same is true of violence, which also comes with several important downsides. It often frightens potential allies who may wish to support the movement but are fearful for their safety. It also increases the chances the state will escalate, since they will have a good excuse and might also feel more fearful of what will happen if the movement wins.

All tactics have their place. There are some situations where violence may be the only option. I don’t blame Palestinians for fighting back in the face of genocide. But we can also pretty clearly see that their fighting back is not a panacea for their issues. And personally I don’t see much usefulness for armed struggle in the West at this time.

More difficult to control I believe but that’s not the same a winning a political struggle for human liberation, which at least for me, is the real goal.

Those other conflicts were lost mainly because it wasn’t the top priority of the US military to win a war on the other side of the world, and militants were able to outlast and make it too costly for it to be worth it anymore. The calculus will be very different when you’re rolling out guillotines in their own neighborhoods. They will fight to the death. Why wouldn’t they?

People won’t like this but elites often capitulate because a movement is able to construct a scenario where that’s what’s in their best interest. That means, yes, we should threaten to make things bad for them if they don’t capitulate. But it also means we need to offer some reconciliation if they do back down. If you’re fighting a war of annihilation then that’s a tough signal to send.

Hello, Michael Bloomberg here. If you would like your life span to be shorter, please contact my office. We are working on an experimental technology to transfer excess lifespan from unneeded people into job creators like me.