Let it not be overlooked that this guy isn't just a Kamala stan but an Elizabeth Warren stan, as we can see from the emojis communicating the wildly ill-advised "blood and teeth" slogan that the campaign staffers/volunteers had.
Everyone that they conceptualize as being on both Trump and Biden's kill list they just sort of consign to being "doomed to die anyway" like the Calvinists they are. Since they are destined to be killed, how can we blame Biden for killing them when there are also people he could kill but doesn't, while Trump would? Thus spake the lib.
Why are you so fixated on that meme?
No, they act based on donor approval, or Roe would have been codified long ago.
The problem isn't the book inherently, but the inevitable reception when put in the hands of pedophilic cultures like those of the anglosphere. Nabakov was adamant, for example, that the cover should not depict Lolita (the character) in any literal sense (or any person, iirc), for obvious and correct reasons. You can look up what cover art has nonetheless been used if you are feeling masochistic.
That's the problem with humans having limited needs while the market needs unlimited growth. The only answer after a certain point is inventing demand.
The NYT said that one is simple!
Most of those conservatives are Democrats, as the OP also states
Do you not understand why I said that? I would not support student loan forgiveness only for white people because, while I like student loan forgiveness, I can recognize that such a program would ultimately just be in the interest of white supremacy. I wouldn't pull the disingenuous liberal line of "you've gotta start somewhere" as though the policy was tethered to some imaginary future state that it is nominally more similar to but practically much further from.
Likewise, saying "well, at least by holding Belarus to account some countries will be held to account, which gets us closer to all countries being held to account!" is absurd. It promotes western dominance, not the abstract idea of "holding countries to account". Striking only one side saying that it's closer to both sides being struck than striking zero sides would be is sophistry.
If you make your own instance, you can curate your own whitelist
Did you ever check out that thread on lemmygrad I made for you? You never said anything but you might have just forgotten.
GarbageShoot
joined 2 years ago
The Chinese Famine of 1906 - 07 was probably larger from a mortality standpoint, though it didn't last as long. The so-called Great Chinese Famine is only the greatest if you take maximalist anticommunist numbers, and recent scholarship is generally in the direction of it being significantly overestimated. Both that death toll and Mao's "30%" (while he did make serious mistakes, let me be clear) are things that were basically encouraged to be exaggerated even in China itself because of the Dengist revolt and new orthodoxy needing to discourage support for Mao-era policy.
What I'm saying is that your anti-wrecking post contains wrecking.