The person who tweeted this, Jake Hanrahan, isn't someone I trust and I'd encourage other people to be cautious about him and his work. He's too cosy with the agents of imperialism, he doesn't strike me as a person who is anything more than aligned with the left (mostly) due to opportunism, and personally I'm kinda waiting on his Tim Pool arc.

I know I'm not my government but I want to apologize to him for "my" government for being a bunch of spineless cowards who absolutely know what they are doing and what they are supporting being done in Palestine.

It boils my blood to hear them talk as if it's a war rather than a mass slaughter and to hear them act like "the hostages" (Israelis) are the only ones who matter, as if Israel isn't holding thousands of Palestinians hostage right now and as if all of Gaza and the West Bank aren't held hostage by them as well.

I don't want to say too much but have a family member who is very, very closely connected to the upper ranks in "my" government but I haven't had contact with them for a long time, which is lucky because if I was near this family member and their colleagues I'd spit in their child-murdering faces and tell them that they're lucky that it's the only projectile that I sent towards their heads.

I can't put it into words how much I hate the injustice of the world and that you, your friend, your families and your people are subject to some of the worst of these injustices. I don't have a question, I just want both of you to know that I'm sorry that the world has failed you for over a century and that my heart breaks for all of Palestine.

Yandex is fantastic for piracy.

Don't tell the other instances but I've noticed that it indexes Hexbear and I've seen Hexbear appear surprisingly high up in search results in Yandex lmao

Withdrawal of Israeli forces from populated areas in Gaza

So the IDF is going to put up a fence around Rafah to turn it into the world's largest cage so they can claim they're adhering to the terms of the proposal?

"We should reject the patriarchy and refuse to adopt our husband's surnames as our own!""

"Right on!"

"We must take back what is ours and overthrow men's dominance over women. We should fight to keep our maiden names."

"Yeah!!
Wait a sec - we're going to reject the cultural practice of taking on our husband's surnames and we're going to keep the ones that we were born with?"

"Exactly!"

"So we will keep the surnames that our fathers gave us in order to reject the patriarchy?"

"I... uhh... hang on, let me check my notes here."

(I'm not shitting on anyone who chooses to do this btw; you do you. After all you aren't property to be transferred from one owner to another. I'm just illustrating why bourgeois feminism is a dead end and why Marxist feminism is the only real path forward for women's liberation.)

This man is a lawyer.

Do you know who else were lawyers? Fidel Castro and Vladimir Lenin.

God I wish that everything that liberals believed was true. Just think about it:

• Communists have infiltrated colleges, and maybe even the entire education system

• China is planning an invasion of the US

• Trump is going to destroy the US alliance with Europe and break up NATO

• Communists are a large and well-organised enough that they can undermine elections and they have enough people influence to sway people's politics

• Capitalism is good, actually, and it's going to improve the lives of people in the developing world and things are improving for the people of the US

• Voting for the Democrats will stop fascism

• The "good guys" are good and the "bad guys" are bad

• All we need is to tweak at the dials in order to make things right

• The global hegemon is a benevolent force in the world

Shit, don't threaten me with a good time...

You could randomly pick any one of these things and if you wished it into reality I'd be overjoyed at the outcome.

With all that money she should have paid for the optional extra safety feature for her Tesla:

What we're seeing is the Wal-Martification inherent to capitalism.

I don't mean this to offend but your instinct here, which is entirely relatable, is paralleled by the people whose political inclination is to try and wind back the clock to the 1950s or the Wild West or "before corporatism" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean) etc.

Obviously the huge distinction here is that you haven't crafted your entire political analysis based on achieving a return to what was and you've accurately identified the political and economic forces at play that have caused things to develop in this way and you have a viable solution for the problem you've diagnosed. On the other hand, those groups have none.

The way that individual production and small-scale local production with small marketplaces that brought together groups with similar interests and some larger agora-like regional hubs gradually turned into increasingly larger corporate entities that vacuumed up all the small production, distribution, and exchange until all we're left with is tiny little farmer's markets existing within the margins between massive operations like Amazon, Wal-Mart, Costco etc. that are pretty much unavoidable today is nearly a 1:1 analogy for how the internet started and how it's going, except in classic internet fashion of course this was done as a speedrun.

More can be read about this event here:

https://acotoronto.ca/building.php?ID=12835

If a Canadian feels like it, they can use their library card to gain access to the Globe and Mail's newspaper archive via the library service to pull up the original article.

Pro-tip:

Never correct a person who refers to women as "females"

Don't ever teach misogynists how to refine their language and to develop a more socially-acceptable way of concealing their attitudes.

Let them throw up those red flags immediately so that people can immediately avoid chuds who use this language.

shit like calling the homeless, the unhoused

I have a strong preference for "rough sleepers" because there are people who are in temporary housing, that are couch surfing etc. which don't strictly fit into the term homeless but who experience precarious (and typically inadequate) housing and because some people consider places home, such as their cars (sometimes by preference), and devaluing what a person calls home because it doesn't meet my personal definition of a home is kinda shitty whereas acknowledging that their home may be precarious or inadequate without erasing the fact that it's home to them, I think, is preferable.

/rant

Legit had a liberal, when presented with the fact that the RAND corporation (the organisation that blurs the line between a US government agency and a private organisation which essentially set war policy in the Vietnam war for having kill counts as a metric for determining "success" in Vietnam, amongst other things) had released a paper that basically said that if the US wants to cripple the Chinese economy then what they'd need to do is to initiate a limited military conflict in the South China Sea within the next few years to disrupt the shipping lanes which China is largely dependent upon for foreign trade (before the Belt & Road Initiative gets away from the US and closes this window.)

The outcome, they determined, would be significantly more damaging to the Chinese economy than it would be to the US economy.

I stated that this has been around for some time now and it's not a coincidence that the US is clamouring for war in the SCS and escalating in that region as much as possible without actually firing shots (yet).

What did the lib do?

You guessed it! It was obviously Sissypee tankie propaganda. From the RAND corporation.

I wish I had a fraction of the confidence of these shit-tier libs on the internet have because goddamn, the absolute balls to make the bald-faced claim that a corporation which would have extremely high US security clearance requirements and which has been directly influential over US policy for three quarters of a century is somehow now churning out pro-Chinese propaganda without anyone noticing or making a fuss over it.

It's absolutely ridiculous the degree of information and knowledge that we are expected to bring to bear in a discussion and, upon presenting this info, the libs can summarily dismiss it for going against their narrative as Chinese propaganda (or tankie propaganda etc.) and they do it with zero evidence and zero familiarity with something like the RAND corporation's history and function.

You'd legit get a military officer to burst out in laughter if you claimed that the RAND corporation was an arm of the CPC in front of them. And that's a bad thing because I wish all US military a very unpleasant experience.