This is the point where, if I was an organiser in the UK, I would start pushing really hard for raising awareness about how the watermelon is symbolic of support for Palestine and I'd start organising watermelon-based protests, including the strategic deployment of watermelons left at the entrances to Zionist organisations.

If they want to push demonstrations for Palestine underground, so be it. Getting arrested as a prisoner of conscience in the UK isn't going to serve the interests of Palestinians.

But imagine how fragile and absurd the Zionists would look if they tried to suppress the celebration of watermelons and public watermelon eating events or if people started getting brought up on terrorism charges for "accidentally" leaving a shopping bag with a watermelon on the steps of buildings.

Not only would judges be virtually forced to throw out any charges laid against people for this stuff but it would be an absolute media coup to have big Zionist organisations playing victim by cowering in terror at a watermelon left on their steps.

[Rules-based order intensifies]

It's hilarious that articles are still needing to give a disclaimer after mentioning X that it refers to the site formerly known as Twitter.

If this isn't proof of a failed rebranding strategy, idk what is.

No need to apologise, I just wanted to find the source for myself and when the screenshotted page didn't turn up in the book you mentioned I did a little bit of digging to find the right book so thought I'd make a correction to save others the time/effort of trying to find the source.

Just move to a different instance which isn't so banhappy. There's plenty of instances which aren't so heavy-handed with what they ban.

Actually it's from page 45 of The Liberation of the Camps: The End of the Holocaust and Its Aftermath by Dan Stone if anybody is interested

This is even funnier if you assume that those messages were sent at 3am

The DNC will be slavering at the opportunity this presents them.

"It votes for Blue behind the screen or else it gets the Trump again!"

Do you mean libertarians, or "libertarians" as per Murray Rothbard's quote:

"One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, ‘our side,’ had captured a crucial word from the enemy . . . ‘Libertarians’ . . . had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over..."

Nah, I didn't do that. I just pointed out that they are either a supporter of capitalism (or reactionary politics) or they support revolutionary/evolutionary socialism, all of which are inherently authoritarian in their own ways.

The material conditions that give rise to authoritarianism is a different question altogether. I was specific in my choice of words for a reason.

"We have liberated Europe from fascism, but they will never forgive us for it."

— Marshal Zhukov

Let's not pretend that your politics aren't inherently authoritarian as well.

Either you support capitalism (or worse), which is grossly authoritarian as it inflicts massive violence not only via warfare but through mass starvation and deprivation, or you support socialism, in which case you have two options:

1. The violent overthrow of the current system (spoiler alert: that's a very authoritarian thing to do!)

2. The gradual reform of the current system, meaning maintaining the status quo for an exceptionally long time as we ever so slowly creep our way to a more just economic system while countless people starve, go homeless, die without healthcare, end up in yet-another war and so on (which is a very authoritarian proposition, just throwing away the lives of the poor in your own country—not to mention those in the developing world—just so you can have a neat and tidy reformist approach that doesn't rock the boat.)