There's also a difference in HOW certain groups support the government. The more modern/city dwelling populace, especially the younger generations, is more of a "general support overall" but they go into the finer details more about which representatives and policies they like and dislike, etc. Whereas the more rural, poorer, and older peoples tend to have a much stronger feeling of support for the communists and less of a breakdown of the finer details.
At least this is what I have heard from interviews with people that travel the area. The Proles of the Round Table podcast have a few good episodes on this.
What does it mean to be a “civilian” when the violence against Palestine is settler-colonial ethnic cleansing?
I do not advocate for the actual assault of children, but the “civilians” in the settlements are the perpetrators of decades long genocide. People who not only do not care that countless Palestinians, children included, have been murdered, but actually support it. It is not a meaningful distinction in this type of conflict.
They put themselves there because they are ideologically committed to ethnically cleansing the land of Palestinians and taking it for themselves. They are thieves and murderers and actions against them by Palestinian forces is self defence.
Counterpoint, there is no such thing as civilian Israelis. They are all criminal settlers occupying stolen land and condoning genocide against the people they have stolen from.
Usually for me it's if they don't point at me and make a loud screeching sound when I mention unions are good and maybe socialist countries aren't as bad as the US media makes them out to be.
It's been collapsing for decades, it's just now becoming more obvious. It's basically already at a collapsed state. I mean, what do we call a society where people regularly can't afford food, water, shelter, or medical attention? Collapse isn't "everything sucks for everyone." It's "everything sucks for most while some still manage to hold on." If you think it hasn't collapsed yet you just aren't yet a victim of it.
Oh I get it completely but the issue I see is that there won't BE any real action or reform taken specifically because the capitalist system doesn't want it to. It's like how the vast majority support extended background checks but Congress will never touch that shit. America is so fucked it would take the ending of capitalism in order to implement any of these ideas. At least that's how it seems to be from my point of view of the society.... God I hate it here.
I don't think the killing in US will ever stop so long as capitalism remains in charge. Most of these comments, while mostly correct, and discussing the symptoms that are causing the mass shootings while the underlying cause of those symptoms is being ignored. Fascist propaganda, white supremacy, mental health, etc? All these things stem from the same general source. They are all a product of rampant capitalism. Especially the mental health. We either don't treat it at all or give people "antidepressants" that have been linked to erratic and violent behavior. All the stresses, social isolations, poverty, etc. that cause kids and adults alike to just go shoot up schools and shit. It's all a product of capitalism driving the labor class insane. It's meant to. To keep us killing each other and not the capitalists.
Sure, you could enact laws against propaganda, better background checks, all that, but those things will never pass in the US's hyper capitalist government. In theory they could work but in order for them to be put into practice you have to actually do something about capitalism. And if you end capitalism you get rid of a lot of the factors that cause the shootings in the first place.
If you skip past most of this please read the last paragraph.
First point to make "will corrupt it the same way they do for capitalism"
People that actually say this are already in the wrong. They look at places like the US and see the politicians not working for the people. Getting into bed with big business money and screwing over the rest of the population.... The rest of the population being the workers, the labor forces..... The US is a capitalist government.... This is not corruption. Corruption doesn't not mean "evil" or "bad," it means "doing something that goes against what the current system is set up to do." The way we use "corruption" in the US is actually the system working as intended. The government is SUPPOSED to do this. They are SUPPOSED to uphold the power of the capitalist at the expense of the people. Protecting and serving the capitalist class has always been the governments purpose. They have just spend centuries convincing the populace when it's not. That the government is there to protect and serve all Americans. A real, actual corrupt politician in the US is one that would help the workers at the expense of businesses. In the same light a politician that uses his office to further their own wealth is not corrupt in the eyes of capitalism. That's a very capitalist thing to do. Further your own accumulation of capital at the expense of the working class.
You notice these politicians never further their own wealth if it is going to hurt the oligarchy in any meaningful way, and the ones that do are cast out almost immediately. So the US DOES weed out corruption. It's why you don't see many politicians in the US actually helping the working class or going against the oligarchy. You think the US didn't do mass purges? Look at what they did to crush the communist parties that had so much support their marches filled the streets of cities during and after the great depression.
The irony is that by doing this they create a definition of corruption in politics that is only really applicable to socialist nations. A socialist working with businesses at the expense of workers IS actual corruption. A socialist politician that uses their position for personal gains etc. Is corruption. That's NOT how the system is intended to work. So the definition applies.
The other thing that no one ever seems to think about or bring up is this.
Ok so let's say both systems get "corrupted" right? What happens when the corrupt get into power? Do the all of a sudden become "less corrupt"? Do the go "ok I'm in now but here where it stops" or do they FURTHER the corruption of the system? Anyone with a miniscule amount of brain activity will say they do the latter. A corrupted system furthers its own corruption. To make it safe for them who are corrupt. So then you have to point out... a "corrupt" capitalist system as they define it.... never really changes. It never stops being capitalist. If history has shown us anything,it's that when a SOCIALIST nation gets to a certain point in it's corruptuon what happens? It BECOMES capitalist.... It stops serving the people and begins serving capitol. The fall of the USSR is a perfect example. By this reasoning one can say that with "corruption" as they define it, there is no socialist country to ever exist that is more corrupt than a capitalist one. Because corrupt socialism devolves into capitalism as it becomes more corrupt. Capitalism is the system in which the corrupt create to be safe and maintain their power and wealth. It does not devolve into anything because it's already at its final level. One could say " but Fascism" but fascism isn't an entirely different system. It still runs on capitalism.
Silly tankie, it's only a war crime when people do it that we, western liberals, don't like. Silly tankie.
"We won't have to worry about being racist if we just killed all the other races."
No
"Genocide is good when it's carried out by the people we like, stupid tankies."
FTFY
Sir, please stand against the wall with the rest.
Yes. Next question please.
There's also a difference in HOW certain groups support the government. The more modern/city dwelling populace, especially the younger generations, is more of a "general support overall" but they go into the finer details more about which representatives and policies they like and dislike, etc. Whereas the more rural, poorer, and older peoples tend to have a much stronger feeling of support for the communists and less of a breakdown of the finer details.
At least this is what I have heard from interviews with people that travel the area. The Proles of the Round Table podcast have a few good episodes on this.
To quote other commenters in another thread.
What does it mean to be a “civilian” when the violence against Palestine is settler-colonial ethnic cleansing?
I do not advocate for the actual assault of children, but the “civilians” in the settlements are the perpetrators of decades long genocide. People who not only do not care that countless Palestinians, children included, have been murdered, but actually support it. It is not a meaningful distinction in this type of conflict.
They put themselves there because they are ideologically committed to ethnically cleansing the land of Palestinians and taking it for themselves. They are thieves and murderers and actions against them by Palestinian forces is self defence.
Counterpoint, there is no such thing as civilian Israelis. They are all criminal settlers occupying stolen land and condoning genocide against the people they have stolen from.
Usually for me it's if they don't point at me and make a loud screeching sound when I mention unions are good and maybe socialist countries aren't as bad as the US media makes them out to be.
Almost like they are all astroturfed by the same 3 letter agencies.
ftfy
Who must go?
https://youtu.be/OqVyRa1iuMc
ONCE AND FOR ALL
Communism without borders when?
It's been collapsing for decades, it's just now becoming more obvious. It's basically already at a collapsed state. I mean, what do we call a society where people regularly can't afford food, water, shelter, or medical attention? Collapse isn't "everything sucks for everyone." It's "everything sucks for most while some still manage to hold on." If you think it hasn't collapsed yet you just aren't yet a victim of it.
Oh I get it completely but the issue I see is that there won't BE any real action or reform taken specifically because the capitalist system doesn't want it to. It's like how the vast majority support extended background checks but Congress will never touch that shit. America is so fucked it would take the ending of capitalism in order to implement any of these ideas. At least that's how it seems to be from my point of view of the society.... God I hate it here.
I don't think the killing in US will ever stop so long as capitalism remains in charge. Most of these comments, while mostly correct, and discussing the symptoms that are causing the mass shootings while the underlying cause of those symptoms is being ignored. Fascist propaganda, white supremacy, mental health, etc? All these things stem from the same general source. They are all a product of rampant capitalism. Especially the mental health. We either don't treat it at all or give people "antidepressants" that have been linked to erratic and violent behavior. All the stresses, social isolations, poverty, etc. that cause kids and adults alike to just go shoot up schools and shit. It's all a product of capitalism driving the labor class insane. It's meant to. To keep us killing each other and not the capitalists.
Sure, you could enact laws against propaganda, better background checks, all that, but those things will never pass in the US's hyper capitalist government. In theory they could work but in order for them to be put into practice you have to actually do something about capitalism. And if you end capitalism you get rid of a lot of the factors that cause the shootings in the first place.
If you skip past most of this please read the last paragraph.
First point to make "will corrupt it the same way they do for capitalism"
People that actually say this are already in the wrong. They look at places like the US and see the politicians not working for the people. Getting into bed with big business money and screwing over the rest of the population.... The rest of the population being the workers, the labor forces..... The US is a capitalist government.... This is not corruption. Corruption doesn't not mean "evil" or "bad," it means "doing something that goes against what the current system is set up to do." The way we use "corruption" in the US is actually the system working as intended. The government is SUPPOSED to do this. They are SUPPOSED to uphold the power of the capitalist at the expense of the people. Protecting and serving the capitalist class has always been the governments purpose. They have just spend centuries convincing the populace when it's not. That the government is there to protect and serve all Americans. A real, actual corrupt politician in the US is one that would help the workers at the expense of businesses. In the same light a politician that uses his office to further their own wealth is not corrupt in the eyes of capitalism. That's a very capitalist thing to do. Further your own accumulation of capital at the expense of the working class.
You notice these politicians never further their own wealth if it is going to hurt the oligarchy in any meaningful way, and the ones that do are cast out almost immediately. So the US DOES weed out corruption. It's why you don't see many politicians in the US actually helping the working class or going against the oligarchy. You think the US didn't do mass purges? Look at what they did to crush the communist parties that had so much support their marches filled the streets of cities during and after the great depression.
The irony is that by doing this they create a definition of corruption in politics that is only really applicable to socialist nations. A socialist working with businesses at the expense of workers IS actual corruption. A socialist politician that uses their position for personal gains etc. Is corruption. That's NOT how the system is intended to work. So the definition applies.
The other thing that no one ever seems to think about or bring up is this.
Ok so let's say both systems get "corrupted" right? What happens when the corrupt get into power? Do the all of a sudden become "less corrupt"? Do the go "ok I'm in now but here where it stops" or do they FURTHER the corruption of the system? Anyone with a miniscule amount of brain activity will say they do the latter. A corrupted system furthers its own corruption. To make it safe for them who are corrupt. So then you have to point out... a "corrupt" capitalist system as they define it.... never really changes. It never stops being capitalist. If history has shown us anything,it's that when a SOCIALIST nation gets to a certain point in it's corruptuon what happens? It BECOMES capitalist.... It stops serving the people and begins serving capitol. The fall of the USSR is a perfect example. By this reasoning one can say that with "corruption" as they define it, there is no socialist country to ever exist that is more corrupt than a capitalist one. Because corrupt socialism devolves into capitalism as it becomes more corrupt. Capitalism is the system in which the corrupt create to be safe and maintain their power and wealth. It does not devolve into anything because it's already at its final level. One could say " but Fascism" but fascism isn't an entirely different system. It still runs on capitalism.