Http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21712128-liberals-lost-most-arguments-year-they-should-not-feel-defeated-so-much
How do we stop centrists, globalists and neoliberal shitters from stalling insurrection? It seems that the elites have learned absolutely NOTHING and want to keep pushing capitalism, except with platitudes of "welfare" or "helping those left behind by globalization", which we know is absolute bullshit as they have never done so before.
Other urls found in this thread:
wsws.org
twitter.com
What stage of dealing with death is "bargaining?" Like two or three?
Anyway, we have to stress the necessity of radical change and kill all traitorous dem socs and repeatedly reiterate the if they are not advocating the replacement of the current system then they're not actually interested in fixing anything.
keep crying faggot
Still such low energy. Sad.
maybe you can use your boundless energy to become relevant again
Good idea, I'll start intentionally alienating and insulting about a third of my voter base immediately, since that worked out so great for you guys.
how did the dems insult and alienate a third of their voter base??
Lol Hiliary-bots have still learned nothing.
By going corporate shill with Clinton, and never coming back.
this might have been a factor
...
so going with the reasonable candidate over a populist demagogue like the republicans is alienating and insulting?and remember that hillary won the primary. people voted for her over bernie; she wasn't appointed.
i would have preferred jim webb or even omalley but sanders, as much as i admire his fervor and consistency, is a mess in terms of policy.
you think bernouts are why hillary lost the rust belt?
I bet you think wikileaks was a plot by the ebil Russians too.
You have got to be fucking kidding me. Apparently the working class with a knife to porky's throat is a "liberal reformer meeting change"
...
well, our intelligence agencies suggest that russia hacked the emails and provided them to wiki leaks. i dont really dabble in conspiracy theories, so that's the story im inclined to believe.
also kek at LE HILLARY IS A MURDERER BECAUSE SHE SUPPORTED OVERTHROWING RUTHLESS DICTATORS
why don't all the self-righteous bernouts care about donald opposing warning civilians of bombings or suggesting we build more nuclear weapons?
according to the definition of leftism, yes
*Hillary is an imperialist
Who said we didn't oppose him? You may be thinking in terms of "Democrat or Republican", I'm thinking in terms of "The Clintons are war criminals who were a driving force behind the total capitulation of the Democratic party to corporate interest".
WEW
I'm still trying to decide whether you're a legit newfag, or a bored Holla Forums shitposter
Isnt it obvious he is a leftypol user masquerading as a Dem out of boredom or to test our resolve.
Etymology, history, and the rest of the world say otherwise.
as for honduras, yeah, i disagree with her, but she did not support us military intervention. not really comparable to nicargua. vietnam, etc…..
im not terribly concerned with labels, but i do know that im closer to the left than to the right in terms of values.
The U.S. military doesn't need to intervene when they have other people doing it for them.
There were casualties like Berta Caceras, and it's just a continuation of covert policies that have wrecked South America. Kissinger would have done the exact same thing. Also, she was a nut for pushing that no fly zone over Syria. She was a war pig and calling her "the lesser evil" is a joke.
You're about 80 years late
she's a hawk, but how is trump not? because he sucks putin's dick? trump supported intervention in libya and iraq. are you one of those retards who listens to russia today and believes that putin and assad are the good guys?
Hillary is a populist demagogue you fucking ape
You just didn't get to finally see it since that disgusting cunt didnt get power
Assads the 2nd best thing in this fight you faggot
If only Trump could actually commit some genocidal atrocities upon the American people, because I can't think of a population that more deserves i
I never said he wasn't, but he also wasn't planning to put a no fly zone over Syria. Defense Secretary Ash Carter was warning us it could start WW3. Pretending one option was better than the other was a farce.
Tranhume
pls
Don't forget that Bill Clinton once fired at a Sudanese medicine factory, leading to up to 30,000 easily preventable deaths.
Or that he was bombing Iraq once every 4 days during the Iraq bombing campaign.
once fired a tomahawk missile*
wow, i guess the hundreds of national security officials that endorsed hillary were willing to overlook that
I think her stealing the primaries from him and then insulting and condescending to everybody who had a problem with that was a contributing factor, yes. Others include her bloodthirstiness, shrillness and alienation. Also her support of the TPP.
Democrats have been useful idiots to capital for a long time. They've stood by and let Republicans strip minorities of what little political power they had with the war on drugs, gerrymandering, financial deregulation and the destruction of the voting rights act,
Hillary got 3 million more votes and still lost, yet Dems blame Bernie supporters instead of the slow irrosion of rights from the poorest and most vulnerable people in this country.
You want those people to go to bat for the Dem party while letting them get screwed day in and day out. The Dem party is going to collapse and dumbasses like you are the reason
...
Is this supposed to be surprising?
can you explain how hillary is a populist demagogue?
ive seen your kind before–drunk on wiki leaks and russia today. who cares that trump advocates war crimes, that he plans to start trade wars, that he's going to go back to fellating netanyahu, that he's going to eliminate health insurance for millions of people, that he's going to do irreversible damage to the environment, that he's not going to raise the minimum wage, that he's going to attempt to deport people who's only crime is seeking a better life? after all, hillary supported a no fly zone.
alright
Hillary is a neocon - we should be able to agree on this.
Anyway, Trumps win is not "good", nor is it "bad" - the point is that it marks a tear from the status quo that would've persisted under Hillary had she won the election.
I'm still waiting to see the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. After all, the agencies that run torture centres are our greatest allies huh?
Whatever you think my kind is you're fittingly wrong - so far off base that only a complete and utter retard could come up with so crazy a strawman, so hilarious a Big Other to put up for you to fight.
Both American parties are inherently populist, should be pretty self explanatory.
Hillary preyed on the ideological prejudices of political ignorants (i.e. you) against the boogeyman of the "sexist, racist Republican"
The two party system raises demagogues on both sides, it's built that way. How fucking retarded do you have to be to not see that?
1. None of that matters anyway if we're all dead after the bombs start falling after she puts up her no fly zone
2. If you think Hillary would stop torturing people, you're kidding yourself. She was never going to stop back Israel either. It's helped a small minority, but Obama care has always been an insurance scam.
When a general sits right next to the defense secretary, who has more information than anyone, and says it will cause WW3, then a war mongering senator tries to get him to shut his dirty mouth because he spoke out of turn, yeah, I think I'll trust that guy.
Also,
If you're a leftist in the military that long, and you think you're actually doing good, you're kidding yourself and your opinion should be subject to skepticism.
Stop talking like a comic book character, you sound retarded. And saying 'drunk on X' doesn't automatically make it not count as a valid news source.
like Gitmo, which Shrillery did nothing about?
War with Eurasia is better than war with Eastasia
And Shillery was totally anti-Israel, she was a regular Holla Forumsyp :^)
You mean the thing that costs me a couple hundred dollars a month and can't be used unless I'm already spending more of my own money, that I can only spend on medical expenses rather than not starving and freezing to death?
like the TPP deregulation she was in favor of?
Neither was Shitlery, and she sidelined the economic issues of the working class in favor of idpol cancer.
And seeking to undermine labor's ability to negotiate with management by devaluing labor to third-world levels. Stop with the fucking handwringing purple prose.
Right, which would have started a war with Eurasia.
...
I swear, every liberal I meet speaks in purple prose.
This. Beige prose ftw.
As retarded as I. I knew they were both full of shit, but never thought of it this way. Makes sense. Thanks, comr8.
...
Lmao
It literally isn't, if you bothered to read the OP's article at all you would realize that leftism%/=liberalism.
The Economist is a liberal magazine, as in, it supports economic deregulation, the perpetuation of the current capitalist system, convictionless centrist idiocy and the enrichment of the elites at the expense of the working class.
And also, idpol =/= liberalism =/= leftism
It is possible for them to mix, for example liberals usually use idpol cancer to ignore economic issues, but they aren't necessarily related and for most of their history all 3 have been at odds with each other.
There's a lot of crossover between leftism and neo-liberal to be fair. It's fair to say that on a global scale, neo-liberalism has done more the past 40 years to redress the global imbalance (east/west) than leftism has.
They're increasingly becoming self-aware.
Because republicans and the right are a huge problem, liberalism and globalist and 100 times better
Why do people even like this magazine? Its articles are biased as fuck even for liberal standards.
Because it makes ignorant people believe they know how economy works because they read an article and now try to justify their stupid opinions with that tiny false knowledge
...
You're damn right i have more trust in Russia Today than US intelligence agencies. USA is fucking cancer. Is there something worth saving from the US? And i'm being serious here. 50 or 60 years a go, yeah USA had some good book authors and good musicians…but nowdays what's in there worth saving? It's only garbage.
...