The anti-chapo crusade reached bezos inc's PR department (AKA the washington post) and the reception is as every bit...

the anti-chapo crusade reached bezos inc's PR department (AKA the washington post) and the reception is as every bit cancerous as you would think.

Other urls found in this thread:

libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=07BE4790C4552AD48A52D55B9F0241A1
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Every. Single. Time.

Bloody hell American liberals are awful.

WE'RE BACK IN BUSINESS BOYS

Chapo is dogshit anyways

If you listen and donate to that stream of spectacle you deserved to have your whiteness mocked.

what if it didn't take a worldwide conspiracy for people to decide that you and your suck

nah.

Who is pulling the strings here? Whenever I see Google or whoever doing a shit redesign that is clearly made to help big business, tech editors come out to fellate them, and everyone tells them to fuck off. The WSJ drums up outrage against youtube - and later print media get a bigger spot on google news.

What the fuck are the old media up to?

I don't even really like Chapo and this enrages me.

Hot takes from the American left as always.

Read a book

...

It's not a conspiracy. It's part of the capitalist system. Idpol helps the bourgeoisie obfuscate power relations.

What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

In any event, at least liberals make it easy to identify them and subsequently ignore their bullshit.

I was hoping someone would answer this for me before I had to ask, but wasn't Debs based? What's the problem here?

It's not a conspiracy. You really did murder your parents. It gave you a large inheritance.

Debs actually was he got like a million votes in prison and Lenin praised his courage in standing up to the war. Fuckin libs don't know shit about socialist history

i genuinely think the main problem is liberals is that El Trumpo collapsed pretty soon, so he cannot be called an all powerful bogeyman anymore. so liberals got bored and started to get back to their existential hobby, bashing reds.

This. The actual left is gaining prominence among millennials (which is the opposite of what is "supposed" to happen according to liberal mythology) and without Trump around to scare millennials into support liberalism they are starting to get scared.

praise the Donald, i guess

I don't think she was trying to deny Debs' success so much as smear his legitimacy because a lot of that support came from WHITE socialists. It's idpol poisoning: the post.

I'm confused, isn't she white?

yeah but she is a white WOMAN and a liberal so she is an honorary PoC, and blocks any PoC who says otherwise

I think so, but it doesn't really matter what she is. The point is she's trying to delegitimize modern-day leftists as being overwhelmingly white and therefore, unaware of racial/gender/what-have-you justice issues. Even if there's a kernel of truth to this, she fucks up by not knowing her history and being spooked by the liberal "all white people from 100 years ago were racist" meme. Proceeds to get shat on by someone who actually does know their history. Her last post is a Hail Mary attempt at damage control. But of course, it's completely irrelevant and she just looks like a bigger fucking idiot.

Nothing is wrong with Debs. The lady is just talking out her ass.

> nor other analysis by hartman, (on like us cold war education - libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=07BE4790C4552AD48A52D55B9F0241A1 and pic 2) just shitting randomnly on twitter

Why are libs so hyper fragile

This is just transparent cynicism, imo. neoliberals don't care for 'PoC' except as a source of fetishised authenticity, to be used for legitimising their awful policies. They'd have us believe Debs was an irredeemable racist because reasons, while Hillary, mass deportations notwithstanding, is the second coming of MLK himself. Under liberal political theology 'Whiteness' replaces capital as the driving force of history. The working class and even 'PoC' are not seen as revolutionary subjects, progress hinges entirely on the 'moral decency' of elite whites like Walsh or Hillary.

Kek, this pretty much sums up my feelings on white women acting like they're treated as poorly as black people.

Sort of does matter then, doesn't it? I just find it annoying, white women have it pretty good, and if you could actually quantify white women/white men on some kind of oppression/troubles/strife scale, they'd probably balance out very closely compared to all the other people they proclaim to care for. Mindless distraction, either way, I agree on that.

The decline of their ideological dominance causes them to act increasingly irrational, as they've learned through experience that they're always right.

I don't speak american so i have no idea whats going on here but is she trying to imply socialists are racists because blacks were treated like shit by the establishment in the 30's?

You just answered your own question. It's cognitive dissonance from the fact that they genuinely think their opinions represent the true "voice of the people" and being confronted by a relatively large population of people (who aren't easily dismissable trolls) calling them out of that shit. They're delusional and trying to cope with it.

what the fuck is a chapo

Yeah, I guess I should've been more specific and said overwhelmingly white men.

Yes.

I'd bet anything that your critique is some vague mumbling about socdems (as if they don't critique them too) and some liberal whinging about how making money = bourgeoisie

Besides, it doesn't even make sense historically. Black Americans were a leading segment of the socialist movement, especially in the 30s and 60s. I would not be surprised at all if Debs got a much higher proportion of black votes compared to the competition.

amazing

Close but not quite. She's so retarded she doesn't realize Debs is the most popular socialist candidate in the history of the US and got a decent chunk of votes even from prison. She thinks that Debs has an ok position, so therefore he MUST have been thoroughly rejected by "da ebil whites" in the 30s

Jokes on her. Liberals in the 1930s supported segregation and Jim Crow. Meanwhile the actual left was anti-racist.

liberals claim the civil rights movement and 'social progress' in general as their own work, when more often than not, liberals were sitting on the sidelines during those struggles, it was the left putting in the hard work

LBJ started to appropriate the civil rights movement in his "great society" thing, that's where it all started. i mean the gaslighting of the dems on race and gender