Aren’t you the guy who constantly curves the colonized who bring up successful struggle against their settlers?
That’s a link to a thread about working class people being more generous about sharing small costs, where I point out that class traitors have played prominent roles in every successful revolution, and should be encouraged.
How is that related to “critical support is the best take, not a blanket endorsement”
The point here is you can’t be trusted to have a single decent take regarding colonized people, which you clearly aren’t (or are a Sunken-Place-assed coon; which’d be sadder, but I’m beyond tears for you if that’s the case). Any time the subject of colonizers and how to deal with them come up, you can always be counted on to be running interference for opfor. Every time. At least you finally said something for once, I expected this to be another one of your hits where a subject-of-empire addresses you and then you just play “I have mysteriously gone blind” for a fuckin week.
The point here is it is not your fucking call to condemn people dealing with their colonizers in the way they see fit. Giving this situation “critical support” implies there’s some element here that perturbs you, that makes you incapable of uplifting their struggle to the point it deserves. What about driving out the colonizers by any means necessary merits bare critical support out of you? You approach them from a state of colonial chauvinism that you’ve never once investigated or attempted to unmake. And it disgusts me.
Neither of these are the original takes you made; nice revisions though. At least my revisions are up-front and indicated by a marker on the post; you do yours skullduggerously, after-the-fact to cover for already-committed fuckshit. For the original take of #1, why won’t you endorse the any-means-necessary driving out of colonizers? Why can you only critically support it, and why does it walk hand in hand with your chauvinism? For the original take of #2, you were not fucking arguing for the support of class traitors, you were whelping about how our use of “cracker” wasn’t “coalition-building behavior”. Own your bullshit with your whole chest, thank you.
Further, when you put an objectively bad take out there and someone addresses you on it, doesn’t your instance specifically have a rule about walking out on good faith dialogue? That one I’ll allow it might be Lemmygrad specific; but I’d swear Hexbear had something like that on the books too, and in ignoring it, you come off as just another haughty-assed settler trying to set conditions on the field when your walk-off comment is running defense for crackers.
You can absolutely leave it here, but just understand that you radiate a certain look at this point; and for someone as obsessed with optics politics with how you’ve tried debating QueerCommie down, it amazes me that you can’t tell. Like I said before: do better.
This coming from the person who edited both of their comments after I responded to them.
Someone can’t read timestamps, apparently.
What I mean by critical support
There is a time and a place for ‘critical support’; and a war against colonizers is not it.
Debatelord shit
I could call your repetitive lying and backpedaling settler shit, couldn’t I? Only reason I hadn’t til now was I was still trying to be civil; but I guess that’s out the window.
I was criticizing the comment “I don’t trust a white person unless they have a biracial kid, and even then maybe not.”
Wrong, you posted a top-level comment to a thread OP that had NOTHING TO SAY about biracial kids “Lots of normal comments, very conducive to building a mass movement”. You were whelping about the whole thread at that top-level point, and then tried to move goalposts to a convenient other comment after you caught pushback. Lies, damn lies, and settler shit. You might as well have that be your last reply to me; it perfectly encapsulates everything you’re about.
You’re right that our support should be critical, but in the previous discussion you constantly implied there is something wrong with hamas, playing into liberal Zionism.
On the referenced link, as a cracker, I get why people don’t trust us. We have not been great organizationally in the past. We have to earn trust. You mention that race isn’t real and just there to divide us, but you don’t realize it was made to protect a colonial system. You don’t appear to recognize the national oppression of the black nation, instead falling into the patsoc error of think we must simply unite to make a socialist us. That’s impossible.
Aren’t you the guy who constantly curves the colonized who bring up any kind of attempted struggle against their settlers? Yeah, this peckerwood-assed take scans coming from you. Hell, there’s already been a read-down on you; it ain’t just me.
Do better.
How is that related to “critical support is the best take, not a blanket endorsement”
The point here is you can’t be trusted to have a single decent take regarding colonized people, which you clearly aren’t (or are a Sunken-Place-assed coon; which’d be sadder, but I’m beyond tears for you if that’s the case). Any time the subject of colonizers and how to deal with them come up, you can always be counted on to be running interference for opfor. Every time. At least you finally said something for once, I expected this to be another one of your hits where a subject-of-empire addresses you and then you just play “I have mysteriously gone blind” for a fuckin week.
The point here is it is not your fucking call to condemn people dealing with their colonizers in the way they see fit. Giving this situation “critical support” implies there’s some element here that perturbs you, that makes you incapable of uplifting their struggle to the point it deserves. What about driving out the colonizers by any means necessary merits bare critical support out of you? You approach them from a state of colonial chauvinism that you’ve never once investigated or attempted to unmake. And it disgusts me.
Removed by mod
Neither of these are the original takes you made; nice revisions though. At least my revisions are up-front and indicated by a marker on the post; you do yours skullduggerously, after-the-fact to cover for already-committed fuckshit. For the original take of #1, why won’t you endorse the any-means-necessary driving out of colonizers? Why can you only critically support it, and why does it walk hand in hand with your chauvinism? For the original take of #2, you were not fucking arguing for the support of class traitors, you were whelping about how our use of “cracker” wasn’t “coalition-building behavior”. Own your bullshit with your whole chest, thank you.
Further, when you put an objectively bad take out there and someone addresses you on it, doesn’t your instance specifically have a rule about walking out on good faith dialogue? That one I’ll allow it might be Lemmygrad specific; but I’d swear Hexbear had something like that on the books too, and in ignoring it, you come off as just another haughty-assed settler trying to set conditions on the field when your walk-off comment is running defense for crackers.
You can absolutely leave it here, but just understand that you radiate a certain look at this point; and for someone as obsessed with optics politics with how you’ve tried debating QueerCommie down, it amazes me that you can’t tell. Like I said before: do better.
Removed by mod
Someone can’t read timestamps, apparently.
There is a time and a place for ‘critical support’; and a war against colonizers is not it.
I could call your repetitive lying and backpedaling settler shit, couldn’t I? Only reason I hadn’t til now was I was still trying to be civil; but I guess that’s out the window.
Wrong, you posted a top-level comment to a thread OP that had NOTHING TO SAY about biracial kids “Lots of normal comments, very conducive to building a mass movement”. You were whelping about the whole thread at that top-level point, and then tried to move goalposts to a convenient other comment after you caught pushback. Lies, damn lies, and settler shit. You might as well have that be your last reply to me; it perfectly encapsulates everything you’re about.
You’re right that our support should be critical, but in the previous discussion you constantly implied there is something wrong with hamas, playing into liberal Zionism.
On the referenced link, as a cracker, I get why people don’t trust us. We have not been great organizationally in the past. We have to earn trust. You mention that race isn’t real and just there to divide us, but you don’t realize it was made to protect a colonial system. You don’t appear to recognize the national oppression of the black nation, instead falling into the patsoc error of think we must simply unite to make a socialist us. That’s impossible.
deleted by creator