Sure as fuck not by voting lol, you’ll never get something other than a continuation of the status quo from engaging with a system designed specifically to maintain the status quo on its’ own terms. The obvious answer is violence, you could argue that a general strike might do the trick nonviolently, but I would correctly argue back that our government would definitely respond to a general strike with violence, at which point your options are reduced to either caving to the status quo or resisting it with violence, so the answer is still going to be violence whether we like it or not.
Mao made some terrible decisions that resulted in a lot of deaths, yes, but definitionally not a genocide no matter how much you’d like to pretend it was, no matter how much it would really help your argument, because words mean things. The fact that you have to twist definitions so drastically to have anything close to a leg to stand on should give you pause, make you consider the possibility that you’re wrong, but that would require self-awareness and humility and you have neither.
Tankies suggesting a revolution while not doing a revolution and shaming people for also not doing a revolution. Name a more iconic trio.
Mao made some terrible decisions
Drinking too much is a bad decision. Millions dead in forced labor camps is a little bit worse than that.
but definitionally not a genocide
Yeah, you’re right. So we can hand wave mass murder as long as it doesn’t target a particular ethnic group? Because tankies love to complain about America’s death toll even though it’s (while still awful) an order of magnitude lower than Mao’s.
“Yeah well if you think a revolution is necessary why don’t you do it yourself” same reason you can’t just vote yourself out of a regulatorily captured duopoly, because that’s not how reality works halfwit.
I’m not hand waving anything, I’m correcting you on your deliberate misrepresentation, and no actually the death toll for China’s cultural revolution is nowhere close to the US’s. The Native American genocide alone puts us in a respectable lead for deadliest regime in history, our countless wars since then are icing on the murder cake, and you’re happy to make all the excuses in the world for it while accusing others because the only thing you actually care about is yourself, you don’t give a shit how many people the US empire kills as long as you and yours stay comfortable.
same reason you can’t just vote yourself out of a regulatorily captured duopoly
I’m glad you finally came around on the initial point. Now Google harm reduction. We do what we can with what we have.
The Native American genocide alone puts us in a respectable lead for deadliest regime in history
You’re right. I was talking about the infographic of deaths in post 9/11 wars from a few days ago but I wasn’t specific.
you don’t give a shit how many people the US empire kills as long as you and yours stay comfortable.
As established, genocide wasn’t even on the ballot. Not having a choice in a shit election is not “voting for genocide” and certainly not the same level as “well Mao made some bad decisions but great leap!!!” That’s equivalent to me saying the genocide of native Americans was justified by how big and powerful America became. No, the ends don’t justify the means. That’s the difference between leftists and tankies.
“Actually I was referring to a specific arbitrary time frame within which I’m not completely fucking wrong” lol cope, you’re not a leftist, you’re a morally bankrupt intellectually stunted mess of a liberal
Sure as fuck not by voting lol, you’ll never get something other than a continuation of the status quo from engaging with a system designed specifically to maintain the status quo on its’ own terms. The obvious answer is violence, you could argue that a general strike might do the trick nonviolently, but I would correctly argue back that our government would definitely respond to a general strike with violence, at which point your options are reduced to either caving to the status quo or resisting it with violence, so the answer is still going to be violence whether we like it or not.
Mao made some terrible decisions that resulted in a lot of deaths, yes, but definitionally not a genocide no matter how much you’d like to pretend it was, no matter how much it would really help your argument, because words mean things. The fact that you have to twist definitions so drastically to have anything close to a leg to stand on should give you pause, make you consider the possibility that you’re wrong, but that would require self-awareness and humility and you have neither.
Tankies suggesting a revolution while not doing a revolution and shaming people for also not doing a revolution. Name a more iconic trio.
Drinking too much is a bad decision. Millions dead in forced labor camps is a little bit worse than that.
Yeah, you’re right. So we can hand wave mass murder as long as it doesn’t target a particular ethnic group? Because tankies love to complain about America’s death toll even though it’s (while still awful) an order of magnitude lower than Mao’s.
“Yeah well if you think a revolution is necessary why don’t you do it yourself” same reason you can’t just vote yourself out of a regulatorily captured duopoly, because that’s not how reality works halfwit.
I’m not hand waving anything, I’m correcting you on your deliberate misrepresentation, and no actually the death toll for China’s cultural revolution is nowhere close to the US’s. The Native American genocide alone puts us in a respectable lead for deadliest regime in history, our countless wars since then are icing on the murder cake, and you’re happy to make all the excuses in the world for it while accusing others because the only thing you actually care about is yourself, you don’t give a shit how many people the US empire kills as long as you and yours stay comfortable.
I’m glad you finally came around on the initial point. Now Google harm reduction. We do what we can with what we have.
You’re right. I was talking about the infographic of deaths in post 9/11 wars from a few days ago but I wasn’t specific.
As established, genocide wasn’t even on the ballot. Not having a choice in a shit election is not “voting for genocide” and certainly not the same level as “well Mao made some bad decisions but great leap!!!” That’s equivalent to me saying the genocide of native Americans was justified by how big and powerful America became. No, the ends don’t justify the means. That’s the difference between leftists and tankies.
“Actually I was referring to a specific arbitrary time frame within which I’m not completely fucking wrong” lol cope, you’re not a leftist, you’re a morally bankrupt intellectually stunted mess of a liberal