What part of this is propaganda? Russia is pretty open about their plans of kidnapping children

That highly depends on the country and city. Communist decay is a real thing.

All these pictures are from capitalist countries

What kind of question is that? It should be extremely obvious that I think he should’ve ignored or rejected the DSA’s endorsement. Endorsements go both ways. By openly accepting their endorsement, he’s basically saying that he’s proud of them and what they do. Do you not find this at all concerning considering what the DSA has done and stood for in recent years? Do you think it’s not at least worth criticizing him over this? Just because he’s better than Cuomo for not being a sex pest and better than Adams for not being blatantly corrupt and accepting bribes, that doesn’t mean he’s now absolved from receiving criticism. Saying “but there’s worse” doesn’t in any way justify, excuse, or negate this endorsement. If accepting an endorsement by a billionaire funded right wing group or a foreign funded lobbyist group is problematic, then this should be as well.

There, I’ve addressed your point, can you finally address mine?

…and there it is. I was spot on about you word for word. Alright, go troll elsewhere.

It’s really simple actually. There’s two intellectually honest paths you could take here:

1. Mamdani accepting the DSA’s endorsement is a bad move and a red flag that we should criticize and keep an eye on because the DSA is a shitty organization that has done shitty things.

2. Mamdani accepting the DSA’s endorsement is a good thing because I support the DSA and the shitty things they do

Aren’t you tired of dancing around like a clown by running in circles with one desperate disingenuous fallacy after another? You’re not making yourself look smart, all you’re doing is demonstrating that you’re aware that DSA is shit and support them despite of that, but you’re too ashamed to admit it so you keep trying to mask your support with whatever this is. You can concede that I made a good point or own your support for the DSA so we can shift the conversation to how shitty they are. If you can’t do this, then you’re not worth another reply.

Why dream about being a genocidal pos when you’re already there? You should see what the current regime has done to the Kurds and Baha’is in the 80s and what they’ve been doing to the Balochis over the past decade or so.

I literally don’t care how many of you mouth breathers downvote or repeat the same bullshit assertions. It’s not going to change anything. Not a single one of you has been able to address a single point or address a single argument or even point out a single flaw. You didn’t and I know you never will either.

This, right here, is the best you could ever do. I literally asked you to provide a case like 3 times now, and you’re simply not able to. That’s all there is to it. It’s clear you’re full of shit, you’re aware of can’t prove me wrong, but you’re dishonest to admit you’re wrong so you resort to whatever this is. You’re done here, I’ll only reply if you have something of substance to say, which I know you won’t.

“no u”

This was exactly the level of intelligence I was expecting

You’re dodging the point. This isn’t about cosmic metaphors or Cuomo. It’s about Mamdani claiming anti-establishment credibility while embracing an endorsement from a group with serious baggage. That contradiction doesn’t disappear just because the alternative was worse.

If the only way to defend a candidate is by pointing to who came in second, maybe the candidate didn’t earn the trust they’re asking for. Keep in mind, I actually like a good chunk of Mamdani’s platform and he’s clearly better Cuomo, but that doesn’t change the fact that this is a red flag. He could’ve simply reject or just ignored the DSA’s endorsement, but he instead proudly accepted and put it on his website. Critiquing a flawed move isn’t “complaining”, it’s accountability.

You’re doing it again! Dodging the issue by assigning motives and projecting tribal loyalty tests. My point wasn’t that progressives need to be “perfect”, it’s that if a candidate brands themselves as anti establishment, accepting an endorsement from a group that defends extremists, such as the DSA, is a contradiction worth examining. That’s not a purity test. That’s basic consistency.

Dragging in the DNC and centrists doesn’t make that contradiction go away, it just shifts the topic, again. If you can’t address the original point without framing everything as a left vs center grudge match, maybe the problem isn’t the critique, but it’s that it landed.

But we’re talking about different things though. I don’t disagree with the notion that the work week should decrease or that people should get more based on their production. We’re in total agreement here. I’m arguing that automation is going to bring about the apocalypse like the person I replied to implied because history shows us that this wasn’t the case when similar situations arose in the past. Technology does progress, the economy does evolve, old jobs and industries do die out, and people do lose their jobs because of it. But what is also true at the same time is that new jobs and industries do get created because of the new technology, and the people who lose their jobs do adapt and end up getting new roles that utilize their skill sets. People who get laid off don’t become forever useless, people aren’t that rigid.

My point isn’t based on an idea, it’s based on history. We’ve literally had the same thing happen before many, many times in the past.

Your arguments is based on the assumption that humans are static like sims characters. That they can only ever do one job, which isn’t true. You also know that it isn’t true, otherwise you wouldn’t appeal to extremes. There’s a lot in between being a truck driver and being a programmer that you’re intentionally skipping over. When people lose their jobs, they don’t automatically become eternally useless because they can’t do a highly specialized job that doesn’t utilize any of their skill sets, that’s not what history shows us. Instead, these people find other roles that use their skills.

In this case, truck drivers usually have skills like spatial awareness, logistics knowledge, mechanical aptitude, and time management. These skills are transferable, and other jobs do demand them. For example, they could work as safety inspectors or warehouse supervisors or logistics support or remote vehicle operators, field service support, and the list goes on and on. People adapt, that’s economies progress.

I don’t even understand what you’re argument is here. Should we just straight up freeze technological advancement and stop society from evolving because some people work outdated jobs? If things were left up to you, would you just not implement electric street lamps so lamplighters wouldn’t lose their jobs? You could make the some argument for people who work specialize for health insurance companies, so should we never have universal healthcare because these people might lose their jobs? It’s a ridiculous argument.

Imagine being this dumb

You ARE being disingenuous.

This isn’t about “hating progressives”, it’s about integrity. If a candidate claims to stand against the establishment but proudly accepts an endorsement from a group that’s defends extremists and doubles down on moral incoherence, that’s a real problem. You’re not even attempting to address that.

Instead, you’re dodging with bad faith assumptions and false equivalence, as if calling out one group’s hypocrisy demands total denunciation of everyone else, or that I’m obligated to spread my criticism evenly for it to count. Going “b… bUt WhAt AbOuT tHe DeMoCrAtS” isn’t even a valid point, that’s just the whataboutism fallacy which are you using to deflect from the criticisms being made.

Also, labeling valid critique as “copypasta” doesn’t make it so, make it wrong, or make it go away. It just shows you’ve got nothing to say about the actual issue, otherwise you would’ve done so instead of desperately scrapping for anything fallacy you throw out. The endorsement from the DSA wasn’t just a footnote in his campaign, it exposed a contradiction you’d rather not reckon with.

But I know you’re not honest enough to actually address any of this, so like I said, you’re so close bro. You’re just one more disingenuous attempt, and you’ll surely get me next time.

This is literally just a longer version of your previously pointless comment.

I don’t think you understand, so let me explain. You asserting that I’m wrong, while claiming that you’re right… neither proves me wrong or you right. Proof by assertion is not an argument, it’s a logical fallacy. Why? Because you didn’t provide anything of substance and you’re not addressing the points being made.

If you want me to take you seriously, then you’re going to need to stop being so lazy, and actually provide your reasoning. You have to address the specific points you disagree with, provide reasoning as to why you disagree with them (including the sources that I provided), explain why you believe in your views, and provide what your evidence and logic is for your positions.

This should be common sense, I shouldn’t have to explain this to you. If you’re incapable of doing this then that you means you either lack the ability to defend your views on their own merits or you just can’t counter my points properly because you know they’re right. Simply, put up or shut up.

Lemmy users are so intellectually lazy, and this is a prime example of that. It is so obvious that you can’t defend your views on their own merits. Instead of providing a counter argument that explains your views or address my points, it’s far easier to just pull random, baseless ad homs out of your ass and pretend that you did something.

I’m neither a zionist nor an islamophobe, and there’s literally nothing in my comment that even mildly implies either. But that won’t stop you from making stuff up. Too bad it doesn’t mean anything, but I’m sure you’re next logical fallacy will surely get the job done.

I literally lived in two countries that experienced both, and I’m telling you that Iran has been worse in both countries for far longer. Maybe America is worse elsewhere, but in Iraq and Syria? Iran is very hard to top. In Syria’s case, there’s more competition for that top spot because Turkey, Israel, and Russia all have really good cases for being the worst imperialist force in the country’s recent history because they’ve all done just so much damage.

And I’m telling you that you lack perspective. I actually lived in both regions. I’ve seen this first hand. Trump is trying to speed run us into an autocracy, but Iran is way past that point. If a regime change happened and the current theocracy was replaced by a flawed autocracy, that would still be seen as a big improvement by many Iranians.

Nobody is denying this coup negatively affected the country. That still doesn’t absolve the current regime from criticism or responsibility.