What is your proposal to stop creeping fascism? Because all you seem to want to do is nothing.

You’re mistaking “it took a long time to end Apartheid” with “we shouldn’t even try to end Apartheid.”

They very much did actually. Biden shamelessly just cribbed much of Elizabeth Warren’s economic policies. Hillary’s loss in 2016 forced him to run on a much more progressive platform in 2020 than he ever would have otherwise.

[CITATION NEEDED]

He’s had people involved in backroom negotiations for months. Yes, it is a dirty tactic. This has a lot of undertones of Reagan’s deal with the Iranians. He didn’t have great intentions in negotiating a ceasefire, but he did manage to do it. And Trump has shown a willingness in the past to hold US military aid as a stick to change the behavior of allies. It’s reasonable to think he did the same thing here.

The US DOES have substantial control over Israel. Reagan for instance dramatically affected Israel’s behavior by withholding weapons. Biden was more permissive of Israel than Reagan was.

I despise Trump, but I do not buy that argument for a second. You’re clearly taking a meaning that you’re inventing on your own, not from the text itself. “Let Israel go and finish it” could just as easily be interpreted as “they need to wrap this war up and reach a cease fire.”

Kamala called for a ceasefire, but her and Biden wouldn’t lift a pinky finger to actually produce such a cease fire. Trump seems to have actually succeeded at getting a ceasefire.

Voters weren’t expecting Biden to issue a complete trade embargo with Israel. What they were expecting was for Biden to FOLLOW US LAW and stop shipping arms to Israel, a country flagrantly violating law. There is a universe of possibilities between “stop sending Israel bombs on our dime” and “turn Israel into Cuba.”

Are Republicans going to stop being Fascist at any time in the foreseeable future? They ran a fascist in 2016, 2020, and 2024. And they have a long line of potential future candidates.

“Don’t hold them accountable while running against a fascist” == “never hold them accountable.”

And there’s no point in going after officers other than the president on this issue. It’s not like governors have much control over foreign policy.

They said the same thing about Apartheid South Africa. You think it was easy to cut ties with them? They were also tied into our military industrial complex.

And I find the argument “but it’s going to be haaard” despicable.

That part comes after, once democracy is assured.

When, precisely, did you expect that day to come?

A slightly bigger bomb won’t change anything materially on the ground in Gaza. The only significant change recently has been a cease fire. Whether it will hold or not is as yet unknown. But at least so far, Trump has somehow actually managed to be better on Gaza than Biden. Trump has shown a willingness to actually use the carrots and sticks of US foreign policy to produce outcomes. Biden offered unconditional support to Israel, while Trump seems to have forced them to come to the peace table by threatening to withhold support. In other words, Trump did what Biden’s base had been begging him to do for a year.

It’s possible all this falls apart. And it is possible that Trump will prove far worse, for example by allowing an annexation of the West Bank. But so far at least, Trump has actually been a lot better for the Palestinians than Biden. Biden and Harris fundamentally do not accept that Israel should ever be held accountable for anything.

I don’t think Trump did the cease fire out of moral concerns; I’m sure it was purely self-serving on his part. But he was actually willing to use the US’s various carrots and sticks to force through a cease fire agreement. That is something Biden never had the balls to do.

Refusing to hold Democrats accountable is also voting for Fascism. If your vote is 100% reliable to the Dems, they don’t have to do anything to win your vote. And thus, they can completely ignore you and everything you care about. The Dems have moved so far to the right that modern Republican Fascism doesn’t seem completely unreasonable to many people by comparison. After all, Democrats firmly embraced what was far-right immigration policy just a few years ago. Democrats have made a hard turn to the right. This has forced Republicans to move even further right into Fascism. And if things continue down this path, with Democrats never being held accountable, eventually both Democrats and Republicans will be overtly Fascist.

That is what happens if a party is never held accountable.

Where do you draw the line? The problem with “vote Blue no matter who” is that you give the Democrats more and more license to drift further and further right.

Kamala thought wrongly that she could completely abandon the progressive base. She fully embraced conservative positioning on Israel, the US border, and other issues. She ran a right wing campaign, compromising issue after issue to appeal to centrist Republicans.

Kamala’s degeneracy was only possible because of the attitude you espouse. Because as long as progressives are willing to “vote Blue no matter who,” there is nothing to prevent Democrats from drifting ever-further to the right.

The modern political landscape exists precisely because of the fact that for decades, progressives have been voting “Blue no matter who.” Democrats haven’t had to work hard to secure their base; they’ve taken them for granted. This has allowed Democrats to slip further to the right. As Democrats have slipped further right, Republicans have responded by moving into outright Fascism.

You are unwilling to ever hold Democrats accountable. And by doing so, you guarantee that eventually the presidential race will be “KKK vs neo-Nazis,” as Democrats themselves drift into Fascism.

I voted for Kamala, but you have to be pretty dense to think that there is any meaningful difference between how Kamala and Trump would have handled Palestine. They’re both full-on Zionists. Giving them some bigger bombs won’t change things much. They already flatten entire neighborhoods at a whim.

If two candidates will likely both be abominable on an issue you care about, you might as well vote to hold the one representing the party that has already committed genocide accountable.

It’s what I call the Rapiscan systems

https://www.rapiscansystems.com/en/

I just call them the rape scanners.

My biggest pet peeve about the TSA is how they get all annoyed if you don’t know what randomly selected procedures they’ll be using today.

The TSA deliberately randomizes its security procedures. Different airports use different procedures, and the same airport uses different procedures at random. Sometimes you need to take your laptop out of your bag; sometimes you don’t. Sometimes you need to take off your shoes; sometimes you don’t. Sometimes you can just use the metal detector, sometimes they want you to use the rape scanner.

Which is fine I suppose; it makes sense to leave potential threats guessing. But the real problem is the attitude of the TSA agents themselves. It’s not just that they randomly select procedures; it’s that they get angry about it. Start taking off your shoes out of habit at a TSA line that today doesn’t require it? A community college dropout will soon be by, screaming at you for daring to take your shoes off in line. Start taking your laptop out when they’ve decided that today is a day for leaving it in? Some guy that couldn’t even meet the low bar of becoming a regular police officer will be in your face about it within seconds.

Did you know that actual historical alchemy was often banned by various kings and monarchs? They did so not due to superstition, or because alchemy didn’t work. Rather, they banned alchemy because it DID work.

We now know that you cannot use chemical reactions, however complex, to turn base metals like lead or copper into silver or gold. However, you can use alchemy to give these base metals the appearance of silver or gold. Alchemists could coat coins in durable coatings that would appear to be like silver or gold. Dip a copper coin in the right solution and it will take on the appearance of gold. And you can then take that coin out of the solution, clean it thoroughly, and the faux-gold treatment will remain. It’s not just a layer of paint resting on the surface; the upper layers of copper atoms have actually chemically reacted to produce compounds that give the appearance of gold or silver.

So, even though alchemy didn’t work to truly turn lead into gold, from the perspective of a monarch, that didn’t actually matter. Because when it comes to currency debasement, making a fake gold coin so good that it fools people is just as good as making real gold. The alchemists couldn’t turn create real gold coins, but they could create counterfeit gold coins that could be quite convincing in the right circumstances. They didn’t need to create a forgery that could fool a modern PhD chemist with a lab full of equipment; they just needed something that could fool an illiterate 12th century merchant at his shop. The process:

1. Take a mold or press a stamp of one of the king’s official gold coins.

2. Use the mold or stamp to cast, press, or forge coins out of cheap metals like copper or tin.

3. Apply an alchemical process to make the copper or tin coin look like gold.

4. Spend the counterfeit coin as a real coin.

Coins were a better target than bulk gold like bars. With a bar, you would notice that the “gold” has an incorrect density. But a counterfeit coin, mixed in with a larger number of legitimate coins? Easy to pass off as the genuine article.

Kings often banned alchemists from their realms. Practicing alchemy was often a capital offense. In terms of true elemental transfiguration, alchemy failed. In terms of the ability to create spendable wealth from nothing, alchemy absolutely did work. From the perspective of a monarch looking to protect their currency from debasement, alchemy was a very real threat.

When I die, I want to be turned into a drone.

It’s a travesty that his inauguration will coincide with MLK Day.

Works have meanings beyond their surface-level detail and literal meaning. They also have themes and clear implications. And Idiocracy certainly has those. It has clear undertones of eugenics.

The first is the clear implication that population demographics require active management. In the movie, there was no mass government program to encourage births among those of low intelligence and discourage births among the intelligent. This situation developed entirely naturally through culture acting on its own. A viewer could only conclude that if this horrible future is to be avoided, that we need to start worrying a lot more about who is reproducing in what numbers. We either need government mandates or major cultural initiatives to encourage reproduction among the deserving. Idiocracy never outright endorses eugenics, but the implication is obvious. Writers aren’t idiots. They know the clear implications of their work. You don’t end up with a political movie that clearly implies the solution is genocide without realizing that’s the obvious implication.

The second is the theme that intelligence is something that can be bred or selected for at all through the social stratification we have now. Are those with PhDs really more intelligent, by writ of birth, than those that never graduate high school? Or it mostly about circumstances of birth, opportunities, personal choices, or even neonatal environmental pollutant exposure? Do we have any real evidence that intelligence differences within the species are something that can truly be selected for? Hell, what kind of intelligence are we talking about? Scholastic ability, emotional intelligence, executive reasoning, etc? There are many types of intelligence. And the very idea that the poor and those of lower educational attainment are of genetically lower intelligence is a key eugenics theme.

Yes, Idiocracy never comes right out and explicitly endorses eugenics. But the implications and themes are undeniably pro-eugenics.

Potash for quota I need. But no potash have I. However, tungsten I have. Is anyone I can I trade tungsten for potash?