They want slaves and desperate people; not people that are responsibly managing their finances. I don’t recall any of the Republicunt politicians actually saying they were in favor of the nuclear family; but then again, maybe I missed it since I tend to not listen to idiots.
They’re not though. They’re using that as a facade to spring families into poverty, keep them there, keep them uneducated, keep them popping out kids to feed low skilled, high risk modern slavery type jobs, and for prison.
low skilled, high risk modern slavery type jobs, and for prison
I think you repeat yourself.
I wonder how many women have given up on the idea of a family die to cost. Or toxic men
They don’t want the nuclear family for the poors… They want as many poor, unhealthy, uneducated, and subservient people as possible.
Yeah, they want their slaves breeding
How else are they going to create a class of untermenschen
I can just see Musk giving Trump estimates of when his robot army will be ready so they can get rid of us all.
And I imagine it’s going to be like the timeline of “full self driving”.
A quick glance at both party’s voting history indicates Republicans aren’t going to vote in favor of the average American anytime soon.
Unfortunately, it appears most Americans are too stupid and lazy to do this kind of basic research and would rather have social media and talking heads on TV tell them what to do. Idiocracy.
Fun Fact: Democrats are historically better for our economy.
They don’t care about America because they are Russian assets literally trying to invite a civil war. I have sources.
You lost your Mana?
I have started receiving a lot more violence since the election from men.
I raise the spine of sympathy, Lifts-Her-Tail.
Well it it’s anything, I argued with you earlier thinking you were a dude
Will still probably continue to argue with you regardless
Yeah so assuming I’m a man and assuming therefore you can use rape language because all of you love rape isn’t any better. Assuming I’m a man at its base is also sexism.
I assumed you were a man because everyone on the internet is a man.
I still think you are for previous rule, just trying to go on as a woman for whatever reason.
If not man then bot, which at this point is the better guess anyway.
Plus I was just trying to make a joke, yeesh
Bro, this was redundant. We all already know you’re sexist and a gender narcissist and fascist
Lol k
I was just trying to comment on your name change
Do you just want to fight with everyone? Chill
Edit: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ThereAreNoGirlsOnTheInternet
"As the Internet grew, women became more common. Interestingly enough, men pretending to be women also became more common as well; it soon became apparent that announcing you were female online (and thus a geek girl) was a way to get lots of attention and accommodation from other users, even to the point of some of them being tricked into mailing gifts, cash, or passwords. In some circles the backlash was huge and violent, leading to anyone claiming to be female to instantly be accosted with demands of “proof” "
We fought over some dumb shit like twice and you’re throwing out the worst comments you can think of. You shouldn’t feel good about yourself
their idea of nuclear family is more like fat man and little boy
Meanwhile the new president is both, simultaneously
Donald and Elon?
They’re not worried about threats to the nuclear family and abortion, they’re just trying to make people who consider themselves nuclear families (potential voters) think that Democrats are the ones who are threatening them, so that they will be more likely to vote for the Republicans.
They convince the rubes that you can vote in a different, more “traditional” culture than the one you currently disagree with despite not doing anything to move back to the economic conditions that made the “previous” culture possible in the first place.
It works to pull culturally regressive, economically movable morons into the coalition. But since voting out a culture is basically not possible because culture isn’t created by government in the first place, they’ll quickly learn that the PC lingo, “cancel culture”, #metooism, and “wokeness” still remain. Or they would learn that if they weren’t completely braindead and incapable of analyzing how their actions do or do not affect things.
But think of the corporations!
They want cheap labor. It’s not worth it if it costs more.
If *anyone were really worried about the nuclear family and abortion, they would make it so that a family could live on a single income again.
FTFY
You plebs wouldn’t have to worry about childcare if you just sent those selfish brats to work down the mines!
The children yearn for the mines.
If Republicans* were
The purpose of an apostrophe is to warn people that there’s an S coming.
Republican’s what?
But how do we know an s will be the next letter? 😟
This pretty quickly became a well liked post with lots of interaction and is remaining mostly civil.
It’s hard to argue that this post doesn’t break the new rule for “avoid politics”.
Should this post stay?
How do people here feel about the “avoid politics” rule? Should it be rewritten in some way to allow this post?
I’ll phrase it like a shower thought:
“Avoiding politics is about as useless as avoiding economics, math, science, or the arts; they permeate everything we do. We even use them to define what it means to be human. We might as well avoid breathing.”
I think avoiding partisanship and incivility might be more productive, but it has the problem of being more vague and requiring judgement, thus requiring more effort to enforce fairly and consistently. I don’t think there is an answer that will satisfy everyone. Avoiding politics may be a good rule for this community, even if it’s pointless.
Thanks for the feedback. I would argue that determining what post counts as a shower thought (rule 1) is a lot harder than determining what posts are about politics.
I think it should stay because I disagree with the rule. “No politics” is impossible (everything is political), so this rule boils down to acting like the status quo is fine.
Thanks for the feedback
No they wouldn’t, it would be bad for their investments in the economy, with more workers in the labour pool the cheaper labour becomes. So reducing that worker pool would mean companies would spend more on each worker reducing profits. Same for any political party though, since they are all run by %1ers anyway. (At least in the USA)
The problem is you think of them as one group when there are two white supremacists / religious zealots, and capitalist. The capitalist use the first group to get power to get capital and keep capital for themselves. They want cheap labor while the first group just wants more white babies and less anything else. The second group justs wants cheap labor and zero regulations and they can get cheap labor overseas if there are no regulations so they don’t care about mass deportations.
True, now that I’m thinking about it, you’re correct about manufacturing but not service jobs.
Yeah but who creates most of the service jobs Small business owners and they are not the ones I’m talking about in the capitalist group. The real capitalists just convinced them they are in the capitalist group so they vote with the first group.
I call them the embarrassed millionaires as they vote against themselves on the off chance they make it to the that next tier. The problem men like Howard Pew and John Birch stack the deck against us before most of us were even born.
Remember it was the National Association of Manufacturers and their meeting with James William Fifield Jr in response to FDRs the New Deal that started all this. You can draw a line directly from that meeting to Billy Graham to Ronald Ragan to The Tea Party to Trump.
Also automation is already be coming for those service jobs. Self checkout or order kiosk / mobile ordering anyone at McDonald’s. It turns a service job into a manufacturing job.
This logic doesn’t align with their mass deportation policy.
Consistency was never their strong point.
Republicans consistently take the worst side on any issue, so there’s that.
Mmm, the most profitable side for themselves or their donors.
Then you’d better tell them, because it will cause more problems than just worker pay, drops in productivity due to a lack of man power.
They’re not listening to me.
Modus Tollens
Ah yes, bOtH sIdEs BaD. Glad to see you welcome what’s coming. Since we’re totally in the same exact position as if Kamala had won /s
One side is worse, but both sides ARE bad.
If democrats really wanted to improve our lives, they wouldn’t have quashed Bernie in 2016 or 2020. What they did this year with Kamala was equivalent.
She was still a better choice in every possible aspect over Trump. It wasn’t enough.
I agree. Democrats are freshly revealed to be hot garbage, but they’re still lightyears ahead of republicans and I find it disgusting to make any remark that alludes to them being the same
Democrats are freshly revealed to be hot garbage
Lol, if by “freshly” you mean “for at least almost a decade if not further back”
I find it disgusting to make any remark that alludes to them being the same
It sucks, but they literally both do what the guy is accusing them of, so they’re actually the same here. Doesn’t mean they’re perfectly identical in all other ways, but this is and has been a major red flag for yeeeeeaaarssss BECAUSE it’s a spot where they’re the same
I’m just tired of the false equivalency that landed us in fascism. But enjoy feeling smug about how you knew this is exactly how Democrats would run this campaign 10+ years ago.
I’m just tired of the false equivalency that landed us in fascism
Valid criticism of the Dems isn’t false equivalency, it’s so fucking annoying to hear people keep acting like it is
enjoy feeling smug about how you knew this is exactly how Democrats would run this campaign 10+ years ago.
Didn’t claim anything close to that, merely pointed out that acting like this election suddenly revealed something new only proves youre unaware of previous ones
And I’m annoyed that we continue to see “both parties” without strong fucking qualifiers.
acting like this election suddenly revealed something new
You have no idea what I meant and you obviously care more about making something up than knowing. I meant that we saw democrats reach a new level of ineptitude with this election cycle. If you cannot see or accept that is true, then I’m right. You’re smug and not interested in actually conversing with me or understanding what democrats do/don’t do correctly.
Do you actually disagree with any of what they said or is snark your contribution?
I disagree with equating the parties, clearly. Kids born 50 years from now will too, if they decide to read about American history.
“No they wouldn’t, it would be bad for their investments in the economy, with more workers in the labour pool the cheaper labour becomes. So reducing that worker pool would mean companies would spend more on each worker reducing profits.”
You agree with that comment?
That part, I have no problem with. I just told you what my problem with it was. Seems you didn’t really care.
So, do you think one of the parties isn’t owned by the 1%?
I think people ought to be to have enough intelligence to know that a statement like that can be true and at the same time, one party acts nakedly, unashamedly that way, and the other doesn’t.
The fact that Trump won probably proves I’m an idiot for thinking people don’t have to be nuanceless morons. But the fact remains that we remain entirely fucked because people can’t tell the difference in dogshit and dirt. Comments like the ones above help reinforce the idiocracy.
“Both parties…” followed by anything is almost always unhelpful and destructive but sure go ahead and defend that shit.
