Turkey is cooking.

Ha yes, you can just do that. It’s totally not out of reach for all the peoples who have to work 2~3 jobs at once and still can’t save any money because even the basic necessities for survival are sold at extortion prices not to mention possible medical, college debt or mortgages.

You’re confusing private property with personal property. While this is a very common mistake, you can’t claim to have an informed opinion about communism while still making it, it’s 101 level stuff.

Further, you are also making the other very common error of assuming the state is oppressive because it is like some kind of monolith somehow cut off from the rest of society as though the peoples staffing it weren’t as much part of society as everyone else, this is not the case, whether a state apparatus is oppressive and against whom it is oppressive is dictated by the class character of the state, a factor that is systematically neglected by the peoples using variations of “power always corrupt” truisms to “analyze” a state.

tl;dr: you’re knowledge of communism and communist theory and praxis is very surface level at best, go read some reading list from prolewiki’s library, To criticize something you need to know at least the basics of it first.

Yes but not only, small business owners, small landlords and “casual traders” who own some stocks but not enough to be considered rich or have influence in the company the stocks are from are also part of the petty bourgeoisie.

Generally, the petty bourgeoisie are peoples who technically own means of productions and may even have a few employee working for them, but don’t make quite enough from that to not have to work anymore. They are constantly under the threat of being out-competed by larger businesses, especially corporations owned by the high bourgeoisie, and becoming a proletarian.

Basically, they are the subclass at the boundary between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. They are better off than the proletariat and own means of production and private property but are under constant threat to lose these privileges and become part of the proletariat, especially in time of crisis.

They are the source of the overwhelming majority of fascists as I’ve said, because they still benefit from capitalism and generally aspire to become part of the high bourgeoisie even tough they are very much the underdogs. The bourgeois state will intentionally let fascism grow unopposed so that if the bourgeoisie feels their privileges are threatened by working class movements, they can give power to the fascists who will crackdown on the proletariat and protect the capitalist system from being overthrown.

Material analysis is an analysis using the method of dialectical materialism and historical materialism.

To put in in a grossly oversimplified way, one of the most important concepts of dialectical materialism is that ideas aren’t independent from society. Peoples don’t pull ideas out of some Platonist void, their ideas are shaped by and consequences of the society and material conditions they live in.

For example, writing didn’t appear just because some guy one day said “what if we drew funny shapes in clay and pretended the shapes are words?”. When the first human societies started accumulating reserves of food, lumber, domestic animals and materials and to exchange these with other groups of humans, keeping track of everything was becoming a problem. The first writing systems were invented as a way to solve that problem, they figured out that by associating each resource with a symbol they could easily keep track of what they had and how much of it they had.

The same logic apply to fascism. Fascism didn’t appear because some guy woke up one day and decided to be an asshole for no,reason. As the contradictions of capitalism worsened (contradictions are also a concept from dialectical materialism btw), peoples were becoming radicalized against capitalism and the bourgeoisie which created the threat of a potential revolution overthrowing capitalism, in order to protect capitalism from that threat, the petty bourgeoisie tried to hide the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat by fabricating a fake struggle against a group of the proletariat (typically a “race”) that they could point to to divert attention from the class struggle.

This is what is meant in this context. Since liberalism is the main ideology of capitalism, when the contradictions of capitalism inevitably makes everything break down, liberals will either be radicalized to the left and stop being liberals, or defend capitalism to the end by slipping more and more to the right until they become indistinguishable from fascists.

Forcible suppression of opposition

Democrats kicked the Party for Socialism and Liberation off the ballot in Georgia already, so while we aren’t all the way there, signs of it are showing up

Don’t forget all the times they broke strikes, sent the cop beat up protesters, arrested peoples who spoke against Israel, etc…

Militarisation of society

Not there yet, sure.

Normalizing wars for resources and geopolitical influence, cohering poor peoples to join the army by having military service be the only way to not fall into decades long crippling debt to pay for college, continuing to throw more and more money at the military industrial complex even though they already give it more than the next 10 biggest military spending combined and justifying it with fearmongering about Russia/China/whatever country they don’t like invading them and their allies. They already seem pretty militaristic to me.

“The evil is gonna step on us, but the lesser evil is also gonna step on us but with clean boots, which is totally better!”

It seems like they took Kursk without losing much.

Pretty sure they lost at least 3 columns trying to take some towns there.

Now they have a bargaining chip for peace talks…

No they don’t. For the territories they occupy to be a bargaining chip, the territories would need to be strategically important enough for their capture to threaten Russia’s ability to fight this war (they aren’t) and Ukraine would have to be able to guaranty that Russia can’t get them back by fighting and is forced to negotiate to get them back (highly doubtful given that Ukraine can’t even stop Russian advances in their own territory, only slow them down at best).

…and possibly diverted attention away from the main front.

Last I’ve heard Russia haven’t even diverted troops from the main front line in Ukraine, so no, it didn’t even achieve that. Which makes sense when you know that Russia has way more manpower and equipment than Ukraine right now, this isn’t the stare of the war when Ukraine’s army was motivated and received billion dollars arms shipments every week anymore.

Forcing the enemy army to split over more front lines only works if you have the resources to maintain more front lines better than your enemy can. Which is why it’s Ukraine who are getting stretched thin by their own shenanigans here, not Russia, the Kursk invasion was objectively not a smart move.

The western reporting may also get under Putins skin.

That’s cute, but war is won with steel and blood, not twitter ratios. “owning Putin” is at best going to be a very short moral boost that’s only gonna last until the soldiers on the front line notice that they are still getting shredded en mass by Russian shells all the same as before.

This drawing will never cease to be relevant until the fall of the empire

Okay you are clearly refusing to face facts. Whatever the Dems do, the Reps say ‘they should have done more’. You are fixated on the Dems being the ones signing solely because they are in power when the Reps ENTIRE FUCKING PLATFORM is that Israel needs more support.

None of the facts you presented show that the Republicans would do worse.

Of course they’re saying the Dems aren’t supporting Israel enough, the Reps’ whole electoral strategy is to whine about the Democrats and blame them for everything they think is wrong. Just because they say the Democrats support Israel less than them doesn’t make it true.

Again, the Democrat’s actions show clearly that they are unconditionally supporting the genocide with every resource they have.

You aren’t arguing in good faith

I am though.

I go through every argument you made point by point, and explain point by point in detail why they don’t convince me, the problems I have with them, my perspective, so that you can come with better more convincing arguments.

That’s arguing in good faith.

But instead crafting better arguments to counter the points I raised you just keep repeating over and over that the Dems are better without ever demonstrating it. So far you’ve given just 2 sources, of which only the second was relevant to my main point, and no actual argument of your own as far as the subject matter is concerned.

I dare suppose that this is because you don’t actually have any answers to the many points I raised, or if you do you’re certainly not showing it.

and just repeating the same tired ‘Dems did bad stuff tho’ instead of acknowledging that the Reps would absolutely do worse, in their own words, supported by their own actions, happily.

'Course they say they would do worst. Complaining about the Dems posturing as progressive is their all thing. Doesn’t make it true. See first point.

This unwillingness to get beyond past wrongs to see how you’re own myopic actions only make things worse is a running theme with the Anti-Zionists so I guess in a way this is my fault for trying to educate the unwilling.

This is not just past wrongs, this is above all current wrongs, the genocide is going on right now, and the Democrats are supporting it right now.

Again, this point is only valid if you believe that the Democrats are less bad than the Republicans, which I don’t believe and which is what I’ve asked you to provide evidence of, which you didn’t do.

Also, your smug attitude since the beginning certainly isn’t isn’t a sign of good faith on your part.

Don’t listen. Keep sawing away at that nose. You aren’t worth arguing with at this point unless you agree the Reps outright say they want to do more for Israel than the Dems have and admit the only reason they haven’t is solely because they aren’t in power. We’ll just have to wait for the Rep leopards to be voted in and start eating your faces. At which point the metaphorical screams of pain will be little consolation.

I’ve listened, I’ve read the things you linked and responded to the points you tried to make with them.

To me, it’s you who don’t seem worth arguing with or willing to hear a different perspective.

I doubt you even opened any of the many links I gave, or again, if you did, you sure aren’t showing you did.

I mean, look at this line:

You aren’t worth arguing with at this point unless you agree the Reps outright say they want to do more for Israel than the Dems

That’s the whole thing we are arguing about tough. You’re basically saying that I’m not worth arguing with if I don’t already agree with you on the thing we’re arguing about. If that isn’t bad faith, I don’t know what is.

And again with that smug attitude, as well as wishing harm on me for not wanting to support your favorite genocider club to top it all, how very blue MAGA of you.

Weather or not you respond, I’m done here.

I’ve done nothing but provide evidence the Republicans are worse, in their own words, if you’d read it.

No, you didn’t. Once again you’re focusing on what the parties and their voters are saying and ignoring what they are doing.

I’ve already addressed why the article you linked don’t prove that the Democrats are less bad 👈 This is what I’ve requested evidence for, in case you forgot. I don’t need you to tell me the Republicans are bad, I already know that.

The very fact you say ‘no, the Dems are worse’ proves you support republicans because at this point it is one or the other.

An other strawman. When did I say that the Dems were worst? I said they were both bad. That’s my whole point since the beginning: that there isn’t any lesser evil between the two. They are both equally bad, only the optics, the presentation, the aesthetic is different.

Throwing a tantrum because the Dems are technically the ones in power and so you place all the blame on them is weak tea.

It does put the blame on them though. As president, Biden is the chief of the entire US military, he could literally send one e-mail and end all shipment to Israel immediately, he has that power right now he just chose not to use it.

And that’s just what the president alone has the power to do. Let alone the entire Democrat party with all the senators and governors that have.

The House vote Republicans initiated to force the Dems to stop delaying the release of weapon shipments had 16 Dems vote for it, versus 208 Reps.

That’s meaningless lip-service once again.

If the bill don’t pass, they’ll maybe do one or two more bullshit pause in the shipments and boast that they’re so fucking great and progressive for it even though it doesn’t even bother the ongoing genocide in any meaningful capacity for the reasons I explained.

If the bill do pass, they’ll get a free excuse to continue to unconditionally support Israel while getting to pose as great progressives for the even cheaper price of simply crying crocodile tears on TV and social medias about the bill, while not actually doing anything against said bill.

In both cases they get their voters (you) to berate everyone about the Democrats just because they didn’t vote for a Republican bill they at best feel neutral toward.

Press releases by Republican Senators calling the Dems “weak Palestinians” in a blatantly racist attempt to belittle their hesitation.

Yes, the Republican don’t care if you see them for what they are while the Democrats are scrambling to convince their voter base that their evil actions somehow don’t makes them the ‘bad guys’. Again, nothing new, and nothing that contradict my position.

If you have two racist KKK members uncles coming to Christmas eve, would you say that the one who at least shut up during dinner is better than the one who vomit racism on the table, or that it doesn’t matter because at the end of the day they are still both KKK members and you should kick out both? I say the second option.

What the Fuck more do you need? Them to get into power and start invading Palestine with American troops? Get a clue, come on.

They won’t do that. The American military know they would lose an open war in the region and that if they lose it would be the end of Israel. I know that Trump is a dumb fuck, but he’s not alone, there are corporations, handlers and generals behind him who won’t let Trump wreck Israel by his stupidity.

The only way the US would send the army is if Iran, Hezbollah and Yemen attack Israel first, in which case the Democrats would sent the army too.

Your argument sits on what ifs with no basis in reality.

I’m not putting my hopes in the republicans, that’s a strawman and I’m sure you know that.

I already said the Dems are the lesser evil.

You still didn’t give any evidence that they are. You just assert that they are and retreat to pretending like I’m supporting the Republicans when I didn’t buy the Democrat’s “good optics” as proof that they are less evil.

The evidence is overwhelmingly clear the Reps are not simply just unsympathetic but hostile to anti-zionists.

So are the Democrats, have you not seen what kind of things they say about the anti-genocide protests? Have you not seen Kamala’s statement about the protests when Netanyahu was visiting? Or all the violent police crackdown that happened under the Democrat’s watch since October 7?

You are holding a shitty hand and everyone knows it. Threatening to go all in on the Reps is going to get called every time.

You know what else will get called out? You blatantly lying about what I said because you ran out of counterarguments. I don’t support the Republicans, they’re horrible too. It’s your unproven assumption that the Democrats are better that I’m criticizing here.

All you can do now is fold, hope your chips go to the almost sympathetic Dems, and start playing the next hand dealt.

the almost sympathetic Dems

Ha, yes. The genociders who are almost sympathetic to the peoples they’re genociding. Again, no evidence, just faith. “The Democrats are the lesser evil, no I won’t prove it, you must accept it in your soul that they are the good guys, reject the evidence of your eyes and your ears telling you that they keep doing the things they used to criticize Trump for less than 5 years ago, just believe in the holy blue party!!!”

The more time passes the more Blue MAGA becomes a fitting title for the convinced Democrats crowd.

I see where you’re coming from, but once again, this is mostly the Democrat parties saying stuff and not doing anything meaningful.

This article is talking about the Republican wanting to pass a bill forbidding withholding weapons from Israel over Biden saying (as in, not doing) that he might withhold weapons shipments.

Digging a little in the links off your article, the only instance of Biden actually doing something is this. Which to be fair, sound convincing at a glance.

But let’s examine closer: First of all, as is clearly written, the shipment is merely paused meaning they will still deliver it eventually. So already I can tell they don’t actually intend to hold back on the weapons and are just trying to calm the peoples angry at them for what they’re doing. If they’re elected again, as soon as they get to office they will resume giving every single bit of armament they can afford to Israel.

Now let’s talk even more concrete, how much does this pause in the weapon shipments really affect the genocide. As anyone who was following the events since October 7 can tell, the genocide continued completely unbothered, and of course it did:

A US official told CNN on Tuesday that the shipment, which was held back last week, includes 1,800 bombs weighing 2,000 pounds and 1,700 bombs weighing 500 pounds.

This is the article’s description of the paused shipment, 1,800 + 1,700 = 3,500 bombs in total.

Israel has dropped 45,000 bombs on Gaza since October 7 alone (so not counting the ones dropped before), This report dates back from Mars so the actual current number is probably much much higher. Sources: Bombings in populated areas: a new extreme reached in Gaza

3,500/45,000 = 0.07 = 7%

This shipment represent a mere 7% of the bombs dropped on Gaza, for the record the bombs the Israelis uses have a failure rate of 9% ~ 14%. In other words, this paused shipment bothered the ongoing genocide less that the small chance the bombs they do have might malfunction and fail to explode.

I should also mention the fact that they paused the shipment of just 2 types of bombs out off all the weapons the US delivers to Israel, that’s essentially nothing. Source: Which US-made weaponry does Israel, which stands …. It’s all just lip service, good optics so that their convinced voters (you) can come at us all smug and go “see? they’re not that bad”, but when you look closely, there is nothing, it’s just a show to make themselves look good, there is nothing actually meaningful going on.

And beside, let’s be honest, the reason they even did this inconsequential stunt of pausing this shipment is above all because the Democrat’s handlers knew that if Israel want into Rafah, they would just get their asses handed to them by Hamas and put the whole country in an even worst situation that they already were, which is exactly what happened. Source: Hamas Prepare Traps for IDF in MAJOR Counteroffensive.

All this article is saying is that the Republicans openly boast about the evil things they do and their voters are openly pro-Israel, both of which I already know, and neither of which contradict what I said.

Yes, the Democrats don’t give speeches in which they shamelessly talk about what they’ll do to all the peoples they hate the way the Republicans do, and pretend to care about minorities instead. But that doesn’t matter what they say, it’s too easy to say shit you don’t mean, what matter is what they do, and what the Democrats are doing is, as I’ve said, sending every weapons they can afford to Israel so that they can continue to slaughter Palestinians.

All that is only valid if you assume that there is a lesser evil between the two. That’s your problem, you’re left all confused at our stubborn refusal of voting for the democrats because you assume that we agree with you that the Democrats are less evil than the republicans. we don’t (those I know at least don’t).

I’m telling you that honestly, I haven’t seen any evidence that the Democrats would be any less bad, nor any evidence that they have been any less bad until now, on the contrary. I haven’t seen any of the peoples who keep telling us to vote blue give any evidence than the Democrats are less bad, you just take it as an axiom that they are, never try to actually demonstrate it and build your entire argument on this very much unfounded basis.

Your claim here that the Republican could do worst implicitly assume that the Democrats are holding back and not giving as much to Israel as they could, except 1) the Democrats are way too rabidly Zionist and full of AIPAC money for that to be true and 2) the US, right now under a democrat president, is already sending Israel everything they can afford to send without risking to escalate into a war with Iran and Lebanon against whom they know them and Israel would lose (they did war-games to simulate a war against Iran, they lost badly. Sources: How the U.S. Military Lost a War to Iran (In a Simulation, That Is) - Mackenzie institute A $250 Million War Game and Its Shocking Outcome - The National Interest Millennium Challenge 2002 - wikipedia)

The single issue voters on abortion voted blue, that’s why they have no problem with those.

Death to Israel.

I wish Netanyahu a very

There are no truly neutral parties and there is no such thing as unbiased. If a source or a media tells you they are unbiased and/or perfectly neutral, they are either lying to you or don’t properly understand what biases are and how they work.

However, some sources are more biased than others on different things.

Take the American election observers who endorsed the election results mentioned by the article for example.

Like I’ve mentioned, they aren’t truly unbiased or neutral as that’s not possible.

BUT

At the very least, they don’t have a money trail linking them the international terrorist organization that tried to overthrow Venezuela’s government multiple times (CIA and it’s ecosystem of right wing think-tanks), unlike the one you’ve cited.

I’d like to hear how the heck you can possibly think that this ☝️ isn’t a VERY OBVIOUS bias.

Apart from the pure , you gotta love the subtly racist smugness of white westerners halfway across the fucking planet being so confident that they would know better whether or not and by who the peoples of middle-income countries are exploited than the peoples of middle-income countries themselves.

I DON’T insist on Biden at all.

Maybe not you specifically but I’ve seen a lot of peoples do.

many MORE people in this world will suffer, struggle and die under Trump than under Biden. It’s just math and all your ideology is VERY empty in the face of it.

See, I think this is where we disagree.

You operate under the assumption that the things that the Republicans want to do couldn’t happen under Biden, presumably because you think he would block Republican policies, but knowing what I know about Biden and his policies, his willingness to “reach across the aisles” and give concessions to the right, his tendency to passively letting Republican bills pass without doing anything about it even when he clearly have the power to, his failure/unwillingness to roll back Republican policies from Trump’s last term let alone the ones that he expanded instead, etc… I’m telling you honestly, I don’t believe that for 1 second.

I have not seen ANY evidences that Biden would act against Republican politics.

Heck I haven’t seen evidences that he wouldn’t do a complete 180 and start supporting Republican policies that he used to denounce, it wouldn’t even be the first time he does it.

In your arguments in favor of voting blue, you (the peoples who tell everyone to vote blue) always use this assumption that Biden couldn’t possibly be as bad as Trump as an axiom, as if it was just obvious, you never bother trying to show that it’s true, you never question it, I certainly haven’t ever seen any of you questioning it or trying to demonstrate it. You just treat it as some sort of fundamental truth to the point you don’t even seem to notice that you are using it sometimes.

I haven’t seen any reason to believe that this assumption is true, on the contrary.

When I look at the 2 last US presidential terms, I don’t see a bad president and a worst president, I see a bad president who tell you that he’s gonna to terrible shit and does exactly that and an other equally bad president that pinky promise he wont do terrible shit but then do terrible shit anyways and blames the other bad president for it when he get caught doing terrible shit.