Have you looked into the “demonstrators” they clashed with? If not, you may find that particularly telling. You know how the usian media acts like every protest is a bloody clash where cops are being overwhelmed and murdered? Well, this was that, for real.

I support unarmed cops, and I support “clashing” with citizens who start killing them.

So you and I watch memento like, how is this interesting? Doesn’t everyone live like this?

Yeah, you’re right. You and other user must agree on terms and on what you already agree on first.

I saw they had a similar experience of talking past each other with cowbee. They might be a particularly articulate wrecker, but I didn’t want to jump straight there.

Yeah but you’re not just looking. You’re running your mouth. People tend to ask for clarifications.

Sometimes people sacrifice things for principles. What’s funny about that?

Shoehorning objectivation into every context may be simple, but answering the question of why we do that is not.

“He takes the some of the liberal achievements (rationalism, the end of feudal bondage, and the Labor Theory of Value) and shows that they can only be fully realized by moving beyond the capitalist mode of production”

I thought that was pretty clear. The achievements are to be fully realized which cannot be done without overthrowing liberal democracy. The full realizations of achievements are mutually exclusive with the continued existence of libdem

That might not be what they meant though. That’s just how I read it.

Becoming? Those were always accusations in a mirror

Do you not have people in your life who understand that the police lock people up for bullshit all the time? Why would they assume you deserved it? You need less ignorant people in your life (don’t we all)

Consider this liberal scratched y’all

Thank you for providing a great example of the propaganda tactic often called “accusations in a mirror.” This is more often referenced with the term projection.

This, unironically.

If your “circle jerks” involve discussing the nuances of history and political theory, that’s just a discussion.

If your “circle jerks” involve spreading imperial lies and frothing at the mouth for genocide, that’s a problem.

Unfortunately, it seems the latter is much more acceptable on the Internet overall.

This question only serves to enable mudslinging while hiding behind a homophobic term.

The term is so loaded with homophobia that’s it practically useless.

There are communities where leftists can openly discuss leftist theory and (to a lesser extent) praxis without being permabanned for thought crime like most spaces.

I find that fun. I haven’t had the opportunity to join a circle jerk, but it sounds fun to me. So, in that sense, the answer to your question is a tentative, horny yes.

Not even just left to the streets. Many cities are death marching the homeless around, arresting, terrorizing, and stealing personal property of the homeless every step of the way.

https://projects.propublica.org/impact-of-homeless-sweeps-lost-belongings/

Ah, the same Reporters Without Borders gaslighting the world about journalist deaths in Gaza?

You know how it’s frustrating when far right reactionaries roll up in lib spaces on reddit spewing propaganda the sources of which they haven’t investigated critically? That’s you. You’re doing that here. Please stop.

Human Rights Watch? Seriously? Do you look into your sources at all, or are you just happy to spread imperial apologia?

Wikipedia is a terrible source for current affairs.

Your attempts to smear the three gorges dam project are part of a tradition older than the Internet. Of course, the human rights watch was all over that propaganda.

but the tianaghur squarocide or something. I heard it on a podcast gimme a sec

Yeah the us would never force anyone off of land.

Also the first thing I said was that it will not be allowed to happen. That pretty clearly indicates I don’t believe in it, at least in this place and time. Nice snark nonetheless