Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

That only works if you have enough incentive to trade. The EU simply isn’t that valuable.

The EU just got overthrown after dominating the world and making the world infinitely worse.

Europeans can never be global leaders ever again after performing the worst genocides in history and performing the most slavery in history, both on scales unimaginable in the modern world.

Removed by mod

The problem was she wasn’t a choice for a lot of people. That’s something you guys have consistently failed to understand.

For people that actually suffered under the Obama or Biden regime, Harris did not represent a greater future than Trump. If you are given a choice of either shooting yourself, being shit, or ignoring the entire thing while trying to to find a way to survive being shot; most people will choose the latter option, which is simply not voting.

Homelessness hit a record high under Biden, and only climbed throughout his term. Credit card debt soared, yet consumer spending on nonessentials went down. People aren’t worried about the status quo or the collapse of the US, people were worried about tomorrow.

When you have that situation, they don’t give a fuck about a status quo candidate lying to their face about how great the economy is and how much nothing different they’ll be doing.

Their choice was not Harris or trump, their choice was vote or not vote. And given their experience during Biden’s term, they chose to not vote.

Well Harris wasn’t a viable candidate, as proven by her ridiculous loss against one of the most hated men in history.

Same goes for Clinton. And Biden was polling worse than Harris before his handlers finally made him pull out.

So which neoliberal is a viable candidate again?

Are we just going to do the same thing in 2028, with, using your word, a nonviable candidate?

Words written by a socialist to satirize capital based dictatorships might not be the argument against leftists that you think it is.

It had a better chance than a rightwing cop trying to get elected to the dem party, or an even more senile Biden.

You can’t run incredibly right wing candidates and expect anyone to vote for them, unless you’re running them in the furthest right party.

Cool, you know you can write in the candidate, right?

In any case if dems wanted to be elected, they could try not being republican. Even in the face of fascism no self respecting person would vote for a republican.

Liberals aren’t ‘non-authoritarians’, you just think you should be able to buy authority and violence instead of being born into that luxury. You want violence in the hands of the rich, not the hands of the people where it belongs.

Sure… But that political theory is still explicitly illegal in the US and can get you imprisoned if you manage to get elected. Barring the obvious, we can’t base our political theory on entirely different material conditions experienced by entirely different people. The number of voters that were alive 60 years ago is miniscule, and the number of voters that voted 60 years ago is going to be less than 1% in the next election.

Even supposing those people were physically still alive their material conditions have changed so dramatically they aren’t the same voters.

By ignoring the change of conditions and change of voters mentality, you set yourself up for ‘surprise’ failures, like clinton in 2016, which all leftists knew clinton would lose.

If you just look at the last four years and the material conditions people face, you’re far less likely to overvalue old elections that have nothing whatsoever in common with modern elections.