Maybe rather than doubling down on it, you should consider why it might be that fellow leftists always tell you you’re repeating fash tropes every time you bring up a certain topic? Don’t be the principal Skinner out of touch meme.

Edit regarding your edit: Thank you for the link, I had no idea about any of that. Though I can’t say I find it to be too surprising either. Very different situations obviously, but I can’t help but get some occupied Korea + Moonies cult ties vibes when reading that.

There was so much cope of Delcy Rodriguez for a while but I guess most people gave up on that.

Unfortunately, no it’s not been given up on yet. Even over the last few days, there have been struggles about it on some of the other ML instances. Apparently hexbear even has a contingent that enforces a “Delcy is the Second Coming of Lenin” line and labels you an ultra for getting upset about what happened to Venezuela. It’s wild. I hate to say anything bad about those instances where libs can see, because hexbear and grad are mostly excellent despite all the dipshit lemmitor teeth-gnashing about them. But they do sometimes get infested with terrible party lines and fall into the trap of defending bad analysis, though that’s hardly exclusive to them, as your own comments here prove.

BadEmpada is much better than Norman. I’d wager their influence is about equal.

Lol, no. Finkelstein is a world renowned published academic who has been vocal about Palestine for decades. BEmpanada is a post-breadtube left-leaning drama youtuber. They are both problematic in a few ways and have some terrible, even reactionary takes in addition to their good work, but a drama youtuber doesn’t even come close to the kind of influence Finklestein has.

he explained quite well in his video about it

If there’s anything BE is completely wrong about it’s that like most leftists he adamantly refuses to admit that the US is significantly controlled by Israel instead of the other way around.

Comrade, first of all you really need to get over your parasocial attachment to that guy, he’s not worth defending; what Saymaz is trying to tell you about him is correct. Secondly, I would encourage you to learn more about how US hegemony works and reassess how material your analysis of the situation really is, especially when you start repeating fascist-created ZOG positions.

Is your point that you’re immune to reason?

Regardless, no, your own inability to comprehend the distinction between a population and a state is not a failure that most other people share. It’s actually easy and commonplace for human beings to recognize that they are not in fact identical to the entity that governs them. I’m sure even you are actually capable of it too, since even the most diehard fanatical nationalist doesn’t unquestioningly agree with everything their state does or mistake themselves for their government when they look in a mirror, or mistake their state for themselves when they see a flag in a meme.

Sure some people identify with their state, but none of them identify as their state, the way you’re trying to make out as if they do with your weird impregnation analogy.

But I get it, it’s rhetorically handy to be able to preemptively discredit the most obvious counter to your argument by stating a falsehood about it and then pretending what you said is “the norm.” That way you don’t have to account for that pesky reality getting in the way of the point you’re trying to make.

The absurdity of your claim also becomes apparent as soon as it’s pointed out that there are significant numbers of people within each of those countries (excepting maybe “Israel”) who would fullheartedly agree with the OP image and affirm the illegitimacy of the state that rules over them.

Gotten people who can do better into positions of power? Kept people who can do harm out?

Trump won even by popular vote this last time. You sure you want to make the claim that it’s voting in particular that gets people who can “do better” in positions of power? How can a person be so dense as to think that voting is what keeps those who do harm out of powerful positions when every president, certainly at least within living memory, has wrought unmitigated harm upon the world?

Gotten rid of the feudal system where you only have power of you’re genetically born into it?

LOL. You honestly think voting is what ended feudalism?! And you think people in power now weren’t born into it?! Behold, the intellectual heights of liberal “thought.”

If voting didn’t matter, why would people fight and die for it?

Right, 'cause no one ever fought and died for something that wasn’t true or didn’t work the way they thought. (facepalm).
Also, if voting did work as you say, why do people still have to fight and die for their basic livelihoods and the well-being of their children, let alone the myriad other reasons people to this day are fighting and dying? There are just so many ways in which these questions reveal a deep and fundamental misunderstanding about how material reality works, I don’t know where to start. Oh and wait, didn’t you just say that voting ended feudalism? I guess all that fighting and dying was the sideshow, just done for emphasis apparently.

If voting didn’t matter, why do conservatives want you to not vote?

Why do you, a liberal, not want conservatives to vote? Or maybe you do, in which case you should be content with Trump who was voted in. But to answer your question about conservatives: it’s rather obviously because they’re the part of the machine that generally has less popular support for the time being. This isn’t rocket science. Funny how despite that fact, conservatives still have as much and usually more power than the liberal “progressives,” I thought this voting thing (that ended feudalism! lol) was supposed to magically solve all of that.

If voting didn’t matter, why bother pretending and gave elections?

Because people like you believe the lie that it gives them some sort of power and control over the systems that rule them. Obviously. In other words, it clearly does work miracles to placate doofuses.

Why should you give up your agency over your government?

You shouldn’t, and that’s the point. Only a fool thinks voting within this system is exercising their agency.

In response to all of your “iF vOtInG dIiNt WoRk tHeN WHY” questions, how about this: If voting did work to give ordinary people power, why would your bourgeois overlords (who literally control more absolute wealth and exercise greater relative power and control than any rulers at any point in human history) let you do it? Answer: they wouldn’t.

Or are you cool with the people who didn’t vote and kinda let Trump take over?

Ooooh, so it’s all about people who realized they were only given shit options to vote for, they’re the real problem here, not the people who… umm… voted for Trump? According to you voting has all this amazing magical power to effect the world. But the people who actually used that supposed power for their choice of Trump aren’t actually what put Trump in the presidency let him “take over.” No, you think the problem is the people who can correctly identify a rigged system. Trump won the election via people doing exactly what you say they should do, by voting, but when it’s not the outcome you wanted, you say the man who literally won the popular vote “took over” and proceed to blame that “takeover” on the people who chose not to use that supposedly great power to endorse genocidaires. My god liberals are such a fucking joke it still gobsmacks me somehow.

they are teaching that stalin is evil because he is rightwing?

Yes. That is essentially the lesson they derive from Animal Farm: that any communist/socialist revolution will ultimately devolve into “the same thing” or “just as bad” as fascist dictatorship. If you you don’t recognize the incessant equating of Stalin with Hitler in both popular media and school curricula, then I don’t know what to tell you. And when I say they derive that lesson from Animal Farm, that is not to let Orwell off the hook at all, because that is the most obvious and valid way to interpret it, as Orwell intended.

What’s more, the lesson seems to be one you’ve absorbed and accepted, considering you’re touting Animal Farm as if it has pedagogical merit instead of treating it as the silly, puerile rightist dreck that it is and even worse, insisting that fucking horseshoe theory is a useful heuristic. Oh and of course unironically using the epithet “tankie” to refer to other leftists in the same comment where you said you “just wish local efforts could connect to larger efforts, since we need multiple groups cooperating in solidarity, not isolated individualism” (and to be clear, that latter quote is good and correct but demonstrates unrecognized hypocrisy in someone who also talks about those ebil “tankies”).

Any one of those things is enough to induce a huge facepalm in any leftist who has actually engaged with real leftist thought and theory. Yes, we are actually reading the words that you’re typing and we can’t help but wince.

You can be anticapitalist and liberal at the same time

No, that doesn’t even “check out” on the NATOpedia article. Even that article is explicit that liberalism is fundamentally a pro-capitalist ideology with private property as a core aspect. But it is fun watching you did a hole for yourself, step into it, then declare victory.

And how is the OP meme referencing anything “tankies” say, other than that the person speaking in the OP image is someone you would call a “tankie”? See that little hammer and sickle next to her name? You really are deeply confused, aren’t you.

That comment was not about “quantification of suffering,” it was pointing out that untold suffering was already being caused by the US and its war criminal presidents before the most recent one was in office. Yet so many only seemed to notice when it started effecting them personally. Which isn’t surprising, but when Americans who previously just went about their privileged lives up until Trump came along talk as if this juggernaut of misery, cruelty, and death is only a recent thing, that’s very demeaning to the millions who have bore the brunt of that cruelty for decades. It is also frankly chauvanistic. It is very inappropriate to write that off as “quantification of suffering” but it sounds like you just have a beef with the .ml instance.

This is unironically the big moral dilemma presented by so much western entertainment media it’s nauseating. “Would you pRoTeCt yOuR FaMiLy even if it meant the world/everyone else would die?” and the correct moral position, after much soul searching and garment rending is usually presented as: “Yes, fuck the world, you gotta protect you and your own above literally ALL else.” And it’s always so contrived, with such manufactured scenarios to ignore the fact that in the vast majority of both real and imagined cases, the better option for the world is also going to be the better option for your family. But constantly pitting the individual and their immediate family’s interests over the well being of the community and society is fundamentally necessary to maintain the capitalist mode, so they gotta keep reinforcing that false dichotomy as some kind of universal conundrum that is best answered by being as self centered as possible “for your family.”