CleverOleg [he/him]

That headline is pretty awful, becaused “erased” is a term that can mean a lot of different things to humans. The actual content of the article is critical to understand:

The first Trump regime went far further than its already disgraceful policy of separating families, instead erasing them as legal units by recoding parents separated by immigration enforcement from their children as ‘single adults’ and labelling their children as ‘unaccompanied alien children’ who were then put in shelters to face immigration court hearings alone – many of them still infants.

Trump’s system created intentional chaos, with officials admitting data was “corrupt” and grossly inadequate, leaving the number of children separated from their families still unknown – but at least three thousand in a matter of weeks – and the government admitting in court that it is probably impossible to reunite many of them.

The regime sent many of the abducted children thousands of miles away from their detained parents to foster this chaos and make separation more likely to be irreversible.

Unspeakably evil. This regime has knowingly separated children from their parents and made it difficult if not nearly impossible for them to be reunited again. I don’t like saying “it’s hard to understand just how evil this is unless you are a parent”, because it’s not true. Of course people without kids can understand it. But as a parent, man, this one is really getting to me. To try and get a better life for my kids only to have them ripped away and never seen again… I can’t begin to describe what I would do in that situation.

I think there are many valid criticisms of online dating, I would not suggest it’s an unalloyed good thing. However, I am old enough to have plenty of experience (trying to) date when online wasn’t an option (limited only to work, through friends, and through church since I was religious when I was younger) and I have to say, I prefer having the online option - or at least I did before I married my wife, who I met online.

Relying only on non-online spaces sucked for me. I just didn’t have the confidence to approach women and ask them out. I put myself in the friend zone all the time. When I first found online dating, I found it refreshing. It lowered that barrier for me and I think probably for a lot of other more socially awkward people.

There’s probably broader social problems when online becomes the dominant form, at least under capitalism.

Sometimes I get the feeling Zoomers think dating was “easier” before apps but I really don’t think that was the case, at least for me.

Did those who advocate for abolition of slavery have intensely detailed plans for how an economy would function post-slavery, complete with successful examples of societies that built some other economic system after slavery?

Marx and Engels spoke just enough about future socialism to provide the framework. They didn’t fill in the details because that is not possible, there is no one-size-fits all blue print for socialism. Each time and place has its own specific context that must be accounted for. Ignore that and you will likely fail.

Also, Marx and Engels whole point was to describe the history of all hitherto society, and how class struggle defines that history. To try and authoritatively say “this is the precise next step” would be undialectical and anathema to their entire approach.

People don’t want to hear this but an iPhone, with the right settings, is the most secure phone outside of a pixel running GrapheneOS. This is something that Daniel Micay himself would say often.

Three votes away from a veto-proof supermajority.

Also no way Kamala wouldn’t have also signed it.

Ilan Pappe stated that before Al-Aqsa flood, he felt the cause of Palestinian liberation was really on the ropes and possibly done for. Saudi legitimization of the entity would have been disastrous, and the Resistance themselves cited this as a reason for launching Al-Aqsa Flood; now that’s not happening anytime soon. Now Pappe says he think the entity is living on borrowed time.

Not to downplay the unimaginable price paid by the Palestinian people over the last 15 months, but the story isn’t over yet. It is certainly possible that down the line, schoolchildren will learn that it was Al-Aqsa Flood that was the beginning of the successful liberation of the Palestinian people and maybe even the end of the Zionist entity (inshallah).

I have actually found the “tankie” moniker to be useful IRL:

Tell someone you’re a Marxist-Leninist and you just get a blank stare.

Tell someone you’re a socialist and they think you mean you’re simpatico with AOC and Bernie.

Tell someone you’re a communist and they will just shut down and not hear anything else you say.

But “tankie” seems to convey enough truth - that you support past and current efforts from AES states to build socialism - to be useful.

Not that I rewatch Games of Thrones really but I would always watch that intro, and got unreasonably excited when some new region was “unlocked”.

Just to add, the idea that western countries do not subsidize their exports is laughable. I don’t doubt that in many sectors, western governments - both now and in the past - have subsidized their industries to far greater degree than China ever has with theirs.

You might want to sit down for this but… Donald Trump is a big talker, and will usually bloviate well beyond what he’s actually capable of doing. Yeah of course, he uses more genocidal language but so what, how does that translate into action?

Biden has given Bibi everything he’s asked for. The administration has provided diplomatic cover for every single genocidal action that taken place. Weapons are sent to Israel without delay, to the point that supplies are getting stretched there’s talk about how Ukraine and Israel can’t both be supported (guess who’s losing out there btw). Every time Biden draws a red line, Bibi crosses it with zero consequences.

But as you correctly point out, there is really only one way a president could be MORE genocidal than Biden, and that’s by committing ground troops. I should point out that Biden has already done this with the recent THAAD deployment, but that’s not a massive commitment of personnel. But no, neither Harris nor Trump will be committing troops because not only would that end up being a disaster, but because doing so defeats the purpose of Israel. Israel exists in order to do America’s wetwork in the region. For reasons of both domestic and foreign policy, America can’t be seen as directly causing so much blood to spill in the region, so it gets outsourced to Israel. The CIA and State Dept know all this too well and neither Trump nor Harris are gonna cross them.

We know Trump supports …let’s call it “Genocide+”

We do know that? Biden and Harris are currently ok with the IOF sealing off an area with 400k+ people in it, hoping to starve them to death. No, if you’re going to claim Trump will do something more, be specific. Because outside of dropping a nuke on Gaza there isn’t much more that can be done, we’re at what essentially is maximum genocide that is reasonably possible.

I believe most people think Harris will make getting a permanent ceasefire and supporting a two state solution central tenets of her administration.

Oh wait, you’re serious. Oh you sweet summer child. I can even be mad at you. But not only do most people not believe this, most people know this is patently false because it IS false. Btw the reason people like Blinken and Harris bring up a 2 state solution is because Israel has made it functionally impossible.

This post is a good reminder why I need to sort by Local and not All.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator