How exactly? By reporting on them?
Or is there evidence of an astro-turf situation?
Why Democrats Lost In Virginia Is Painfully Obvious
- Thread starter gorfias
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Or is there evidence of an astro-turf situation?
Part of the reason BLM disintegrated was companies trying to take it over. It was also specific individuals who were using it for Insta Activist Points. Some individuals became heads of smaller organizations in BLM and then tried to make money or power. These things are common in a disorganized decentralized movement.
See also this JFK meet up in Dallas. Q denied it being a possibility but other Q supporters have co-opted parts of the movement for their personal gain
Take this as you will. You've brought up Dore a few times, so I assume you like his content.
While I might not agree that he's courting the anti-vax movement, he's clearly misrepresenting things here. But he might just not understand, as I've seen him not understand topics before
In the Force the Vote thing, I don't thing Forcing the Vote would have gone anywhere. I dont Dore understands how Washington works or that he has to manipulate centrist Dems in voting for M4A. But I still approve of the general sentiment
I would say there are books that students be limited to reading at a certain age. As a non-political example, sex scenes in books might be limited to a certain age.
But then, I learnt a lot about sex at the age of 10 when a (female) friend of mine at school got some books with a few incredibly graphic sex scences from the normal library. So maybe I shouldn't be worried... but then my daughter is 8 and a half...
Last edited:
I'm not sure about the astro-turf thing. I understand the movement founders are 3 black lesbian Marxists. Did they have corporate backing? Was Soros involved? I've not heard.
The legacy media did report on them a lot. 1) They should not have done so much. 2) They should have aired opposing view points to their charges. There are plenty. Instead, they were deified. There are potentially innocent reasons that this may have happened in this hyper polarized political environment but it sure seems to the advantage of those that want to change the subject from class conscious movements and own most of our legacy media.
Maybe.
Corporate media isn't doing their job when it comes to Marxism. They aren't ending any news story on Marxism with statements along the lines of, "Marxist governments killed some 100 million innocent people in the last century"
I think Corporations can benefit by pushing Marxist ideology to divide people, which is a big part of what I think "wokeness" is ultimately about.
Think piece about the divide and conquer aspects of wokeness:
But this thread is ultimately about a view I'm not hearing in most places: that McCauliff did not lose for being too Left. I mostly read/hear that he lost for picking the wrong side of the divisions Corporations are pushing. I think it is for reasons similar to why Trump beat a dozen other better government experienced candidates: the establishment is not offering the people enough to bother supporting them, and even causing backlash against them.
Okay but only if we do the same with any story on capitalist governments. Between the UK and the US intentionally killing civilians across the Middle East and the people who die in the developing world as a direct result of the exploitation of the larger capitalist governments. Oh we should probably also include people killed by police in America. What's that, like 1000 a year? How many people have died across the countries that England decided they owned because the people there were like "actually we don't think you do."
Because I am perfectly fine to take a trip down "government bad" boulevard as long as we hold ideologies equally accountable.
OK. How about, Communism is fine until your run out of other people's money. Then it uniformly brings tyranny and crushing poverty.
Those, "people who die in the developing world as a direct result of the exploitation of the larger capitalist governments"... those people would not be better off in a Marxist gulag hell hole. They'd be worse off.
Yes, I'm sure as they were taking their last breaths, they were thinking "At least I'm dying to support the wonder that is capitalism and not sitting alive in a gulag!".
Is a nothing phrase made by people who only regurgitate right wing talking points and never actually study communist philosophy.
But let's stay on track. Why don't all of the people directly and indirectly killed by capitalist governments count? If your point is communist governments kill people then why isn't capitalist governments killing people a strike against capitalism?
I don't believe there should be any government my dude, you'll find I'm pretty ideologically consistent on "government kills". So there's no point whattabouting me here. I'm not here to defend anyone else's view, just asking you to be consistent with yours. It's not that long ago that America killed an aide worker in Afghanistan along with about half a dozen children and all that happened was they said "oops". What's the UK and the US body count alone? In the last century, and that's only looking at when soldiers kill people.
We have tyranny and crushing poverty all across the world in countries that are decidedly not Marxist (also I seriously doubt you understand what Marxism/Communism/socialism actually are as their own distinct ideologies and that's funny to me). So again, all I'm asking is that, in order to be consistent, whenever we discuss capitalism we close with how many people have died because of capitalist governments. Stop moving goalpost and address THAT point.
... They're dead dude. The people who died in the developing world are dead. We're speaking specifically about the dead here. Capitalism killed them and I want to know why you think we should have to sign off every discussion on Marxism(lol why Marxism?) with a death count but not capitalism. Just explain why you're ideologically inconsistent.
That's really not a good source. Its a guy who only barely didn't overtly support the idea of ''the great replacement''. Though I certainly recall him gloating about the success of anti EU politicians too. If he isn't counting among the usual suspect of alt right pundit its only because he knows how to dial it back. But when you spread the great replacement you can't be anything but an alt right clown. (Edit: Oh god I watched the video and he's certainly not dialing anything back. He's really an alt right clown with stock phrases as ''degeneracy''. Really not a good source)
Ultimately he has it the other way around when he says its the ''woke'' who are using divide and conquer tactics. Its usually outsiders from the far right who love to infiltrate fandoms and make them extensions of their creepy little culture war. Even in the most charitable depiction of ''the event that shall not be named' its indisputable that there were far right outsiders stoking the flames and seeking to escalate the event that shall not be named as part as their culture war. Milo for instance was on the record as detesting gamers before he saw an opportunity to advance the cause of the far right. And Bannon hasn't been shy about purposefully radicalizing young gamers to serve his own ends. Meanwhile many of the targets aside from the exception that shall not be named were all insiders of the industry to some degree.
Often it becomes clear that right wing pundits aren't quite as familiar with their source material as they want us to think they are. Those who ponder about how Rey could possibly be a better mechanic than Han and imply that its only there to make her a marry sue for instance don't exactly know their Empire Strikes back very well. And while its unreasonable to expect everyone to remember that one scene of Han bumbling around while trying to make repairs, these peoples position themselves as THE true fans so they at least should be aware that Han was never a great mechanic. And if the complaints towards the Star Wars sequels are in the vein that Star Wars has suddenly become too political then its clear they were never very familiar with the source material or the guy who wrote it. It also suggest they don't know the sequels well either because its easily the least political of the bunch. Same with Captain America. Those comic gaters who bemoan how Steve Rogers has only now became very political obviously missed him having started out as a guy punching Hitler before America joined the war, and that other persons he punched included the likes of Nixon and Reagan. We even saw it recently with many of the pundits groaning about how ''Superman is now woke!'' obviously not realizing the difference between Jon and his dad, or that Jon does not have an extensive history of dating woman and that this Superman thus did NOT get changed from straight to bi.
A lot of these'' true fans'' telling you that us true fans that we should be outraged at the left for ''ruining'' our fandoms clearly are not the true fans they pretend to be. Because its not about the fandoms, the fans or the material. Its about creating another front for their creepy culture war. Star Wars, Captain America, Superman. Its all just a vehicle for their own politics.
As for your take on why Trump one. That never really made much sense. Being angry because one side doesn't offer enough doesn't make sense if you respond to this by supporting a candidate who offers you absolutely nothing and who intends to burn everything to the ground.
Last edited:
Marxism literally calls for a revolution, a violent one if necessary, to overthrow and dispossess the shareholders of corporations and redirect the means of production into the ownership and control of the workers. Corporations, their shareholders, and their managers and executives want nothing to do with that. "Wokeness" as employed by Marxists (though they wouldn't typically call it such) is about assembling the broadest possible coalition of people disadvantaged by capitalism and standing all in solidarity. That may mean educating those who are racist or sexist or other actually divisive isms that they are being pigheaded and should stop both because it is the right thing to do and for their own interest because standing in solidarity with all workers has a much better prize than the meager crumbs of wealth and status workers can get from e.g. racial privilege.
Kinda off topic, but I think this is the most electric pro-politician speech I've ever heard. And it's an accident. Michael Moore goes on to say Trump will be the worst ever. But what he says is pretty amazing:
Murphy Narrowly Wins Re-Election as New Jersey Governor (Published 2021)
The victory over Jack Ciattarelli, which ended Democrats’ 44-year re-election losing streak in the state, was far tighter than polls had predicted.
I am pretty late, but hey at least the Democrats didn't lose.
In New Jersey...
The Marxists claim that Capitalism will sell them the rope with which to hang them. Given our current relations with the Chinese, I think there's a lot to that. Big Corporate collusion with Government to make money off of Maxists? There was the allegation, for instance, that without technology transfers green lighted by the Clinton establishment, China would not be able to hit the US mainland with nukes. https://archive.vn/SWUgb
The meme is "The last capitalist we hang will be the one who sold us the rope". There is no claim there about capitalists wanting to help.
This has literally nothing to do with the idea that corporations will want to promote Marxism. Coming to an agreement with a foreign government to make use of their land and labor and develop their capital for your own profit is a far cry from whatever it is you think was going on with BLM.
There's much more money to be made off people who believe corporations, of all entities, are pushing marxism, like you, than there are money to make off of Marxists.