It’s the death of the macro culture. All the styles from all the previous eras now coexist and are very much in depending on what sub culture you belong too. Like if you are the edgy kind of teen right now you are wearing y2k style clothing, but if you are more of a normie you wear more classic street wear. If you’re a fashion forward guy in his late 20’s or early 30’s, 40’s to 60’s inspired menswear is the thing to wear. And so on.

What if the people never agree with you? What if you can never convince them that for example transgender women should be able to use the women’s bathroom? What if people elect officials that pass laws to make sure they can’t? Would you accept that outcome peacefully as part of the democratic process? Would you be content with what the people have chosen? Democracy can be as tyrannical as any other system, for progressives there is a moral imperative to not accept outcomes that hurt people even if it is done through the democratic process.

If the best course of action is the only choice then there isn’t a choice at all.

For example we might know that universal healthcare is better for society in almost every aspect, however people might feel that they prefer lower taxes regardless of the benefits that universal healthcare might provide and so they vote against a measure to establish universal healthcare. This is the people choosing out of their own free will to vote against their best interests, democracy is ok with bad outcomes that result out of collective choice. The progressive movement is not ok with negative outcomes, and as such will always choose the best course of action.

The “progressive” movement in the US is without a doubt 100% the unaware foot soldiers of the elites. Every single thing the movement supports only helps to further entrench capital into power. The file and rank of the progressives are well intentioned, no doubt, and the goals are nobles. But because the idea is to solve problems from the top down instead of the bottom up, all it serves is to further create methods for capitalism to solve the internal contradictions that would otherwise result in its collapse. Furthermore it is not a democratic movement nor interested in democracy in any shape or form and saying so is as much newspeak as fascist saying the same thing. It is a technocratic movement that dismisses the wisdom of the masses for the wisdom of the experts, and I do not think that’s necessarily a problem in practice, the problem is that people, as stupid as they are, are smart enough to realize that either you believe in democracy or you believe in doing whatever is scientifically, statistically or mathematically is proven to be better but both things cannot be true at the same time. Honestly I feel like progressives would fare better if they actually had a mask off moment and actively campaigned on that.

I find that it’s pretty much the same if not worse on here on certain topics. Like you might agree on the problem but if you disagree on the solution as generally accepted by whoever sets the agenda you are the enemy. I’m banned from some political instances because I have dared question the progressive’s positions/solutions on certain topics. Like apparently because your goal is morally “right” that justifies using stupid ass solutions instead of attempting to fix deeper rooted issues.

Oh I’m also generally allowed to say retarded on here, but we’ll see if that’s true.

Two decades of “just learn to code bro”, will do that to a profession.

What’s that supposed to mean? It’s the truth, you can’t just act the same as the people you criticize and expect not to be criticized about it.

Removed by mod

For me the wisdom is that for all the good a strong federal government could do, it inevitably was going to be used for ill and we are seeing that play out in real time. Which is what traditional republicans always said.

But to a point I do think the founding sin was writing in the constitution that all men are created equal and still allowing slavery. Many (if not most? I’m not sure here I know they all owned slaves as that was the thing to do at the time) who signed that paper knew that this sin would destroy the union and it’s obvious they were right because all of American history has been the shockwaves of allowing slavery instead of making it illegal from the very beginning, and to this day it is still playing out. Thats what happens when you weave in contradictions into the foundation of your country, event those contradictions cannot coexist.

Fair. The same style of organization was the intention under the constitution still. Just a little bit tighter wound.

The idea always was that people should be free to live in a place where they agree with the laws, so each state would have broad powers to organize itself and make its own laws and then every person could decide to live in a place that was organized in the way they wanted. The Federal Government was only to handle military (which is still constitutionally not supposed to be a standing army, but congress votes to maintain it every two years), international relations, regulate relations between the states themselves and tariffs. This has always been the traditional republican position, and time has proven the wisdom behind it. But now it’s too late to turn back I think.

You just described the United States as intended there at the end. The whole thing was designed to be something more like the EU than what it is today.

Removed by mod

In reference to how socialism will truly come about, Marx literally criticized the kind of thinking that dominates left wing thinking nowadays.

Removed by mod

No you can’t. It collapses on the weight of its own contradictions. Any imposition of socialism without the right material conditions is doomed.

Sometimes I wonder how many “Marxists” really have read Marx.

I can’t say if they killed drug dealers or not but drugs are absolutely moved via boats like these. Drones is a lot more advanced that Caribbean drug smugglers usually use.

International law is a joke anyways. I say this every post that brings up international law and I’ll continue raising it. If you believe in international law you might as well believe in the power of friendship.

Yes that’s the theory of why capitalism good by liberals

I think this is possibly also the problem for me. I compulsively explore, and the more a game has to explore the higher the chances I’ll get tired of it before I even finish it.