Solidarity among evil people, never fails to make me want to puke.

Haiti? Hawaii? Honduras? Philippines? All this shit? The US went from 37 states after the civil war to 50 less than a century later. Surely you could’ve thought of a few examples yourself.

It might have originated as such, but in practice it defined a sphere of influence where America had a carte blanche to do whatever it wanted to enforce its interests. and would eventually become a form of unilateral vassalization, as seen from nonsense like the Olney interpretation and the Roosevelt corollary.

He extended the meaning of the Monroe Doctrine, which had previously stated merely that the Western Hemisphere was closed to additional European colonization: "Today the United States is practically sovereign on this continent and its fiat is law upon the subjects to which it confines its interposition…[1]

Sounds like an empire if I’ve ever seen one.

Literally https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_Doctrine?

Why not both, but also no way this is happening without the permission and/or direction of the billionaire class so oil is definitely involved.

Did… did this person just say that unemployed people shouldn’t get to vote?

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea and makes less than 200k$ a year shouldn’t have passed their 8th grade civics exam.

This technology is supposed to be for disaster response (sending cockroaches to check for survivors under rubble and stuff), but yeah that sounds about right. I wonder how long it’ll take until they put bombs in these.

Wouldn’t the market just expand to absorb the extra demand?

According to betteridge’s law: No.

Okay I’m not sure where you got this from, but you’re wrong on both counts. Socialists absolutely want to do more than just implement progressive policies (you’re thinking of social democrats); the definition of a socialist is someone who believes the working class should seize the means of production. Some socialists believe that can be done through capitalist democratic systems (we call those democratic socialists), but still the goal is a lot more broad than just implementing progressive policies; on the other hand you have more militant or even revolutionary socialists, who usually advocate direct action (sometimes but not always including violence). Meanwhile communists are a subcategory of socialists who believe in the creation of a moneyless, classless, stateless utopian society as described by Karl Marx.

If they could do that they wouldn’t try to get people to avoid unionizing. They still need people to work for them, regulations or no regulations.

Cough cough will no one rid me of this turbulent bitch?

Jesse what the fuck are you talking about? The fucking satellite imagery showing half the strip being reduced to rubble isn’t made up.

Over the last 40-50 years, pro-Palestinian news bytes have shown one thing: the Palestine cause is great at marketing, especially to youn people.

Absolutely not. Palestinians and pro-Palestinians are absolutely terrible at marketing. There’s a reason that with few exceptions the only places where Zionism didn’t find purchase were the ones where people were reading about the Nakba in the daily newspaper and it took a livestreamed genocide for anti-Zionism to become something resembling mainstream elsewhere.

it simply shows the complexity of the conflict

Nothing is complex about this.

And why is every democratic presidential nominee like this?

Money.

Hurwitz also claimed that Holocaust education was “confusing” young people into sympathizing with “weak, skinny Palestinians” instead of “powerful Israelis.”

What. The. Fuck.

Maybe they’d consider it if you stopped fucking ruining their country.

Trump got increased support from literally every minority group in 2024, but I doubt Ilhan Omar supports him.

It sounds nice, but I think this is a wash.

Eh, I’d argue the system is broken. Not because it’s exploiting the poor, mind you, that part is intended. The unintended part is how it’s starting to encroach on the authority of the rich. The system is supposed to “sustainably” make the rich richer and the poor poorer, which is of course complete balloony but that’s neither here nor there.