• stella@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Of course.

    Fuck this country.

    Never voting for a democrat or republican again. They’re all scum.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Bernie was the only one with balls to step forward. If there are any others out there then they’re hiding or being hidden somehow because we don’t see them.

        AOC is as close as you’ll get and the right immediately “Hillaried” her so now she’s “damaged goods.” They’re very good at muddying waters and ruining candidates via propaganda and brainwashing society.

        • loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Neither Bernie nor AOC is socialist in a meaningful sense. Bernie campained on taxing the rich and single payer healthcare which is radical in the American contest but it is not enough to make him a socialist. After he got ratfucked by DNC he has started toeing their line uncritically.

          If you want a prominent western anglosphere politician who is socialist, look at Jeremy Corbyn. Compare Labour’s manifesto during his election to Bernie’s programme. Bernie’s looks extremely lukewarm in comparison.

          • Asafum@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            As an American the only thing I know about him is the media smearing him for standing in front of an illuminati mural that they tried to frame as him being antisemitic… Figures he’d actually have good policies if they’re going to go after him like that.

    • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      unless youre actually voting for a third party, not voting for the shinier turd is still a worthless position that does not improve anything

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, voting 3rd party in the US system is just letting the party you agree least with win… There’s no good option :(

        • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          i can appreciate that third parties can only become mainstream if folks vote for them while they arent, and that its perfectly possible that there will never be a ‘right’ time to vote for them

          even if you dont think its worth it now, theyre at least using their vote to improve things long term

    • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Aye that’ll solve it.

      Trump actively increased sanctions while biden reduced them. They’re both shitty, but let’s not pretend they’re the same.

      Not voting at all makes it easier for the vastly worse party to consolidate power.

      • stella@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not voting at all makes it easier for the vastly worse party to consolidate power.

        There is only one party: the party of the ruling class.

        The bickering between democrats and republicans is just a show to distract people while making them think their side is making progress.

        Both sides are just looking out for rich people. This will be true until we can get money out of politics.

        • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re right that the US’s democracy is deeply flawed. Criticising and discussing how politicians are influenced, and the systems that allow it is great and valuable, especially when those systems are used to influence both major parties.

          But to pretend that every single politician is part of some hive mind run by a shadowy cabal, rather than a set of individuals with their own beliefs and aspirations is not only falling prey to conspiracy theories, but also massively damages your ability to actually understand how the systems work, and how its flaws can be mitigated. At the end of the day, regardless of what else may be influencing them, politicians still have to be elected by the citizens.

          Opting out of being involved in politics, not voting and just letting the universe run its course doesn’t solve the problems or stick it to the man, it only takes away your small piece of influence.

          If you don’t vote, politicians don’t care about you

          So vote, protest, have conversations with people about your views and listen to theirs. That’s the only way the system will work better for the people.

          • stella@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            No, not all politicians are bad.

            US democracy is so horrendously flawed, however, that only a few good eggs make it though. They almost serve as an excuse for ‘not all representatives are bad’ when the vast majority of them are.

            I think the true issue is the constituency. Nothing will change until the culture changes. For the culture to change, people need to admit when they’re wrong.

            I won’t hold my breath, personally.

          • Augusto@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            it’s not a “shadowy cabal”, it’s the ruling class, aka the bourgeois class, the owners of the means of production. capitalism’s flaws cannot be mitigated because it’s because of these flaws that the system itself can exist (exploitation of workers in different degrees, exploitation of the 3rd world, revenue concentration in the hands of a few, wars and misery etc etc)

            the system won’t work well for the people because that’s the whole point of the system’s existence since its inception. it works for a particular class and only that class. the problem isn’t Democrats vs Republicans, it’s capitalism vs the working class. you don’t have to vote, you have to join worker’s unions, a socialist/communist party, be an activist, and when duty calls, participate in the revolution that is to come. the only real material change comes when the working class takes power and actually makes way for changes in the socioeconomic status of the country/world. I suggest reading some of Marx’s work

            With that said, I do agree that in some aspects the Democrats are “better”, such as LGBT rights and such, but that could be 10 times better if the people were actually in charge instead of a few rich lobbyists.

            • Asafum@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I get what you’re saying in theory, but even then the “owning class” is a large group of people that are not working together for anything. They all independently influence whomever they want and it’s the disproportionate amount of power they hold in that respect that is the issue (money.)

              It’s no wonder though that the majority of the “owning class” that we really see as problematic in their nature (think Koch’s, Musk, Adelson, Russian oligarchs via the NRA, etc) all support Republicans. Those that support Democrats tend to be better people as far as what they do with their money for society (Think: Gates, but not always: Bezos).

              Edit: 50/50 wasn’t really worth the comment so I’ll just strike through instead of delete lol

  • zerfuffle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If the US and Israel are completely aligned in foreign policy, what keeps Israel from just becoming treated as another state of the US?

    • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Its ethnonationalist policies would violate Federal law pretty severely, and then the US is explicitly on the hook for Israel’s war crimes, terrorism, assassinations, etc.

      • kboy101222@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        1 year ago

        The US isn’t on the hook for it’s own war crimes, terrorism, or assassinations, so that wouldn’t matter

        • stella@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, “all’s fair in love and war” means you can do anything you want if you can get away with it.

    • enkers@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think that’s an understandable position, given their situation. They’re receiving a lot of military support from the US, so it’s not surprising that they’d at least be cautious about taking a position that might harm ties with the US.

        • enkers@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, they didn’t vote to uphold the embargo either, so maybe half puppet? Also, not saying I agree with their position, just that it’s understandable.

              • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Stop being obtuse. Why would Ukraine be even hostile to Cuba to the point of not opposing the murderous embargo? The only reason is to bootlick USA.

                • Cockmaster6000@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Ukraine’s ability to defend itself from Putin’s “special military operation” directly depends on continued financial and military support from the US.

                  It’s not bootlicking, it’s a rational decision to avoid making waves with US foreign policy that doesn’t involve Ukraine at all.

            • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              can you explain in detail how you came to the conclusion that i meant ‘by cuba’, because im genuinely interested

              • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                You said:

                how many of those are currently suffering an invasion

                (by “those” i meant US vassals)

                It’s pretty clear you somehow counted Ukraine being invaded by Russia as reason for Ukraine to not oppose the murderous embargo on Cuba, unrelated country on the other side of the world.

                • Cockmaster6000@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah, why would Ukraine not upset the US when continued support for their country’s defense is currently being debated in congress?

                  It’s a real head scratcher.

                • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s pretty clear you somehow counted Ukraine being invaded by Russia as reason for Ukraine to not oppose the murderous embargo on Cuba

                  thats funny, ‘it being pretty clear that i meant russia’ is a weird reason for thinking i meant cuba

                  It’s pretty clear you somehow counted Ukraine being invaded by Russia as reason for Ukraine to not oppose the murderous embargo on Cuba, unrelated country on the other side of the world.

                  currently relying on military aid from the US government to deal with an ongoing invasion might be a reason to abstain from voting against an embargo being upheld by the US government

                  ‘the other US vassals’ are generally not currently relying on military aid from the US government to deal with an ongoing invasion

                  i figured that was pretty clearly what i was talking about, what with it being the literal topic of the conversation:

                  They’re receiving a lot of military support from the US, so it’s not surprising that they’d at least be cautious about taking a position that might harm ties with the US.

  • Ashyr@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    In all seriousness, who does the embargo really benefit. Maybe it made sense during the Cold War when missiles were getting moved around, but now? Someone somewhere must be profiting from it, but it’s not the American people.

  • D3FNC [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    It feels very cool to buy hand soap or whatever at the grocery store and see the box is stamped ‘made in Iran / DPRK / Vietnam’ though

  • _cnt0@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Podcast recommendation for people like me who like to listen because they don’t find time to read as much as they’d like and don’t have first hand experience/memory of the Cuban revolution and the following intertwined history with the US, because, well, they weren’t born yet:

    https://blowback.show/Season-2

    After a critically-acclaimed retelling of the Iraq War, season two of Blowback presents the unlikely story of the Cuban Revolution: America’s Cold War crusade brings the world to a nuclear-tipped showdown between the Kennedy brothers, Fidel Castro, the Soviet Union, the CIA, and the Mafia. Co-hosted by Brendan James and Noah Kulwin, season two is a 10-part account of how the United States tried and failed to thwart the creation of a socialist government less than a hundred miles to its south.

    The style of the podcast, with two moderators, took some getting used to for me. But I learned to love it. It is very comprehensive and in-depth. You can find it pretty much everywhere; I listened to it on spotify.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    HAVANA, Nov 2 (Reuters) - The U.N. General Assembly called for the 31st time on the United States to end its decades-long trade embargo against Cuba as the communist-run island suffers its worst economic crisis in decades, with shortages of food, fuel and medicine.

    Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez said in a speech before the assembly that the “blockade prevents Cuba from accessing food, medicines, and technological and medical equipment.”

    Havana is also prohibited from exporting to the neighboring United States, Rodriguez said, curtailing access to a massive market for its goods and costing Cuba nearly $5 billion in losses in 2022 alone.

    “The blockade (embargo) qualifies as a crime of genocide,” said Rodriguez, who said the U.S. policies were deliberately aimed at promoting suffering among the Cuban people in order to force change in the government.

    U.S. diplomat Paul Folmsbee, in a brief speech opposing the resolution, said the embargo was aimed at promoting “human rights and fundamental liberties in Cuba” and that the U.S. made exceptions for humanitarian purposes.

    The long-running dispute between Cuba and the United States shows little sign of detente, despite some modest gestures of goodwill under the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden.


    The original article contains 330 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 40%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!