Matt Christman: Arguing Biden vs. Third Party is Stupid 

Not anymore lol

@@kumatmebro315 Very poor taste. At best.

Don't think this loser is gonna be doing too much talking anymore, thank the LORD. Can you say JELLO CUPS Matthew? Lol

@@kumatmebro315we don't even know what happened to him or whatever. Unless you have inside information that everyone outside his family and close friends lacks. It certainly seemed like something related to his brain but we just don't fucking know AND IN ADDITION he said in his last vlog that he had seeing doctors because of pain in his head so that means he was aware of something wrong and was being monitored/had tests done so when it did finally happen he got to a hospital quickly and they had some information already logged on his symptoms previous to the event. All of this raises his chances of making it through literally the worst events possible minus ones that kill instantly. And if he died, we'd know. So right now he's between braindead and fine and we have no info of how he is, what caused it, etc. So all that said What the fuck kind of joke is this? Come on dude. Even if you "hate commies" or whatever your deal is, ok, go yell at ones threatening you in some way. Matt at most gets grumpy and yells into a mic about how we're all dumbasses. He's mostly a philosopher at this point. Fuck off.

Such a lazy perspective. If a third party wants to get real numbers they need to do the work BEFORE the election. Their primaries are decided by thousands of people, where (D) and (R) are counted in the millions. A third party candidate isn’t going to magically gain 60% of the vote out of the blue.

why? justify that. In a good democracy, that's exactly what you'd do - vote to change things how you want. What are you suggesting? That the electoral system should be undemocratic in terms of who's allowed to run for election? I'm not entirely against that - in that you could say that the choice to be democratic is beyond something to be voted on - but what you're saying is not clear.

@@reallyidrathernot.134 said what I meant try reading it again idk

I don't understand your use of either of those terms.

Proletarian revolution.

@@marcusnelson7026 What does that mean in the context of the contemporary United States? How's that going to come about?

​@@TheYopogoThey can never answer that most important question. They only know how to critique.

@@maxsmart9116 That is true but to be fair, neither can we. Neither can anyone as it stands! That is very much the problem

Agreed, the left/right schema thats being presented in Norwegian media is relying on people being ignorant or indoctrinated. A political party that partly privatized Norway's biggest oil&gas company 20 years ago, is considered "on the left", despite pushing neoliberal policies since the 90s.

sounds like media is not your friend

@@thuggoe The fact that Norwegians refer to the center-right coalition as the "bourgeois parties" is just an amusing relic of the language rather than the media but, yeah the media serves the duopoly, just as it does in the US. We get the illusion of a wider choice of parties but the result is the same and this is a good lesson for those that think everything will improve in the USA if the 2-party duopoly is disturbed by the growth of other parties that can pressure the Dems and Repubs.

Thanks for the movie recommendation. lol

>hard truths

Which truths did he deliver? Give me a timestamp.

My heckin' voterino!

If you don't vote your political analysis is literally worthless and you're just doing a politics podcast for clout.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 Man you really try to pick fights in every single comment supporting Matt 😂 most hinged individual ive seen in awhile

It's not a matter of "being obligated to", just the reality that there's no left mass movement to direct that energy towards at the moment. The question is what we supposed to do and nobody has a real answer. I feel like all the people complaining here aren't looking for actual solutions, but are just looking for someone to pat them on the shoulder and tell them everything's gonna be alright.

@@jamesoakes1819 Maybe the problem is everyone has their own answers. There is so much in fighting and splintering on the Left and maybe that (all this individual thinking), makes it nonviable. Why did Jill Stein undermine West by feeding him to Peter Daou? She was probably jealous of his attention. I always thought a big name coming into the Green party would be met with ugly internal behavior and I was right. It's like everyone on the Left just wants to be a righteous critic and this has nothing whatsoever to do with anything happening in the world. Stuff happening in the world is just a pretext for virtue signaling,

"In fighting" is literally what politics is. There's never going to be 100% agreement within any mass political movement. Political change isn't gonna come because every leftist on Twitter decided which particular interpretation of maoism is correct. Real change only comes when people are so fed up with the current conditions that they would rather risk their lives than continue to uphold the status quo.

@@Will_Moffett The left doesnt exist in the US. To the extent that people talk about the working class, its a euphemism for american consumers rather than the actual working class of the world (mostly brown folks making pennies). Awkwardly the Globalists are much closer to achieving communism through posthumanism than the masses are to getting rid of usury and capitalism.

​@@Will_MoffettWell put

Not even close. People this sophomorically stupid are dangerous.

@@keithjackewicz8423 Try this little exercise: Look again at each of the comments to which I've responded. Now close your eyes, rub your temples, and ask yourself exactly what principle you think you're appealing to in your reply to me, and ask yourself if you're applying it even-handedly. Then tell the what answer you arrived at.

@@keithjackewicz8423 You are in the weakest conceivable position from which make such a pointed declaration, and, amusingly, you're obviously attempting to ape my diction from the other thread. The question I put to you here is unimpeachably clear, and a direct answer to it might look something like this: _The principal I'm appealing to is that if you're going to reply to an empty assertion like "Christman is Top G", you thereby adopt the onus to expand upon it at length and far exceed the comment to which you've replied with something much more substantive, rather than dashing off a merely reciprocal counterassertion._ That would be _one_ possible answer, but then you'd adopt the onus to defend it -lest you make it appear that you can't.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 i take great umbrage from the characterization of my comment as « empty » Muskets at dawn, coward!

@@keithjackewicz8423 I would point out that you are having « words » with THE Hadron of Theseus… Please respect the exploit involved in getting A+ all through Junior College philosophy 101 class

Ahem, I mean, glad to see Matt again.

Buffoons, both of you.

You have very odd notions of "comforting" and "reality".

Or it could be that he is contributing further to political apathy. Matt's analysis and points are good, but change is never going to happen with that attitude.

That is your failure of intellect.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 no u

We love our big boy don't we folks.

Well, fortunately it's also a false thought. I hope you won't slay the messenger for bearing good news, but we don't in fact live in an era in which major change is unfeasible in any especial sense. To wit, it is eminently possible that there could arise a candidate younger than Sanders with but with similar or still better politics, who successfully secures both the Democratic nomination and the presidency in 2028. This is not _wildly_ implausible in the mind of anyone who can manage to get more than a few dozen neurons firing, and frankly I'd place the subjective probability at greater than fifty percent. (People who think this is starry-eyed are drawing _exactly_ the wrong conclusions from 2016 and 2020.) In the mean time, we can push the discussion of ranked choice voting into public discourse as often and assertively as possible. Neither party wants it of course, but there's a silver lining, and it's actually quite an opulent lode: There is _absolutely no case to be made_ against ranked choice voting - even a fleetingly specious one. The weight of argument is so utterly and immensely lobsided that it has literally no sincerely principled opposition. None. This is not hyperbole; such people just flat out _do not exist_ . No, they _really_ don't. As such, any politician who opposes ranked choice voting _on pretext_ can very easily be made to look either contemptibly evasive or overtly dishonest in the eyes of even the most obtuse and poorly educated voters - if only such conversations can be pressed upon them against their will. And again, this is far from impossible. These two very live possibilities alone are flint and tinder enough to start with.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 I disagree.

@@charleswofford6296 May I ask then, what is it about Sanders that's not replicable or indeed surpassable in the relatively short term -aside from his decades the senate - and what convinced you that this is the case?

TIL capped insulin prices are actually libido.

Because thwy have 2 terms if experience defeating Sanders and there will be nobody better than that in the foreseeable future. The senate history cant be so easily dismissed. How is a newcomer building a coilition without getting kneecapped before they even get a running start?

"Makes a joke about digesting some stupid unintelligible meme filtered into two party politics" im sorry is something different happening here? Is it more fruitful to digest this for 5 hours instead???

@@Avernalism I think Matt's point is that if we're honest with our analysis and ourselves, there's not much we really can do, other than local activism which has direct, immediate, tangible goals, and which has little to do with major elections. Matt says that somewhere in the larger episode.

​@@charleswofford6296unfortunately we have to sit through is Bill Maher/Dennis Miller level smugness to get to his point, which you neatly described in a simple sentence.

@@Avernalism What meaningful came out of this comment that could be useful to the average voter beyond masturbating yourself into superiority? This is just as empty and vacuous as third party conversation; like what's meaningfully happening here? Cool I'm blackpilled about podcasters; where's that action items???

"...instead of just be a voice for people disillusioned by media... That's not what she's doing either. She's a disingenuous careerist and paid saboteur, much like Elizabeth Warren. If you have even the faintest glimmer of remaining doubt about this after watching her recent debate with Kyle Kulinski and Krystal Ball, I strenuously suggest that as soon as possible you try to schedule a full neurological exam and bloodwork for heavy metals poisoning.

I dislike BJG, but I agree that Matt’s arguments tend towards eating their own tale like this… disappointing because I agree with a LOT of what he says.

Matt would, for this take, probably call me a *yuge nerd* who needs to stop being a logic fetishist weirdo, but I am cringe and I am free ❤

@@sacrificezone yes I totally understand. I agree with him 99% of the time too. And I appreciate a lot of what Gray says but she can fall into a detached lawyer perspective too much

Lifelong? You were born in 2016?

Lmao, Oliver Anthony had an interview scheduled with Midwestern Marx and then cancelled after going on Jordan Peterson's podcast. Proving once again why Matt Christman is the real midwestern marxist. Matt has always been consistent pointing out in his analyses how Americans on both sides of the political spectrum are both equally stuck within the bourgeois framework of republicans vs democrat, and that trying to pull people out of this framework is going to be a futile endeavor if there's no larger political project to direct them towards. Otherwise you're just grandstanding about how you're the true marxist, the one who really understands those pure salt of the Earth working class folks in Appalachia. The way some of you guys talk about blue collar whites actually reminds me a lot of the way liberals talk about black people and other minorities; as if their mere existence is a revolutionary act in and of itself and that any criticism of the media-annointed representatives is secretly an attack on the group as a whole.

People love drama, so they click on it. The majority report and other shows know that.

Lmao, isn't like 90% of Brie's podcast just talking about drama with other podcasts?

@@jamesoakes1819 not really. its only majority report, gtaa, and tyt that still bring up FTV which happened two years ago lol

I find this intensely invidious. If I were in the same room with Christman, at least one of us might have gone to jail.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 Yeah ok.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 Thats the most honest remark youve had toward Matt throughout your many comments. You admit you wouldve had trouble restraining yourself from assault. It sure makes the rest of your overreactions make more sense in the context of this clear bias.

@@ultravioletiris6241 proving the "libidinous freaks" points Matt made, the mirror in the reflectorium must be reflecting uncomfortably brightly

An Arabic first name with a Polish surname, writing in Spanish for no apparent reason...

​@@hadronoftheseus8829 que te valga verga ¿o q un tiro titopu? jk just doin it for the sake of it

@@hadronoftheseus8829 What a strange statement. Half a millennium of immigration flows to the Spanish-speaking New World and you can’t imagine someone with this name and surname living there? …Although historically most Poles migrated to Brazil, there were sizable communities that migrated to Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Peru, Mexico. And as for “Omar” don’t even get me started on the variety of Middle East immigrant flows to LatAm. Educate yourself. It’s really interesting and horizon expanding!

@@hadronoftheseus8829That’s kind of the future. Whether you like it or not.

@@johnsinclair4621 My comment insinuates absolutely nothing about whether I would like it or not.

And Bernie got destroyed. This is where he's at as a result of it

​@LeahLuciB So if Bernie didn't get destroyed than everything is possible?

He's referring specifically to 3rd party voters which are so few that it might as well be "one vote". He was a Bernie bro because Bernie was the one guy that could have done it within this 2 party framework. We don't have a Bernie this time around, however.

Could you specify a time stamp for any point you perceived to be quality analysis? Let's discuss.

What's your definition of doomer? He's not saying to flee to the woods or drink bleach or something. If the analysis he has makes you sad and scared, that's an indication you need to find your own meaning and direction. I've felt the way Matt does now for over a decade, well since I was a teenager. I've never just given up on political engagement or think that means this system ending is the same thing as the world ending. That's a you thing, simply put.

It's only doomer if you do something. I'm already going to local meetings. These people are fools! Please continue, Alexander the Great!

It doesn't need to be but yea I wish he would accent possibilities against this piece of shit system.

It's also an absolutely inane argument. It falls drunkenly on its face at the first premise, and gets no better at any step.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 Your counter to it is vacuous, one might say

@@hadronoftheseus8829r/iamverysmart

@@billyconnelly3568 Christmas's whole disjointed rant is no more intelligible than a fever dream, but 1:41 is the first thing I hear that sounds something like a premise. I say it's straightforwardly false - to high a degree of probability - and _at best_ it most definitely is not self evidently true. Do you disagree?

Neither of those words means anything anymore

Yeah, and yours is exactly the type of incisive commentary these "back pilled takes" typically inspire.

Everyone who uses “___ pilled” should be sent to the g*lag

@@hadronoftheseus8829 lol wat

I should add that the non-existence of any (major) vehicle for effecting change outside the red/blue dichotomy doesn't mean you can't work on building them, and there are currently several such projects. One of the most interesting is Vote Pact, a concept that involves finding someone with opposite ideological leanings but a similar frustration with the pressure to vote lesser-evil, and jointly declaring that neither of you will vote for either major party in any election for which you're both eligible. This withdraws two votes from the big capitalist parties without changing the balance between them, but also has the virtue of motivating people to seek out and develop understanding and trust with people who have a different perspective.

Interesting comments but virtue signaling and social proofs do not mean anything in voting without the proper context. The US has a first past the post voting system, so the viability of third parties in the national scale are mathematically unfeasible. You could social proof and virtue signal for a third party all you'd like but it's not going to affect or change the minds or persuade anyone who doesn't already have the same ideological inclinations as you.

Matt famously has mic issues. Theres a ghost that haunts him or something

It's not nihilistic at all. What's actually nihilistic is to imagine that American electoral politics is important to the future of the world.

@@r_bear "What's actually nihilistic is to imagine that American electoral politics is important to the future of the world." - Orders of congress have funded 1200% of the standing annual Ukraine defence budget while they are invaded by Russia. One party is currently opposed to giving them anything. - Trump's trade war put China on a more belligerent footing against the West, triggering reciprocal embargos and boycotting from China against other nations, damaging their economies. The belligerence to China could yet ultimately result in an invasion of Taiwan - A unilateral decision taken on the advice of John Bolton saw the abrupt gutting of a CDC office in China and the firing of the NSC officer in charge of emergency health responses in 2018. If these people were on the ground at the outbreak in 2019 the course of the pandemic could have been dramatically different - 14% of the world's greenhouse gases are emitted by the United States, and there is a clear divergence from the parties on their management. Sorry, but US policies have a colossal impact on the world and the lives of billions of people. That's what happens when you have an economy as big as the next three on the list combined. We foreigners don't follow your politics closely because we've been brainwashed by your media into thinking it matters, it's because we get to see the impact of you voting in complete morons, then shrugging and saying 'well, it doesn't matter' afterwards.

​@JPH1138 yes, you were. American politics is a show. All the important decisions have been made, the government is run by capitalists, for capitalists. Neither party is actually interested in halting funding for Ukraine, just as neither party is actually interested in addressing climate change. Because that's not what makes money. It's all a show, and in the end all that will get accomplished is the rich will get richer.

@@kevingriener7441 Please, more brainlet conspiracies. Not enough of those online already.

@@JPH1138 conspiracy? Lol. rich people run America, dude. Everyone who isn't a child knows this.

wait what? where did he move to for this?

Oh shit did he really do that? That’s badass since so many states were super close and Trump is objectively way way worse than a Joe Biden administration.

@@keithjackewicz8423 how important are local politics with a fascist leader on the top?

@@keithjackewicz8423 you should’ve quit while you were way behind. What does that actually even mean governing like a regular Republican?

@@keithjackewicz8423 Absolutely, I know he is - I reckon "inadvertently" might just be the wrong wording on my part.

Lol “MFs” autocorrected to “music”...

💯Matt is correct overall though. BUT the characterizations of why cranks don't vote for either major party is a wee bit more than just being erotic, neurotic or whatever else. I watched fuqqin Biden take us to the 90 second mark on the Doomsday Clock. I watched Biden literally having the power in his hand with student loans, with other democratic senators TELLING him how to do it, and he just ignores them. I watched him literally undermine Roe V Wade via his correspondence to the Supreme Court. I watched him ignore the biggest titans in the global markets tell him don't enact sanctions on Russia. At what point does it become common sense to stop voting for the problem? Same goes with the republicans, but at least they tell you where they stand. So you know upfront to just give them the finger. But the parties are so close when it comes to policy, they are basically indistinguible (per the study out of Princeton) other than their lowbrow virtue signaling.

It's very very simple: Because third party candidates are, unequivocally and incontrovertibly, worse than worthless unless and until you have ranked choice voting. This is not something anyone even remotely intelligent is in any confusion about whatsoever. Good god, this segment had me spitting mad.

He does say you can do something about politics, but by getting involved in organizing and not by consuming media online (towards the end). He is against the perception of online political commentary as activism rather than consumerism. He is saying that affecting change in the real world is hard and has a very small chance of success. There is more self-loathing in this segment than doomerism. As Chapo Trap House, they consistently support unions, strikes and left-leaning politicians who are actually doing stuff offline. Of course, in the USA there is no chance of any actual third-party gains unless there's a huge movement behind the candidate, large enough to scare the establishment into some modicum of compromise. I don't see how that's a controversial pov if you're not one of the people talking yourself into believing that your posts or taste in podcasts somehow equate with battling the political establishment.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 Too bad ranked choice voting gave us Eric Adams. Err....

This isn't nihilism, this is just the truth. The real nihilists are the ones who keep trying to tell you everything's gonna be fine if you just get in line and keep supporting the bourgeois electoral system as conditions continue to deteriorate regardless of which party is in power.

wah, why can't everything be perfect for me.

@@ephreyep! Watching Christman whine comes across as an uncomfortable baby that soiled the diapers and starts to scream since it’s the only way to signal discomfort.

@@keithjackewicz8423 It's not that it's ineffective or effective, it's all we have, and adults do what is required of them. The more we can convince people that one side is better than the other the better our conditions get, if we meander we get meander politics. Republicans accepted Gay people for a minute and now they don't again.There is a good reason for this. Also, to say Biden hasn't affected people's material conditions considerably is just not reality. He may not have done everything he said he would, but Christman seemed to let theoretical Bernie off on M4A, but not real Biden on student debt.

​@@keithjackewicz8423they don't like it when they're made to consider their parasocial dependence on spectator sport for a sense of empowerment and participation.

@@keithjackewicz8423 that’s because you’re liars. The expansion of Medicaid was huge. The subsidies with Biden’s Covid-19 bill was massive. Just because you try to throw a wrench in the system, trying to demoralize anyone with hope without acknowledging the positives makes one consider the source

if you aren't blackpilled on US Politics you aren't really paying attention. He's right; if you actually think you have a single iota of say in how it plays out, you're just a rube

The progressive reforms done by California in the 80's and 90's were absolutely partially driven by a very significant competing Green party. It may not work on a federal level but it has many times on a state level

​@@dthomscappellothat's a good point. That can work on a local level bc local and State representatives run the risk of seeing you in person. But without representation for the entire working class at the national level (eg trade unions), to influence policy with the same strength as capital, organizing against bourgeois parties using their own system is a lost cause.

@@lonniejackson4225 I definitely agree that any lasting movement has to start outside of elctoralism for any meaningful change

@@dthomscappello You can start by ignoring Briahna Joy Gray. You were duped.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 I was duped into what, exactly, little fella?

What we're these specific movements and what we're the material conditions which propelled them? Those same conditions don't exist for a third party president at the moment. Your argument insipid and lacks nuance.

Are you over fifteen years old? This is not a rhetorical question. Please answer it.

@@hadronoftheseus8829man you are seething. Christman is right btw

@@ALLCAPSNOSPACES "Christman is right btw" I'm gonna be honest, that was a little too convoluted for me to follow. I think you lost me somewhere around step seven. Could you walk me through it again? Thanks in advance.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 This is so funny to me bc the biggest problems with 15 year olds all the way up to younger millennials is they’re all doomers like you. The age of idealistic young people who believe in progress and working towards collective good is over.

@@heymotivator2231 _I'm_ a doomer?? Ah, your initial comment was sarcastic... In most contexts this would have been obvious right away, but not when surrounded by all the other comments on this page.

Because this isn't a static world like it is in your precious little stories about good vs evil. Perfection should never be the enemy of progress. I'm not going to argue with you btw.

@@muttweedz how are we as a nation progressing by voting between two bad choices every four years? Isn't that strategy how we got to this point? Btw I'm not advocating vote for perfection, I'm advocating vote for who people feel is good. Vs advocating people to vote for bad #1 or bad #2

Its a bit of a perfection fallacy you're appealing to mate. The lesser evil is the greater good. Don't let the perfect conceptual outcome be the enemy of the sufficient real world result.

@@michaeldeaton wdym by a "perfection fallacy"? What is that? The lesser evil is still evil not the greater good, how do you think a lesser evil can be greater good when due to voting between lesser evils we are seemingly stuck between Biden or Trump again for 2024? How am I encouraging the perfect conceptual outcome be the enemy of the sufficient real world result? So far it appears the lesser of two evils is brain rot Biden or Trump the terrible. Both are objectively evil choices while 3rd parties offer good instead of evil

In a presidential election there are two viable options. And every person that doesn't have a child like brain and thinks voting is an expression of their personality votes for the candidate that is slightly better. Don't know how this is even a question...

I just don't understand how they can be such doomers when the system is already kicking up lots of anti-capitalists.

@@LongDefiant Because it rationalises being lazy. If you admit you *could* change a system you hate, then people may suggest that you do so.

@@boggisthecat hipster nihilism disguised as philosophical pragmatism?

The smugness is logically prior to the pretext, which is spitballed along the way.

He”s an “Artisan” you see, not like us. A veritable Philosopher King. Something something We love our lame passe phrases don’t we folks, also I am happy

Lmao AOC bought a Tesla which tells me all I need to know about her, why waste time supporting establishment clowns who tout consumer-side “solutions” to climate change

AOC and the Squad are effectively neolibs now. Regularly voting to support wars/military spending and breaking the rail strike were the main death nails

@@keithjackewicz8423 AOC did not set out to break the rail strike, and Bernie has votes just as bad, on guns etc. so I respectfully disagree

They were pretty enthusiastic supporters of Ilhan and AOC in the beginning bit became jaded once they realized they were never gonna be anything more than the left flank of democrats. Last time I remember them even mentioning Bernie was like 2 years ago and it was only to criticize for copying up to democratic leadership.

This may be the single worst segment I've ever seen on this channel. Far from classic.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 bestow your Praxis on all of us, oh great one

@@frenchdonut22 You know, without a trace of jest, you'd do far better to just consult me in all matters beyond your personal toiletries, for the rest of your life.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 you’re so smart, man.

most of it is not “political”

What’s BB?

Ben had always been in the dog house.

What are you even implying?

Neither of them talk about voting third party or voting in general. He was clearly talking about the BJG types.

@@maxsmart9116 They're the ones who need the third party voters to feel like they're doing something by arguing for Biden. Absolutely who he's referring to

Yeah, I thought that was weird, them laughing it up about how ridiculous people like Briahna Joy Gray and Medhi Hasan are, arguing back and forth about the strategy or effectiveness of voting Joe Biden vs Third Party, when that is exactly what people like Ben do ALL THE TIME.

and the point flies ever so highly over your content little head lol

@@dash_rendar39 oh yeah, since you’re one of the wise, compassionate and understanding, please tell me what mechanism we have to get Trump out? Those like you, the removed and angry don’t seem to understand a guy that campaigns on “I am your retribution” unless you actually want THAT. Thankfully, climate change will take it eventually and after a generation of jailing, brutality, and the list of enemies disappearing, please pat yourself on the back for the foresight and brilliance like Matt to have understood the difference between a fascist and an institutionalist 👍

@@dash_rendar39 what is the point? To be clear, I'm not ever going to watch this video or anything involving Chapo, ever

Yeah. Sound and fury, signifying nothing.

@@dash_rendar39 Would you elucidate this point, please?

Where is the lively politics taking place? Genuinely want to get involved

Well said!

​@@NosyFellafor contrast, UAW leader Shawn Fain describes the situation we're in as hell, but unlike Christman, he has a solution and is actually carrying it out and has no ego.

@@maxsmart9116 you're annoyed at Christman for not being a union leader?

​@NosyFella I'm disappointed that he's nothing. He's a vibes smith which is fine except when he goes shitting on people with some kind of agenda

Should have thought about that four years ago and begged the donor class for a better candidate.

@@joshuaism wow I really hope that smugness is enough to keep you alive when the christofascists take over. Maybe we'll even get to be in the same mass grave :)

@@keithjackewicz8423 if it means I have more time to either organize or leave and live as myself, without being thrown into a men's prison to be used as *bait*? I'll take that. And still do local organization. Electoralism is defensive. Always has been. I have no illusions that it will solve our problems, only local and grassroots organizing can. But if getting people to vote buys time to not live under fascism? I'll screech about voting blue.

Just you wait until the climate apocalypse built by Democrat and Republican capitalists makes you into a helpless climate refugee. Then you'll be lucky to get any attention at all. We don't live in the world you think we do.

​@@joshuaismdude...

the point is you don't have any control or say over that because none of the people having these arguments are part of some organized effort. If they were, then they would be voting based around the decision of said organization. That doesn't exist on the left, so it's pointless to argue about how this or that individual votes because it doesn't fucking matter in a very real tangible sense.

If this isn't the kind of content that makes sense to you maybe head over the Vaush or something.

He’s not saying don’t vote. He’s saying that leftists debating who to vote for doesn’t actually change the outcome of the election, because the left isn’t a large organized block.

I think you're confabulating and/or experiencing auditory hallucinations.

Rewarded with a pail of gasoline and a match?

@@LongDefiant "...with pail of gasoline and a match?" _truculent sneer_ Yeah, this is exactly the intellectual caliber of people who are taking Christman seriously.

@@LongDefiant I just want you t know that although I feel intense empathy for some human beings, I view _your_ misfortunes - which I'm certain are extensive - with unalloyed schadenfreude. And believe me, this is a heavily sanitized version of what I would have written without the content filters.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 now that I've provoked you to anger, you should take this experience and ask yourself, "why did I get so unsettled? What in me is so tender that an Internet comment can move my emotions in such an extraordinary way?" If you take this challenge seriously I promise you'll experience significant personal growth. Good luck!

@@hadronoftheseus8829 "I'm a deeply serious person because my politics do nothing, but you, you are a joke because your politics do nothing."

"...voting is not how the capitalist class will be overthrown..." Well, it certainly won't be "overthrown" by any other means.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 So you're saying it won't be overthrown 10-4 good buddy

@@billyconnelly3568 No, you are, but you have absolutely no idea what you're saying.

@@hadronoftheseus8829 Tell me how you're going to overthrow the capitalist class by voting.

@@billyconnelly3568 You'll notice (or rather won't) that I put "overthrow" in sardonic quotes. There are suppressed premises in your commentary. Now, ask me a more precise question.

I remember reading my first wikipedia article. Citing Ezra pound makes you sound really smart by the way nice job

@@frenchdonut22 Well don't stop there! The experience was obviously a very formative one and I can tell you're excited to share it. What was the article about? Did you search for it directly or were you taken to the page auspiciously by an external link? I recently went to an optometrist for the first time in my life, and believe you me it was a wondrous adventure full of sights and sounds I'd never before experienced. -But I want to hear your story first. Go ahead.

@@hadronoftheseus8829it was a article about suicide. You should try it!!!

Dude, the term debate pervert never was more fitting than in your case...

Lmao, give them an argument guy won't even make a point by refutation of all my schizophrenic ramblings. This is literal censorship.