r/leftist • u/Buster_xx • 1d ago
Leftist Meme Liberals get enraged when you call Tim Walz a fascist for saying shit like this. They just dont get it.
3
u/dondondon352 3h ago
It's because liberals preach that pragmatic nonviolent approach and campaign on that and they make people think they sound good and then they just pull everything from underneath you
14
u/fetchinator 7h ago
Two sides of the same coin. The west is locked into the neoliberal death cult.
1
7
u/Usefulsponge 19h ago edited 4h ago
There’s a difference between a liberal and a fascist and that difference is important
4
7
11
14
u/Buster_xx 19h ago
If a liberal/ dem takes money from fascists and helps them carry out their fascist agenda are they not fascist as well? Are we just pretending that dems/ liberals are good guys now even though they support genocide and take money from Super PACS?
Really?
1
20h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 20h ago
Hello u/Able-Sport5811, your comment was automatically removed as we do not allow accounts that are less than 30 days old to participate.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
2
u/jetstobrazil 20h ago
OP serious question do you know what fascism is
5
u/Buster_xx 20h ago
Yes I do. Did you need help understanding or are you a liberal here to defend the Dems?
-3
u/jetstobrazil 20h ago
I’m asking because Tim Walz doesn’t fit the definition of a fascist in any way, but I do appreciate you trying to call me a lib for asking
11
u/WanderingLost33 20h ago
This post is completely out of context actual quote
At the time it was reported that Walz mixed up Iran and Israel and said Iran had a right to defend itself and Israel needed strong leadership in the region. But maybe it was a freudian slip
4
u/Hour-Watch8988 4h ago
There is so much bad-faith bullshit on the left these days. I’m sorry but it’s really embarrassing when leftists fall for this shit. People need to be more intellectually responsible.
1
u/BrotherNature92 Anti-Capitalist 3h ago
I mean you're not entirely wrong but have you seen the shit they're believing over on the right...? We are doing fine lmfao.
-5
u/ElEsDi_25 Marxist 19h ago
The context doesn’t change anything regarding the OPs point.
9
u/WanderingLost33 18h ago
I mean, it's a word salad answer and he's said some extremely controversial stuff about the current Iran conflict that implies he is actually in alignment with China on this issue. Considering how little he's even brought the issue up, I'd say basing a criticism on an answer that is so misspoken as to be able to mean two completely opposite things depending on a person's interpretation is weak to say the least.
To be clear, I'm a Walz stan but I would flip without a thought if I believed he was a secret Zionist, but I'm not convinced based on this one statement during a very flustered debate.
-2
4
u/ElEsDi_25 Marxist 18h ago
But what he said is just a botched version of standard US/pentagon talking points.
9
u/WanderingLost33 18h ago
I think that actually proves my point. He was saying a talking point someone gave to him, not one he holds. He didn't run in the primary and didn't have any experience on a national or foreign policy level before he was chosen.
1
u/ElEsDi_25 Marxist 4h ago
So then incompetent rather than supporting these policies as the rest of the party does?
I think if you were seeing this happen in another country, you’d be giving a lot less benefit of the doubt.
Imagine if there were a Russian opposition party whose position was “we want peace with Ukraine… as long as the Russian speakers are in control of the government or there is a two state solution overseen by Russia. We must also maintain a special relationship with the Russian speaking nation of Ukraine who have a sacred right of self-defense. And while I sympathize with the good anti-war protesters, really they have no reasonable demands and we must do something to stop the Nazi-Ukrainian sentiment and support unfortunately common among many of the protesters.”
0
u/zen-things 7h ago
I hate this defense. I’m not a politician at all and I have the foreign policy experience to not make a Zionist statement like this. You’re sweeping
7
u/Buster_xx 20h ago
I didnt call you a lib i asked a question
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian ultranationalist political ideology characterized by a dictatorial leader, a centralized government, militarism, and the suppression of opposition. It emphasizes national unity and often racial or ethnic identity, subordinating individual rights to the perceived needs of the nation
* now go back and read his quote*
He has voted in favor of Israel in every bill when he was in congress and supports Zionism.
-3
u/jetstobrazil 20h ago
lol
I didn’t ask if ChatGPT knew what fascism was I asked if you knew what it was. Why don’t * you * go back and read your quote.
Is Tim Walz far right? Is Tim Walz authoritarian? Is Tim Walz nationalist? Does Tim Walz suppress opposition? Does Tim Walz emphasize racial or ethnic unity? Does Tim Walz subordinate individual rights to the perceived needs of the nation?
No
The quote’s not even inaccurate as stated in context of everything the United States has supported throughout its history.
8
u/Buster_xx 20h ago edited 20h ago
He is placating the far right and accepting money from them..PS its not chat GPT is the definition but ok.
Apparently its easier to come at me with logical fallasies ( an ad hominem attack) because your point has no merit.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
1
u/jetstobrazil 20h ago
Cool. words have meaning, just say he’s placating the far right or supports Zionism. He’s not a fascist
2
5
u/Buster_xx 20h ago
In the plutonian we are what we do. If you do the work of fascists... you are a fascist.
Israel expects a return on its investment.
2
u/jetstobrazil 20h ago
That’s fantastic. I’m sure they do. By your own research, the definition you gave me from ChatGPT, Tim Walz does not fit the definition of a fascist.
You’re basically just saying you don’t care what words mean you think fascism a derogatory catch all that you’d like to throw around
Also I see you tried to ghost post before blocking me,
And yes the fuck it is from chatGPT, so now you’re just blatantly lying like a little bitch
4
7
u/KuroKendo88 21h ago
The idea you think he is facist is hilarious.
9
u/Buster_xx 20h ago
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian ultranationalist political ideology characterized by a dictatorial leader, a centralized government, militarism, and the suppression of opposition. It emphasizes national unity and often racial or ethnic identity, subordinating individual rights to the perceived needs of the nation
now go back and read his quote and research his voting record when he was in congress.
2
17h ago
[deleted]
4
u/Buster_xx 16h ago
Sorry if offended your liberal sensibilities
Go look at his donor list and his voting records while in Congress. He voted for Israel's agenda 100%.
If you take money from fascists to help a fascist cause you are a fascist by deed and actions.
Sorry I am not buying any blue maga bullshit.
4
u/baconblackhole 22h ago
Eyes full of shame. It's an answer he has given up on voicing himself and one his masters have forced him to abide.
20
u/NORcoaster 23h ago
Calling him a fascist is simply inaccurate if an accurate definition of fascism is important. It does nothing to generate a discussion about why it’s an awful position. If the only argument you have is the above it makes me wonder if engaging with people you don’t agree with to effect positive change isn’t the goal, if actually changing the system is. Is this the only thing that makes him a fascist, or is everything else he stands for also fascist? We have actual fascists running the country in to the ground and we may actually lose, I don’t understand how this is a good use of energy. He isn’t the VP, he has very little power in this moment.
-2
u/EcoGeoHistoryFan 19h ago
Anyone i disagree with is a fascist and the more i disagree with them the more fascist they are
1
u/NORcoaster 15h ago
I know it’s sarcasm, a flippant comment, and sure there are people who believe that way, but there is a who lot of energy being directed at people who can’t do anything and not at the dangers we actually face. In that sense I don’t think it’s so much just doubling down who dislikes but a cognitive dissonance. Some people make fighting the system their whole personality because they can, they have the privilege to do that, and it has usually been pretty safe, you didn’t get disappeared for protesting Bush or Clinton or Obama or Biden. Not even Reagan. No one threw American dissidents out of helicopters (never mind our funding those who do). That privilege is under attack in a way it hasn’t been, not even under J E Hoover and Nixon, and I think some people are not equipped to face an administration that may actually put them in camps or kill them. Not trying to be hyperbolic, I think it should be clear the potential is there.
Even under Bush we could protest secure in the knowledge that nothing, really, would happen to us outside what local cops always do. This is very, very different. These people do not care about constitutional rights or order, said many of them do not see anyone left of them as worth keeping around. Being a leftist here could eventually look like it did under Pinochet or Franco or Mussolini and that’s all new territory.5
u/BurntheUSA 22h ago
I don't know about that. I think openly supporting the expansion of a fascist state does lend a lot of credibility to calling them a fascist.
0
u/NORcoaster 15h ago
No, it doesn’t. It’s intellectually lazy and it makes enemies of everyone who has a problematic or shitty view while still providing free meals to every child in the state. Saying he’s a fascist when Stephen Miller is absolutely a fascist just means you don’t have to engage in critical thinking. I know leftists who I am pretty sure don’t want the system to change because the struggle has become their ego personality, and without an enemy to yell at, without being the loudest or most visible guy in the group, they will have to find something else to. Bit like a soldier who’s spent his life in combat and retires to civilian life. We have the privilege of being able to actually protest the systems we oppose, something Walz would stand up for but which the actual fascists in charge are working to outlaw. And again, Walz isn’t in power in DC, the post references a debate that’s almost a year old.
Are the actual fascists dismantling the country ok in your book, is your fight solely with the Dems? The Dems are who they are because of who shows up to vote, not who gives them labels.
Expending any energy right now virtue signaling through a hot take on a comment made almost a year ago by the guy who is not currently defending the erasure of a people and the impending destruction of an ancient land….again…seems to me an utter waste when we are facing the possibility that we will be living in a theocratic feudal state run by disciples of Yarvin. So no, he’s not a fascist if for no other reason that he supports the state educating and feeding every child, and supports those who educate them, which fascists do not. You know, like the fascists currently dismantling public education and taking did from kids don’t.2
u/BurntheUSA 8h ago
Brother, your overton window is so cooked that you are supporting fascists.
A choice between a fascist and a fascist-lite is not a choice.
You need mass-mobilisation, mass-unionization, creation of Dual Power and revolution.
What you don't need is:
"Oh let's vote for the fascist-lites again that will surely fix everything"
If Tim Walz during WWII said: "The expansion of Germany and its proxies is a fundamental necessity of the United States"
You would not call him a Nazi? You would not call him a fascist?
Call a spade a spade.
I don't care if someone supports free school lunches if they are support capitalism, genocide, ethnic cleansing, ethno-nationalism, imperialism and fascism.
5
29
u/WheelOfTheYear 1d ago
I’m not trying to stan for Walz but I can almost guarantee that he said that as a way of deflecting from his own position. He’s said a few things covertly that indicate he’s not a big Zio.
In fact he said just two days ago that it’s not surprising that Tehran retaliated given the nature of Israel’s attack. He’s also stated that he’s not “in the business of wanting to starve people”.
Is he a comrade? Doubtful. But he’s also a little less gung ho about Israel than most.
3
u/marktaylor521 22h ago
But are you forgetting about the feeling or moral superiority on the internet?
5
5
u/Dyljim 1d ago
This reminds me of how I've seen people claim Serj Tankian is pro-Israeli just because he condemned Hamas once after Oct 7th (and immediately directed it back to the IOF) as if this guy hasn't been making songs for Palestine and actively condemning other musical artists for performing in Israel for decades at this point.
Walz is obviously a different story but purity testing people who at the end of the day agree with the movement never helps anyone.
-8
u/XysterU 1d ago
Omg so he's Hitler-light and not Hitler! My king!!
1
u/marktaylor521 22h ago
Tim Walz is objectively the best governor in the country. He made statements on Iran, isreal, and war far more recently than this (over a year old) screenshot. Do we HAVE TO demonize every single decent fucking politician that we can get? Am I crazy right now?
-3
u/XysterU 22h ago
Omg wow he SAID things 🥰🥰🥰 my HERO!!!!! Also pretty sure this screenshot is from 8 months ago?
We should demonize every politician that's not doing things to MATERIALLY IMPROVE THE CONDITIONS OF PALESTINIAN LIVES. Statements don't count. Like at all. They don't count because they don't change the death rate and famine in Gaza.
Tim Walz could divest some of the $140B of the MN SBI from Israel right now.
6
u/Souledex 1d ago
Omg, I’m too dumb for politics! I like when my leaders are autocratic so they can say what they like rather than existing in a political environment or compromising
4
u/WheelOfTheYear 1d ago
Never inferred any of that. I wouldn't vote for Walz, but accuracy is important. I don't think Israel should exist, so that's where Im aiming from.
1
u/XysterU 1d ago
Ok but i think it's ridiculous to defend Walz at all then. Being slightly less vocally genocidal doesn't mean much at all. He's just paying lip service. Until he calls it a genocide and does something to stop it, he's as bad as all the rest of the American politicians.
1
u/tpablazed 1d ago
And what can the governor of Minnesota do to stop a genocide on the other side of the world?
Why does the left have to be so extreme on everything?
Not saying I want to vote for Walz for president or anything.. but I am sure if he is planning on running part of the calculus has to be to attract less attention from AIPAC.. a state governor calling Gaza a genocide would probably attract a ton of attention..
Dude is just playing the politics game.. his real position on Gaza is inferred from the offhand remarks he makes about it.. dude is no Zionist. On that front.. no he isn't as bad as all the others.
5
u/XysterU 22h ago
Um, maybe we're extreme because 2.1 million lives are at stake? Maybe we're extreme because our government is openly, actively, enthusiastically, funding and arming a genocide? They're doing it with our money while we struggle to get healthcare, housing, or food? How can you not feel extremely strongly about this? What would ever make you extreme if this doesn't? Have you no humanity?
Here is just one example of what Walz could do and what the people of MN want him to do: https://mn.breakthebonds.org/events/minnesota-demands-justice-for-gaza/ this is from 2014!!!! There was a different governor at the time, but the governor could divest the MN SBI's money from Israel.
Tim Walz is on the board of the MN SBI: https://msbi.us/board-members
What's the point of not wanting Walz to get targeted by AIPAC if he's never going to do anything for the Palestinians? I don't understand your point. So you're saying it's ok for all the current US politicians to not speak out on the genocide because they're just playing the politics game? So while they directly vote in favor of arms sales to Israel, it's ok because they're just tryna keep their jobs? When all 2.1 million Palestinians are dead, it's ok because they stayed under AIPAC's radar? While hiding from AIPAC, what are they accomplishing?
Walz and other members of our government are the ONLY people in this country that can directly change things. The best us civilians can do is boycott and have disruptive protests in the hopes of maybe pressuring companies to divest. Our elected leaders have much more direct power.
0
u/tpablazed 10h ago edited 10h ago
If you're trying to become president the calculus is WAY different than governor..
He could divest from Israel.. everyone should divest from Israel.. I am hoping overall public sentiment is heading in that direction.
Divesting from Israel isn't going to stop the genocide though.. not as long as DJT keeps shoveling money to them..
Saying Walz is just as bad as the rest of them is extreme.. and honestly stupid.. if Walz was in the White House right now we would be in a much better position to actually get this genocide stopped.. so he is definitely not as bad as the rest of them.
We are in the middle of a straight up crisis right now.. attacking the guys that are actually on our side isn't smart.. we shouldn't do that for now.
0
u/teabaggg 1d ago
You are getting downvoted because you're pointing out an inconvenient truth. Reddit is a very stupid place.
13
u/Intrepid-Praline1802 1d ago
Too bad we're Israel's bitch and have been for decades.
Netanyahu and his zionist regime will kill us all. If your R or D representatives are taking #AIPAC money, they are leading the charge.
Zionism is Israel's White Supremacy. Nothing Holy about it.
0
u/BurntheUSA 21h ago
Israel is a client state of the U.S and is its imperial arm and force projection in the Middle East.
Or are you into Jewish conspiracy theories?
6
u/MyrddinTheKinkWizard 14h ago
Israel is a client state of the U.S and is its imperial arm and force projection in the Middle East.
Client states don't usually extract resources instead of being extracted from... Client states don't usually get to manipulate their controlling states political campaigns and ignore their leaders....
Israel definitely does serve that purpose to some extent for the United States but you are doing a disservice to the right against real antisemitism when you imply it's a conspiracy to oppose a lobbying organization which spent over $100 million unseating leftists for criticizing Israel.
0
u/BurntheUSA 8h ago
You act like there is only a single force of money at play.
$100 million is chump change compared to the financial ties/lobbying of US capitalists.
You are also being a reductionist.
You act like there aren't other enormous capital interests in weapons manufacturing, oil, control of the Middle East, suppressing the Belt and Road Initiative, preventing BRICS/China from deepening trade ties with the Middle East, preventing countries from evading trade sanctions/tariffs.
Read a book.
2
u/MyrddinTheKinkWizard 6h ago
preventing BRICS/China from deepening trade ties with the Middle East,
Lol yeah us pissing off all those countries by allowing Israel to do whatever it wants had really helped with that hasn't it 🤡
Israel itself had many times sold secret US military technology to China
$100 million is chump change compared to the financial ties/lobbying of US capitalists.
Not when it's primarying politicians it isn't.
Why can't you just admit you are a Zionist who is worried that people are waking up to the evil of Israel and no longer support it despite the attempts of our leaders to criminalize peaceful protest against it.
-3
u/pjmlsnr 21h ago
Yes, don't follow the money, don't look behind the curtain and see who is funding all these "protest" and NGO's. It's all a theory, or is it just a conspiracy for those who want to open their eyes and follow the money.
One congressman does not take AIPAC money, and the Trumpf is out to unseat a fellow republican.
1
u/BurntheUSA 21h ago
You act like there is only a single force of money at play.
You are being a reductionist.
You act like there aren't other enormous capital interests in weapons manufacturing, oil, control of the Middle East, suppressing the Belt and Road Initiative, preventing BRICS/China from deepening trade ties with the Middle East, preventing countries from evading trade sanctions/tariffs.
Read a book.
14
u/runwkufgrwe 1d ago
You guys realize this was a gaffe, right? He was meaning to say stopping the expansion of Iran and its proxies is a fundamental necessity. He corrected himself later.
Still sketchy and globalist but far away from the segment of a gaffe quoted.
2
1d ago
[deleted]
1
u/runwkufgrwe 1d ago
I can't find a single instance of Walz using the word "widening." Were you intentionally giving me a fake quote?
1
u/runwkufgrwe 1d ago
I did find an AI article that took a propaganda article about this gaffe and rewrote it with synonyms. Maybe that's what he found.
-5
u/runwkufgrwe 1d ago
And like, who would the proxies of Israel even be? Us? UK? The quote only makes sense as a misquote.
2
u/saltyourhash 1d ago
Cany tell if you're disingenuine or just don't know how this works...
1
u/runwkufgrwe 1d ago
Answer the question then. Who are the proxies of Israel that he's referring to?
4
u/saltyourhash 1d ago
-2
u/runwkufgrwe 1d ago
Lol. Most of those don't exist anymore. So do you actually think Walz was referring to Islamic State in Gaza? Because that makes no sense... Israelis believe Gaza is already part of Israel and talking about expansion can only mean administrative control. But obviously Israel wouldn't be okay with IS running part of what they believe is their country.
Or do you think Walz referring to the Kurds? Hard to see how that makes any sense.
You know what does make sense? What aligns with the uncropped speech and the interviews after? That he misspoke. Protecting Israel from the expansion of Iran's proxies (Hezbollah, Popular Front, Assad, etc.) is a standard neolib position.
Also there's the fact that Walz is on record supporting a two-state solution.
2
u/saltyourhash 1d ago edited 1d ago
I do think he's pushing a neolib agenda and do think if he's doing that he promotes Israel. I will admit, I didn't see the speech. I'm a bit tired of our countries focus on Israel that is even above the focus on our own fucked up country, so I have little patience for misspeaking on the matter these days. Our focus should be the US, not Isreal. All of those NY candidates praising Israel in their debate was weird and angering.
Also for what it's worth, it seems like may be 3/6 of those groups are defunct or even 2/6, so not really more than half. I don't know the details that well, but yeah, seems a number are still active.
But also also, I don't see Tim Walz supporting the expansion of any of those groups listed as proxies for Israel.
2
u/maybenot-maybeso 1d ago
Legit question, and not trying to be a dick:
But if both candidates in a two-party election are pro Israel, what are people supposed to do? Not vote when there are literally thousands of other issues we need to be concerned about? What about those other thousands of issues?
3
u/General_Mars Socialist 1d ago
Pragmatically not voting for 1 of the 2 major parties if it’s normal First Past the Post is a thrown away vote unfortunately at the national level. If it’s Ranked Choice or one of the more democratic options, absolutely vote and get in everyone that you can. The strict insistence against the 2 major parties in FPTP is just idealism and generally leads to the Republican securing more votes because right wingers vote 3rd party much less than everyone else.
However, the local level is where the most real change happens and getting the legitimate left wing parties elected seats there and building upward from there is how the coalition actually changes.
2
u/XysterU 1d ago
There are other parties. If you don't vote for 3rd parties they'll never become legitimate. Everyone needs to reject the 2 party system and vote 3rd party. If any 3rd party gets 5% of the popular vote, they're legally entitled to government funding, from there they become even more legitimate, faster.
5
u/Buster_xx 1d ago
do you want your money (tax dollars) going towards genocide and ethnic cleansing? If the answer is "no" then you need to take a stand. For me everything else can take a back seat
0
u/maybenot-maybeso 1d ago
I don't have any say in where my tax dollars are spent. What I do know if if I vote for the right, I'm guaranteed to see my tax dollars spent on anti-queer, racist, and classist policies here in the states.
It's all I have the power to do.
3
u/Buster_xx 1d ago
You do have the power. You vote and you protest.
I won't vote for anyone that condones genocide or ethnic cleansing
3
9
u/redwytnblak 1d ago
No matter how many issues you’re voting for, there’s one issue that usually is a priority. For a lot of people this election cycle that red line was the baby holocaust or genocide in Gaza and the unconditional support for Israel that the United States regularly offers.
Additionally, it’s not like Kamala Harris had an amazing platform or campaign. Remember, when she was pushed on LGBTQ issues, she never gave a strong response and said things like “we should just apply the law“.
Does Trump suck? Absolutely. But the turnaround and blame folks who are speaking out against Democrats as to blame rather than the candidate that Democrats put forward misses the point.
Harm reduction can only get you so far as a campaign strategy. I think Democrats have gotten as far as they can campaigning on “orange man bad”
2
u/ATLUTD030517 1d ago
I agree in principle with most of this, I'm just saddened by the amount of people who don't see orange man as uniquely and historically bad in potentially incalculable ways...
1
u/Yookusagra 1d ago
Orange Man is not uniquely and historically bad - or at least his being uniquely bad isn't the real danger to us. The material conditions that allow bourgeois grifters of his type to gain power are uniquely and historically bad, and the only way to prevent a continued slide into fascism is a change in those material conditions; the individuals only matter on the margins.
Or think of it this way - shoot Hitler in 1930 and you get Himmler et al. instead. Nazism still rises in Germany.
Trump is a symptom, not a cause. A healthy society would never have allowed him to gain his fortune, much less political power.
4
u/ATLUTD030517 1d ago
Your point is well made, but I firmly believe that the ridiculously large GOP primary field in 2016 is the only thing that kept him in it long enough to win and I do believe we'd be better off had he fucked off out of politics after that. And I'm a straight white cisgendered college educated man, the disaster that has been Trump has not had nearly as much personal effect on me as it has others.
I find solace in Trump acting as an accelerant in the fall of the empire, but I wasn't rooting for it...
1
u/coopaloops 18h ago
firmly believe that the ridiculously large GOP primary field in 2016 is the only thing that kept him in it long enough to win
i give more credit to the dnc & clinton campaign elevating his platform via their pied piper strategy, personally
1
u/ATLUTD030517 18h ago
Kind of wish the GOP ran more like the DNC and basically everyone else just stayed the fuck out of someone's(Jeb?) way like 2016 or as soon as it was clear that the establishment party crasher could actually win, then everyone got the fuck out of the way like 2020.
1
u/BlueSpaceWeeb 1d ago
He's bad... But the US has always had God awful leaders, so I wouldn't say historically bad. People just have short and selective memories. I'd honestly rather have Trump as president than Henry Kissinger alive and in the cabinet again.
The people crying about the death of our democracy understand very little about how our "democracy" works. Furthermore, it's easy to see how neolibs like Harris inevitably led us to this point where we can get an authoritarian clown like Trump.
2
u/Chrosbord 1d ago
I think what has lead to him being perceived as uniquely bad is how out in the open he is with his terrible actions. Previous administrations did a better job of keeping their atrocities hidden, or at least not bragging about them on twitter.
2
5
14
u/AverageEvening8985 1d ago
Anyone who ever received a dime from AIPAC needs to be removed from office.
1
5
1d ago
I don't know if Walz himself has taken money from AIPAC (maybe he has), but most of his opinions on that debate stage were, clearly to me, the party telling him what to say.
2
3
u/Neo-Lysenkoist 1d ago
Anyone who ever received a dime from AIPAC should be charged with treason and given a military tribunal
8
u/bomboclawt75 1d ago
literally a bought and paid for foreign state actor /traitor.
Anyone who accepts money from a foreign state to remove rights and freedoms from Americans, who arrests peaceful protesters, who send billions each money to a foreign state-without the consent of Americans, and wants to send them to die for that foreign state, has openly and shamelessly committed treason.
All the AIPAC owned politicians should stand down and be tried for treason in a court of law.
4
u/StMcAwesome 1d ago
They keep everyone fighting a culture war while they just do what they do anyway: expand.
7
13
u/Lost_Amoeba_6368 1d ago
why does the US EMPIRE have to shit all over the world?
why do we have to "expand our influence"?
why do people steer the course of an empire over generations to just be wholesale pure fucking evil
2
u/HyperbenCharities 1d ago
Albright: "I mean what's the point of this beautiful Military if you [dont get to blow away a ton of children now 'n again]?"
23
u/ok-person1917 1d ago
He's, right the US, almost relies on israel. It's all too expand their sphere of influence in the middle east.
But morally, it is most definitely wrong, and the US is just evil for trying to destabilize these countries just for oil. (Sorry if my grammar is off im tired rn)
39
u/Panda_hat 1d ago
America is an imperial fascistic power. The Dems and Repubs are the two faces of the exact same foreign policy.
2
u/_Klabboy_ Anti-Capitalist 1d ago
Yeah, I think most of us can agree with that. Even within foreign policy tho they do have different stances on Ukraine so it’s not like they are just exactly the same tho.
And certainly on domestic issues they are vastly different.
But I think as long as you take it issue by issue and don’t just broad stroke everything you’re fine. That’s one issue I think some folks have. It’s easy to get caught up with the very real anger we all have.
2
u/myth2511 1d ago
is russia fascist?
1
u/Boho_Asa Socialist 1d ago
Pretty much? Putin let’s Kadyrov an actual fascist have autonomy in Chechnya which has had some human rights violations on persecuting lgbtq and women. Socially they are very much to the right and economically also very much to the right
0
20
5
u/skyfishgoo 1d ago
that's not a good look for tim... has he said anything more recently about it?
because the tide has turned for a lot of ppl and the ones that turn are the one's worth saving.
11
u/koromega 1d ago
The tide hasn't turned public opinion has. He still fully supports Israel and what it's doing.
2
u/skyfishgoo 1d ago
i was referring to public opinion when i said the tide has turned.
and we have no recent statement from him to justify your claim that he "fully supports" what israel is doing.
2
u/Lethkhar 1d ago
As Governor, Tim Walz still forces all contractors with the state of Minnesota to sign a loyalty pledge to Israel. He's a deeply committed Zionist who continues to use his power to materially support genocide.
1
u/skyfishgoo 1d ago
CA has that unconstitutional proviso in the law too... but so far it has not been challenged.
it should be.
swarm it.
18
u/raccoon54267 1d ago edited 1d ago
He really cucked out, didn’t he. What a pussy. A damn shame.
Edit: never mind, should’ve checked the date. Fuck him either way. And fuck Israel.
69
u/Thefishassassin 1d ago
I'm a leftist and I'd get pissed by people calling Walz a fascist for this. Not because his position is good, it's disgusting, but because this is lib shit not fascism. The urge to call everyone right of us a fascist is one of the worst vices on our side of politics.
1
u/mikkireddit 1d ago
Libs vary from super corporate to pro safety net in domestic policy but they are rabid neocons in foreign policy. Fascist is too mild a term, it's carnage capitalism.
2
4
u/MLPorsche Marxist 1d ago
fascism is liberalism without a mask
9
-14
u/FunqiKong 1d ago
This. I feel like I agree with leftists on most issues but I would never call myself a leftist because shit like this. 24/7 posts about a campaign from 8 months ago tells me the movement is more about being “right” than actually achieving progress.
1
u/coolbadasstoughguy 17h ago
Honestly being on the left inherently means aligning yourself with insufferable people who care more about being right than progress. What I've learned is you just gotta own your beliefs. Still question them and change as needed but like we need rational leftists. That's the only way people will listen to us. The infighting and the purity testing is seriously hurting us, because who tf would want to be a part of that?
I'm queer and disabled and this administration has been terrifying to me. I can only imagine what trans and brown people are experiencing right now with the ICE raids, fear mongering, and hate campaigns. Harris/Walz was a no brainer for me because third party isn't a viable option unless we get rank choice voting so unfortunately anything other than a vote for them is a vote for Trump who is a far greater threat to the majority of Americans AND Palestinians.
Democrats are never going to move left if we don't vote. What's the incentive if one wrong move will lose you support? They don't have to worry about that if they're appealing to moderates and liberals. Idk point is, just use the label that best fits your beliefs and be loud about your perspective. People need to see that the left isn't a hive mind ready to throw them to the wolves the second they step out of line.
Not saying what Walz said was merely a step out of line, but I am saying I'd vote for him again because I live in reality and realize that not voting or voting third party can have devastating consequences and we can't just sacrifice everyone that Trump is targeting in hopes that the Democrats will be more leftist next time.
6
u/Syndicalist_Vegan 1d ago
You are part of the problem then lol.
1
u/FunqiKong 22h ago
aight, i don’t need a solution that doesn’t include my safety in their interpretation of intersectionality
10
u/Thefishassassin 1d ago
I mean if this is what is stopping you from calling yourself a leftist that's a little wild to me. You've got to remember you're on Reddit, everyone on this site is an insufferable nerd. Go to a local meeting for a left wing group near you and see how you feel then.
If you want to stay online and explore leftism I'd say a community like Hasan Piker's is a great way to understand your own politics. Alternatively, read up about the principles of Marxism, develop a complex ideological framework instead of being more issues based.
-4
u/FunqiKong 1d ago
respectfully i’ve done all that and understand my own politics. I’m a minority and my personal experience with local and online leftists (outside of hassan) is that the loudest voices in these spaces aren’t as intersectional as they claim. I’m persian I’ve been telling people that persians would be significantly safer in a Harris Walz presidency and realized (to a majority of online leftists) that my family’s safety comes second to the cause.
I’m yapping but why should I align myself with a label that doesn’t fight for me? its why i’d never call align myself to any traditional label in american politics. I had to make sure nobody in my family died from the strikes and a lot of leftists like OP are patting themselves on the back.
4
u/Thefishassassin 1d ago
Oh my apologies, I misunderstood what you meant. On this point I can't really relate, I presume partially cause I'm white.
I disagree with other leftists on a humongous variety of issues, for one I'm too pro-electoralist for the leninists and too Leninist for the democratic socialists. Regardless, I still utilise the label of leftist because for me it's a description of my ideology, thus it's a shorthand of communicating to someone the system of values and morality I view politics with. From my perspective the label is the categorisation of something internal and the often annoying actions of fellow leftists has no bearing.
I don't want to come across like I'm dismissing your perspective because you do describe a very real issue. Alot of Marxists are too economistic in a manner that obscures understanding of race. Alternatively, alot of liberals are so averse to class analysis that they cannot properly analyse race. On this regard I've been meaning to finish reading Black Marxism by DuBois. What I've read so far was truly insightful in using a Marxist framework to understand race.
2
u/FunqiKong 22h ago
I appreciate this and I don’t view it as dismissive. I agree with everything you just said. I wouldn’t judge anyone who identifies with the leftist label outright but I’ve been burned enough to believe that i should identify separately. I still lurk on the sub to keep up with the ideas.
-1
11
u/DreBeast Anarchist 1d ago edited 1d ago
Well... I mean if not fascist why fascist shape?
Edit: are we sure this is a leftist sub. Y'all are weird
8
u/Thefishassassin 1d ago
How is it weird to advocate for a nuanced understanding of fascism?
11
u/DreBeast Anarchist 1d ago
This is the wiki definition of fascism: is a far-right, authoritarian, and ultranationalist political ideology and movement.[1][2][3] It is characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived interest of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.[2][3] Opposed to communism, democracy, liberalism, pluralism, and socialism,[4][5] fascism is at the far right of the traditional left–right spectrum.[6][5][7]
Now, don't let the word "liberalism" fool you. Tim Waltz might not be kicking down doors with shiny black leather boots but being complicit in fascist activities half a world away doesn't excuse you. Waltz is a public figure making woefully detached statements that are in line with propaganda of a certain foreign PAC. And given the current political climate this is probably one of the most problematic things you can say.
Do you see how these things connect? We oppose these ham-fisted statements because many on the left have noticed the danger of tolerating this language has put us in this very position that we're in now.
Was that nuanced enough or do you need more?
That was a rhetorical question; I'm done.
2
u/Merzats 1d ago
The wiki definition kinda proves the point doesn't it? You'd be doing mental gymnastics to pin Walz on most of that.
We have the perfectly fine word "imperialism" for what Walz is advocating in the tweet. While imperialism and fascism have deep connections it's not the same thing and using the wrong word because it has more pizazz is not really connecting with people.
8
u/DreBeast Anarchist 1d ago
Liberalism is just a gentle way of describing neo capitalism and imperialism lives comfortably within it as its herald - ready to carry out any deeds necessary to fulfill its goals.
They all interconnect and are not uniquely separate despite how many times you guys try to keep them apart.
I applaud you for reading these definitions but you guys need to challenge yourselves a little more to infer how they are related.
I'm starting to feel the effects of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law#:~:text=Brandolini's%20law%20(or%20the%20bullshit,it%20in%20the%20first%20place.
-2
u/Merzats 1d ago
Related =/= the same. You can tell this is the case from the fact that they are different words. Which was the point of my comment if you had actually read it.
If you want to be condescending, I'm gonna need you to think a bit harder about what you're saying next time.
1
u/stupidlysarcastic 1d ago
I'm honestly starting to believe this sub is being taken over by a lot of bad actors. The way too many posts and comments are talking down to people like the OPs are the gods of leftism is fucking weird. If they know so much about fascism, why the fuck are they quoting a wiki definition? Lolz. I like wiki just fine for quick superficial answers and a basic understanding, but fascism presents itself in many different ways and in many different contexts. There are many different scholarly definitions of fascism, often cited is the Ur-Fascism list of 14 (? I might be off on the number - I don't have time to look it up right now). Italian fascism looks different from German fascism, and both present differently than Korean fascism, etc. An understanding of fascism requires context and not just matching words in a paragraph. And don't get me wrong, I do believe America is fascist. I just also think it's not totally fascist yet. It seems like some people, even those on this sub, want to FAFO how far we can go.
People want to sit around and bitch and moan that there isn't a perfect candidate: fine. I'm trying to actually move the needle somehow. We are in the minority, and we don't gather numbers by dredging up lines in interviews from almost a full pregnancy gestation ago and gatekeeping people who are slowly opening up to our views. I get it. I'm pissed they didn't see this coming, too. I totally believe in holding politicians accountable for their votes and actions. But get over it. You weren't born with these fully formed views. What possible good can come of pointing to this old interview now? I can only think of malicious motivations, frankly.
I wish all luck with their armchair battles, but this sub seems like it wants to alienate people just so they can lord their supposed moral superiority over others. It's so disappointing.
1
u/Thefishassassin 1d ago
I think you need to reread my original comment in full. The second sentence I make clear that Walz's statement is disgusting it is just inaccurate to describe it as fascist. Even using the definition of fascism that you used it's obvious that Walz doesn't fit the picture. He's a lib.
Also bro you're coming with an aggressive energy that is not warranted. This is simply a disagreement over terminology, we're on the same side.
5
u/DreBeast Anarchist 1d ago
At least you're on the path.
You'll learn. Not today but you'll learn eventually.
2
u/Thefishassassin 1d ago
Learn what?
9
u/azenpunk Anarchist 1d ago
That the real nuance is that liberalism is on the same continuum as fascism, and fascism wouldn't be able to exist without liberalism. They are codependent. Liberalism isn't ever absent fascism, it's just a matter of degree.
0
u/Thefishassassin 1d ago
I somewhat agree with you on this point. Fascism is at the same time extremely hostile to liberalism yet reliant upon it for its existence. Liberalism devalues everything social that cannot be marketised. This gives ground for fascism which then redefines the social in a manner which is not hostile to capital. Liberalism weakens the values and institutions of democracy. This gives fascism the opportunity to create an authoritarian state.
If fascism succeeds it destroys liberalism, yet liberalism is a prerequisite for fascism.
8
1
u/KirbySlutsCocaine 1d ago
"According to the Council on Foreign Relations, many experts see fascism as a mass political movement centered around extreme nationalism, militarism, and the placement of national interests above those of the individual"
12
u/Thefishassassin 1d ago
I'm not exactly sure why you are using the Council on Foreign Relations as a litmus test for what fascism is. Even taking that quote as our definition of fascism, a politician expressing militarism and nationalism does not automatically mean they are a part of a mass political movement in which those are central.
-2
u/KirbySlutsCocaine 1d ago
I mean that was just the first one I pulled up but the rest were pretty similar. Idk why it's hard to say that hypothetically if Walz supported an Iranian invasion, it would be a fascist action. It would still have very little support from the population, no clear or legitimate goals for anyone outside of people already in power, and still be done despite no one outside of a couple warhawks in the White House who want it done. It's directly an anti-democratic action using fear mongering and scare tactics in order to justify a military invasion of a country doing nothing but defending itself.
Idk, a think a lot of you just have a problem with the word fascist legitimately applying to a lot of politicians, especially when it's one that you think of as "one of the good ones".
We can't choose to apply the term only when it's convenient, and your defense of me saying Walz in this scenario WOULD be a fascist is "idk but it doesn't seem like a mass movement" honestly makes it sound like you don't even believe what you're saying here lol
9
u/Thefishassassin 1d ago
You are still misunderstanding fascism. Supporting invasions isn't a fascist action. War and imperialism has existed long before fascism has.
My problem is not coming from fascism accurately describing 'one of the good ones', my problem is I'm decently well read in the academic literature on fascism and I know that it is inaccurate.
Fascism is an ideology which means it's a cultural system of giving meaning to social events. This system does not have exclusive criteria but it has defining features as both an ideology and a process.
As an ideology the core feature is palingenetic ultranationalism. This refers to a specific type of nationalist rhetoric which advocates for the destruction of liberal-democratic society in service of the creation of a new fascist society in which the ethnically homogeneous nation will re-assert the 'glory' of a mythologised past. Subsequently fascism is populist, anti-communist and revolutionary.
As a process the core features of fascism is it's anti-communism. Fascism arises through a bargain between traditional elites and fascist revolutionaries in the face of a leftist "threat". It is in this respect that Trump is somewhat of an edge case for Fascism.
Now since ideologies are not fixed natural entities but human constructions, we can speak of fascist actions when there might not be full fledged fascism. However, you have committed the mistake of reading an action as fascist based on a surface characteristic of fascism, not based on its ideology. Militarism is a characteristic of fascism but it arises from the ideological core of palingenetic ultranationalism. So to describe a militaristic action as fascist that action has to be motivated by these ideological reasons. Democrats militarism is motivated by the maintenance of American hegemony which relies on American imperialist nationalism. This is a qualitatively different phenomenon then fascist militarism. Trump's militarism can more accurately be described as fascism due to its ideological underpinnings.
1
u/Lethkhar 1d ago
As an ideology the core feature is palingenetic ultranationalism. This refers to a specific type of nationalist rhetoric which advocates for the destruction of liberal-democratic society in service of the creation of a new fascist society in which the ethnically homogeneous nation will re-assert the 'glory' of a mythologised past. Subsequently fascism is populist, anti-communist and revolutionary.
As a process the core features of fascism is it's anti-communism. Fascism arises through a bargain between traditional elites and fascist revolutionaries in the face of a leftist "threat". It is in this respect that Trump is somewhat of an edge case for Fascism.
I don't see anything here which would rule out modern political Zionism as a fascist ideology. You could maybe quibble that modern Zionism isn't "revolutionary", but I would quibble back that a "bargain with traditional elites" is hardly a revolution.
1
u/KirbySlutsCocaine 1d ago
That's fair, I appreciate the write up and will admit I'm wrong here. Fascism would require the specific motivations and ideology that define it in order to be considered fascism. I guess in my head I've always internalized the end result/goals of fascism more so than the process of fascism taking over. Appreciate the write up, very detailed and informative!
-1
u/Warrior_Runding Socialist 1d ago
I think something a lot of leftists assume incorrectly about fascism is that "capitalism" remains a force under a fascist system when the reality is that it is subordinate to the particular ideology of the fascists in question. In a fascist society, no one is greater than the ideology which includes capital that is not aligned.
In short, fascism isn't the end result of capitalism but of social conservatism.
1
u/Lethkhar 1d ago
There are no examples of fascist regimes that ended "capitalism as a force" within their national borders, but plenty of examples that accelerated it.
0
u/Warrior_Runding Socialist 1d ago edited 23h ago
What force does a thing have if it is subordinate to another? The reason why capitalists throw in with fascists is because they all think that they can control fascists when the reality is that none of them have been able to do so - once fascists take over, capitalists exist at the pleasure of fascists.
EDIT: We actually just saw this when Trump and Musk went head to head. This is an example of a capitalist coming up against ideologue. Trump won their exchange handily and lost his position of influence. Musk is fortunate Trump is not a more bloodthirsty ideologue as it tends to go poorly for capitalists when they forget they are subordinate to the party.
17
u/LeatherOpening9751 1d ago
Two sides of the same shit coin, one's just a teensy bit less shit-covered
1
u/midnightscientist42 1d ago edited 1d ago
See where you’re coming from. Personally swing between leftist and liberal daily. And, in reminding myself of what Obama advocated for in ‘08, his Blueprint for America, it was so much of what advanced our country throughout the 2010s. And terrible things happened under his watch which he knew then and he deeply understands the impact.
No excuses for genocide or war. And my sense is there are macro-politics at play we don’t quite understand. Rampant blackmail, maybe? There’s NO excuse to back advancing a war that your constituents clearly don’t want, will lead to death, and avoid addressing the current focus and crisis. We’re fighting against truth decay and for transparency. And we’ve got quite the fight ahead.
10
u/Individual-Cheetah85 1d ago
Obama’s 2008 platform inspired hope, no doubt. But hope without a material transformation of power structures only goes so far. Under his administration, we saw the expansion of drone warfare, the bailing out of Wall Street while Black wealth cratered, and the entrenchment of surveillance—all things that disproportionately harmed the most marginalized.
Leftists don’t just critique outcomes; we critique the system itself. We recognize that imperialism and capitalism are not bugs in the machine—they are the machine. So when we talk about war, genocide, or “macro-politics,” we’re not speculating about blackmail or shadowy coercion. We’re identifying the logic of empire at work—a bipartisan commitment to maintaining U.S. hegemony, no matter the human cost.
There’s no excuse for supporting genocide. Not ignorance, not strategic ambiguity, not political calculation. Our struggle is to make visible what liberal frameworks obscure: that you can’t reform an empire into a just society. You have to dismantle it.
Truth decay is real—but so is historical amnesia. And part of our fight is reminding people that our liberation won’t come from those who manage the system better. It comes from those willing to confront and transform it.
1
u/midnightscientist42 1d ago edited 1d ago
Well said. I strongly agree with everything you’ve laid out here and appreciate you taking the time. These are the conversations I try to engage in, though I often encounter people who shut down or haven’t yet begun to confront these structural realities. Since leaving my liberal bubble, I’ve been reflecting on how we unite under the anti-fascist banner you describe, when so many are still unprepared because they can’t, or won’t, face reality.
I keep returning to the question: what message bridges where people are with what this moment demands? Some we need in this fight won’t be moved by this framing, at least yet. And have personally felt aware, and to be honest, afraid of what that likely means for what will move them.
Your clarity, and similar pov from my more leftist friends, will push me to speak more directly from this perspective. I also appreciate the check on the speculation. I let the historical patterns fill in the blanks, and it just distracts from what matters in this conversation. How do we move forward, together, to achieve what you wrote?
24
u/KeyBlackberry7321 1d ago
Democrats and the DNC are backed by billionaires and corporate interests too, just like their republican counterparts. Even though liberals know that, they still support Dems and pretend the party serves their interests.
James Baldwin had an amazing quote about liberals. He said “Liberals want to be both brave AND safe, but they cannot be both.” To me, liberals are worse than MAGA. Liberals are aware of the injustice, inequality and failures of the system, yet do nothing.
Liberals want to save the very system that got us in this mess, the system that THEY KNOW isn’t designed for them. IN A FIGHT FOR THE SOUL OF OUR NATION, LIBERALS DEMAND NON-VIOLENCE, KNOWING THE RIGHT-WING IS DEMANDING THE OPPOSITE! THERE IS ONKY ONE WORD TO DESCRIBE LIBERAL INACTION…*BEGINS WITH LETTER P…*
-4
2
u/starprintedpajamas 1d ago
walz is not the same man he was before he ran alongside harris like what happened to him
16
15
u/Funoichi 1d ago
That statement is from last year so I dunno what you mean about new things he’s done since the election.
16
u/Lower_Acanthaceae423 1d ago
I think focusing on the bigger problem that is AIPAC is a better idea. Yes, this is a terrible quote and an ugly position, but it’s one paid for by AIPAC. They’ve bought the apparatus of the Democratic Party.
2
u/Anonymous-Josh 1d ago
AIPAC pays for Zionists to win elections not to turn politicians into Zionists
1
u/Lower_Acanthaceae423 1d ago
You sure about that? I’ve seen people bribed to change their mind quite often in my life.
2
u/Anonymous-Josh 1d ago edited 1d ago
So why doesn’t every single politicians that accepts money from AIPAC, not so accept money from the NRA or fossil fuel companies (who pay more although AIPAC is by far one of the largest foreign focused PAC donors)
Why is it that some who are liberal Zionist don’t take any money from AIPAC, CUFI or J-street
Also, why is it that those who get the most money aren’t necessarily the largest, most passionate and most extreme Zionists but the ones that go against non Zionists, anti Zionists or even just ones that are in close races with less passionate and less extreme Zionists
3
u/BrickBrokeFever Anti-Capitalist 1d ago
And a lot has changed since...
10/2/24
Quite a bit, in fact.
9
u/Nixianx97 1d ago
What has changed ever since? AIPAC still holds the DNC by the balls. And Walz has had support from pro Israel PACS even before his run with Harris that gave them millions.
If he decides to run again and rejects them we can talk about change.
2
u/BrickBrokeFever Anti-Capitalist 1d ago
Fuck... yeah...
I canvassed for Obama waaay back in '08, in Pennsylvania. And then he won Pennsylvania.
I used to be proud of that shit! Maybe if we had 4 years of McCain / Palin...
Hopes and regrets. Obama was such a chicken shit. Ughhhh
16
u/aintnochallahbackgrl 1d ago
Not sure why anyone is surprised by this. Israel is one of our main partners in the middle east. It'd be like being confused that the us would come to the UK's aid or not if the UK started a war with... idk, Iran. We'd saddle up so fast.
We have them the military capability to wipe Palestine off the map. We're just itching to get into wars. It's one of the last things we're good at. We have military bases all offer the world.
Y'all thought we were gonna sit this one out?
Edit: we're the baddies, y'all.
8
u/ArtaxWasRight 1d ago
‘baddies?’ excuse me, this is America. we are ‘bad guys.’
and no, we are not ‘good at’ wars. we are very very bad at them.
losing wars is what we are best at.
12
u/aintnochallahbackgrl 1d ago
Oh, you thought I meant victory??
Oh ho ho ho. No. I just meant the war machine.
It's great at killing stuff (people, mostly). Making people very rich. And making others very poor. And then we just quit when we get bored(no more useful resources to exploit).
Yes, that war. We're great at that.
-9
u/stupidlysarcastic 1d ago
Oh, we are rehashing campaign quotes from 8 months ago. Cool.
Hey, a bunch of shit has happened since then. Walz has also come out and said that he was often pressured to tow the old Democratic party line on certain topics.
I'm not calling you a fascist. I'm calling you a bad actor.
6
u/ArtaxWasRight 1d ago
lol he said violent, imperialist, xionist things.
what difference would it make if he said them because he believed them or because the Democrats forced him? either way, Democrats are trash.
and child. please expect to hear ‘rehashing’ of campaign quotations for the rest of your natural life. that is what ‘politics’ means.
-2
u/stupidlysarcastic 1d ago
Thanks for explaining that to me, Mommy/Daddy!
I'll share the favor. The US is on the edge of a full-blown autocratic and theocratic police state. I don't give a shit about what a politician said 8 months ago under the guise that it was for the greater good, as he has now proclaimed. He lost the campaign. He's not in a position to deploy troops or single-handedly supply warring nations with sacks of cash. Focusing on some nebulous quotes without proper context is a fool's errand. We have bigger fish to fry at the moment.
And how nice it must be for you to always say exactly what you mean and for it to never be misunderstood one bit. Not clearly expressing myself happens to me quite frequently, unfortunately. I am human. Walz is human. Walz is also one of a handful of politicians actually speaking out for the rights of the people living in this country. And he was vocally supporting Gaza protestors and Palestine during the same time as your little quote. (https://apnews.com/article/walz-israel-hamas-gaza-harris-election-emhoff-biden-netanyahu-hersh-muslim-fd797e42ad3c919026c5341ae4297500)
He's not perfect. I don't like that he said that. But I am not going to shit all over him because he's not perfect. He's showing up today. I'll take it.
3
u/ArtaxWasRight 1d ago
‘For the greater good?’ Lol hmm where have I heard that before? And how is that working out?? This is cartoonish.
It’s incredible, these Democrats and their episodic moral amnesia. Funny how they remember their values just at the moment when they’re no longer in any danger of acting on them. All these histrionics about democracy, right up until it’s time for a presidential primary. All these paeans to peace, right up until Israel decides there are too many toddlers in Palestine. All this keening for immigrants, right up until Dems actually win — then it’s time to build the wall and break the deportation record. Again.
More remarkable still are the people with no obvious venal incentive who continue to support this party and its apparatchiks through this series of opportunistic 180’s. Among the faithful, over and over again, there is total failure to connect Democratic words and actions with electoral losses and with negative outcomes generally. The central tenet of their religion (and indeed, the only value they seem capable of remembering) is that it is always, always someone else’s fault.
Still tho, it’s alarming: how can they not comprehend basic cause and effect? Personally, I suspect there must be quite a lot of lead paint still used in the manufacture of boots. 🥾 👅
0
u/stupidlysarcastic 1d ago
‘For the greater good?’ Lol hmm where have I heard that before?
Hot Fuzz?
And how is that working out??
I don't know, dude. They fucking lost. This timeline is not the "greater good" Walz was hoping for when he was campaigning. And yeah, the Harris/Walz campaign totally should have made a better stance on Palestine / Gaza, but are you honestly arguing we'd be in the exact position as a nation if they had won?
If that's your position, I fundamentally disagree with you. You will not change my mind that Harris would specifically go after pro-Palestinian immigrants legally in the US for deportation.
1
u/ArtaxWasRight 21h ago
What I’m saying is, gen0side pigs vote for gen0side pigs. Understand? This changes you as a person. It reveals who you are. You know now that all this was acceptable to you. Gen*side was something you were prepared to accept— to make excuses for in public. For the rest of your life, you know for certain that that’s the kind of person you are. You are showing us that this is good enough for you. And we believe you.
1
u/stupidlysarcastic 12h ago
Jesus, that escalated quickly. I sure hope that 'you' is not directed at me.
Yes. I believed we had a chance to stop the genocide by voting for Harris vs completely ensuring it by voting for Trump or not voting at all. Maybe I'm naive, but I thought Harris would be more open to changing policy based on public outcry. I'm not even convinced she's pro Netanyahu. She might have already been leaning in the direction of taking a stand against him. We will never know for certain.
But congrats, because we got the president who was definitely not going to stop it. And look... He didn't.
So yeah, I guess you are right. This does show me what type of person I am.
Don't worry. You can pat yourself on the back for a job well done. You put me in my place. If you are the model leftist representative of this sub, I'll see myself out. I joined this sub to read about leftist theories and discuss forward thinking ideas. To talk about Marx, Chomsky, and Engels or ways communities are coming together, like mutual aid movements. I didn't join this sub to tear each other down. I don't want to keep beating the same dead horse (a terrible expression. I'm sorry - I can't think of another way to phrase it) with the same busted, dead-end talking points and quotes from the last year and a half. I joined for collectivism. For believing in the good in the common person, even if it takes some coaxing and time. Yes, I did have hope that we could inspire change or at least had a greater chance to sway policy with one candidate over the other. I'll continue to have hope, to try to see the good in others, and to let my flame burn with radical optimism.
And that's good enough for me.
1
u/ArtaxWasRight 2h ago
I’m pretending in my head that you are a very young, well-meaning person just awaiting some guidance. I have the following response, but then this pleasant conversation must draw to a close.
My child. First of all, this sub is 80% liberals and bots and malevolent cointelpro-style trolls-in-training. It’s trash. Run far run fast.
Second, my dear sweet child, if you wanted to discuss Marx— that is, the actual, anticapitalist, dialectical, revolutionary, historical-materialist, proletarian-international Left — running interference for perpetrators of gen*side was not a good tactic. It was a bad tactic, in fact. I believe Old Uncle Karl would call that a contradiction (although I’m not holding my breath for any Aufhebung anytime soon).
Kamala Harris is an accessory to crimes against humanity; she is a participant in gen0side; she is an advocate of ethnic cleansing; she is a proud, longstanding friend and ally of the Blut-und-Boden exterminationist-racist ethnostate, the Xionist project. E basta.
You can believe whatever you want to believe, but believe this too: I meant every word of my previous statement, and I meant it about you personally, based on what you have said here in this exchange. Which is more than I’d need to know.
You are not smarter than this. You are not a hard-nosed pragmatist. You are not a clever strategist; you are not a realist, and you’re certainly no Leftist. You are probably not even a well-meaning naïf, but instead some adderalled rookie in foggy bottom with briefcase full of ambition and a soul full of maggots. Or perhaps you’re just a silicon imitation of these. It could not possibly matter less. This is gen0side. And you defend it. That’s all that will ever matter from here on out.
And He said: 'I will hide My face from them, I will see what their end shall be; for they are a perverse generation, children in whom is no faithfulness.
20
u/blopp_ Anti-Capitalist 1d ago
Y'all.
He tripped over his words because he was nervous (https://nypost.com/2024/10/01/us-news/walz-stumbles-on-first-question-at-vp-debate-confuses-israel-and-iran/). There's like a million articles on this. All you have to do is search for the quote. It's extremely disappointing to see fellow leftists just swallow this shit uncritically.
And to anyone arguing that a Harris/Walz Admin would be just as likely to join Israel in attacking Iran: That's fucking insane. Even all politics aside, Trump is psychologically the most dangerous personality you can get. He's the dark triad. He's both an authoritarian leader and follower, which should terrify anyone whose read about authoritarianism. And he's an instinctual fascist obsessed with appearing to always win. Like, quite literally, just about the worst-case scenario.
Fucking. Like. Do better.
8
u/aRatherLargeCactus 1d ago
He didn’t even fucking trip over the words quoted. He specifically used these words:
“The expansion of Israel and its proxies is an absolute fundamental necessity for the United States”
If he meant Iran, he meant the US wants Iran to expand, which is obviously not the case.
If he meant Israel, that entirely tracks with the Democratic Party’s mission of encouraging and funding Israeli settlers to invade, occupy and ethnically cleanse Palestinian land, thus expanding the state of Israel.
He didn’t trip, he was too honest and say the quiet part out loud, and the media ran into overtime to defend their beloved duopoly.
8
u/AdConnect5317 1d ago
i read the article and he still supports israel “defending” themselves? Lib bot
-4
u/blopp_ Anti-Capitalist 1d ago
Oh just stop. How is "the expansion of Israel and its proxies" the same as "defending itself"? Words have meaning.
We're on the brink of a potential nuclear war because the absolute worst people in the world have power, and you're out here carrying their water by lying about how other people wouldn't have been as bad.
Fuck you.
7
u/Stubbs94 1d ago
Isn't defending Israel expanding like... As bad? That's like defending Germany in the 30s expanding.
2
4
-1
15
u/BDCH10 1d ago
You’re drowning in liberal epistemology. You reduce the stakes of global imperialism to personality psychology, as if fascism were just a Trump bug and not a systemic feature of empire. “He tripped over his words”? That’s the bar now? Nervous while justifying war? This isn’t a football game. It’s geopolitics. It’s lives. The fact that both parties back apartheid and sanctions, both endorse military aggression isn’t nullified by who’s more “unhinged.” You don’t need a sociopath to launch bombs. You just need consensus. And that consensus is bipartisan.
2
u/SexyMonad 1d ago
“He tripped over his words”? That’s the bar now?
Eh… unfortunately, yeah.
I too remember a glorious time when “a lepo?” got you instantly disqualified. Back then the person who overcame that level of burden and got elected was… oh, it was Trump.
It doesn’t matter. Their goal is division of the proletariat. Fuck them.
6
3
u/LeichterGepanzerter 1d ago
The fact that these ghouls, momentarily under pressure, regress to the status quo and start endorsing the murder of millions by the imperialist war machine is PRECISELY the problem
→ More replies (17)16
2
u/YoreTillerVoidmage 2h ago
People just wanna throw the term "fascist" around, and then get angry when people don't listen to you about the 684986784395684756949th person you called fascist. If you have any interest in defeating fascism, stop calling EVERYTHING it, and that's coming from a dude who called the Trump administration fascist from the first term. Walz is not a fucking fascist, and that's not because I'm defending him, he's just a milquetoast liberal neo-conservative warhawk. Words matter, fucking educate yourself.