immuredanchorite [he/him, any]

I agree, those are contenders… there is also the war in Afghanistan, the second Congo war, syria, Sudan…They have all been horrendous. I think the war on Gaza seems like it may be the worst arguably because the speed with which high numbers of civilians are being killed, particularly children, is unmatched in nearly any sort of conflict the world has seen since the last century-- on top of the past 16 years of blockade and sanction which left Gaza an open air prison prior to this recent onslaught

I am really starting to think that the liberal infighting and constant media coverage about Biden’s age is an attempt at hedging against any argument that his electoral failure is tied to his support for the genocide in Gaza. Biden was not going to win the election against trump before this debate, it was already assured that millions would refuse to hold their nose and vote for him regardless. But now the ruling class can ignore this sort of analysis and focus on, “Biden lost because he was too old, he couldn’t connect with young people” and they will hammer that home until they can completely erase the effect of the first anti-imperialist mass movement in the USA since the Vietnam war. The death toll coming out from the Lancet article had really driven this home for me. They have fully convinced themselves they can invent their own reality. The public hand-wringing the Biden admin has done, all while being primarily responsible for the genocide continuing as it has, is just so absurd for anyone paying close attention. This is probably the worst atrocity of the 21st century (so far ) and they will try their best to erase any electoral consequences, and thus erase anti-imperialist discourse from popular understanding of history. Seems even more important now to symbolically vote for an anti-imperialist candidate like Claudia de la Cruz, because even a relatively large, but still marginal vote in a battleground state would be hard to ignore, particularly if liberals decide to demonize and blame 3rd party voters for a Trump victory. “If everyone who had voted for de la cruz in Georgia voted for Biden, he would have won” etc. etc.

isn’t this the same group that went to Cuba and snubbed Diaz-Canal, met with “dissidents” and then wrote a lengthy article about how Cuba was bad and won’t listen to other voices on “the left?”

I keep seeing articles saying that Russia has told the US it will retaliate against the US. So like, are we all going to get irradiated or worse because Biden’s worm-filled brain is stuck inside the end-of-history? Is Russia in a position to end the war in Ukraine? I remember reading a lot in the news mega about the lines finally moving appreciably… but did that stop happening or is Russia advancing still? I feel like that might be the only way to actually stop the escalation. Other nations are starting to call the US’s bluff, but it seems like the US regime just pretends they weren’t bluffing and it keeps doing the dumbest shit imaginable and choosing mass death over a wounded ego. I just don’t want everyone to die because an Alzheimers patient wound up in the US presidency in a sick combination of elder abuse, class warfare, and neoliberal hubris.

why would AOC need critical support? she isn’t on our side and her vision of “democracy” “economic rights” and “civil liberties” are as meaningless as when Biden or Blinken talk about “human rights” or “democracy.” she called a white supremacist a white supremacist and that’s cool and all, but she upholds the system that enables people like him

it is known, the second hamas charter accepts the 1967 borders. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Hamas_charter

pretty sure they can buy US weapons and tech through Israel that would otherwise be prohibited from getting. I also think that the whole support for a 2 state solution thing was an artifact of the six day war and a consensus of the UN mediated peace process that has been nearly every UN members “official” line (except for maybe Israel, Iran and a few others) since then, and is also the position held by Hamas

Good thing I allegedly could pirate everything they make

I think that some of the comments in here are great, and others are completely wrong-headed. Patriarchy must be abolished, but Patriarchy is also one of the oldest and most pernicious of the oppressive systems we live under, and overturning capitalism will only even begin to allow that transformation to occur in a more unrestricted way. Toxic masculinity has recently been correctly identified during a period of consciousness raising, but failing to build a constructive and revolutionary alternative to understanding masculinity along side that has alienated and further entrenched many working class people who identify as masculine. But this could be a relatively easy task in the grand scheme of things, compared to dismantling Patriarchy itself.

Part of the issue I see could be a lack of imagination or insight into understanding positive aspects of masculinity, but it may just as well a pessimism that would deny “revolutionary” as much as the “masculine.” … many of the supposed masculine traits, toxic or positive, are just reframing and redefining aspects of masculinity that have been utilized to uphold class relations in different eras to suit different purposes. This is a normal occurrence, where some cultural gender constructs change to serve as an important component of the superstructure that upholds class relations.

I think a good example of this is the development of “chivalry” or the code of chivalry. Where a cultural tradition of a warriors code that probably predated the feudal era ended up becoming a complex and often contradictory social code that signaled a connection to the aristocracy, but also demanded fealty to the church and one’s lord. Today we can see those old ideas being harkened back to by reactionaries who decontextualize, reimagine and romanticize that code to suite their own ends of keeping masculine-identifying people identifying with a bourgeois and reactionary understanding of masculinity to further everyone’s oppression. But those traits could just as easily, and may necessarily, be reframed and shaped into something that upholds a new and better class relation, or at least something that facilitates the transition to it. If you write off a huge chuck of the masses based upon utopian understandings, you will be isolated and unable to move the masses of people in a progressive direction.

I think it would be relatively easy to spin masculine constructs into something positive and revolutionary. The current toxic masculinity bullshit fed to kids by Tate and Peterson can be subverted and turned on its head.

Strength isn’t inherently masculine, but you can play with that concept all day. “Who is strong and brave: someone who defends the oppressed with their life, or an impotent person who kills unarmed civilians because they can’t get laid?”
“Who is comfortable with their masculinity: someone who is unafraid of people who challenge gender norms, or a scared, weak-minded person who chooses to hate them?”
“Are you going to whine and whine about how unfairly you are being treated, or are you going to organize with your community to build a better world?” “If you cannot treat women as your equal, you must not love them after all?” Brotherhood and solidarity. Protecting the oppressed and the innocent. Giving your life to stand for your principles. Building a better world through hard work and determination. Selflessness in service of the community. Standing on principle. truth be told those things are honestly not masculine in and of themselves, but I could easily see them being used to construct a more positive vision of masculinity.

Yeah, I think this just also misunderstands the definition (or popular definition) of a ceasefire as a stoppage of hostilities by both sides in a conflict. So it wouldn’t make sense for that to be the outcome of Israel being found guilty of genocide, as Palestinian resistance is legal under international law. I know Palestine isn’t a recognized party to the conflict, but the popular slogan for a ceasefire is being used here by imperialist narratives to make it seem like the ICJ ruled in Israel’s favor by not demanding one… whereas it isn’t clear that that would be the outcome (according to popular understanding of what a ceasefire means) if Israel were found guilty of the crime. The court asked Israel that they should stop committing a genocide, but instead the press is reporting that the court “stopped short of calling for a ceasefire” and to “prevent a genocide” instead of stopping their actions (even though the court literally did say that afaik)