As somebody who lives in a country that spends over the NATO agreed 2%, and for whom Russia is very threatening, I’m not entirely unhappy about what Trump is saying about European defence. We do need to put in more effort. Another thing is what he’ll actual do.
Wow, which region of Russian-speakers is your country’s armed forces bombing? Because that’s what it takes for Russia to be “”“threatening”“”.
i dunno about finland, but the baltics seem like they’re a single bad morning’s commute from shelling their russian minorities… just the vibe i’m gettings…
When arent they one bad morning to reenacting what their grandparents did during ww2?
It seems wanting to join NATO is enough for Russia to be threatening, if they consider one’s country to be in Russia’s sphere of influence. See for instance Georgia (2008) and indeed Ukraine (2014/2022).
Oh also
What is “Abkhazia”?
NATO is a hostile military alliance formed for the sole purpose of destroying the Soviet Union. It did not go away when that purpose was achieved, but continued to creep closer to the USSR’s main successor state despite assurances that it would not. In this post-USSR period it has undertaken multiple purely offensive actions (the former Yugoslavia and Libya come to mind). It also invaded Afghanistan as a response to 9/11, despite none of the hijackers being from Afghanistan, and despite the Afghan government offering to turn over bin Laden. Then you have the puppetmaster of NATO invading Iraq on completely false pretenses, and generally running a wide-ranging assassination program all over the world.
I wouldn’t want NATO near me, either.
NATO is a hostile military alliance formed for the sole purpose of destroying the Soviet Union. It did not go away when that purpose was achieved
Somehow it doesn’t currently seem like it was achieved.
If you think the Russian Federation and the USSR are remotely comparable, you’re smoking crack. NATO won, and the depraved, neoliberal regime it replaced the USSR with is its own God damned fault.
NATO won, and the depraved, neoliberal regime it replaced the USSR with is its own God damned fault.
I don’t think USSR became what anyone in the west wanted it to become. It’s nowhere near neoliberal, for one, more like a mafia state.
If you think the Russian Federation and the USSR are remotely comparable
Oh no, I don’t. The Russian Federation is much worse. Just saying that we didn’t really “destroy” them in the same way as, for instance, Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan was destroyed in WW2.
Incidentally, what’s with the constant insults on Lemmy? I’ve been nothing but polite here, I think.
I don’t think USSR became what anyone in the west wanted it to become.
Who is Yeltsin?
It’s nowhere near neoliberal, for one, more like a mafia state.
Technically it quickly became something closer to classically liberal rather than neoliberal (as the imperial core shunned it) but to claim that liberalism is opposed to mafiosi is hilarious, it has never existed without them. It’s like saying liberalism is opposed to slavery, there is some vacuous sense in which you could use sophistry to push that angle, but when you look at real, historic manifestations of liberal states, they are heavily economically reliant on various forms of slavery, whether domestic or via their dogs in the third world.
Lmao what?
What nations are allowed to have their own interests, and act to secure those interests? Is that something only for the U.S. and (when the U.S. allows it) its allies? Or is it possible that some countries have legitimate interests that conflict with the U.S.?
What nations are allowed to have their own interests, and act to secure those interests?
Is Ukraine allowed that?
Legitimate national interests don’t include attacking ethnic minorities, which is a major cause of the current war dating back to the early 2010s.
There’s also a question of what “national interest” means when the U.S. coups your elected government, as it did to Ukraine in 2014.
I don’t know, why don’t you ask the Americans who replaced their government for them?
goddamn man it’s actually so fucking stupid to be fearful of Russia in Finland.
Yes, Russia, the state still grinding it out in Ukraine 2 years down the line, is suddenly going to invade Finland and trigger a war with the entire western world so they can uhhhhh steal Finland’s lovely lakes. You piss me off
Relax, man.
Finland has been in NATO for less than a year. Before that we had a war in which USSR tried to take over the whole country and after failing at that, hovered over us for 50 years before collapsing.
But if you’re saying that we shouldn’t anymore be afraid of them now that we’re in NATO, perhaps you’re right. We’ll still need to be cognizant of the fact that Russia is our only potential enemy on this planet.
lol tried to take over the country lol.
the USSR beat your ass and STILL didnt want most of your shit country. they could’ve taken it after winning the winter war, but didnt.
and you’re still convinced they’re coming for you. fucking fascists, man…
the USSR beat your ass and STILL didnt want most of your shit country. they could’ve taken it after winning the winter war, but didnt.
The fact that their casualties were 5 times worse (or about 150x worse if we’re counting tanks) than ours might have had something to do with them not wanting our shit country.
and you’re still convinced they’re coming for you.
Well, not anymore that much, thanks to our NATO friends.
hah, yes, k/d ratio is how you measure success, right. you’re a child.
hah, yes, k/d ratio is how you measure success, right.
As you correctly point out, this is not the only thing that matters. Other issues contributed to USSR failing to conquer Finland as they set out to do. As they indeed did to every other country they had been given the permission to conquer from Hitler.
you’re a child.
I wonder how serious Rule 2 is to lemmy.ml admins, when people keep breaking it everywhere without any consequences. Is this a sort of sandbox that I have entered into, and that’s why so many people are throwing tantrums here?
oh, did the USSR set out to conquer finland then? must be why they started with demanding territorial concessions, and after beating the shit out of finland, ended up taking somewhat more territory.
when was this wholesale conquest on the table?
your shit people on the other hand joined the nazis, who were out to conquer all of russia and kill all its inhabitants. it’s all projection with you fucks.
hovered over us for 50 years
“Their mere existence is a threat”
“They’re just existing there…Russianly!”
I guess you had to be there.
Think about what you’re saying.
- The USSR just existing next to you is a threat.
- But Russia is in the wrong for thinking NATO existing next to them is a threat.
Why is it OK when you say it but bad when they do? If you’re encouraging others to put themselves in your shoes (“you had to be there”), why can’t you put yourself in Russia’s shoes and see how they could reasonably perceive NATO as a threat?
I’m not actually saying that Russia just existing close to us is a threat. I’m saying that what Russia is doing and how it’s behaving, and how it talks publically is a threat.
But I do understand how NATO might be viewed as a threat to some nations or world leaders. I don’t immediately remember any particurarily good (liberal, free, non-oppressive, democratic) nations that NATO poses a risk to, however. Perhaps you can refresh my memory.
I don’t immediately remember any particurarily good (liberal, free, non-oppressive, democratic) nations that NATO poses a risk to, however. Perhaps you can refresh my memory.
Liberal, free, non-oppreasive, democratic nations that oppose Western neocolonial interests tend to get coup’ed by the CIA and replaced with pro-Western fascists. Countries that do survive, like for instance Cuba, have their name dragged through the mud by an enormous propaganda machine - which also whitewashes or conveniently forgets the crushing of the leftist projects that don’t survive.
There are countless examples throughout history, but my go-to is Mohammed Mossadegh of Iran, in the 50’s. No doubt the line will be that “that was a long time ago so it doesn’t count,” but the CIA covered up their involvement for decades, and if I picked a more modern example you’d likely either deny involvement or say that the government deserved it.
Iran suffered under British colonialism for decades. In the 1800’s, the shahs signed all sorts of deals selling out the country at absurdly bad rates and no expiration, to fund their exorbitant lifestyles. A large scale popular movement ousted them, but the agreements remained, and a new dynasty took power with British support, and the exploitation continued. Britain secured enormous profit and wealth through Iranian oil while falsifying records to pay virtually nothing for it while the Iranians lived in abject poverty. For decades the Iranians sought a diplomatic resolution and we’re completely stonewalled.
Finally, another popular movement caused the shah to appoint Mossadegh as PM (a position that had previously been hand-picked by the British). Mossadegh nationalized the oil industry to enormous popular support, but the British responded with a blockade, and offered Eisenhower support in Korea and in forming NATO in exchange for having the CIA oust Mossadegh (an offer Truman had dismissed in disgust, as this was the first case of CIA involvement of regime change).
Mossadegh, like many Iranians at the time, saw their struggle as being only against the British and trusted the US to uphold the values it preached and saw it as a potential friend. The CIA took over every newspaper in the country and started publishing anti-government propaganda nonstop. They hired false flag protesters, who claimed to support the government and then wrecked shit (as well as hiring protesters to march against the government). Politicians, vote counters, religious leaders, journalists, anyone with an ounce of power was getting bribed by the CIA. Mossadegh believed that these were genuine and legitimate expressions of dissent and did nothing to crack down. Finally, a US diplomat told him a made-up sob story about people at the embassy getting death threats from his supporters and threatened to close it, and Mossadegh got on the radio and told his supporters to stand down and stay home - the next day, the CIA launched a coup that ousted him from power.
What followed was the restoration of the shah’s power, which included hunting down leftists with secret police, banning traditional religious garb to make the country appear more Western, and of course the continued exploitation of Iranian oil, the proceeds of which went straight to the king’s bank account. When the Iranian Revolution of 1973 happened, decade of political repression of the left allowed the Islamic fundamentalists to be the ones that took power, and the US allowed the shah to flee there which outraged the Iranians, considering that he had previously been installed by them.
I could tell you the same story over and over again about countries all around the globe. Many nations had resources stolen from them via violence and colonialism and these resources remain in the hands of the people who took them, and anyone who attempts to reassert control over their own resources is putting themselves in the crosshairs of the the US and NATO, whether through sanctions, seizing assets, CIA backed coups, or overt military aggression. But all they have to do is cover up the truth or present a bullshit justification, and by the time it falls apart it’ll be too late to do anything about it, it’ll have faded from the public consciousness, and people will assert, without reason or evidence, that “they don’t do that anymore” dispite having clear means and motive to and never having faced any sort of punishment for it. Meanwhile the historical examples can continue to be used to intimidate countries outside of the imperial core who don’t have goldfish memories, and understand that they could be next. So they either comply with neocolonial exploitation, or they take measures to prevent CIA infiltration, which then gets them derided as “authoritarian” by people like you - and if they do neither of these things, then they get coup’ed and replaced by a fascist.
I’m not actually saying that Russia just existing close to us is a threat.
That’s exactly what you said, although you said it about the USSR, which was even more absurd.
I don’t immediately remember any particurarily good (liberal, free, non-oppressive, democratic) nations that NATO poses a risk to, however. Perhaps you can refresh my memory.
So clever to fall back on the “well if I did do it, they deserved it” defense.
Do you think the people of Libya, a country you’d say deserved it, prefer their country after the NATO attack on it? They went from one of the highest (if not the highest) living standards on the continent to a decade of civil war and open-air slave markets.
I don’t immediately remember any particurarily good (liberal, free, non-oppressive, democratic) nations that NATO poses a risk to.
God, this is so mask off. Just because a country doesn’t meet some extremely vague notion of “good” that you’ve arbitrarily decided to apply (and which almost always just means “part of the West” in practice) you think it’s not aggression to bomb their people into poverty and famine. Fuck liberals.
Finland clearly isn’t the weak spot they’d go for anytime soon. You’ll have plenty of time to decide what to do and which of your 20.000 bombshelters to go to while 🇱🇻 🇪🇪 🇱🇹 is taking a first blow.
Yea we now who you are.https://duckduckgo.com/?q=mannerheim+hitler&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images
Yeah, that sucked.
USSR tried to take over the whole country
These things happen to axis powers during WW2, yes. Perhaps the white Finn government shouldn’t have slaughtered its own people, joined with Hitler, kept Russian people in concentration camps, and participated in the seige of Leningrad.
Perhaps the white Finn government shouldn’t have slaughtered its own people
Yeah well civil wars are a bitch. It’s difficult to say for sure, but I’m pretty sure if the Reds had won that one, a similar or worse slaughtering would have taken place. At least it happened in every other place where the communists won a civil war.
joined with Hitler, kept Russian people in concentration camps, and participated in the seige of Leningrad.
I have to point out that when USSR first attacked Finland (Winter War), we were not yet allied with Hitler. USSR was actually enacting a secret deal[0] they had made with Hitler about the division of East Europe.
The things you mentioned happened during the Continuation War, for which I think we were rightfully punished.
I’m pretty sure if the Reds had won that one, a similar or worse slaughtering would have taken place.
Oh no! Don’t massacre all of the antisemites and fascists in my nation!
but that’s just it, they didnt.
let’s look at the case of hungary. the respectable conservatives and the fascists murdered hundreds of thousands of fellow hungarians.
the evil russian hordes that conquered the country… didnt. they did super minimal purges. sadly, they let the vast majority of the fascist scum live.
so no, preemptively doing mass killings because the other side would do the same is a fascist/colonialist/racist myth.
“Uhh well the people we slaughtered totally would have done worse, despite the fact that we were allied with the Nazis and they were against them”
Great little bit of projection my man
The things you mentioned happened during
So you admit you’re cool with concentration camps
muh molotov ribbertropf
Not sure why libs think this is some kind of trump card, but I never get tired of watching them whip it out thinking it will be like holy water to a vampire. Why yes, the USSR was forced to buy itself time to fend off lebensraum by itself after a decade of the other “allies” rejecting it’s defensive treaties and handing Hitler Czechoslovakia on a silver platter. It used that bought time to evacuate 7 million Jewish people from Poland. Say, what was white Finland doing with it’s Jewish people around then?
For which I think we were rightfully punished
I do not take the word of fascist’s descendants about whether or not they have been rightfully punished. The many thousands of working Finns who your government disappeared, tortured, raped, massacred, and dumped in ditches for the crime of wanting a better life would be a better authority on that.
That you still sit there and bloviate about “well they would have done the same to us, probably!” Is the most naked fascist cope at your dogshit country being called out for what it has become, and proof positive that no, you were not punished enough.
Say, what was white Finland doing with it’s Jewish people around then?
At the time of the Winter War? Nothing, I think? USSR destroyed a synagogue in bombings in Wiborg, though.
Lmao that’s the weakest shit. “Sure we helped starve Leningrad and worked with the people who did the Holocaust, but look, some commies blew up a single synagogue during combat! This proves that we were right to massacre thousands and work with fascists, actually.”
How do you type that out and fight off the embarrassment long enough to hit post? Long practice, I guess. Defending fascists tends to put you in the clown shoes time and time again.
I didn’t expect the state propaganda campaign to convince their people to accept welfare cuts and to embrace austerity to work this well.
I don’t know about propaganda, but sometimes reality can be motivating. Here’s one: https://yle.fi/a/74-20050548
Not sure if the current government is doing a good job with tackling this, though. Somehow even with the frugality they’re claiming they’re doing (pretty minimal actions really), the loan amounts are still growing. But these things don’t change fast.
I don’t know about propaganda
Agreed
Comrades, I sincerely apologize for any psychic damage taken from being exposed to my fellow countryman’s takes
imagine not knowing that the wrong side won the civil war
We should really have a great firewall to keep all of us inside it, the psychic damage a single fucking finn can inflict on the internet is insane
smol bean finland never done did no wrong uwu, is not like we were sucking the boot of the nazis even before they took over germany no no no, evil commies bad owo
Innocent smol bean pogromists.
The world’s been a scary place for people under Biden.
I’m not saying correlation is causation but it can feel that way, people might long for the more secure past time under Trump.
Delusional
you sure are
As if it even matters which shitty imperialist party is in power lol
It matters hugely even internationally. If you’re female it would I’m guessing based on the fact that want to ban abortions. As a guy, I wouldn’t want to be forced to be stuck with a kid.
Are you not paying attention? I’m Australian, and the difference is totally night and day.
And as a human being, I wouldn’t really want to support a zionazi that’s funding a genocide.
I can’t speak for that.
But sure…
- The rapist who is VERY clear about wanting to be a dictator, is EXACTLY the same as the other guy.
- The rapist with over 30500 known public lies in 4 years… Yeah… Definitely the same.
- The guy who loves other dictators who support genocides? Obviously the same
- Oh, yeah, lets not forget about the guy who killed hundreds of thousands of american’s, and even more worldwide through misinformation during covid. Here in Australia, there are STILL people who were influenced by people like him.
- Also, I forgot about the guy who tried to overthrow the election (and it was obvious leading up to it)
- Lets also not forget about the guy who when found guilty in court is considered so mafia-esque, that the judge told jurors that he STRONGLY recommended people didn’t disclose they were on the jury
- This “businessman” cycles through more lawyers than a supreme court, and his own lawyers say they can’t control him.
- The guy who likely compromised the security of millions of US, Australian and other soldiers by taking classified documents for his own benefit
Joe Biden? When his son was found guilty, he let justice take course.
It would be good to see Michelle Obama stand though instead of him, but, Trump is VERY dangerous. He was willing to start a civil war to get back power, and the only reason he hasn’t gotten into any wars, is because he is likely giving other dictators everything they want (including top secret information)
The only reason we know 100% that he is giving away top secret information, is because of audio recordings, and a billionaire in Australia said directly that was the case.
Joe Biden has done none of that stuff. The judge didn’t need to warn jurors on his son’s trial that they could be targeted if they diclosed they were on it
Last I checked abortions were banned while dems held the house, congress, and the presidency.
The of only one of them wants to actively kill my queer friends, so yeah, it matters.
Both of them want to actively kill Palestinians, including its queer population. “The lesser evil” one is currently bypassing congress to do so (congress actually rejected Biden’s attempt to send more weapons to “israel” a few days ago, which is fascinating)
Sounding alot like this rn
Cool story, still matters for my non-palestinian queer friends.
Both siders and on-voters malding hard rn lmao
Notice how you haven’t addressed how dems are any different from reps if both are okay with a genocide so long as they themselves are fine.
Is your Russian-English translator failing or did you not read the part where I said that for one side I have to fear for queer folk in the states and in other countries and for the other side I don’t have to worry about at least some of them.
Its so telling how you use queer people to further your own little agenda here. Its not just queer people being targeted in Gaza, its all of them.
No queer friends in Palestine, I’m guessing. But even if only people in the US deserve life, Biden isn’t doing anything to stop LGBQT rights from being dismantled. It will get worse even if Biden wins a second term. If Democrats didn’t codify Roe v. Wade when they had the chance, why do you think they will do anything concrete to protect them, when they can use their fear to scare them into voting for them.
Yup, the same dynamic as the right and immigration. More to gain using as a political football instead. The tactics are from the same, cynical playbook, and partisans are happy to play along when it’s their team.
Biden only passively wants to kill us and is willing to look the other way when states do it, youre right.
It absolutely seems to matter.
For the first one, it’d be great if the US actually let NATO destroy itself, but that’s just rhetoric to get Russia to ally with the US against China; like they allied with China against the USSR in the Cold War. Unfortunately it’ll never happen.
For the second… you’re currently watching a zionazi president bypassing congress to hasten the Palestinian genocide.
it matters. one is an accelerationist the other is a conservative of the status quo. neither are going to improve anything but one will try his most to destroy any confidence.
one will try his most to destroy any confidence
Talking about Biden? You know, the one currently supporting a genocide? I’d think that counts as trying “his most to destroy any confidence”
Biden never implied there was a chance the US would abandon its NATO allies in case of a war, Trump did.
Pro-Trump argument? Didn’t expect that here. Regardless, it’d be great if the US actually let NATO destroy itself and limit their ability to commit their imperialism in the middle-east (and across the world), but that’s just rhetoric to get Russia to ally with the US against China; like the US allied with China against the USSR in the Cold War.
Unfortunately the US would never truly antagonize NATO; Trump would just be assassinated and replaced like JFK was for wanting to abolish the CIA, not that Trump would actually go through with it. He isn’t any better than Biden.
The only way the US would improve is if a leftist org took power over this thinly-veiled imperialist oligarch altogether from outside its political system, which is designed to prevent leftward movement in the first place.
Also uh, I don’t think US’s ongoing genocide victims care about that.
Since when did the CIA assassinate white conservative leaders? What a delusional comment. Most of the people in the CIA are Trump cultists. They won’t do shit to Trump no matter what decisions he makes. He already spent his last term undermining nato and other institutions, and nothing happened to him.
Always have to laugh at the tankies who act like Russia and China are the good guys somehow, in spite of all their very obvious imperialism and despotism. The US Russia and China are all the same thing, a bunch of rich fucks looking out for themselves.
Since when did the CIA assassinate white conservative leaders?
They would if they threatened the imperial core’s ability to commit their imperialism.
The US Russia and China are all the same thing
What an obnoxious statement lol. Only the US (and its allies) are built from centuries of capitalist colonialism, and are greatly benefiting from ongoing neocolonialism of those same former colonies through the IMF and World Bank. They are also the ones waging countless wars across the middle east, coup’ing Africa’s governments, and keeping them unstable and unable to unite and stand on their own.
China, and even modern capitalist Russia, for all their flaws, are not even comparable to the sheer amount of suffering the US has inflicted, and continues to do so. There’s a reason songs like this are common across the developing world. No one outside the imperial core sees China or Russia as equivalent to the US, for good reason.
As someone from the “third world”, you’re absolutely spot on.
And thank you for putting into words what so many think, i don’t think i could have done it as well as you did.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
songs like this are common across the developing world
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Shut the fuck up.
Damn you really destroyed my comment there 😔
I don’t have to destroy your comment. Everyone with half a brain already knows that you‘re talking bullshit.
Arguing with people like you is just a waste of time.
Sure sure.
Yeah, sorry. Everyone who thinks Trump and Biden are the same, has no political education and or is blinded by ideology. And has, simply put no eyes in his head.
You’re an idiot. And you’re little downvote brigade changes nothing about that.
Hahaha tell us how you really feel.
I feel like I’m surrounded by idiots.
Everybody feels that way.
Hey at least we know where you got it from 🫂
Hey bruh! Genuine question:
How does it feel to be a useful idiot for Putin and to live inside his anus?
germany is doing the same. so i guess confidence isn’t being destroyed between those two. but is was talking about the american isolationist trump.
Geopolitics is actually one of those examples where it does matter quite a lot. All the planning world leaders does gets thrown out the window when someone new comes on to the stage. For example I don’t think anyone could have predicted America being nice to NK under Trump.
Trump simply subconsciously recognized Juche supremacy.
He realized he’s getting old and needs to get a Juche necromancer for himself before it’s too late.
Canada has straight up said we have a doomsday plan if the US goes really wonky.
Do we have a doomsday plan if a fascist becomes prime minister like Pierre Poilievre?
Sadly I’m bracing for what I think is the coming Trump/Poilievre combo.
Which one? Defence Scheme 1?
No, way more recent, and not public yet, for obvious reasons.
Link to an article.
sounds like a grift to funnel more cash into the military ngl.
I mean under Biden the US bombed Nordstream and is attempting to vassalise the EU through the Ukraine war. I don’t think the president matters that much, the US will continue to act in its own interests regardless of who they are.
Europe has been a vassal since 1945. How do you vassalise your vassal?
EU suggested forming an EU army as early as the 1950s! USA was against the EU forming its own integrated military. So was, not a member yet, Britain, historically always scared of a too united continental neighbour. Instead, the Anglo-Saxons basically forced the young EU-predecessors to rely on NATO instead of forming their own big military defence force. How the tables turn.
I think U.S. allies had long since internalized that they would occasionally have to eat shit from the U.S. The bargain was a place as a vassal state instead of a target, and if those are your choices being a vassal state has a lot of appeal. The occasional overt screwjob is much less damaging than a constant destabilization effort.
The deal will continue to get worse under any U.S. president, but what they seem to be getting at here is the possibility of it getting torn up altogether, opening the door for more direct U.S. hostility. As long as they support NATO they aren’t likely to be the target of a coup like the 2014 one in Ukraine, but what if NATO is gone?
Trump isn’t going to be allowed to unilaterally withdraw from NATO on a whim, but he could do a lot of damage to it, and he can rile up the reactionary hogs against it, which would at least lay the groundwork for a still more impactful change.
So you are saying Trump is the harm-reduction candidate?
There is no harm reduction candidate. They’re both far past the point of any reason to support them, they’d probably do different bad things, though.
True enough.
yanks have never been reliable allies, just ask the people they left in Afganistan as one of the more recent examples
The Euros are convinced that
will come through and spare them. It will be interesting watching them realize that’s not quite the case.
Why the heck and when was the United States considered reliable?
Reliable in what context?
Oh I see defensively reliable.
It might not make a lot of sense to overwhelmingly rely your national defense on a partner separated by an ocean.
I’m glad the EU is taking more responsibility for their own defense, and I’m also surprised to see so many European leaders acting surprised that they should have to, or the idea of a European defense as a novel idea.
The US was considered reliable because, until Trump, both parties had identical foreign policy.
No they didn’t.
At least, I can’t think of examples of democrats and Republicans having similar foreign policy, outlook strategy or execution.
You mean specifically in the interests of defending Europe?
As an outsider, the US was always very reliable for exporting unfettered liberal capitalism, and exporting “democracy”, whatever the party in power.
the worse political export the us has is the bi-party system. it does way more damage to any political system than the liberal capitalism. lobbying comes a close second.
I can see how the broader export of capitalism could make the us political scene look homogeneous from outside the fish bowl, thanks
Not sure if that’s sarcasm or ppl down voted you for nothing 🤷♂️
Ofc outside of the USA, internal politics is not our focus, even though we see regressive policies hurting the population (eg. Abortion). How the us handles foreign policy (not just war and conflicts), it pretty obviously only has its capitalist overlords best interest in mind.
That was a genuine response.
Down votes or upvotes whatever votes.
I’m trying to relate and understand.
I don’t agree with the simplified absolutist perspective you’ve put forth, but I understand how you could come to that conclusion and how it would circumstantially appear to be a uniquely American endeavor.
I agree that’s not a full view of America, but for the general population that only hears about the USA through conventional media, I’d say that’s what most people will see and remember.
And of course this is only my perspective from my country and my neighbors may very well have a different outlook.
Which is actually a bad thing, because it doesn’t give voters a choice.
Whith only two parties there isnt much to choose between anyway
There’s more than two parties to choose from. There’s only two realistic choices because as a population you all choose to make it that way.
Don’t get me wrong, the US isn’t alone here. We have the same problem here in the UK. I usually vote for a third party that more aligns with my own views, not one of the main two, and people tell me I “wasted my vote”. My response is: Did I waste my vote, or did you?
Simpsons of course parodied the situation best when the two aliens both ran for president.
There’s more than two parties to choose from.
Technically true, but there is no real choice. The US doesn’t have a proportional voting system but uses first past the post voting. This by default will result in a two party system. If one party splits up or loses voter to a third party, the remaining party will utterly dominate the politics until one of the other party comes up on top again.
Sane countries do have a proportional voting system which allows several parties to flourish.
That’s the point I (and the simpsons) is making though. If people didn’t vote for one of the two parties because “anything else is a wasted vote”. Even with FPTP you’d get a more varies result, at the very least in the upper/lower houses.
But that doesn’t happen, and that’s how they have us all by the balls.
That’s great in theory but there’s this thing called the collective action problem that pretty much explains why that can’t / won’t happen.
But that doesn’t happen, and that’s how they have us all by the balls.
Well that’s very easy when one party openly is working to destroy the whole democratic system.
you all choose to make it that way.
Boomers make it that way. They’ve made it that way for decades.
And had credible defense too.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/xTgoSa7nzjo
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Europeans realizing they’re not America’s core interest after spending two years talking up a war with Russia is never going to stop being hilarious.
“Becoming” less reliable.
Of all the things libs think is a sales pitch to vote for Biden “you have to vote for Biden or America’s global influence will decrease and other countries will realize were an unreliable and antagonistic ally” is probably their worst
It’s going to be this way every election, ain’t it? Basically two year election cycle of Trump once again running, all the fears of him winning, then he looses, and we get next 4 years of him talking shit and “raising concerns”.
I really don’t see him running in 2028. I don’t think his health/Republican money would both line up and support that
It’s not about Trump (the dude may not even live much longer, he looks awful).
It’s about all the people who support his values and way of thinking and use him as a distraction while they erode democratic rights and processes. America is undergoing a tremendous divide which may lead to the federation coming apart and individual states breaking away. That’s what’s worrying the rest of us, not the POTUS making a fool of himself on TV.
America is undergoing a tremendous divide which may lead to the federation coming apart and individual states breaking away.
God I wish, US’s balkanization would be such a blessing to the entire world.
It would be hilarious for sure
That sounds like an overall good thing though? Especially for the rest of the world.
Why though?
Vaguely points to everywhere - the middle-east, Asia, Africa, everything
Does it? I’m not looking forward to whichever side decides they want part of Canada.
Sure are a lotta bots in this thread
^ found one
Welp, time for Europe to start making nukes again. What could possibly go wrong?
[Happy French noises]
they can’t wait to give them to ukrainian nazis et al like they gave them to
When can I, an international with an interest in the US election, commit money to a political party? Or do I need to be a corporation?
Just apply to open a LLC in a business friendly city online. Now you can funnel money to our politicians legaly from anywhere in the world.
If I had the money I will support Cornel West, but I guess he’s too good for the US
You could just bet on the election.
