PresidentCamacho

joined 2 years ago
[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Now to make it worse, ask this, "If the corporation did 10 times this amount of damage, but to the general citizens of the country, how many people would go to jail?"

That's right 0 people would go to jail! And they would only be fined for no more than 10% of the profit they made while doing it. Maybe someone like a jr director of operations gets tossed in jail, but he wasnt really apart of the club.

[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

And how our legal system is setup to best defend the wealthy.

[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

No, it doesn't fight fascism. If you have a socialist country there are things about the system that inherently make it harder for fascism to pop up, but this is prevention. Also if fascism is already in your country, socialism isn't doing a god damn thing because it doesn't exist.

Socialism is preventative care on a healthy or mildly sick system, it is not the major surgery needed to remove active cancer.

[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

This would be a goal, socialism is not an action to fight fascism.

[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

If you make the point simpler it works. "We are banning tiktok because it is a social media platform we have no ability to censor" with this in mind it makes sense to say "its because of isreal-palastine" because that is just a facet of not having control over platform censorship.

If you really believe that when they say they are getting rid of tiktok it is for national security you're a fucking rube, they have been taking away our freedoms for decades under the guise of national security, they sure as fuck dont consider it any sort of threat that any of the American social media platform would sell your data do a hostile foreign power. They want it gone because A) they cannot control what spreads on it, and B) their rich owners arnt profiting from it.

If you want to argue that any social media platform dying is a good thing, then i can at least sympathize (thought id argue this isnt a step in the direction of getting rid of social media in general), but if you think banning tiktok is about anything more than corruption you're a rube.

[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

Lefty Batman is inherently contradictory too. Because a real leftist Batman would use his money to fix the systemic problems of Gotham, and are you still really Batman if you're not out beating the shit out of poor mentally ill people?

Or you could make the argument that Batman solves his problems with violence, in which case Luigi is fucking literally Lefty Batman for targeting a person far closer to the problem than Batman ever normally would.

[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

So thats on me, I said "does nothing to change our two party system" when I should have said "does nothing to remove our two party system". All this does is concentrate power into the democrats which if they had no worry of winning elections would very quickly openly turn into the Billionaire Boot Licking Society overnight. We need more political parties.

All this being said I'm not arguing against removing the electoral college, it needs to die. But Americas problems run so much deeper than the GOP

[–] PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee -1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Removing the electoral college does nothing to change our two party system so I don't understand why you think it solves billionaire class rule.

view more: ‹ prev next ›