If they can elect a felon to the white house, so could we.
Edit: Better image, thanks to @[email protected]
But he can’t run because by the time of the next election he’ll be a convicted fe-
-Oh wait, never mind.
Here is a better version.
if we nominate him, lawyers can drag out his case until …
Holy shit yeah it’s a get outta jail free card right?!
not for everyone. one of these felons helped the rich. that’s how you get the card.
the other is just an allegation btw. if cops say he did it he probably didn’t. but that alone is the worse crime.
I upvoted, but these kinds of posts make me uncomfortable. Luigi was a wealthy crypto bro working though a mental crisis. Luigi is not lefty batman.
I am very happy about the discussions his actions are creating and the overreaction from the upper class, but I am not sure it is a good idea to glorify Luigi.
Crypto bro working through a mental crisis… not lefty batman…
Batman was a rich bro with severe mental trauma. Any modern reboot would have no problem making Wayne a crypto bro.
If you’re waiting for perfect, you’ll be waiting for ever.
unfortunately it is also a bad showing of the left because this guy ends up taking more action.
“the point of theory is to change the world” -Marx. If the left does nothing then the left has failed us. Luigi isn’t perfect, but he is a real person who was willing to sacrifice everything, to walk away from a life of comfort and privilege, just to take a stand against evil and to show the entire world that even a god king can bleed (300 reference)
Luigi was a wealthy crypto bro working though a mental crisis. Luigi is not lefty batman.
That sounds a lot like Batman.
That’s why I use Saint Luigi. It’s a ignore all the things that don’t line up with the ideal, and only focus on those that do kind of thing. Just like the churches do with thier saints. Lol
Explain how Batman was not a wealthy crypto bro working though a mental crisis ?
lmaooo
tangentially I feel like Batman could never jive with leftist ideology anyhow. His whole thing is beating and scaring the crime out of people, which is in contrast to the leftist idea that crime happens because the needs of individuals (physical, psychological, and social) are not met by their material conditions.
the leftist idea that crime happens because the needs of individuals (physical, psychological, and social) are not met by their material conditions.
Like, why do people always jump to thinking there can only be one correct option out of multiple choices?
I am sure there are many people committing crimes because they can’t fulfill their basic needs any other way.
But do you think Trump is lacking in material conditions? People are diverse and they commit crimes for diverse reasons.
Good point ☝️
Also batman didn’t change the systemic issues with Gotham.
Also batman didn’t change the systemic issues with Gotham.
This is exactly what I have been saying since the assassination. You cannot fix systemic problems with vigilantism.
Did anyone’s coverage go down? No. Did UHC just deny the claim of a woman in a coma? Yes.
You cannot fix systemic problems with vigilantism.
Well you can’t fix it from within the system. You can’t fix it with vigilantism, but it can be fixed as every other country in earth has fixed this problem.
The fuck do you people want then?
There was time to fix it from within the system. That was before the fascist dictator was elected. There is no fix at this point. The good news is it will almost certainly come all crashing down due to incompetence and you only have a few years before global warming because a much bigger problem than healthcare anyway.
What do I want? A socialist utopia. I’m just not under any illusions about it happening in America.
No, there demonstrably wasn’t. This happened under Biden.
Sorry, do you think time began in 2020?
When has Batman been lefty?
His generally agreed upon biography is a wealthy billionaire trust fund baby who suffered great emotional loss and broke, who now spends the rest of his life and fortune fighting injustice
There will never be the perfect Robin Hood. Engels was wealthy, Bernie is a millionaire.
Really the point is that Luigi is (allegedly) right, and represents a justifiable sentiment of disdain for the system and class solidarity.
I agree. Do we really want to make Luigi a political leader then?
I think this is less about actually making Luigi a political leader and more about reminding everyone that the actual political leaders the working class puts forward deserve consideration as a compromise by the powerful people in the system, because the working class could at any point decide to stop compromising.
The System works by compromising, should the system through fuckery stop delivering acceptable compromise, the (by far) larger class has other ways to defend its interests.
He was not wealthy if he couldn’t afford the health care…
All I know is that his family is very wealthy. I hadn’t heard that he couldn’t afford healthcare. Do you have a source on that?
I thought the dead healthcare CEO was the source.
You can kill an insurance CEO while being covered by said insurance.
In the manifesto I read he had coverage. It didn’t matter because the claims were denied.
Do you have that link? When I search for the manifesto I get this one: https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/luigis-manifesto and it doesn’t say anything about coverage or getting denied.
That’s the point though- people tried playing by the rules, the system shat in their faces. Now you have people snapping and going vigilante with guns and that’s called consequence.
You break the socialist contract, bad things start getting lauded
Yeah, I get that this is an inevitable outcome. But now that we’re talking about it, instead of putting every CEO’s head on a spike, let’s try to do something more constructive. You know like creates systemic change to close the wealth Gap.
I’m still proposing that we take the richest person in the US every year, and confiscate 50% of their wealth and use it to fund healthcare, housing, education and food (all basic needs that the top 1% has stolen from us). Then we build a statue in their honor somewhere, labeling them as “This Year’s greatest winner and Patriot”.
I appreciate you trying to shift the narrative and demonize our modern day folk hero, but it’s probably not going to work.
Just because he’s your “modern day folk hero” doesn’t make him or his actions immune to scrutiny. This way of thinking opens doors that people like you tend to stand firmly against.
No one should ever stand above our laws, our standards of morality, or our ethical codes of conduct without question. And propping someone up to such a height makes you every bit as bad as those you accuse of doing so.
Lol WTF.
They said it makes them uncomfortable, and explained why.
Don’t bring this kind of conversation shutdown, bad faith misinterpreting, toxicity BS from reddit.
Demonize? What have I said that was incorrect?
I don’t think he’s a hero, but his actions are the inevitable outcome of our system.
When justice can no longer be achieved through peaceful demonstration or the legal system, people will increasingly turn to violence as their only option.
While I won’t celebrate violence, I do prefer targeted violence upon those causing the damage to mass murders of innocents.
If you’re going to murder someone - don’t. But if that doesn’t stop you, I’d rather the victim be someone who damages the world instead of schoolchildren and churchgoers.
The NOLA NYE terrorist attack on random party-goers is also an inevitable outcome of our system.
A lot of people on Lemmy believe that a wealthy elite controls the whole system. I think it’s far more likely that no one controls the system. Sure, some people are able to get rich off the system and carve out a little niche for themselves but the whole state apparatus is just a big tug of war that’s long since pulled everyone into the mud pit.
Political gridlock was long ago designed into the system as a way of preserving the compromise between ideologically disparate groups. Now we’re reaping what we sowed.
A lot of people on Lemmy believe that a wealthy elite controls the whole system. I think it’s far more likely that no one controls the system. Sure, some people are able to get rich off the system and carve out a little niche for themselves but the whole state apparatus is just a big tug of war that’s long since pulled everyone into the mud pit.
The closest I’ve seen to that is people explaining that the upper owning class has influence and control over many aspects of society, like politicians and mass media, but this does imply a conspiracy, that any one group has a cohesive agenda or control. It’s more about acknowledging a mutual class interest among the owning class which trends towards certain outcomes despite that tug of war among them.
He’s part of the reason I hate phrases like “Kill all billionaires”.
Yes, most rich people are pretty evil, and I’d like them taken to task. But simply being born into fortunate circumstances doesn’t make someone evil; it’s the things they DO to keep that wealth that make them a greater or lesser evil. Ideally, everyone would have at least that basic quality of life that he did. Investing in crypto is one thing, but if he committed some atrocity using crypto I’ve yet to hear about it.
Mental health crises are very common now. They don’t necessarily make the act “not brave”.
I have the position that murder is the least ideal form of change, but as the post states all less violent options have been removed from the table at this time. It’s sad that CEO (person) was killed, but it may have been an inevitable outcome.
It’s sad that people with for-profit health insurance are forced to buy it and then killed when they can’t use it. Then I feel bad for CEOs who kill their clients some time later I imagine.
Actually… Shit. That’s kind of a good point. His approach was the non-violent solution.
If we’re fighting with the same weapons, then Biden’s last act should be a pardon for Luigi…
Biden is not on our side on this issue, that’s part of the problem. He is and was the candidate that the people who didn’t want healthcare reform pushed in to block Bernie from putting the issue on the ballot by running on it.
I keep hearing this idea floated, do people really think that Biden is not on the same side as the health insurance companies??
He hasn’t been convicted yet. You cannot pardon someone who doesn’t technically have a record.
Incorrect. Example, hunter was pardoned for everything he might’ve done in the past 11 years, not just what he was actually convicted of.
I stand corrected. That was quite a misinformed post I made.
Disgusting. This is as bad as championing Trump. Rape, murder—what’s the difference?
Bootlicker.
Who you murder matters.
I have zero problem with all the Nazis the Allies murdered in WW2.
This is a class
waroccupation. The Class war was lost in the 80s, the people were tricked into surrendering without terms. Luigi, an alleged traitor to his class bless him, tried to foment a resistence/revolution to the class occupation most of us suffer under.The idea that change must be nonviolent is something that the oligarchs put in our heads to maintain their control, which includes violence using captured government force against us. Most nations were founded using violence, including this one. Further, the oligarchs have captured both major parties, leaving us to bicker on social issues, and without a vote on the shape and priorities of the sociopathic economy both parties are well paid to defend from us, the people that suffer it. Our nonviolent options have been taken away, as we’re encouraged to be divided and hate our fellow laborers on every conceivable wedge so we never look up. Divide and profit.
Brian was murdering Americans in swaths. His murder weapon was snake oil, a con: “buy our service as your preparation for inevitable illness! Just give us your money every month, and you’ll be prepared when you need life saving care…” “… Oh you’re sick now? You’ll die without care you expect us to pay for? Whatever gave you the idea we’d pay for your care? Thanks for all the premiums, fuck off and die, poorie sucker.”
cough India’s independence, Jim Crow Laws. cough cough
Neither of which were achieved through purely peaceful means.
Ghandi had violent freedom fighters supporting the same cause, which are never mentioned in today’s history books. And the civil rights movement had Malcom X, the Black Panthers, and riots.
Violent flanks are associated with higher success rates of social movements:
https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article/1/3/pgac110/6633666?login=false
“India’s Freedom Struggle (1857-1947) was shaped by influential leaders who are called Freedom Fighters of India like Mahatma Gandhi, who pioneered nonviolent resistance”
Those riots wouldn’t have had any influence whatsoever, along with so much of all the other things done outside of the influence of MLK’s nonviolent influence, if it wasn’t for him sitting down with the president himself, and pressuring him via calm mindedness logic and reason, not to mention organizing the biggest moment in the entire movement by far.
If only the leader of Poland had sat down at a table and calmly negotiated with Hitler to not invade.
That’s obviously not what I’m saying exactly. If you’re interested check out Leo Tolstoy’s non-fiction: Confession, What I Believe, The Gospel In Brief, and The Kingdom of God Is Within You
You’re so close to getting it.
I hope someday I can say the same for you my friend.
India’s independence
There was plenty of violence there, even in the Quit India Movement launched by Mahatma Gandhi.
Violence didn’t result because Gandhi ever advocated for it, it was something that happened as a result of it. Because again non-violence isn’t just standing by and doing nothing, it’s about resisting evil via non-cooperation. Resisting it by not obeying it; not retaliating, but never to submit to evil at the same time.
Why does this argument assume violence is always evil?
There are plenty of situations where non-violence is not effective, where an attacker does not want or need co-operation, making non-cooperation merely non-resistance to evil. Sometimes the only realistic way to disobey violence is with targeted counter-violence or the threat of counter-violence, we don’t always have the luxury of non-violent tactics available to us.
Even groups like antifascist orgs emphasize that non-violent tactics are generally preferred, and I agree completely, but ultimately, there are many real-world situations where non-violent methods just aren’t applicable. This is important to realize if we want to stop evil.
“Where an attacker does not want or need co-operation.” That’s the context in which I’m speaking. That’s the whole point, to not submit to both your inherent need to retaliate and there demand for you of something; to not just sit there and do nothing, but resist—non-violently. To not submit to them taking your land, your children, but to do so non-violently. To resist the aggressor, by never giving them your obedience, which includes allowing them to harm you or your loved ones, but without literally fighting back, but by never backing down at the same time.
👊🏻 fuck yeah
Luigi didn’t change anything. He just killed a guy, who will be shortly and largely painlessly replaced by another stooge to do the bidding of the owners of society.
Real resistance must be organized to achieve anything. This Rambo shit is a Hollywood fantasy. And yes, organized nonviolent resistance can work and has worked many times, including in regimes far more repressive than the US.
I recommend reading Civil Resistance: What Everyone Needs to Know for those interested in how resistance movements an actually win real change.
Luigi didn’t change anything.
- Overnight sense of fraternity and class solidarity amongst the working class
- Billionaires and execs are already second guessing their safety
- Would be school shooters types were taught there is a better outlet for their anger that will get them national love, attention, and legal donations
- Reinvigorated interest in gun ownership amongst everyone
- Started a national conversation about how the rich are robbing us blind and killing us in mass, a conversation that is still going a full month later despite the media’s constant distractions
Yeah, absolutely nothing changed. 🙄
I think you are way overestimating the reach of these changes due to echo chambers. Most people don’t support Luigi outside of terminally online political radicals (no hate, that’s me as well). Loud but small in numbers.
It’s possible his action will take on a symbolic importance that leads to bigger changes in the future. But that remains to be seen, and I think ordinary people are already forgetting about this story. Again, without sustained organization this leads nowhere.
There was a poll posted indicating 70% of those surveyed view united health care’s CEO as “kind of asking for it”, not that uncommon.
My 80-year-old Trump voter MIL recently told my wife we need more Luigis in the world. Anecdotal but I think it’s probably more commonplace than you’re imagining.
But that remains to be seen, and I think ordinary people are already forgetting about this story.
I’m not even in the USA and that’s not the case here.
Again, without sustained organization this leads nowhere.
Yes, but this is very different from saying it didn’t change anything. It evidently has. We’re not pretending this is the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, the flashpoint of a new era. No, this is one of the small little steps where organizing becomes more viable, when the “”“public debate”“” shifts from ‘is it ok to punch nazis?’ to ‘is it ok to assassinate the worst capitalists?’. For many, it’s provided a real window into the corporate mass media’s alienation from the people on the ground.
Most people don’t support Luigi outside of terminally online political radicals (no hate, that’s me as well). Loud but small in numbers.
They don’t need to support him for the above changes. But now that you mention it, a rather significant number of people support him even if they’re in the minority:
Again, without sustained organization this leads nowhere.
I agree. But it’s absolutely silly to think nothing changed.
I mean, if actually meeting your end at the hands of a customer your company fucked over becomes a perceived risk to the job, C-suites might think twice about anti-human profit-seeking decisions for their companies
Maybe, but that’s only going to happen through a broader movement and not through a single killing. And organizing a movement to kill enough people will be difficult or impossible (and I believe unethical but I understand I’m in the minority there). OP had it backwards—nonviolent resistance is actually much easier because of state repression, not in spite of it.
Also, I think without deconstructing the structures that produce such outcomes, it would be at best a temporary improvement.
Luigi wasn’t working in an organised group though… he was a disgruntled citizen fucked over by our healthcare system like many, many others in this country. You don’t need to organise shit when you’re denied life-saving treatment and have nothing to lose by offing another greedy billionaire. Wouldn’t surprise me if we start seeing more Luigi’s until our government and the billionaires who control it start listening.
https://www.npr.org/2024/12/05/nx-s1-5217617/blue-cross-blue-shield-anesthesia-anthem
To those patients… it matters.
It’s unclear if this is related to the assassination. There were a lot of efforts pushing back against this horrible policy so attribution is difficult without knowledge of their internal deliberations.
Given the timing, and the general apathy and march towards even more malice towards their customers, that would be an unbelievable coincidence.
The day before, they simply had no fear to rescind a profitable new policy. It also happened at the same time BCBS took down all their executive profiles from their website. Was that also just coincidence? Or do you concede that was because of the shooting?
No I think that clearly was. But you are ignoring pressures by various elected officials and civil society on the anesthesia policy. Luigi may have been a factor but he clearly wasn’t the only factor.
I don’t think most of these decision-makers really understood why Luigi did what he did, or why so many people supported him. They think they’re the good guys. And it’s not at all clear that this policy change will protect them from the kind of person who does this anyway. So the causal link is not as clear as you imply.
That said, I’d be interested to hear health care execs talk about how this made them feel or behave, if any are willing to be honest. Maybe I am wrong, it’s difficult to know.
But you are ignoring pressures by various elected officials
Seriously? Both parties are very well bribed to protect their sociopathic corporate greed from civil society.
https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/industry-detail/F09/2024 https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/unitedhealth-group/summary?id=D000000348
If there were elected officials working against them, there were a hundred elected officials being called by the companies telling the parties to get their spoiler members, because the DNC and RNC only promote on your ability to get the bribe money aka “fundraise,” back in line.
My question still stands: rape regarding trump, and murder in this circumstance—what’s the difference?
It wasn’t the oligarchs that suggested nonviolence, sweet lord; hate only ever breeds more hate, evil only ever makes more evil. Love (selflessness, i.e., logic and reason) is the only true remedy, as proved in gaining India’s independence, and in eliminating the Jim Crow Laws here in America as a couple examples; not to mention leading to mankinds first experimenting with Democracy in ancient Geeece: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codrus
Most of Greece fell to Tyrant rule for the next 400ish years, while Athens stood tall to practice this system of Archons, leading to 9 more positions regarding things like their judiciary system and religion.
My question still stands: rape regarding trump, and murder in this circumstance—what’s the difference?
How many examples of public political rapes can you find?
Lt. Commander Data: But if that is so, Captain, why are their methods so often successful? I’ve been reviewing the history of armed rebellion, and it appears that terrorism is an effective way to promote political change.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: Yes, it can be. But I have never subscribed to the theory that political power flows from the barrel of a gun.
Lt. Commander Data: Yet there are numerous examples when it was successful: the independence of the Mexican state from Spain, the Irish Unification of 2024, and the Kenzie Rebellion.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: Yes, I am aware of them.
Lt. Commander Data: Then would it be accurate to say that terrorism is acceptable, when all options for peaceful settlement have been foreclosed?
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: Data, these are questions that mankind has been struggling with throughout history. Your confusion is… only Human.
How does this answer my question? I’m not following.
How many public political rapes in history can you mention?
I can list you pages and pages and pages of political murders.
How does naming all of that answer my question?
Removed by mod
It was literally just explained to you.
No it wasn’t. If so, please kindly reply to me with it quoted so I can understand more clearly. Thank you.
Who you murder matters.
I have zero problem with all the Nazis the Allies murdered in WW2.
So who you rape matters? So if Trump raped what he considers as the worst of the world or someone he considers that deserves it and that it’s unquestionably justified for doing so, that makes it okay?
The conversation is about murder, not rape. The purpose of rape is to personally gain sexual satisfaction, or to hurt someone for the sake of it. That is not the case here, and it’s a false equivalency.
I tried to 🤷
You didn’t though. If so, would you care to explain further? And make sure to answer the question directly this time.
I can repost my at length response as to who is murdered and why matters, your response to it would indicate you don’t see the someone murdering an active murderer, or a member of a mass murder movement, as any different than any random murder of hatred or convenience.
Eva Braun apparently just didn’t love Adolf enough to mend his heart.
So who you rape matters? So if Trump raped what he considers as the worst of the world or someone he considers that deserves it and that it’s unquestionably justified for doing so, that makes it okay?
Do you think we could have loved the Nazis into standing down and stopping their genocide?
Do you think you can love a sociopath capitalist murdering for profit into no longer doing so?
Do you think plotting to run up and Hug Brian would have saved a single life? Because BlueCross, at least for now, reversed a policy to deny enough anesthesia for surgeries because of what Luigi allegedly did. He brought about positive change to some, for now, however temporary.
I don’t believe in justice in another life there’s no evidence of. Loving hate just gets you mowed down, this isn’t a fairy tale or a movie. If we want to turn an unjust world into a just one, good vibes won’t cut it when the people in charge don’t even view us as people due to no meaningful net worth.
Yeah, I can assure you, returning good for evil done is far from a fairy tale or movie, and a slap in the face to all the people that have given their lives for its cause and its potential.
We’ve always retaliated throughout history, and it only ever got us more and more retaliation; it only ever puts a reason to retaliate in someone’s lap. The tickle of love or hate in the world both begins and ends with the individual.
We’ve always retaliated throughout history, and it only ever got us more and more retaliation; it only ever puts a reason to retaliate in someone’s lap.
Who retaliated on the Allies for winning WWII?
Did the world get worse when the war ended?
Did the Nazis stop of their own accord, or did someone have to fight them?
You’re pretending as if you’ve never heard of Popper’s paradox of tolerance or indeed understand that justifies self-defenses can’t exist.
If a 50kg woman was regularly raped and beaten by their 200kg muscly husband and never allowed to leave the house, would it be unreasonable for the woman to kill the man in his sleep? In this hypothetical she can not run or contact anyone for help.
She should be a peaceful individual and accept that it’s her responsibility to be non-violent so the world is a better place and to to keep just taking the beatings and the rapes?
We have yet to see. 9/11 ring any bells?
What does that have to do with the relevance of returning the evil of that war with good?
This still doesn’t prove the irrelevance of it becasue who can say what else would’ve happened if evils to this degree were met with equal parts good?
I thought we were talking about war here? More specifically even murdering a CEO as a matter of fact. Of course that person should be trying to escape, people have a tendency of not looking at this idea reasonably, and especially to ge off topic and use these specific situations where of course we should be using any means necessary to get ourselves out in that situation. I didn’t realize world peace rested on this women trying to change the mind of this one serial killer apparently, I’m assuming.
In what world is a 50kg woman obese??
You say that as if this is a retaliation, then peace, then retaliation.
United Healthcare murdered people for profit yesterday. They are today. They will tomorrow. This is an active attack. An active slaughter is upon the people, though the owners just call it business, whether we would fight back or not.
Don’t confuse quiet for peace. We haven’t had peace here in decades.
No amount of murder justifies the murder of even one.
I’m not sure what you mean by the peace retaliation bit, can you explain?
Are you familiar with the trolley problem?
This is frickin’ genius. Let’s get some yard signs pronto - Etsy people, Assemble!
I’d vote for him. Or against his conviction, if I was on his jury.
Btw is Lemmy.world finally cool with that opinion yet?
Yeah, there was clarification a few days after the assassination that discussing jury nullification for crimes already-committed was not a violation of the TOS, contrary to the claims of some of the mods (not admins).
I haven’t had anything deleted and I’ve said more than a few things about Luigi and death to CEOs
Lemmy.world was never not cool with that opinion. There was an issue about talking about jury nullification which, it turned out, did not apply to this case, and it is not legal to call for assassination in The Netherlands, where the server is based, so those posts get removed because, and I really don’t know why people don’t get this, we want Lemmy.world to continue to exist.
Hey I appreciate your explaining the nuance. Thank you.
When will leftists face the fact that Bernie simply wasn’t popular enough to win not one but two primaries?
Love Luigi, (may he live forever), but this delusion around Bernie is hilarious.
Leaving aside the issue of whether or not he legitimately lost those primaries (which is certainly debatable at least in 2016), I think he would have not been a very effective president because both parties in congress and the judiciary would have done everything in their power to oppose any social welfare policies he might have tried to get implemented.
Obviously, he would have been better than Trump, but I do not think he would have achieved much. In fact, I think he would have achieved less than Carter.
You do know the meme doesn’t say “Bernie would have won” or anything like it, yes?
We all know you lefties think Bernie was “plotted against” by the DNC or some other victim mentality bullshit you guys love so much. Lmao.
*plonk* <º)))))><
Why russian flag?
I did not create this meme, but if you’re referring to the colours, blue red and white are the colours of the US flag. Afaik all design elements and colours are directly taken from irl Bernie-posters.
Huh.
Btw. this apparently russian flag seems to be an accidental result of the design language of those posters. On posters with a white background the top stripe is blue instead of white. The design simply tries to use the 3 american colours and retain the appearance of 2 stripes.
This seems to be the original design and was simply adjusted to a blue background with this unintentional side effect of creating the impression of a russian flag.
And an American flag is a nightmare in terms of graphic design. It’s asymmetric, both the stars and the stripes are distracting and, honestly, it’s just ugly.
Red white and blue are actually the colors of the Russian Federation’s flag. It shouldn’t be my job to educate you /smdh
Sorry the /s stands for just kidding.
Do you recognize this flag? Can you tell me what the colors on it are?
That looks like a French flag that was put in a blender.
Wow, y’all just became, un ironically, Unabomber stans?
Holy shit, losing the election surely fucked everyone up in the head
that is some impressive mental gymnastics to equate those two things, keep huffing the copium.
As far as I know, Luigi’s popularity is not limited to one political side.
It could also be referring to overall election loss, or DNC primary loss.
I’m probably going to get downvoted into oblivion for this, but I don’t care. The “left” fawning over Luigi is the same energy as the “right” fawning over Kyle Rittenhouse.
First, the right is also fawning over Luigi.
More importantly, you’re missing the underlying point of this meme. It’s displayed in the other pieces of text. We wanted Bernie and would’ve been happy to make that much progress nonviolently, but the DNC did not allow that. And “oppression makes revolution inevitable” because there’s no such thing as negotiating with your oppressor. Think of a hostage situation. The people who successfully negotiate away that situation are the police because they are backed with the threat of violence. Those who crave power will never give it up voluntarily.
We wanted Bernie . . . but the DNC did not allow that.
No. Bernie didn’t win. The DNC was a part of that, but he also didn’t get the votes to suggest he could win, other voters didn’t support him - which is how primaries work. I wish he would have won!
And to add to that, Bernie’s an Independent, not a Democrat. If I ran in a republiQan primary and they did some bullshit to make it harder for me - plus the real issue that enough republiQans didn’t vote for me - that’s not the RNC’s fault. That’s hardly “I didn’t win becaus the RNC didn’t let me”.
I just don’t want “Bernie didn’t win because the DNC prevented it” to become some sort of arguable fact - it is part of a larger picture, but a pretty small part.
The DNC’s role was not small lol
You can say that he wouldn’t have won the presidential election if you want but he was absolutely pushed out of the nomination in favor of a more-corporate candidate.
Getting over half the country to vote for someone as out of touch and unlikeable as Hilary Clinton is proof that the most Democrats would have voted for anything to avoid Trump. And this November was further proof that moving to the center does not win elections.
Bernie had momentum and was VERY popular with the youth. Clinton’s ignorance of the working class was the subject of memes…
Yeah, that’s the easy narrative for people to hate Democrats with but I don’t think it’s true. Furthermore, it seems like most of the people who promote that idea either weren’t of voting age at the time or aren’t US voters.
I’d be interested to see it as a post where we can slug it out. Start with the news reports and then make your case as to why you think that. We’ll see if there’s anything to learn.
he was absolutely pushed out of the nomination in favor of a more-corporate candidate.
By who? When? What did he say about it?
You don’t have the actual answers to that. But if you think you do - make a post, let’s see it.
Except one fought an oppressor, the other took a trip to do some oppressing themselves.
Sure and I think the system should change for sure. But in both cases they are persons that murdered people their backers thought should be murdered. The right wants to oppress, so killing in the name of oppression is right for them. The left wants to break the oppression, so killing in the name of breaking oppression is right for them.
But the truth is, both were wrong, killing someone is never the answer. Preparing to go kill someone, planning to kill someone is a sign of mental health issues.
Nothing is going to be fixed by this. It only further polarizes the world. It only escalates the conflict. We need actual solutions and people in charge that know what they are doing and can bring about systematic change. Maybe using the guillotine in the late 1700s was the right solution back then, but I hope we as a society have evolved way beyond that point. Plus when it comes down to a fight, the people in charge of, you know, literal armies would probably win.
Elevating a literal murderer to the point people see them as a viable political candidate like in this meme is simply insane. We need more tree huggers like Bernie, not insane gun wielding thugs that think violence can solve anything.
That’s just not how the world works, or has ever worked. It’s just a disarming thought thinking nonviolence will save the planet when clearly the powers that be have never had any intention to listen to nonviolent efforts. Killing people may not be necessary, but the threat of violence undoubtedly is. If you cannot show you are able to defend yourself, there will always be a power ready to exploit that lack of defense.
Nonviolence only works when your opponent has humanity. Capital and the state do not, and never had any humanity in their ideological framework. This cannot be solved if you avoid shows of force, a war cannot be won with nice thoughts and prayers. A war is fought, and we haven’t been fighting in a long time.
It’s a depressing thought, and it shouldn’t be like this. But so it is, and the only way we save this world might be if we taint our own hands, this revulsion from violence will be our death otherwise
Respectfully disagree. Look at how much progress we have made in Europe since the second world war. We’ve done so much through diplomacy alone. Sure there has been conflict and there still is, but nothing like what it was before.
There are less wars, less murders, less crime than ever before. Prosperity is up across the board. Sure it’s not perfect and we have a long way to go, but there is so much we have done.
The current disparity between the ultra rich and the general population is a huge issue that should be addressed asap. But it should be done using the right means.
I refuse to believe the only way to stop being oppressed is to become the oppressor. It might be the US is lost in this regard, but I hold out hope. But I’m sure in Europe we can deal with it the right way, without getting violent.
It’s not an oppress or be oppressed issue.
Nonviolence only works when your opponent has humanity.
The point of this is that both sides need to be engaged in making a nonviolent solution happen. If only one side is on board with the process, then the result is either a lack of change or one sided violence.
Look at how much progress we have made in Europe since the second world war. We’ve done so much through diplomacy alone.
In Europe, both sides are engaged in nonviolence. Both sides are interested in diplomacy over violence, so progress can be made.
The situation between American’s and corporations (and increasingly corporate controlled government) is one where nonviolence has been met with inaction. That is a single sided engagement. The lack of both parties being engaged means the approach isn’t working anymore.
