GarbageShoot

joined 3 years ago
[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think others have explained it well enough. Fitness is cool and useful, but this streetfighting shit is dumb. Convincing one person to get a gun is worth more than convincing a dozen to take up muay thai. Boxing comes out more favorably, but literally only because of the sheer volume of cardio training, since it will actively teach you to be worse at punching (ungloved) along with the other litany of issues applying a combat sport to a street fight.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)

OP is a larper, but your concern is valid, Two options include sports glasses (which can still shatter, but a flexible frame makes them less likely to break otherwise) and wearing a visor or safety goggles or something in the case that you wear contacts, so they act as a protective barrier to irritants.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

Yes, but we have that because we hate them

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

God damn it, we didn't need an NL emote. He's a miserable shitlib.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 16 points 1 year ago

I'm going to copy a comment I posted a couple of weeks ago:

I hate the "collectivist" vs "individualist" framing, it's so loaded towards "individualism" when what people usually mean is atomization, meanwhile us so-called collectivists don't as the myth goes, believe in submitting one's individual interests to the Greater Good of The Collective, we believe that most people have most of their interests in common with other people and should work together to pursue those interests rather than against each other. Because of that, I prefer the framing that is loaded the other way of "pro-social" vs "anti-social". The people you describe are significantly anti-social and disliking individual corporations has no bearing on that.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

It's more like saying global warming isn't real because a new ice age just started. Biden is leading the greatest attack on civil liberty seen since the fucking Patriot Act, and his warmonger inclinations in Ukraine and Israel aren't counterbalanced by fleeing from the fiefdom of Kabul, and if we take a broader look at how he's handled policy, we see the continued escalation of the war on immigrants (not that he hasn't pursued that lately too) and him basically shrugging at Roe being struck down.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago

None of your gripes here are Biden's fault, unless you're wishing he'd be more authoritarian (fuck that)

Your ideology calls it authoritarian to not give free-reign to unelected judges with lifetime appointments. You're a joke.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago

Send troops. Enact a draft to that end to "make the libz cry."

You are really out of touch. Trump loves imperial domineering, but he generally prefers to avoid boots on the ground because they represent a liability to his image. He will not send volunteers and he knows as well as anyone that it'd be suicide to enact a draft.

Send more weapons.

Biden does this.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago

It's only logically moot specifically because there's only two options. Refusal to participate doesn't change the fact that it will either be Biden or it will be Trump in the Oval Office next year. Choosing a third party will also not change that fact.

This is simplistic. There are only two outcomes to the upcoming election, but there are countless political strategies, many of which do not treat 2024's presidential election as a totalizing issue. Other people, for example, think that what matters is building a strong leftist opposition so that we can escape the cycle of Republican vs Republican-lite elections, accepting that it means not giving unconditional support to so-called "moderates" for whom genocide is moot. Your logic only makes sense because you are question-begging by framing the question like the future doesn't exist beyond the next four years.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're the one arguing in favor of continuing to bail water out of a sinking ship like Dems have exploitatively argued for decades. This is your status quo, this is what lesser evils of the past have won you.

Disowning the present circumstances requires disowning every single application of your horseshit political perspective for about 50 years. Under neoliberalism, there have only been two Dem strategies: Republican-lite (e.g. Clinton), or lie about not being Republican-lite (e.g. Obama), and you've won about half the time and gotten us your "lesser evil" administrations, "crisis" after "crisis", and all those "lesser evils" have accomplished nothing but serving up new situations to keep choosing between Republican and Republican-lite.

If you want anything other than a farcical good cop/bad cop routine carried on until the country implodes, your strategy has thoroughly failed, repeatedly, for decades.

You have two options: live in madness and keep trying the same thing over and over again in denial of it having the same result, or accept that the "moderate" path is opposed to you ever getting an improvement, instead of the first step towards it.

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 15 points 1 year ago

I think most reasonable accounts of the violence at the southern border (which has escalated again under Biden) would be considered a genocide

[–] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

continue to get slowly better

lol looking at the last couple weeks all I see is a crackdown on supposed "open society" in order to combat anti-zionism while the war machine rattles on abroad.

view more: ‹ prev next ›