|
Greenwald goes on reactionary Brazilian radio and literally got assaulted one time because he pissed off the host so much for opposing Bolsonaro So if they invited on Greenwald he'd probably agree, but since I think the only thing he knows about the country is that an illegal coup is going on, that's probably what he'd say.
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 18:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
ArmZ posted:so Greenwald is doing a sit down interview with them next week I guess? Do you have even one single good post to your name?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 18:19
|
|
|
ArmZ posted:so Greenwald is doing a sit down interview with them next week I guess? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 18:26
|
|
|
ArmZ posted:so Greenwald is doing a sit down interview with them next week I guess? gently caress off Gringo subhuman
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
Da libs really hate Glenn
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 18:30
|
|
|
if you scrawl the words "glenn greenwald" onto a piece of parchment and set it out overnight above a hole-in-the-ground trap, you might wake up the next morning with up to a dozen concern-troll libs who stumbled into the trap and couldn't get out without revealing their true face
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 18:45
|
|
|
lmao
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 18:45
|
|
|
ArmZ posted:so Greenwald is doing a sit down interview with them next week I guess? What in the world is it with liberals and Glenn Greenwald My hypothesis is that most liberals get some sort of sexual pleasure from the act of "condemning (what they perceive to be) bad people on the left" because someone who sees the bad On Both Sides is clearly the most reasonable and impartial.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
greenwald is one of the best americans, the permanently online messy bitch of freedom.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
greenwald is wrong about some things but his Brazilian reporting is immaculate and I see no reason why he’d do a bad job on Bolivia
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 19:01
|
|
|
Stay safe bolivians
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 19:35
|
|
|
Except the coup lady and the cops
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 19:35
|
|
|
Addamere posted:Except the coup lady and the cops And Camacho
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:greenwald is wrong about some things but his Brazilian reporting is immaculate and I see no reason why he’d do a bad job on Bolivia It really seems like the most consistent thing about people liberals absolutely despise is disagreeing with US imperialism in some fashion. I imagine that this is mainly just a result of US media strongly opposing such people and most liberals kinda being gullible rubes who are manipulated by media far more than they're willing to admit. Like, Tulsi Gabbard sucks rear end, but the reason most liberals hate her is ironically probably the only remotely good thing about her - her opposing mainstream US opinions with respect to Syria. So this in effect makes her "marginally better than your average Democrat/presidential candidate" (which is still poo poo, but the focus on her is wildly disproportionate).
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
the rules of liberalism are written in sand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 19:45
|
|
|
my biggest problem with greenwald is hiring dipshits like lee fang
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
Al! posted:my biggest problem with greenwald is hiring dipshits like lee fang I don't think Greenwald does the hiring at Intercept. The worst thing you can say about him is that he's willingly employed by the private news outlet of a billionaire creep like Omidyar. https://twitter.com/henrykrinkie/status/1197908188135395329?s=21 Pener Kropoopkin has issued a correction as of 20:04 on Nov 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 19:53
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:It really seems like the most consistent thing about people liberals absolutely despise is disagreeing with US imperialism in some fashion. I imagine that this is mainly just a result of US media strongly opposing such people and most liberals kinda being gullible rubes who are manipulated by media far more than they're willing to admit. pretending to be naive and gullible is a way to protect yourself from the cognitive dissonance of ones self-proclaimed liberalism and the us imperialism required to uphold it
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
liberals are the kind of people who know generally what's right and wrong but would never advocate for immediate courses of action to fix that wrong, because they would never willingly give up their relative comfort in the present day. when it comes to imperialism, they know imperialism is wrong but fear that if their country stopped exploiting the global south there might be some changes to society that result in temporary inconveniences. like, what if you couldn't just pick up a relatively fresh banana any time of the year at any old gas station
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:when it comes to imperialism, they know imperialism is wrong lol no chance, can't even see imperialism. *zizek slurring* ideology
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 20:27
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:lol no chance, can't even see imperialism. *zizek slurring* ideology that's why they cast their own invasions as "humanitarian interventions" against the tyranny of dictators who cannot be allowed to stand and spread their imperial influence. of course, some scapegoat group is picked for people to get mad at as the group of people who have infiltrated our society, to better sell the idea that our invading country is actually the ones under attack. people know on a base level that imperialism is bad and war is bad and killing's bad so things have to be spun in a way that makes people feel it was defensive action instead of imperial conquest Rodatose has issued a correction as of 20:39 on Nov 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 20:33
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:liberals are the kind of people who know generally what's right and wrong but would never advocate for immediate courses of action to fix that wrong, because they would never willingly give up their relative comfort in the present day. when it comes to imperialism, they know imperialism is wrong but fear that if their country stopped exploiting the global south there might be some changes to society that result in temporary inconveniences. like, what if you couldn't just pick up a relatively fresh banana any time of the year at any old gas station Liberalism can only work by dismissing the contradictions in favor of some notion of incremental progress. Like, their moral worldview is absolutist in the sense that every evil is absolutely evil and requires immediate action to correct it - except when it comes to the evils we're responsible for, because doing anything about it would require violence and hurting people is evil. So overthrowing democratically elected left wing governments or right wing dictatorships is a necessary good because it's all premised on the idea that progress can't happen until you empower people who conveniently fall in line with the Washington Consensus. It doesn't matter that objectively, foreign interventionism produces way worse outcomes than the status quo almost every single time - because like Ytlaya said, they only care about whatever makes them feel good at the moment. But if you make a clear case that this is all part of an imperial project that's objectively bad, and we have to overthrow the US government then suddenly the moral absolutism gives way to political pragmatism and the moral certitude that political violence is always bad. It was hard for me to even compose this post because I couldn't make all of these contradictions fit neatly into a satisfying structure to read - but that's just the inescapable fact of the matter. Liberalism perpetuates itself by ignoring the contradictions until they ball up into a massive Gordion Knot that can only be cleaved with the sword of The Immortal Science. On the other hand you also have conservatives and other reactionaries who externalize the contradictions onto a "degenerate element" that only needs to be defeated for everything to fall into the correct order. From that standpoint all forms of political violence are objectively correct, because the contradictions can only be subsumed with force. That may be stupid and evil, but it's simple enough to make sense. Liberalism doesn't make any sense because it's the edifice of bourgeois class power. A 300 year tradition of contradictory moralizing that stops making sense with any kind of scrutiny.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Liberalism can only work by dismissing the contradictions in favor of some notion of incremental progress. Like, their moral worldview is absolutist in the sense that every evil is absolutely evil and requires immediate action to correct it - except when it comes to the evils we're responsible for, because doing anything about it would require violence and hurting people is evil. So overthrowing democratically elected left wing governments or right wing dictatorships is a necessary good because it's all premised on the idea that progress can't happen until you empower people who conveniently fall in line with the Washington Consensus. It doesn't matter that objectively, foreign interventionism produces way worse outcomes than the status quo almost every single time - because like Ytlaya said, they only care about whatever makes them feel good at the moment. Have you read Losurdo's book "Liberalism?" The ideology morphed from a spirited and passionate defense of owning slaves from the overreach of absolute monarchs wanting to ban the practice into being the PR arm for imperialism that it is today.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
CAPS LOCK BROKEN posted:Have you read Losurdo's book "Liberalism?" The ideology morphed from a spirited and passionate defense of owning slaves from the overreach of absolute monarchs wanting to ban the practice into being the PR arm for imperialism that it is today. I'm aware of Losurdo but haven't read him. That's still consistent with the historical record of liberal intellectualism though. Like how John Locke tried to create permanent serfdom in the Constitution of Carolina. It's well worth keeping in mind that the primary opposition to slavery came from a religious Christian universalism, while the secular liberal tradition was desperately trying to protect that kind of absolute private class power. You can see that in the antebellum South too, where the Planters were all about individual freedom & liberty.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
got to give Tulsi credit I think she is the first to acknowledge the US might be behind this. she’s not terribly consistent but still
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:liberals are the kind of people who know generally what's right and wrong but would never advocate for immediate courses of action to fix that wrong, because they would never willingly give up their relative comfort in the present day. when it comes to imperialism, they know imperialism is wrong but fear that if their country stopped exploiting the global south there might be some changes to society that result in temporary inconveniences. like, what if you couldn't just pick up a relatively fresh banana any time of the year at any old gas station I think this is overly generous and most of these people probably just think "yeah imperialism is bad, but (insert foreign leader) is definitely evil and anyone arguing against ~regime change~ is clearly a tankie who supports (insert foreign leader) and all the bad things they've done." Basically, the media they consume causes them to see foreign evil (or made-up nonsense like in the case of Morales, but they'll believe whatever the media says) as a clear black/white moral issue, while US evil is perceived as "nuanced" because it's part of the society they live in. edit: Another way of putting it is that they can see the evil of past imperialism because accepting past US evils is at least somewhat mainstream among US liberals, but they don't see current imperialism because their impression of events is entirely manipulated by the media. Ytlaya has issued a correction as of 21:40 on Nov 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
She definitely took the cowardly "wait for the facts" stance - and I guess to be fair as someone with a real job like being a congresswoman she probably couldn't pay that much attention. But if Bernie could recognize this was a coup then she should've.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:37
|
|
|
Glenn texted her that it would make Hillary mad
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
greenwald is, it is true, an Online messy bitch who loves drama and has some bad ACLU adjacent and civil libertarian takes on some stuff, but the liberal objections to him mostly boil down to thinking his anti-imperialist, anti-interventionist takes (and willingness to talk to anyone including creeps like Carlson) make him hysterical in some way - and there’s also a non-zero percentage of liberals who are homophobic and either knowingly or unknowingly have a basic revulsion to him as a person
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:44
|
|
|
personally i do disapprove of his lifestyle, though. having that many dogs is unsanitary and disgusting
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:45
|
|
|
Liberals think doing something like going on Cucker Tarlson is one of the worst crimes against humanity you could commit, because they don't know what it's like to be marginalized and denied a platform. It's the same reason they hate anybody who works for RT. Any liberal idiot could get on an MSNBC panel, but a foreign government that's antagonistic to US foreign policy is the only interest willing to give leftists a platform with production value.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:49
|
|
|
my theory on the dogs is that they make it impossible for intelligence agencies to plant any surveillance devices in their house and even if they did, little intel can be derived above the cacophony
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 21:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ErikSperling/status/1197983280865464320
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
I'm gonna buy Professor Furr's bibliography this black friday
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
Good idea Has this been posted? The right wing press literally acting as footsoldiers for the dictatorship https://twitter.com/OVargas52/status/1197892572561203200
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 22:51
|
|
|
Cool that Ayanna Pressley recognizes the coup but the person she endorsed for president doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
'a full blown humanitarian emergency' lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 22:56
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/HenryKrinkIe/status/1197923064522117120    
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2019 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:15 |
|
|
i thought warren was the first native american congress woman 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2019 00:19
|
|
