|
The long-talked about new EPA power plant regulation is out. It requires at least 90% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions for all power plants by 2035 or shut down. The rule will absolutely be challenged in court and is likely to survive any legal challenge as of now. However, an upcoming Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo could change that. It depends how far the court rules in terms of overturning the precedent that executive agencies can make broad interpretations of their powers and act on their own when Congress passes non-specific laws. Some groups have expressed concern that coal and natural gas plants provide the bulk of America's electricity and this transition may be too fast, which will result in either delaying implementation of the rules or spiking electricity prices from shutting down non-compliant plants. https://twitter.com/politico/status/1656625405342756864 quote:Biden rule tells power plants to cut climate pollution by 90 percent — or shut down Joe Manchin is extremely unhappy with this news and has announced that he will oppose every single EPA nominee in protest until the administration backs down from the plan. https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1656306566583205888 Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 16:07 on May 11, 2023 |
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 14:22 |
|
|
I cannot tell you how excited I am to have CNN talking heads start picking up how I am personally hiding around every corner to make your kids trans.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:22
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Those societies had to engage in the context of the established capitalist societies. They were forced to compete on those terms or perish What's the evidence for this? I've seen this excuse before, and it's used to excuse anything by a socialist or communist state as long as capitalism exists elsewhere. Is the argument that their citizens saw the better quality of life in the west and therefore the USSR was forced to try and achieve the same? I don't think wanting a better quality of life is unique to capitalism, nor do I think it has to go hand in hand with ecological destruction. Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The long-talked about new EPA power plant regulation is out. About time. I wonder if this will force more nuclear power plants. DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 16:30 on May 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Joe Manchin is extremely unhappy with this news and has announced that he will oppose every single EPA nominee in protest until the administration backs down from the plan. "Joe Manchin vows to do what he was going to do anyways. News at 11."
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:27
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Those societies had to engage in the context of the established capitalist societies. They were forced to compete on those terms or perish Oh the old X can't fail it can only be failed argument. The thing is that the attempts at communist command economies failed to provide the promised result. In fact not only did they underperform compared to liberal democracies operating a capitalist system economically they failed completely on the social tolerance question. After over a half century of communist rule Russia is one of the most bigoted, misogynistic, homophobic nations on the loving planet with China not too far behind. Meanwhile loving Disney is taking on the Fash while tankies are defending Putin's Genocide in Ukraine. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:27
|
|
|
Barrel Cactaur posted:The soviet system was essentially imperialism for Moscow focused on centralized control of industry as its model of extraction instead of cash crop territory control. Plenty of cash crop territory control too, especially in Central Asia.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:29
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The long-talked about new EPA power plant regulation is out. I think this is after the supreme court said "you can't regulate the states to change the power mix, you can only apply regulations to the plants themselves... so the EPA did.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:34
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Those societies had to engage in the context of the established capitalist societies. They were forced to compete on those terms or perish I don't think this is a terribly good rebuttal. Any emerging system is going to have to deal with the world around it; the results that system produces under real-world conditions are probably a more valid point of comparison than the results the system could theoretically produce if it didn't have to deal with the rest of the world.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:34
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:
Unlikely in the short or medium term. The bipartisan infrastructure law and IRA both include a bunch of money for nuclear, but it is primarily for keeping existing plants open and slightly subsidizing electricity costs from them. There's nothing in either of them that would fund the amount of money required to build dozens of nuclear power plants required to replace the coal and natural gas plants. The new modular nuclear power plant technology that has been invented might lead to more nuke plants, but it is still in the testing phase with just one test reactor. The rule would basically require coal and natural gas companies to spend huge amounts of money to create new pipelines and carbon capture technology to store it in underground vaults or basically shut down. Almost everyone will choose the second option because it is too expensive and still somewhat unproven to do the carbon capture setup. The EPA isn't exactly shy about admitting that this is basically the intended effect: quote:The rule is one part of EPA’s Biden-era clampdown on coal, the dirtiest fuel in the nation’s power mix. Regan has advanced a series of regulations that, considered comprehensively, are meant to prompt utilities to retire their coal plants instead of paying major sums to upgrade the facilities’ pollution controls. Most major power companies have already made plans to go zero-emissions, but their deadlines for the transition are 10-15 years later than the rule would require. Their criticism is that the rule happens too fast and the penalties are too sudden if they aren't in compliance, so it will cause energy price spikes or damage to communities based around coal/natural gas in a way that a slower transition wouldn't.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:35
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:About time. I wonder if this will force more nuclear power plants. I don't think it's realistic to expect nuclear plants to be built to meet the demand in the next 12 years. It's quicker and cheaper to operationalize other renewable sources like solar and wind. (Unless those neat little micro-reactors are actually able to be built and deployed at scale)
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:36
|
|
|
Aegis posted:I don't think this is a terribly good rebuttal. Any emerging system is going to have to deal with the world around it; the results that system produces under real-world conditions are probably a more valid point of comparison than the results the system could theoretically produce if it didn't have to deal with the rest of the world. It's not a rebuttal. Maybe that's the confusion a lot of you are having. Skex posted:
This has nothing to do with anything. No one thinks Putin is a communist. Disney isn't "taking on the fash", it's defending it's right to sell to people the fash hate. The fash started it and Disney is showing no signs of intervening in other areas where fash are fishing. Skex posted:Oh the old X can't fail it can only be failed argument. The thing is that the attempts at communist command economies failed to provide the promised result. In fact not only did they underperform compared to liberal democracies operating a capitalist system economically they failed completely on the social tolerance question. After over a half century of communist rule Russia is one of the most bigoted, misogynistic, homophobic nations on the loving planet with China not too far behind. I'm not sure what this has to do with what I said at all but your axe to grind against communism seems irrelevant DeadlyMuffin posted:What's the evidence for this? I've seen this excuse before, and it's used to excuse anything by a socialist or communist state as long as capitalism exists elsewhere. What is the evidence that the USSR was in competition with the US? Uh... history. The argument is multi-polar. Quality of life, military projection, cultural/economic projection, basically any realm where the nations compete to use their influence requires resource expenditure and capitalism tends to favor consuming greedily to fuel future greed. So the US ramps up its engine of consumption and others do their best to keep up within whatever confines they impose on themselves or cast off for the sake of keeping up. Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 16:47 on May 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:38
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Most major power companies have already made plans to go zero-emissions, but their deadlines for the transition are 10-15 years later than the rule would require. Their criticism is that the rule happens too fast and the penalties are too sudden if they aren't in compliance, so it will cause energy price spikes or damage to communities based around coal/natural gas in a way that a slower transition wouldn't. Something interesting happened in my community recently where, apparently, a number of local jurisdictions formed a cooperative to lobby for energy choice, and they were able to achieve (somewhat) more affordable rates for 100% renewable sources. I'm not sure how controversial it was, because it was actually opt-out - like, by default, everyone in these communities was switched to 100% renewable sources at a higher per-kilowatt price. We just received a mailer that said, hey, this is happening, reach out if you want cheaper rates using fossil fuels. One caveat, though, is that we're apparently largely serviced by Quebec hydroelectric, which seems to have a surplus of production? So that makes up a substantial amount of the supply, likely keeping prices down - I'm not sure how that scales nationally. But I'm interested in it as a case study of seeing how the market is changing, and how much the issue can be forced without it feeling apocalyptic like the energy producers are claiming. edit: link for details on how it's being handled in New York
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:44
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:What's the evidence for this? I've seen this excuse before, and it's used to excuse anything by a socialist or communist state as long as capitalism exists elsewhere. This is the reverse of what you are asking, please don't ban me mods, but the quality of life thing was a genuine concern for political leaders in post-WW2 Finland, which sat right next to the Soviet Union while it existed. Of course the fear was that Finland would have a communist revolt if the living conditions were markedly better next door. But perhaps more to the point, there definitely existed a very public competition over quality of life "stuff" between the Soviet sphere and the west. That is what lead to the famous "kitchen debate" between Khrushchev and Nixon!
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1656646628411949056 [Scene: Conference room at CNN headquarters. Mid day.] "I've brought all of you in here because there just isn't enough news to go around anymore. We can't get by simply reporting on the news that already exists; we have to make the news. Caroline - tell me what you're doing to make news" "I've been stopping random people on the street and asking them what they think about the introduction of hypercrack in the illicit drug market. They are all very concerned, which will be great for ratings when we break the story of its existence." "Great. Jemal - how close are we to inventing hypercrack?" "We have scientists working around the clock sir. The current formulation is more addictive than the last one, but the skin lesions aren't as severe so it's not quite photogenic enough yet." "Keep me updated. Jerry - how is the story on domestic terrorism coming?" "Not great. Every time I think I'm getting close with someone planning an attack, it turns out to be an FBI honeypot. They told us we need to stop pushing in on their turf." "If you want something done right, you gotta do it yourself." *slides block of Semtex across the table* "Now go make some news, boy!" [End scene]
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:54
|
|
|
shoeberto posted:Something interesting happened in my community recently where, apparently, a number of local jurisdictions formed a cooperative to lobby for energy choice, and they were able to achieve (somewhat) more affordable rates for 100% renewable sources. I'm not sure how controversial it was, because it was actually opt-out - like, by default, everyone in these communities was switched to 100% renewable sources at a higher per-kilowatt price. We just received a mailer that said, hey, this is happening, reach out if you want cheaper rates using fossil fuels. It seems like it varies wildly by area and what type of renewable energy sources you have. According to this study from Wisconsin University, if you are supplied by a huge solar farm that is generating power at scale, then you are just slightly more expensive than coal (technically, 25% more expensive, but the difference is coal and natural gas costs about $0.04 per kilowatt-hour and solar farms cost about $0.05 per kilowatt-hour so the dollar amount is very small). Wind and hydro are also very cheap if done at large scale, but very difficult to do for many areas. The national average residential electric customer is billed at $0.124 per kilowatt hour because the rooftop solar panels are generally not very efficient or have issues with efficient battery storage. https://www3.uwsp.edu/cnr-ap/KEEP/nres635/Pages/Unit2/Section-B-Comparing-Renewable-and-Non-Renewable-Energy-Costs.aspx This is really outside of my area of expertise, though. So, I don't know how likely that is to change or how quickly.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:55
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:And what was the dominant economic system throughout almost all of industrialization? Industrialization was the means by which humanity became better able to grow and consume resources. That was the entire point of industrialization, regardless of which economic system it was under. It allowed far more effective exploitation of resources, leading to a substantial increase in the availability of food and a massive drop in the cost of various finished goods, among other things. The impact of capitalism was in allowing the resulting wealth, as well as the negative externalities, to be very unevenly distributed. It's possible that other economic systems could have spread the benefits more equally, while doing more to mitigate the immediate consequences of industrialization (such the substantial job losses and resulting social strife, as peasants and craftsmen lost what little they owned and were left with little choice but to enter the factories).
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:55
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Plenty of cash crop territory control too, especially in Central Asia. I'm not sure it was exactly "cash crops" but major contributors to the Goloshchyokin Genocide / Asharshylyk of the Kazakhs and the Holdomer in Ukranine was the destruction of the small farms in favor of collectization and using the agricultural workers in factories instead, creating of surplus of goods and exporting of the food that was grown in those regions to the imperial core in Russia. China's famine was at least an accident of not understanding how ecological systems work so there were massive crop failures. The famine in Ireland didn't quite make it to genocide ( though Irish understanding of their history is split, most historians fall on the side of "not genocide" as there *was* crop failures instead of it being wholely manufactued ) but it certianly was excerbated by the poltical will not giving a single gently caress about the Irish. The genocide of Indignious communites in North America were accerbated by forcing populations to live on marginal lands and using destrutive farming techniques that would further deplete those lands. ...My point is commuinst countries and capitalst contries do similar things in the name of exploiting the populace, especially those members of the populace that don't meet certian ethnic standards of "real people." Saying that captialism is *quniuely evil* compared to other systems is hogwash. I mean, beginings of colonalism was still under *merchanilsim*.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:57
|
|
|
Capitalism is expressly evil. while other systems end up with people using evil means towards alleged good ends, capitalism says right on the tin that greed is good and should be rewarded
Harold Fjord fucked around with this message at 17:02 on May 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 16:58
|
|
|
shoeberto posted:I don't think it's realistic to expect nuclear plants to be built to meet the demand in the next 12 years. It's quicker and cheaper to operationalize other renewable sources like solar and wind. (Unless those neat little micro-reactors are actually able to be built and deployed at scale) France built 56 reactors in 15 years, 40 years or so ago. It's possible, and you need a solution for when the sun doesn't shine or wind doesn't blow, and we don't need to invent something new to do it. We have had the technology for decades. DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 17:10 on May 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:01
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Capitalism is expressly evil. while other systems end up using evil means towards alleged good ends, capitalism says right on the tin that greed is good and should be rewarded Somewhat pedantic, but Smith doesn't say capitalism is expressly evil or that greed is good and should be rewarded. Adam Smith basically says that everyone is going to act in their own self-interest (and that is bad for society as a whole) so you need to have a system which directs individual self-interest into productive activity and positive societal incentives. It's basically the economic version of the Winston Churchill quote: "Democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried."
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:03
|
|
|
Talking about capitalism as practiced here today not what some Dead Guy wrote about it in theory over a century ago
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:05
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:Talking about capitalism as practiced here today not what some Dead Guy wrote about it in theory over a century ago You can argue, of course, that such a defense of capitalism is flawed (as I would), but the "tin" (i.e. what bourgeois economists, philosophers and politicians write to defend the system) claims a humanitarian purpose. School textbooks aren't going to be like "capitalism is good because you can screw over your friends, family, and the human race muhahahahaha." Enver Zogha fucked around with this message at 17:28 on May 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:11
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:The reason you’re confused is because people have been demonstrating how the societies you idealize, frequently non-European societies, do seek perpetual growth, they are only limited by the ways they believe they can accomplish that end. I cannot emphasize enough how much I do not idolize these societies, or any state societies. My point was supposed to be about the variety of possible human societies. They can adapt and do a bunch of different things in a bunch of different ways. More than you'd think from looking just at how things are done today. That point was incredibly tangential to current events to begin with, and I seem to have entirely failed to support it. Apologies for dragging out this tangent for so long.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:14
|
|
|
If you're not explicitly taking that position I would avoid imputing it on other posters, since that guy is a huge piece of poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:14
|
|
|
I think weve reached the limit of how productive this conversation can be. At the very least ive gained a greater understanding of the saying, "its easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism". I strongly suggest people read Capital Realism, its a quick read but it makes my point better than i ever could. Have a nice day everyone 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
How many years would it be before nuclear power plants could provide a meaningful percentage of what we get from coal and natural gas? I was under the impression that even if a program was approved today it would be decades before enough plants would be online to make a dent. Not that we should avoid doing it because of the length of time for implementation, but that someone like me would probably be dead before nuclear power generation can take over from the dirtier methods.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
I don’t think CNN in their rightward-branding exercise is really going for Fox News viewers. They’re more going for the people who are news consumers, and might watch network news or local news or use social media, but don’t watch cable news because “it’s all so partisan.” Fox viewers either don’t see Fox as partisan or support its partisanship, so they’re not really the targets. After acquiring a reputation (largely as a result of right-wing misrepresentation) of being more or less as “liberal” as MSNBC, and then leaning into that reputation a bit during the Trump years in search of outrage-viewers, they’re trying to recapture the “just the facts” reputation it had years ago and try to capture part of the market that is (in their reckoning, anyway) underserved. Whether they can do this in the era of political polarization is pretty questionable. And it’s going to make their coverage worse, of course, because the “mainstream” idea of non-partisan news coverage is wall-to-wall false equivalency. Obviously all they care about is making money, and they think erasing their “liberal” reputation will help. Not sure if they’re right at all, but that’s what they’re going for, not becoming Fox 2. E: has anybody seen Kaitlan Collins’s prime time show that started in April? She’s their attempt at a big new star, and I imagine that where her style lands on the spectrum of conservatism between Joe Scarborough (whose show their new network head used to produce) and Hannity would tell us a lot about what they’re going for. It’s even conceivable that nothing much is going to change and this is all just being used as an excuse to drive out pricey and underperforming talent like Don Lemon. Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 17:40 on May 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
Well, now that we've shuffled the pile of leaves and sticks that is the senior senator from California into the Capitol and tied some twine around her voting arm we can get some progress on some of the stalled judicial picks https://twitter.com/BLaw/status/1656697007963004929 Also working for a semi fascist pub like the Daily Caller should disqualify you from any putatively objective organization but ultimately journalists are more about protecting their own than following their ethics. https://twitter.com/TurboTweetie/status/1656625881391964162 zoux fucked around with this message at 17:54 on May 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 17:51
|
|
|
zoux posted:Also working for a semi fascist pub like the Daily Caller should disqualify you from any putatively objective organization but ultimately journalists are more about protecting their own than following their ethics.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:03
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I don’t think CNN in their rightward-branding exercise is really going for Fox News viewers. They’re more going for the people who are news consumers, and might watch network news or local news or use social media, but don’t watch cable news because “it’s all so partisan.” Fox viewers either don’t see Fox as partisan or support its partisanship, so they’re not really the targets. It's basically conceding to right wing framing in the pursuit of viewers. CNN has always framed itself as non-partisan, but Fox does that too. Conservatives just repeated that CNN was ultra-liberal over and over again and they are never, ever going to convince anybody to the right that they aren't.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:It's basically conceding to right wing framing in the pursuit of viewers. And to that I gotta give the old “let’s see how it works out for them, Cotton.” Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 18:22 on May 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:20
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Well, Anderson Cooper is gay, which is very partisan of him, so you need somebody who had paychecks signed by Tucker Carlson to balance him out. Fair enough. https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1656707664678723584 That's actually great news, if these things aren;t ratings blowouts it's not gonna be worth the PR flak they get for staging thinly disguised Trump rallies.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:20
|
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:It's not a rebuttal. Maybe that's the confusion a lot of you are having. Putin is the product of a communist system, he was raised, indoctrinated and was an eager participant in that system prior to the collapse of the Soviet union and his rise to power. The Soviet union had two generations to shape their society into a pluralistic society and the result of it is something that falls far short of the mark of what was achieved in capitalist States where leftists assure me that all social injustices are caused and maintained by the existence of capitalism. Also China is still communist and while they have managed to do better on the economic front they sure as hell haven't done so by limiting growth and they definitely fall short on the tolerance scale. Harold Fjord posted:Disney isn't "taking on the fash", it's defending it's right to sell to people the fash hate. The fash started it and Disney is showing no signs of intervening in other areas where fash are fishing. I didn't call them loving Disney because I thought they were being upstanding corporate citizens, I was pointing out that capitalism actually incentivizes the defense of marginalized groups because money is money. Or as MLK said "we're going to boycott Wonder Bread so hard they'll wonder where the money went". quote:
My point is that the focus on capitalism as the source of societal woes is misguided. That the assertion that class hierarchies are a result of capitalism is nonsense. Class hierarchies in capitalist systems are the result of social forces and hierarchies that existed during it's rise. Even then the very nature of capitalism tends to be extremely democratic in nature as the basic unit of value is literally labor which is why over time there is a tendency for capitalist systems tend towards more inclusive and tolerant systems. Bear in mind that the majority of capitalist abuse are the result of external non economic actions either legal or military and those tend to be driven by pre-existing power interests. quote:
Once again this is just more of the usual x can't fail but can only be failed nonsense.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I don’t think CNN in their rightward-branding exercise is really going for Fox News viewers. They’re more going for the people who are news consumers, and might watch network news or local news or use social media, but don’t watch cable news because “it’s all so partisan.” Fox viewers either don’t see Fox as partisan or support its partisanship, so they’re not really the targets. The guy who took over as CEO is a huge right wing trump type that has shut down at least one reasonably popular show for being "politicized" (read: Criticizing republicans for being corrupt and two faced.) and was most likely involved in the decision to host a town hall for Trump himself at some level. It's not a stretch to say that he's forcing his politics on the company much in the way that many of these types of authoritarian republicans do when they're permitted power. It's just another attempt at controlling the narrative through right wing corporate take over by trying to sway ignorant people who don't know of the more insidious agenda at the top. The idea that this time CNN is totally trying to capture all those Fox News viewers is foolish since the last time CNN tried that Fox News just blared "CNN is a commie liberal socialist demonic yadda yadda" on the airwaves every day and their hosed in the head viewers listened. Given the behavior in other parts of the company it's pretty obvious that the prick at the top is trying to strip mine CNN of any personnel that would talk about the hosed up stuff going with the Republicans while trying to keep turning a profit by turning it into another rag that pretends at an unbiased nature while very much being prejudiced in favor of right wingers. Archonex fucked around with this message at 18:34 on May 11, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
Dick Trauma posted:How many years would it be before nuclear power plants could provide a meaningful percentage of what we get from coal and natural gas? I was under the impression that even if a program was approved today it would be decades before enough plants would be online to make a dent. Not that we should avoid doing it because of the length of time for implementation, but that someone like me would probably be dead before nuclear power generation can take over from the dirtier methods. Here's how quickly France ramped nuclear power.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France That's roughly 150-350 TWh from 1980-1990, so 150TWh/decade. In 2022 the US generated 2554 Billion kWh using fossil fuels. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3 1 billion kWh=1 TWh So at the same rate France ramped nuclear power, or would take us 2554/150*10=170 years to replace the entire fossil fuel capacity with nuclear power. We would need to do significantly better than they did, but we're bigger and it's 2023. I don't have ramp numbers for solar to compare. I'd love to see them.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:31
|
|
|
Skex posted:
This meme has nothing to do with what I wrote, and trying to frame Putin as a communist is just laughable, even if his country was nominally socialist for a time. Actually this meme is worse than that because it pretends that this all occurs in a vacuum. Perfectly spherical country
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:33
|
|
|
I think the point was that Putin is the product of an avowedly communist society. In any cas, he certainly isn't a product of capitalism.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
zoux posted:Fair enough. It all depends on if CNN just decides to constantly platform him over and over again like they did in 2016. They gave him tons of free press by covering his insanity and every tweet.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:41
|
|
|
Calling Debs a capitalist or John Brown a slaver would be equivalently incoherent, to use analogous examples
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 14:22 |
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:Here's how quickly France ramped nuclear power. Thank you! Would love to live long enough to see things like neighborhood nuke pods or some such futuristic power generators that put an end to the dirty stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 18:43
|
|