Skip Navigation

User banner

LeninWeave [none/use name, any]

@ LeninWeave @hexbear.net

Posts
82
Comments
3672
Joined
5 yr. ago

  • Shah-loving diasporoids when a supposed Constitutional Monarchy is actually constitutional

    Jump

  • Most will avoid, but I've interacted with a couple of them who admit #2, but also admit that they think working class Iranians, then and now, are dumb plebs who will follow any "demagogue" and need the strong hand of their preferred autocrat to get them to achieve "greatness".

  • Low hanging fruit hours who up?

    Jump

  • British Woman shot by dad in Texas after 'arguing about Donald Trump'

    Jump

  • You sound like Argo.

    I'm only pointing out that the common point of almost every fatal gun accident is that the gun was pointed at someone. It's the one single thing that you can do to nearly guarantee a gun won't harm someone: don't point it at them. In this case, if this was an accident (doubt), that would have easily been accomplished by leaving it in storage, where it could not have been pointed at anyone.

    I'm not sure why you're being a dick here, or what your point is. Obviously, not having a gun is a good way not to have a gun accident. I'm only pointing out that many gun owners can't seem to meet the very basic and obvious standard of "don't point a deadly weapon at people unless you want them dead".

  • British Woman shot by dad in Texas after 'arguing about Donald Trump'

    Jump

  • Never point it at things you don't want dead. No matter how unloaded, no matter if the safety is on. How do they keep screwing that up?

    That is, if this wasn't just a murder and the claim of "accident" is a lie.

  • The only reasonable response to demons who are defending the admin in light of the Epstein files:

    Jump

  • Locked

    Bulletins and International News Discussion from February 9th to February 15th, 2026 - The Return of the Special Period - COTW: Cuba

    Jump

  • Aren't M23 dogs of Rwanda, who are dogs of the US empire? He'll probably be fine.

  • Locked

    Bulletins and International News Discussion from February 9th to February 15th, 2026 - The Return of the Special Period - COTW: Cuba

    Jump

  • Morgenthau apology form: I didn't know how much Germans love genocide.

  • [junge Welt] German Pseudo-Leftists spreading Azov-Propaganda: Sympathy for Fascist

    Jump

  • Morgenthau apology form: I didn't know how much Germans love genocide.

  • The only reasonable response to demons who are defending the admin in light of the Epstein files:

    Jump

  • Hormone therapy?

    Edit:

  • Ok pause… Zohran is lowkey going beastmode with this lmao

    Jump

  • but this meant peasants could only get land reform by accusing their landlords of being abusive reactionaries

    Somehow I doubt they peasants had to lie about that very often, lol.

  • All my homies hate Noam Chomsky

    Jump

  • is that applying his rule means anyone who says "Israel should stop existing and Palestine should be the only state in that territory" is out of line

    I think his point is that it's out of line if the same person also calls for respect of international law, because that's an inconsistent position (international law supports Israel's right to exist, so calling to respect it means also calling for that). As I said before, I think international law is already worthless, but I see the logic of the argument even if I disagree with it. I might have been misremembering his position, though.

  • All my homies hate Noam Chomsky

    Jump

  • AFAIK his criticism of BDS wasn't that they rejected Israel per se, but rather that they upheld one aspect of international law but not the other. I disagree because I think international law is already largely worthless, but I think it was "if you lean on the law that says X, you have to accept that the same law says Y", rather than "Israel has a right to exist and I don't like that you're undermining it". I could be misremembering this, though.

  • "How do you take any leftists seriously?" from r/ZeroCovid

    Jump

  • Right, this is tailism. "The masses are reactionary on this issue, so we shouldn't be too progressive on it to avoid alienating them". I'm saying once again that the people who see leaders at a meeting masking and leave immediately are reactionaries and should not be catered to because doing so will make the org toxic to disabled people and because these people you're trying to appeal to will not be transformed into good cadres, especially if you cater to their biases instead of challenging them. Which is why tailism doesn't work and is a bad idea.

  • "How do you take any leftists seriously?" from r/ZeroCovid

    Jump

  • I'm clearly talking about the average maskless Joe who thru ignroance or inattention is liable to confuse your org for a health support group rather than an instrument to wield political power

    I think this isn't accurate. Your claim is that someone would go to a meeting and just because the organizers are wearing masks, assume that they walked into the wrong one? Or are you dismissively categorizing (in the mind of the so-called "average Joe") people who wear masks as unable, unwilling, or unworthy of wielding political power?

  • "How do you take any leftists seriously?" from r/ZeroCovid

    Jump

  • Agreed, actually, you make a great point especially that ZCC should be the best space for leftist agitation. And re-reading OP in isolation (originally I just skimmed it and read the comments) it's clearly valid frustration. I guess I was just sensitive to the Democrat thing, because I remember watching in real-time as they acted as the vanguard of global COVID denialism.

  • "How do you take any leftists seriously?" from r/ZeroCovid

    Jump

  • It's also easier to alienate new or potential members due to the dominance of covid denialist narratives in social discourse, and that conundrum shouldn't be met with its own denialism in turn

    If seeing people wearing masks alienates new participants, those are not participants you want. They would functionally be wreckers. This is blatant tailism.

  • "How do you take any leftists seriously?" from r/ZeroCovid

    Jump

  • Agreed. I just find it disturbing that OOP is seemingly proud of their vote for the Democrats, who essentially created the mainstream acceptable form of COVID denialism in the USA (and many other places) today. If anything, the problem with the US left is they have largely adopted the liberal position on this issue.

    I agree the state of the discourse on this issue on this website is deplorable. I find it tolerable because it at least gets push-back here even in non-explicitly-COVID-focused spaces.

  • "How do you take any leftists seriously?" from r/ZeroCovid

    Jump

  • The linked thread is largely full of liberals punching left as though they're not the ones who created this situation (OP defensively assuring people they "still voted" as if the Democrats weren't the original architects of the spread of this disease while claiming in the title that no leftists are COVID conscious), but it's true that a lot of self-proclaimed "leftists" seem to have a serious problem with the idea of leading by example and taking very basic and very easy precautions when organizing.

  • "How do you take any leftists seriously?" from r/ZeroCovid

    Jump

  • while maintaining the right of leadership and members to organize in certain contexts (particularly outreach) without constant referral to hazmat protocols

    Leadership and cadres (or at the very least leadership) should be expected to take basic precautions, so that disabled people can participate non-remotely without putting themselves at severe risk. I don't see how this demand is any different from a demand for remote participation. It's much easier for leadership to (for example) lead by example and wear masks, which would do a lot to promote COVID consciousness in orgs, than it is to implement actually effective remote participation in many cases.

    Edit: you still haven't said what "exigency and practicality" meant, so I can only assume you meant that "practicality" was leadership taking literally no COVID precautions, which is practical because... ???

    while maintaining the right of leadership and members to organize in certain contexts (particularly outreach) without constant referral to hazmat protocols

    Derisively referring to asking people to wear masks as "constant referral to hazmat protocols" is disingenuous.

    As far as I can tell, it's pretty easy to figure out

    "I implied my point, it's your fault for not being able to figure it out" isn't an argument. Say what you mean, I'm not reading your mind.