#tools of putin
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
tomorrowusa Ā· 1 year ago
Text
youtube
The murder of Alexei Navalny came during a peculiar week. Putin felt like he could get away with killing off his main opponent after getting winks and nods from his Republican sycophants in the US.
Some people regard Putin as a "savvy genius". But his catastrophic three-day "special operation" in Ukraine, now about to enter Year 3, has demonstrated what s fool he is. Over 400,000 Russians have died so far in his egotistical attempt to become the 21st century version of Peter the Great.
The ramifications of Putin killing off Navalny are only beginning to be felt. It may have speeded up Europe's efforts to further arm Ukraine. Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen of Denmark is donating her country's entire stock of artillery rounds to Ukraine.
Putin may have thought that he's showing the world how strong he is by murdering Navalny. Instead he's sparked another international backlash against his rƩgime.
We need to hold Republicans responsible for their craven backing for Putin. They are holding up aid to Ukraine on the orders of their leader and wannabe dictator Donald Trump.
4 notes Ā· View notes
porterdavis Ā· 10 months ago
Text
The short answer is yes. So is the long answer.
89 notes Ā· View notes
vintageseawitch Ā· 5 months ago
Text
Tumblr media
i see no lie here. at this point i have no faith in the Green Party. they're all vibes & no substance. they count on leftists & their need for "political purity" & their "principles" to divide them up.
the Green Party sounds great on paper... but they only ever appear like an election cicadas during the presidential election. they never run at local or state levels. they know they will never win. at this point since Republicans are more united than Democrats, it's quite clear that the Green Party isn't there to make sure Republicans lose... it's to make sure DEMOCRATS lose.
your "protest" vote isn't saving shit except maybe giving your ego a pat on the back. you could literally be helping the greater evil to win. do you think anyone will want to take you seriously should Project 2025 be implemented? oh, you sure showed those Democrats! please live in the real world & maybe do a little crash course on American civics to understand how our government works. y'all love theory. but I digress.
please don't stop talking about Project 2025 or Agenda 47. they're the same thing & the reason trump never talks policybis because Project 2025 IS his policy. check your registration status often & vote early if you can. Republicans & other non-Democrats who have decided to vote for Harris - welcome! we got this šŸ’™
46 notes Ā· View notes
the-jam-to-the-unicorn Ā· 7 months ago
Text
Who could have seen that coming (Everyone. Literally everyone.)
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
2 notes Ā· View notes
lenbryant Ā· 4 months ago
Text
Never heard of their platform, but kudos for doing the right thing.
Tumblr media
Pucker is a Communist Spin Whore.
742 notes Ā· View notes
amerasdreams Ā· 2 years ago
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
-- from The Death of Democracy: Hitlers Rise to Power and the Downfall of the Weimar Republic by Benjamin Carter Hett
1 note Ā· View note
dontforgetukraine Ā· 4 months ago
Text
Signs That You're Looking at Ukraine Through a Russian Prism
by Mariam Naiem
1. Perceiving Russian culture as apolitical Culture is political. Russia weaponizes its heritage, promoting a 'great Russia' myth to normalize the subjugation of other 'lesser' cultures. Literary classics become tools of cultural supremacy. 2. Perceiving this war as 'fraternal' Russian propaganda portrays Ukraine and Russia as inseparably linked peoples. This concept ignores Ukraine's aspirations for independence and self-determination and imposes the idea that, at the core, we are one and the same. 3. Pushing reconciliation with Russian opposition This narrative ignores the power imbalance. Any dialogue must be on Ukraine's terms, if and when Ukrainians choose. External pressure for reconciliation is unacceptable. Ukraine's agency is non-negotiable. 4. Explaining Ukraine to Ukrainians Explaining Putin's motives, Ukrainian history, Dostoevsky's relevance to Ukraine, and so on implies that you possess superior knowledge of the topic compared to Ukrainians, which is not true. Ukrainians have deep insights into Russia's actions based on historical experience and direct impact. Such explanations, even if well-intentioned, might come across as patronizing or dismissive of Ukrainian expertise. 5. Suggesting capitulation Urging Ukraine to yield? It won't end the war. Russia regroups, and casualties mount later. Ukraine's fight is for survival, severely limiting compromise options. Respect Ukrainians' difficult position and right to determine their future. 6. Whataboutism "Other conflicts exist" isn't a reason to help less ā€“ it's a call to help more. Each crisis deserves its own focus. Don't use comparisons to justify inaction on Ukraine. 7. Claiming Ukrainians don't deserve help Questioning a nation's worthiness of aid based on alleged issues can be seen as justifying inaction. It's more constructive to focus on the current situation and humanitarian needs. Consider the actions of the aggressor rather than criticizing those defending themselves. 8. Not my war A nuclear-armed autocracy attacking a democracy is everyone's problem. It's not about values ā€“ it's about time. This war isn't yours today, but ignore it, and it'll be at your doorstep tomorrow. Ukraine's front line is democracy's front line. P.S. Consider the Ukrainian perspective and try to imagine their experiences. Itā€™s important to avoid assuming how one might act in their situation. What Ukrainians may need most is genuine understanding and support. The key is to listen and empathize.
946 notes Ā· View notes
omgthatdress Ā· 6 months ago
Text
When you say you're not voting, you're announcing to the rest of us the you don't give a fuck about what will happen to us when Trump makes himself president for life, Palestine has been wiped off the face of the earth and Putin is invading the rest of Europe, mass deportations are going on in the US, and The Handmaid's Tale becomes real life, you just couldn't bring yourself to do something as sad and shameful as vote for someone who isn't 100% as perfect as you like.
Seriously grow the fuck up and do the right thing. If you aren't fighting fascism with every single tool you have, you aren't fighting it at all.
Seriously what the fuck do you expect to happen?
412 notes Ā· View notes
mugiwara-lucy Ā· 2 months ago
Text
Do you guys remember when I posted that article of Trump wanting to invade Mexico last week?
Now you think him and his team would realize ā€œhey thatā€™s fucked up attacking a SOVEREIGN NATION.ā€, right?
Tumblr media Tumblr media
This dumb old buzzard REALLY thinks heā€™s Whitebeard pulling into Marineford!
Claudia Sheinbaum is NOT someone to fuck with. He really thinks heā€™s dealing with these weak MAGA bitches like this cunt šŸ˜‚
Tumblr media
Nope President Sheinbaum will fuck him HARDER than Vice President Harris after their debate.
And need I remind you all? Mexico is our ALLY.
This dumb old fucker wants to be the American Putin and make Mexico into Ukraine. Good luck šŸ‘
All you motherfuckers that voted Third Party, didnā€™t vote at all or voted for this dumb old tool are culpable in whatever happens.
108 notes Ā· View notes
mariacallous Ā· 7 days ago
Text
As the world marks 80 years since the liberation of Auschwitz, one of Germanyā€™s most prominent Holocaust scholars says twisting the facts about the Nazi extermination of 6 million Jews is far more harmful than outright denial ā€” and that such distortion is ā€œa stepping stone from antisemitism into the mainstream.ā€
Kathrin Meyer, secretary-general of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, or IHRA, said she considers Holocaust distortion particularly dangerous, especially as the number of survivors dwindles with each passing year. This week, when the world focuses on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, only 50 survivors took part in ceremonies at the Nazi death camp in Poland ā€“ down from 300 just five years ago.
ā€œObviously, itā€™s an insult to the victims, but itā€™s also a threat to our democracy because you will not find a single radical, anti-democratic, nationalistic, imperialistic group ideology that does not have a distorted view of the Holocaust,ā€ Meyer said about distortions that are often disguised as differing opinions rather than outright lies.
Tracking Holocaust denial and distortion is part of its wider mandate to address ā€œcontemporary challenges related to the Holocaust and genocide of the Roma people,ā€ according to its website.
One example Meyer offered is that of Russian President Vladimir Putinā€™s constant vilification of neighboring Ukraine as a ā€œNazi governmentā€ despite the fact that Ukraineā€™s Jewish president, Volodymyr Zelensky, was democratically elected.
ā€œItā€™s always those who attack freedom, liberal views, diversity and pluralistic societies,ā€ said Meyer, who is stepping down from her position after two decades. ā€œThey use Holocaust distortion for their political gain.ā€
Meyer, who is not Jewish, has led the Berlin-based IHRA as the definition of antisemitism it developed became a flashpoint in political debates.
While many Jewish groups and a number of governments and municipalities have adopted the definition as a useful tool in identifying and fighting antisemitism, some critics say it could stifle free speech by chilling or criminalizing legitimate criticism of Israeli policy.
Meyer recalled that it took IHRA three years to adopt a definition of antisemitism that satisfied all its members, which includeĀ 35 member states, eight observer countries and nine global partners including the United Nations, the European Union, UNESCO and the Claims Conference.Ā 
That definition, Meyer said, is now ā€œone of the most important tools everā€ in the fight against Jew hatred.
ā€œBefore the adoption of this definition, I was confronted time and again with statements like ā€˜Oh, in our country, there is no antisemitism.ā€™ We donā€™t have this discussion any longer,ā€ said Meyer. ā€œWe discuss what should and shouldnā€™t be considered antisemitism, but antisemitism as such is acknowledged as a problem in all our societies.ā€
IHRA defines antisemitism as having a ā€œcertain perception of Jews that may be expressed as hatredā€ toward them. That perception includes certain kinds of rhetoric and action aimed at Israel and its supporters ā€” for example, denying Jews the right to self-determination or calling Israel a ā€œracist endeavor.ā€
Proponents of the definition see those examples as an important response to events like the sharp rise in vandalism of synagogues and cemeteries, verbal and physical attacks against Jews and ā€œanti-Zionistā€ incitement since the Oct. 7, 2023, invasion by Hamas and Israelā€™s subsequent war in Gaza.
ā€œThe events of Oct. 7 have tragically proven us right. There cannot be a debate on antisemitism without looking into the completely biased criticism of Israel that we often see,ā€ Meyer said. ā€œThis dramatic increase in antisemitic incidents came right after the worst attack on Jews since the Holocaust. The fact that this didnā€™t lead to more solidarity but to more antisemitism shows how deep this hatred goes, and how irrational it often is.ā€
Meyer, 60, knows a thing or two about deep and irrational hatred of Jews ā€” and about the power of pushing back against it. She was born and raised in Celle, a village in Lower Saxony, just a few kilometers from the infamous Bergen-Belsen concentration camp where Anne Frank died.
ā€œThis really picturesque little town, with these medieval houses and a castle, looks almost like a Disneyland film set. It wasnā€™t affected by the war. No bombings, no nothing,ā€ she recalled. ā€œI was born in 1964, only 19 years after World War II ended. But there was a big silence in my town about Bergen-Belsen.ā€
That silence extended to her own family, said Meyer, describing her ā€œliberationā€ at facing the facts of what her country had done to the Jews.
ā€œI was among the first Germans for whom the Holocaust was part of the school curriculum,ā€ she said. ā€œMy motherā€™s side of the family was very much opposed to the Nazi system, but my grandmother on my fatherā€™s side was a very committed Nazi. I grew up with her views as well, and Iā€™ve had to fight that my entire lifetime.ā€
Later on, she earned a masterā€™s degree in educational science and a PhD in history from Berlinā€™s Technical University, specializing in denazification and reeducation in Germany after 1945.
ā€œFor me, it was liberating to face the facts, to step up to the responsibility I have as a German of this generation ā€”Ā and to not shy away from it,ā€ she said.
IHRA was founded as a temporary task force by then-Swedish Prime Minister Goran Persson. Along with Britainā€™s Tony Blair and U.S. President Bill Clinton, he organized a Stockholm forum held 25 years ago ā€”Ā on Jan. 27, 2000, that was attended by 46 heads of state and foreign ministers. There, they signed the Stockholm Declaration and committed their countries to support Holocaust education remembrance and research.
ā€œThat was revolutionary, because until then, it was mainly Jewish organizations that had commemorated the Holocaust, but it was never really seen as a governmental responsibility,ā€ she said. ā€œThis is where we started. We had very few member countries at that point, but the others were invited. The snowball effect started, and soon it became an international institution with 35 member countries and global impact.ā€
Besides Jewish victims, IHRA also advocates on behalf of the Roma people, the minority ethnic group which Meyer said ā€œare definitely the most discriminated group in Europe when it comes to hate crimes on a daily level.ā€
During World War II, the Nazis operated a concentration camp near Prague specifically for slaughtering the Roma. For years after the war, Czech farmers used the camp as a pig pen. Eventually, local authorities erected a small memorial.
ā€œHowever, when I visited this place in 2016, I was astonished,ā€ she said. ā€œYou see these plaques and rebuilt barracks, and some references to the Roma community that was destroyed, and then in the background, you hear these pigs screaming and you smell ammonia. It was so terrible.ā€
Thanks to IHRAā€™s then-president, Romanian diplomat Mihnea Constantinescu, Czech authorities moved the pig farm elsewhere and constructed a proper memorial site.
One of Meyerā€™s biggest concerns is the immense power of Big Tech, she said, citing ā€œthe problems we face just with Meta getting rid of fact-checkingā€ on Facebook, and the increasing virulent hate speech spread on platforms like Instagram, TikTok and YouTube.
A recent UNESCO study of 4,000 pieces of content collected in June and July 2021 showed that 10% of such content on Facebook, 15% on Twitter (now X) and nearly half on Telegram either denied or distorted Holocaust history.
ā€œThese tech giants do whatever they want, and I have the feeling this is so unbalanced. Itā€™s something that worries me tremendously,ā€ Meyer said, though sheā€™s not necessarily concerned that artificial intelligence will worsen those problems.
ā€œThereā€™s no question AI brings huge risks, but it also brings great opportunities, because AI cannot only be used by the bad guys. It can be used by us tooā€”for example, in keeping the memory of survivors alive,ā€ she said. ā€œItā€™s not a curse. Itā€™s in our world, and we need to use it.ā€
Asked about her legacy, Meyer said sheā€™s proud to have helped turn IHRA into a ā€œglobal playerā€ while putting Holocaust distortion on the agenda.
ā€œMaking that a major topic was definitely one of the big passions I brought to this job,ā€ she said. ā€œWe live in a world of deep divisions within our societies, and since weā€™re a consensus-based organization, we need to keep the consensus alive to confront antisemitism, extremism, hate speech and the challenge posed by AI and social media. This is a huge challenge, but I think thatā€™s also the only way to go.ā€
Meyerā€™s successor at IHRA is Michaela KĆ¼chler, a veteran German diplomat who chaired the organization in 2021, and who currently serves as Germanyā€™s consul-general in Chennai, India.
ā€œShe brings the drive we need to move this organization ahead and to not shy away from challenges,ā€ Meyer said of KĆ¼chler, adding that ā€œafter 20 years in this business, I need a break.ā€
57 notes Ā· View notes
saruvanthewhite Ā· 11 months ago
Text
And tools they are!
Tumblr media
Putin has been receiving the same government briefing as Trump!
4 notes Ā· View notes
tomorrowusa Ā· 3 months ago
Text
youtube
A vote for Jill Stein is a vote for Donald Trump. Despite that, people will make idiotic excuses for voting for a guaranteed loser who would help end American democracy as we know it.
If the people who voted for Jill Stein in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania in 2016 had instead voted for Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump would never have been elected and his three fanatical anti-abortion appointees to the US Supreme Court would still be picking their noses as judges at some lower courts.
Seriously, even Jill Stein's adult children won't vote for her. She's a terrible egotistical person. No wonder Trump adores her.
At best she is what might be called a vanity candidate, at worst she's a willing dupe for Putin.
I previously wrote about Jill Stein and the hopelessly impotent US Green Party here and here. Between Jill Stein and Ralph Nader, the Green Party has done more than any other US grouping to harm the environment, human rights, and American democracy this century.
The best way to think of the Green Party...
Get Republicans Elected Every November
Don't let anybody spout support for Jill Stein without challenging them.
P.S. Just a reminder that the last year a non-Democrat or non-Republican was elected president was 1848. And that will not change in 2024.
13 notes Ā· View notes
thelostdreamsthings Ā· 3 months ago
Text
"Putin is isolated."
Tumblr media
BRICS, 50% of the World population is telling a big "fuck off" to the arrogant, declining and decadent G7 amounting to 10% of the World's population.
Tumblr media
šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡³šŸ‡·šŸ‡ŗ UN Secretary General Guterres respectfully bows and shakes the hand of Putin in Russiaā€™s Kazan at the BRICS summit.
A lot of people start crying and scream hysterically when they see this picture, for some reason.
Tumblr media
[BRICS Currency Looms Large: Could This Be the Beginning of the End for U.S. Dollar Dominance?
For decades, the U.S. dollar has been weaponized as a tool of global dominance, wielded by the American empire to enforce its geopolitical will.
Through sanctions, coercive financial practices, and the threat of exclusion from the dollar-based system, the U.S. has effectively terrorized nations across the world.
The pretense of a ā€œfree marketā€ economy has long been shattered by Washington's aggressive use of the dollar as a weapon to cripple economies, isolate adversaries, and exert control over global trade.
But the world is growing tiredā€”sick and tiredā€”of this financial tyranny. And now, with the rise of BRICS, we may be witnessing the beginning of the end for U.S. dollar supremacy.
BRICSā€”Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africaā€”represent a bloc of nations that together account for nearly half of the global population and a significant chunk of the worldā€™s GDP.
For years, these nations have been quietly collaborating to counterbalance the West's stranglehold over international finance, and now, they are inching closer to launching their own currency.
The creation of a BRICS currency signals an outright challenge to the dollar-dominated global economy, and it is nothing short of a revolt against American financial imperialism.
Why is this happening? The answer is simple: countries are fed up with being bullied. The U.S. has used its currency like a sledgehammer, smashing nations that dare to defy its hegemony.
Whether through sanctions on Iran, Venezuela, or Russia, or by financially suffocating smaller nations into submission, the dollar has become a tool of coercion rather than commerce.
Nations who once played by the rules of the so-called ā€œglobal orderā€ have found themselves punished, their economies crippled, and their people starvedā€”merely for refusing to kowtow to Washington's dictates.
But BRICS is offering an alternative. The creation of a BRICS currency, backed by the economic strength of its member nations, offers the world a way out of the suffocating grip of the dollar.
This is not just about financial autonomyā€”itā€™s about reclaiming sovereignty, independence, and the right to conduct trade without the constant threat of U.S. interference.
Russia and China have been leading the charge in this effort, driven in part by the U.S. sanctions imposed on Moscow following the Ukraine conflict and the ongoing trade war with Beijing.
Both countries have moved aggressively to reduce their reliance on the U.S. dollar, increasing trade with each other and with other BRICS members in their local currencies.
They are laying the groundwork for a currency that could be based on a basket of commodities, potentially gold-backed, further weakening the grip of the U.S. dollar on the global market.
The U.S. has long prided itself on its role as the issuer of the worldā€™s reserve currency, but this dominance was never guaranteed to last forever.
The BRICS currency threatens to dismantle the global financial architecture that has allowed the U.S. to live far beyond its means.
For decades, the U.S. has run massive deficits, printing money at will, secure in the knowledge that the world would continue to rely on the dollar.
But as BRICS nations move to establish their own currency, that privilege could evaporate overnight.
The implications for the U.S. are dire. If the dollar loses its status as the worldā€™s reserve currency, the U.S. economy could face a severe reckoning.
The artificial demand for dollars that has kept interest rates low and allowed the U.S. to run massive debt could vanish, leading to inflation, higher borrowing costs, and potentially a fiscal crisis.
The American empire, propped up for so long by its control of global finance, could find itself in rapid decline.
For the rest of the world, however, the rise of a BRICS currency represents hopeā€”a chance to escape the iron grip of U.S. financial imperialism. No longer will countries have to fear the punitive measures of the U.S. Treasury.
No longer will they have to worry about being cut off from the global financial system for standing up to American bullying.
The creation of a new currency could usher in a multipolar world, where nations are free to trade without being subject to the whims of a single superpower.
Of course, the U.S. will not go quietly. Washington will likely pull out all the stops to crush the BRICS currency before it can gain traction. The playbook will be the same: propaganda, financial sabotage, and even the threat of military intervention.
But this time, the world may not be so easily intimidated. The BRICS nations, backed by their vast resources and burgeoning economies, are prepared to stand their ground.
In the end, the creation of a BRICS currency is not just an economic developmentā€”itā€™s a revolutionary act. Itā€™s a declaration that the age of American financial dominance is coming to an end, and that a new world is on the horizon.
The U.S. dollar, once seen as the bedrock of global stability, has become a symbol of oppression, and the world is ready to move on.
The question now is not whether the U.S. dollar will fall, but when. And as BRICS moves closer to launching its own currency, that day may be sooner than anyone expects.
The empire, long propped up by its financial manipulation, is facing a reckoningā€”one that could change the course of history.]
IMF Growth Forecast: 2024
šŸ‡®šŸ‡³India: 7.0% (BRICS)
šŸ‡ØšŸ‡³China: 4.8% (BRICS)
šŸ‡·šŸ‡ŗRussia: 3.6% (BRICS)
šŸ‡§šŸ‡·Brazil: 3.0% (BRICS)
šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡øUS: 2.8% (G7)
šŸ‡øšŸ‡¦KSA: 1.5% (invited to BRICS)
šŸ‡ØšŸ‡¦Canada: 1.3% (G7)
šŸ‡æšŸ‡¦RSA: 1.1% (BRICS)
šŸ‡¬šŸ‡§UK: 1.1% (G7)
šŸ‡«šŸ‡·France: 1.1% (G7)
šŸ‡®šŸ‡¹Italy: 0.7% (G7)
šŸ‡ÆšŸ‡µJapan: 0.3% (G7)
šŸ‡©šŸ‡ŖGermany: 0.0% (G7)
Tumblr media
ā€¼ļø 159 out of 193 countries have signed up to use the new BRICS settlement system.
US and European Union will no longer be able to use economic sanctions as a weapon.
This system allows countries to settle trades and payments in their own currencies, reducing reliance on the U.S. dollar, which has long been the dominant global currency.
59 notes Ā· View notes
qqueenofhades Ā· 6 months ago
Note
Having seen what's currently happening in Venezuela, I feel so terrible for everyone to tried to vote Maduro out, and I worry about the US election. Will Trump and the GOP be able to do the same thing??
I agree that what's happening in Venezuela is bad and scary, but it's also not unexpected (unfortunately), and it doesn't correlate to the US election. It is very much a cautionary tale for us, but in the case of what could happen, not what has happened yet (and which we could and MUST still avoid). Here's why I think that.
First, Maduro is the heir of 25+ years of dictatorship (first the Chavez regime and then his), and that political machine has had a full generation to fix/control everything in Venezuela just as they want it. They've collapsed the economy, driven mass emigration/purges/brain drains, installed corrupt systems and destroyed civil society, staffed the government with cronies who will only ever do what Maduro personally says -- etc. In other words, exactly what Trump and the Republicans aspire to do here in America, but with 25 years' head start, so all those fixes are well entrenched. Outside observers were also warning well ahead of the Venezuelan vote that even an overwhelming majority for the opposition candidate might not be enough, because Maduro and co. can just fix the result however they want with imaginary fantasy numbers. (See Putin's "win" in the Russian presidential "election.") Because dictators all draw from the same playbook regardless of their professed ideological temperament, they always use the same tools.
Next, voting in Venezuela is all-electronic, which is obviously the easiest kind of voting to jigger, and which means that whatever the people actually select has little to no relevance to what gets published, recorded, or proclaimed. Now, despite the Republicans' constant screaming about ELECTION FRAUD, the 2020 elections in America were widely hailed as the safest, most accurate, and fraud-free in the nation's history. (For that matter, multiple investigations afterward have re-confirmed this, and the tiny handful of cases of election fraud that were found were committed by, you guessed it, Republicans.) This did not happen because of the Orange Fuhrer and co., who were busy trying to commit election fraud on their own behalves, but because America, however flawed, is still a participatory liberal democracy and citizens have the right to engage and to do so in a meaningful fashion. We had the entire investigation about how Russia meddled with the election in 2016, and changes were made. Cybersecurity experts were brought in; redundancies and failsafes were introduced; etc., and even the Russian campaign focused on psychological influence rather than actually, physically changing already-cast votes, because that is very, very hard to do in America. We are not an all e-voting nation; there are paper trails, hard-copy ballots, hand recounts, poll observers, election lawyers, and multiple other safeguards that exist. The Republicans have been attacking them as hard as they can, but they're still there.
Thirdly, the Evil Orange tried to fix the elections when he was the sitting president (don't forget the infamous "find me 11,780 votes" phone call to the Georgia Secretary of State that got him slapped with felony charges), but he couldn't do it even then. He also tried a coup as the sitting president, with full discretion as to whether, for example, the National Guard should be deployed to the Capitol on January 6, and that didn't succeed. As such, when he's a disgraced jobless felon who is not the commander-in-chief of the American military and holds no official or political role, he's definitely not getting it done now. There were reforms made to the Electoral Count Act to prevent another January 6, Biden and not Trump would be the president at any other attempted attack on the counting of electoral votes, and I can guarantee Biden would not sit around for three hours watching Fox News and cheering the rioters on if such a thing happened again. Trump has been threatening violence again because that's the only move in his playbook, and he wants to intimidate people into voting for him out of fear that he'll attack them if they don't give him what he wants, like any other psychopathic bully. But that does not mean he actually has the tools to successfully carry it off, and honestly, motherfucker? Try it one more fucking time. I double fucking dog dare you. Biden has 6 months left in his term and total immunity, according to your own SCOTUS. So.
Basically, Venezuela has already been a banana republic for 20+ years, the dictator has had a full generation to destroy it/remake it/turn it into his personal fiefdom, he allows elections only because he already knows they won't change anything or actually remove him from power, and that is precisely what Trump wants to do in the US -- but, and this is crucial, has not done yet. Which is why it is so, so important to Orange-Proof America and get rid of him once and for fucking all on November 5th. We can do it. So yes.
126 notes Ā· View notes
misfitwashere Ā· 19 days ago
Text
Rejected Cabinet Nominees
Some historical guidance
TIMOTHY SNYDER
JAN 16
Historically, nominees for cabinet positions have been rejected by the Senate or have withdrawn their candidacies in order to prevent that outcome. It is not common, but nor is it abnormal. The power of "advice and consent" granted to the Senate by the Constitution has been exercised in practice.Ā 
A number of Trump's appointments areĀ simply outrageousĀ by historical, ethical, strategic, or any other standards. The ongoing confirmation hearings tend to normalize the bizarre (although Democrats and a couple of Republicans have asked meaningful questions.)
So a few examples of failed nominations might serve as one tool among others to keep the events of the moment in perspective.
Secretary of Defense
John Tower was the first George H.W. Bush nominee for secretary of defense. He has served in the Senate for more than twenty years, and had chaired its Armed Services Committee. He was an author of the Tower Commission report on the Iran-Contra Affair. He was questioned by Senators about his past alcohol use and womanizing.
Pete Hegseth, unlike Tower, has zero knowledge, experience, or qualifications for the of running the Department of Defense. His program,Ā judging from his books, is to ignore foreign enemies, politicize the armed forces, and carry out a "Holy War" against Americans. Pete Hegseth's womanizing and alcohol use, by his own account, far exceed Tower's. Unlike Tower,Ā HegsethĀ paid off a woman who filed a police report accusing him of sexual assault in circumstances that, by her account,Ā strongly suggestĀ the use of a rape drug. HegsethĀ had to resignĀ from both of the advocacy groups he ran because of incompetence and drunkenness. He regularly had to be physically carried away from events because he was too drunk to stand. In once case he had to be prevented from joiningĀ strippers on a stage. He also displayed total financial andĀ budgetary incompetence.Ā In this connection it is worth mentioning that the Department of Defense has the largest budget of any government in history.
There is a disturbing tendency to forgive Hegseth everything because he is a veteran. This seems unfair to veterans who do not display his failures of character. But it also contains within itself the troubling idea that soldiers can do no wrong: an idea that Hegseth himself seems to hold. That way lies military dictatorship. In any event: Tower served in the Pacific Theater during the Second World War and was in the reserve for decades.
The Senate rejected Tower.
Tumblr media
Director of National Intelligence.
This position was created relatively recently and elevated to cabinet rank still more recently. It is meant to oversee the work of all American intelligence agencies. So a relevant historical comparison will be to the position of director of central intelligence.
Anthony Lake was second-term Bill Clinton's nominee for the position of director of central intelligence. Lake was eminently qualified. He is one of the most accomplished American diplomats of the post-1945 period. Among many other positions he was Director of Policy Planning in the State Department under Carter, and National Security Advisor during Clinton's first term. HisĀ nominationĀ ran into trouble because of two occasions when his deputies on the National Security Council failed to inform him of discussions with the chairman of the Democratic National Committee about donor access to the White House.
Tulsi GabbardĀ has no qualifications to be Director of National Intelligence. A very long list of Americans with national security experience regard her as a danger to the safety of Americans. She is known abroad as a supporter of two of the world's most violent dictators, Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin. As a congresswomen she consistently made excuses for Assad, whose regime killed something like half a million people before it was overthrown. She proposed that the Russo-Ukrainian war could be ended "in the spirit of aloha" and repeats Russian propaganda tropes. Russian media refer to Gabbard as "comrade" and "girlfriend" and "our agent."
Under Senate pressure, Lake withdrew his candidacy.
Attorney General
Zoe Baird was nominated by Bill Clinton for attorney general at the beginning of his first term in 1993. She was eminently qualified professionally for the job. She had however hired undocumented immigrants in her household and had not paid Social Security taxes for them.
Pam Bondi is Donald Trump's nominee for the same position. As part of Donald Trump's legal team, she sought to justify his attempt to overturn the results of an election. As Florida attorney general, she accepted luxurious perks from relevant parties in cases she was considering. In that capacity she also failed to pursue a case against Trump University after a political group supportingĀ received a check, an illegal donation, from Trump's foundation signed by Trump.Ā As a lobbyistĀ she represented a Russian money manager convicted in Kuwait and served as a public relations representative for the government of Qatar. She was paid more than $100,000 a month just for that assignment, which she left in order to defend Trump from conviction after his first impeachment. Then sheĀ went backĀ to working for Qatar.
Under Senate pressure, Baird withdrew her candidacy.
Succeeding events created the closest thing we have to a historical standard for rejecting cabinet nominees by Republican Senators: the employment of undocumented workers.
After Baird withdrew, Clinton nominated Kimba Wood. She too was eminently qualified to serve as attorney general. It emerged that she too had hired an undocumented worker as a nanny. Wood did so at a time when this was legal, and she paid the appropriate taxes. Nevertheless, the mere fact that she had employed one undocumented person, entirely legally, stopped her candidacy. in 2001, President George W. Bush nominated Linda Chavez to be secretary of labor. She then withdrew her candidacy after it emerged that she had paid an undocumented person to work in her household.
So one might move beyond the obvious point that Bondi's scandals dwarf Baird's (and Hegseth's those of Tower, and Gabbard's those of Lake) and propose a pragmatic line of questioning that would apply to Trump's other nominees. Have they or their companies employed undocumented workers? It seems a reasonable question to ask,Ā especially of the billionaires.Ā Given the coming administration's oft-declared hard line on illegal immigration, this would seem to be a minimum standard for its cabinet nominees.
The Senate has a constitutional role, and in the past has exercised it. Some of the nominees presented to them this month are wildly inappropriate to the point of risking the integrity of American national security and calling into question basic principles of the rule of law. The history of failed nominations reminds us just how far some of these people fall below any reasonable standard.
36 notes Ā· View notes
licorice-and-rum Ā· 2 months ago
Text
More Snape Slander guys!!!
Lol, I truly, really love having a reason to add to my already 15-pages-long rant of Snape Slander, so letā€™s go:
Okay, Iā€™m going to be posting this as a different post but this is an answer to some arguments that someone made in this post (Iā€™ll tag them below, I just hate to have repostings on my profile - or, if any kind soul could tag them I'd appreciate, this is their post, read at your own discretion [it's terrible, though], I really need to get some sleep rn). If youā€™re interested in reading more about my not really favorable view of Snape, thereā€™s also my character analysis here.
So letā€™s begin, shall we (oh, and by the way, I am as educated as you were with me)?
Interesting that you think that my post is bullshit, love, because I think your arguments are ludicrous, to say the least. I wasnā€™t going to bother with a response but I think itā€™s only right I add some critical skills and point out that many of your points are already taken care of in my original post ā€“ something youā€™d know if you had read it and understood it.
Anyway, your whole argument is based on the fact that no legal system would consider Snape guilty whichā€¦ okay?
Because the judiciary system is completely fair and absolves only people who should be absolved. It is not at all used as a political tool to advance the very corrupted system we all live in, as noted by the contrast between the speed with which the ICJ issued Putinā€™s prison mandate but delayed Netanyahuā€™s prison mandate for months. Itā€™s not like most of the people locked up in jails in America are black and poor despite the criminality rates showing white men as more likely to commit crimes such as rape, child abuse, kidnapping, and feminicide.
Itā€™s not like every and each judiciary system serves a capitalist political agenda. A very white, patriarchal, European political agenda.
And about that, which judiciary system are we talking about? Mine? Yours? The UKā€™s? The International Court of Law? The wizarding world's? Because of course, thereā€™s a difference between all of them and even if youā€™re right, what does it proves? What does it prove that a white, fascist man with connections to the most privileged in the society (rich purebloods and Dumbledore at the same time btw) would be absolved of his crimes in a system that also privileges him?
Because it does privilege him of course: weā€™re talking about a system of oppression that is ingrained in the wizarding world, why would it be any different from the real world? Snape was fighting for the maintenance of a system that is corrupted (and this also includes the judiciary btw) and to keep on the status quo, especially when he was a Death Eater but also when he was on Dumbledoreā€™s side.
He might not have been targeting muggleborns as he once was when he was young but changing his choice of victims doesnā€™t change the fact that heā€™s using his societal privilege to continue the oppressive system and cycles of abuse he upholds so perfectly since he was a kid. A fucking role model, to be honest.
I mean, using his teacher position to condone bullying and terrorize children, who are a social minority and are in a position of vulnerability in relation to his place as a professor? Ring any bells?
And donā€™t come with me with the ā€œbut he saved them all the timeā€ argument. He took on that role because he wanted to, he did it because he chose to, and as a professor, it was his responsibility to care for his studentsā€™ wellbeing (not that he does much besides keeping them alive for enough time to traumatize them on his way out). I imagine what a role like that would entangle in a magical school where children have potential guns in their hands all the time ā€“ sounds a bit like a security hazard to me even without the whole genocidal maniac persecuting one of them, to be honest. Itā€™s like a parent wanting laurels for actually doing their responsibility, itā€™s shameful.
Or, I donā€™t know, using his higher position in the social hierarchy to expel the only competent teacher of the children he was supposed to look out for because of his lower societal status as a werewolf and continuously using that to make them feel bad in Order reunions, over and over again using his privilege as a non-werewolf as a tool to express his well-placed resentment?
The legal point of view is the real bullshit.
ā€œHe paid his debt to societyā€ and now heā€™s free to do whatever the hell he wants because he chose to take vengeance on his ex-best friendā€™s murder (that he also had a hand in) even if it means that he gets to use his privilege against others exactly like he did in the past ā€“ just not on muggleborns because last time he did it, his feelings got hurt. But *these new marginalized people* he can beat up because thatā€™s not the same thing at all.
You say that ā€œredemption within society isnā€™t about changing your ideologyā€ but forget to question why. Is it perhaps because the people who are actually let go always seem to be the fascist one who upholds what capitalism needs them to uphold? In contrast, of course, with the people who actually do the right thing regardless of legality and are persecuted their whole lives because of it.
Plus, you donā€™t take into account what is the effect of it, right? Why should we ever worry about someoneā€™s ideology if they paid their time? Itā€™s not like their ideology reflects on what they think and how they act in and affect society. Itā€™s not like it can do any harm by perpetuating and encouraging these beliefs by, I donā€™t know, taking a racist education and using it to argue in favor of colonization and occupation of non-white countries because your group has been victimized by the same people that think you and those non-white communities are garbage, or taking on a job that involves children and condones bullying and slurs being thrown at the marginalized kids of his school.
Of course not.
And you say that ā€œthe system Rowling portrays isnā€™t fascist because it lacks the economic and social foundations to support that definitionā€ but forgets also that it doesnā€™t really matter whether is a bad or good representation because itā€™s still a representation of it. You canā€™t smell smoke, feel your eyes burning, suffocate on it, and say there isnā€™t a fire because you technically werenā€™t burned.
It's like denying there was a State coup in Brazil in 2016 because the impeachment had ā€œlegal groundā€ (which it didnā€™t by the way): itā€™s a lazy attempt to grasp at technicalities to escape the very obvious truth that, regardless of the argument (or, in this case, the literary representation) being good or bad, the facts remain the same.
And the fact is that Rowling wrote the Death Eaters as an analogy to fascism (nazism, actually, but letā€™s use the general term), and as such, most of the fandom interprets it and internalizes it that way. Thus, her negligence of the societal and economic portrayal (although I would question the need for an economic portrayal in a childrenā€™s book) does nothing to further any argument at all, not when the truth is that it doesnā€™t matter that the portrayal is lacking: itā€™s enough to be understood as such by the masses and thus it becomes a moot point to make.
Severus and every single Death Eater is a fascist because they propagate, believe in, and are violent in the name of fascist ideology. That their group is not represented as a populist movement or that the wizarding world is not on the brink of its economic collapse to sustain that populist background is of little consequence to the average reader and their interpretation of the problem.
Plus, fascism is a concept that should apply to any social variation of the same movement. You sound like my college professor saying my class should call Bolsonaro a fascist because fascism is a concept used in a very tight set of rules ā€“ which is bullshit.
Although I had already taken all that into consideration in my previous post. Youā€™d know that if you knew my arguments.
Now, you said that ā€œredemption is about regretting what has happened and paying for itā€ and thatā€™s interesting because, you see, thatā€™s not what it is at all, not in every legal system, nor when weā€™re talking about narratives and writing.
In Brazilā€™s legal system, for example, our judiciary system is about social revitalization. Prison is not a place we send someone as a punishment, itā€™s not about paying a debt to society or being punished for what theyā€™ve done. Itā€™s about giving them the tools to not repeat their crimes once they come back to society, and thatā€™s not a test Snape would be passing anytime soon because redemption from being a fascist would be to let go of fascist views.
In writing, on the other hand, an author has certain control over their character, which means that their portrayal is the authorā€™s responsibility. A Redemption Arc is not about judging someoneā€™s actions and applying a penalty, itā€™s about allowing your character to develop substantially throughout the narrative. They need to go from what they are in the beginning to a better version of themselves throughout the rest of the story and thatā€™s certainly not what happens to Snape.
Again, refocusing your bullying to fit other vulnerable groups does not equal betterment in any way, shape of form.
Oh, I really love this one: ā€œHis ā€˜sentenceā€™ was 17 years of self-imposed prison and life-threatening service, which is far more than any collaborator with a terrorist group would face in any real-world court.ā€
Seventeen years of which exactly 14 of those he spent being a professor in the most important schools of magic in the UK, being respected by his community, well-fed, having a probably copious amount of galleons in his bank account to do whatever the hell he wanted to, and still wallowing in his own misery and self-imposed (as you kindly pointed out) emotional torture living in his childhood home to go back to a castle and bully children at his leisure instead of bettering himself as a human being and actually putting some work towards self-improvement as to not, I donā€™t know, perpetuate cycles of abuse that ultimately led him towards that mess of a life he got for himself.
Youā€™ll excuse me if I donā€™t find his journey that impressive from where Iā€™m standing. He made his bed, he can sleep in it or try to do something about it. And, to be honest, I have little to no respect for people who do nothing about their own misery.
Then, he used three and something of those doing something useful but ultimately a sorry attempt at a Redemption Arc. Snapeā€™s big, bold actions in the name of his love for Lily are not something I see as useless, theyā€™re pretty heroic but it doesnā€™t matter because thatā€™s not what my character analysis is about.
What I try to bring to light (and what you sincerely lost in the reading) is that there is no Redemption Arc for a fascist unless they are no longer fascist at all, and even so, there is some degree of immorality in portraying them as redeemable at all. But if youā€™re gonna attempt it, you need to be responsible and actually redeem them, ideology and all.
Weā€™re talking about a book, a narrative that will be read by thousands of people, that will be example and insidiously have an effect on how people see the world. Condoning fascist ideology because they donā€™t persecute *this specific vulnerable minority* anymore (ignore that they do persecute others btw) and did some heroic things for the ā€œgood sideā€ because they felt wronged by the ā€œbad sideā€ and not really for basic human decency is not impressive. Or worthy of praise.
Or basis for admiration.
And as for your account on ā€œIn any real-world war, he would not only have been honored and considered a national heroā€”heā€™d have a hundred movies and documentaries made about him. Heā€™d be an icon.ā€ ā€“ so do countless others who are not even remotely deserving of any kind of admiration or having their memories preserved in that sense.
I should know, the number of novellas and documentaries and songs and History lesson materials and street names in my city alone that are homages to ā€œnational heroesā€ that ā€œhelpedā€ the poor people or some other minority while massacring indigenous peoples, selling out our land to big corporations and the agribusiness, censored and persecuted artists and journalists in their time, and so on are actually crazy in Brazil.
National heroes are only national heroes because they serve the political narrative our system needs them to serve, darling, otherwise, they are forgotten and even villainized, make no mistake of that.
ā€œPolitically, Iā€™m sorry, but Iā€™m not going to call a working-class boy a fascist when he ends up in a nest of far-right extremists simply because theyā€™re the only ones who treat him wellā€
Interesting that you should mention Snape as a working-class boy ā€“ like class traitors donā€™t exist? Granted, the expression is mostly used to define cops but thatā€™s no different, although I would call it a bit hypocritical of you to use Snapeā€™s class to defend him when you accuse (rightfully so, of course) Rowling of not portraying well the economical part of fascism.
And ā€œthe only ones who treat him wellā€? Really? Lily apparently doesnā€™t exist in your reality. Or better yet, youā€™ll tell me sheā€™s not a good friend and didnā€™t treat him well enough and all the misogynistic gross and stupid points snape apologists make when youā€™re scrambling to save your fave? Please, if that is it, spare me.
Oh, and by the way, the part you didnā€™t read at all on my very thorough analysis:
ā€œThe truth is, even with all the undeniable good Snape did as he worked as a spy, he was a Death Eater for his conviction, and at the end of the day it doesnā€™t matter why he chose to become one.
At the end of the day, it doesnā€™t matter that he was neglected and abused by his parents, or that he was bullied in school, or that his crush didnā€™t reciprocate his feelings: he still became a Death Eater, he chose to become one. And that is unforgivable. It is unforgivable because it means he supported and actively worked for a system of thinking that ridiculed, persecuted, tortured, and murdered hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people. He advocated for a political view that has no regard for human life, that perpetuates the abuse he suffered firsthand ā€” just in a slightly different direction. He didnā€™t just not break his cycle of abuse, he actively perpetuated it. Advocated for it.
And donā€™t get me wrong: Iā€™m not saying here that the abuse Snape went through isnā€™t important at all: there is definitely something to be said about the preying of supremacist groups for young isolated men who feel left out and emasculated. But that doesnā€™t mean Snape gets to be absolved for his own choices because thatā€™s what they were: his choices. He chose to become a Death Eater, he chose to uphold the cycles of abuse he had been a victim to not long before, he chose to protect it even in the face of people ā€” good people ā€” telling him that it wasnā€™t a good thing.
Thatā€™s my point, actually: Snape may have been preyed upon by the blood supremacy ideology as a teen but at some point, he chose to be influenced by it more than by millions of other influences around him. He wasnā€™t completely isolated or ignorant of the world to the point that the only influence he could possibly choose was the blood supremacy one, no: he had people telling him the contrary and still chose to follow blood supremacy. So, no, itā€™s not forgivable that he chose to become a Death Eater because he did know better than that, his very friendship with Lily proved it.ā€
Oh, and letā€™s be very real here: ā€œthe rich, left-leaning aristocratic kids bully him for not meeting their social standardsā€
First of all, I brought the Marauders into my analysis as little as I could because I could destroy Snapeā€™s character without even needing them. Now, if bullies like James and Sirius are actually better in their ā€œsocial standardsā€ (human decency is more like it, actually) as you so nicely put it, then I have no idea why you bother to defend Snape at all. I donā€™t have time, nor patience to explain that believing people are equal and deserve equal respect is the most basic thing you can do as a human being and if Severus doesnā€™t even manage that, his class or trauma has little to do with it, his character on the other hand...
Many people have trauma, as I already pointed out, and many people were lulled by fascist ideology but not all of them chose to give in to it. His choice is his responsibility, donā€™t ever deny that or fool yourself into thinking itā€™s some kind of forced brainwashing. It isnā€™t, and even if it is, it doesnā€™t matter as much as the fact that heā€™s an adult who should know better than to condemn people to die or think less of them because of things they cannot control.
And even entertaining you're crazy notion that Snape's not actually a fascist (he is) it doesn't really matter if he believes it if he joins a group that advocates for it.
Plus, you should really start thinking about what kind of idiotic ideology you tolerate just because of ā€œtraumaā€. Fuck him and his trauma, I couldnā€™t care less if Snape was bullied because he lacks human decency because the truth, so eloquently put by my fellow countryman, is that ā€œa fascistā€™s hat is a hammer; all suffering is not enough; and the swastika has to be hit until it turns into a pinwheel.ā€ And by lovely miss Lyudmila Pavlichenk: ā€œNot men, fascists.ā€
And yes, I think anyone left-leaning is better than anyone in the far-right any time of the day, not really sorry if I actually understand politics and how important it is to preserve the lives of people in a system that is designed to leave them in an indecent condition. A system that Snape fought to preserve ideologically and politically for the earlier years of his life without so much of a written recognition of the real garbage it all is.
Plus, letā€™s be very clear again, I wasnā€™t talking at all about the Marauders when I criticized Snape. You brought them into the discussion, not me. I could very well cite other characters who are not as terrible as Snape or bullies like teenager James and Sirius (and Iā€™m gonna ignore that you included Peter and Remus into the ā€˜aristocraticā€™ and ā€˜richā€™ context because I donā€™t think even a Snape apologist would be that idiotic although your hashtags beg for me to think otherwise), and still manage some fucking human decency despite their traumas.
Garbage is that you think, at fucking 28 years old, that fascist ideology is somehow tolerable, or that the legalities of some situation actually account for something other than the political structure of the system, or that admiration equals the deserving of it. Bullshit is you thinking that you can actually beat me on technicalities and that you believe advocating for tolerance over the intolerable is somehow admirable, is to be naĆÆve enough to think the legal system doesnā€™t obey a political agenda and therefore benefits whoever is on the winning side, which to Snape was both during the two times he was a spy.
He was the one who had nothing to lose, darling. He had no family, no one that he cared about, no one who could even stand him, no one who would mourn him - all through his own merit by the way. And to be honest, no one to pity him either. It's pathetic that that is the truth because he chose so, that the only thing that "saves" him are a few memories of an abusive friendship.
He was nothing to be admired and never evolved as a human being. He gave himself to a cause that kept him commode most of the time and acted only out of the fact that he was wronged by the other side. The fact that if it had been Neville who was chosen he would never have turned is shameful as a human being, the fact that he only kept his students alive but never really took into account their wellbeing is shameful as a professor, the fact that he hated Harry because of all of it is childish and unbecoming for an adult, the fact that he bullied children is shameful as an adult.
And none of that was redeemed because he was a spy. He could be a spy and a fucking decent person. But he wasnā€™t, and he wasnā€™t by choice, so fuck him.
And, to end with this tiresome and, honestly, easy as fuck to refute, tirade of useless arguments, ā€œWhat Iā€™m saying is that I donā€™t give a damn about moral niceties.ā€ ā€“ Clearly. Just as clear as your ignorance of what ā€œmoral nicetiesā€ really mean in this context.
PS: look, 22 pages now! Iā€™m expecting more to be addedā€¦
PS2: Tbh, you'd think this person thinks the only people to ever fight Voldemort were the Marauders for all they seem to argue
PS3: This person really confirms everything I know about the relativism of European people for dangerous and prejudiced political views.
28 notes Ā· View notes