nandeEbisu

So it seems like we both think the other tact is ineffectual, because if progressives don't vote, then Democrats will simply court Republican voters instead which they are currently doing (multiple candidates have tried out throwing LGBTQ people under bus in the coming primary alread). They don't care about ideology, or even being in power. They just want to be able to cash checks from donors. You need to inject new influence into the party, from my perspective your approach is harmful in both the short and long term. Ideally we have a system that makes third parties viable, but we don't so we need to treat a faction within the democratic caucus as a third party and have them primary sitting candidates and influence policy until they have enough members to drive out the old guard. Actual progress is not immediately visible.

It's not about you, it's about the people who are harmed as a result of your choice. You don't have to settle, but the way you do that is by actively backing people you support into positions of power. People are looking at candidates like Mamdani and seeing things better when corrupt establishment figures are left by the wayside which is causing more support for professivr candidates. This is leading from the front by making positive impacts instead of resignation to corrupt systems and making destructive and ineffectual half hearted measures.

I have a fairly progressive friend group, and they still have problem with accelerationism in many contexts. They're not the ones being hauled off to camps when they talk about more ICE getting white people to be so inconvenienced they finally vote to abolish it. This mindset of I want to make a statement in a way that disregards the effect of how that statement is made on marginalized communities is still alive and well. You want the Dems to change, then you need to do actual leg work to support and lift up opposing candidates within the party. There's no easy way out of this.

Nah, there's a clip of his dog tripping on something and yelping while his hand was in a weird spot and people love to dog pile on him. It doesn't help that he has the worst PR instincts when crises happen. I'm not a fan, but think he's a net positive. He clearly excuses abuses by China, but also does useful analysis of current events in a historical context with actual analysis usually. It's not like his community is an echo chamber either, they're constantly shitting on him and calling him out of things, but as a whole they stick around, listen and get more involved with progressive causes.

Unknown could be anything. It could even be windows!

Why the F is a single contractor able to delete an entire DB without any kind of sign off by a manager for that operation, unless they were and to sign off for each other. Imagine if a junior messed up the command? Every system I’ve worked on has had these controls mainly for the latter issue, by the former also shouldn’t have been possible.