this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2025
28 points (100.0% liked)

Socialism

3452 readers
9 users here now

Beehaw's community for socialists, communists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian leftists (this means anti-capitalists) of all stripes. A place for all leftist and labor news and discussion, as long as you're nice about it.


Non-socialists are welcome to come to learn, though it's hard to get to in-depth discussions if the community is constantly fighting over the basics. We ask that non-socialists please be respectful and try not to turn this into a "left vs right" debate forum by asking leading questions or by trying to draw others into a fight.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] spit_evil_olive_tips@beehaw.org 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Oh yes those infamous left wingers like Clinton and Starmer.

they were mentioned in the first paragraph. did you read the article beyond that? because it's quite clear that they're not claiming Clinton or Starmer to be left-wing.

What a weird headline. In what sense are we too early?

gosh, if only there was something to read other than the headline that would explain the point the author is trying to make...

[–] InevitableList@beehaw.org 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm criticising the headline not the article.

[–] spit_evil_olive_tips@beehaw.org 4 points 1 month ago

I’m criticising the headline not the article.

there's a pattern here...did you only read the 2nd half of my comment?

because you were also complaining about Clinton and Starmer being mentioned, but they aren't in the headline. they're in the first paragraph of the article.

the vibe you're giving off here is that you read the headline and the first paragraph, decided you didn't like the entire article based on that, but then decided to post comments criticizing it anyway.

asking ChatGPT to criticize the article would result in more substantive criticism than what you're doing.