Which Latin American socdem besides Morales said something like that?

Kissinger's death brought back an OG poster lol

I was here

Would a Trump admin have a different U.S. response to the Israel-Palestine conflict? Or would it just be different messaging? Because it seems like Biden has given Netanyahu carte blanche, which Trump probably would have done as well.

We're soon going to see the first actually existing anarcho-capitalism

Imagine the backlash if someone made this same argument about Ukrainians

Ironic for a historian

There was one really good reply to that comment

Anyone who tries to make it any better is typically labeled an enemy by the west.

These places are treated like resource extraction sites for the "first world". If they try to nationalize the literal or figurative gold mines, bam coup'd. They're called a dictator, a commie, a rogue state.

Your take right here really shows how ingrained racism can be. Its always an individual responsibility problem, never a systemic problem. It's not OPs fault for wanting to live outside of a warzone. It sounds like she's already literally a refugee and your first response is "stay there".

Engineering majors need more humanities courses.

I've been hoarding most of them, sorry

It's fascinating how Rowling projects her grievances with the patriarchy onto trans women.

DSA, meanwhile, thrived between 2016 and 2020—because it proved it could win victories in the here-and-now, give-and-take world of electoral politics. And that, ironically, was intolerable to the entryists (who preferred to refer to themselves as “partyists”), because they didn’t want socialists to remain as a wing of, or even a loyal opposition within the Democratic Party. They wanted a break, in the not terribly distant future, from the intolerable compromises required to appeal to mainstream voters and to compromise with mainstream politicians. And they also believed that DSA members elected to public office were, first and foremost, obliged to follow the positions adopted by the organization, rather than their constituents or their own conscience, as if they were already subordinate to the dictates of an old-fashioned Marxist-Leninist central committee.

What's the point of supporting and fundraising for a candidate if they don't even have any obligations to you? Sounds like that strategy was remarkably bad at "winning victories in the here-and-now, give-and-take world of electoral politics."

Lmao wtf