Residential streets aren’t generally intended for through traffic. They’re meant to provide access to the people who live there. These are areas where kids play and people go on walks and stuff, having a bunch of cars run through trying to get from point A to point B as fast as possible is not ideal. That’s why you get cul-de-sacs, intentionally designed with one way in or out, to prevent drivers from cutting through.

What did I say that’s whataboutism? You claimed that Cuba was authoritarian and the US is free, therefore it’s perfectly valid for me to compare the two against each other. It would only not be valid if you had placed them both in the same category.

Freedom House is literally funded by the US State department lmao. Nice objective and unbiased source you’ve got there!

The only “freedom” that Freedom House cares about is how free the bourgeoisie are to infiltrate the government and capture regulatory agencies. By that metric, Cuba is much less “free” than the US, sure.

Mhm. I wonder, which objective metrics led you to list the US as more free than Cuba?

Cuba’s family code is one of the most progressive pieces of legislation in the world concerning LGBT rights and gender equality, meanwhile, there are parts of the US where you can get arrested for using the bathroom, or for merely failing to rat out trans kids to the cops. The US performs mass surveillance on all citizens and has the most sophisticated spy network in the world, it has used extrajudicial, indefinite detention without trial (in addition to having the highest incarceration rate in the world), along with torture (ironically, on illegally occupied Cuban soil). The US has kangaroo courts where children as young as six have to represent themselves in court with no right to an attorney, against threat of deportation. The police are equipped with military-grade equipment designed to fight insurgents, with the police budgets of individual cities exceeding that of the militaries of many countries: Cuba’s military spending is several times less than the police budget of Phoenix, AZ.

Does any of that factor into your analysis?

Non sequitor. Where did I say anything was black and white?

It’s not saying that both sides are bad? You sure about that one, chief?

What’s it saying about US imperialism? Good or bad?

What’s it saying about countries the US opposes? Good or bad?

Right, and what I’m saying is that by that very same logic, Trump supporting the Palestinian genocide doesn’t justify the democrats supporting the Palestinian genocide - they should not be considered immune to criticism either, and when people criticize them, they should not be assumed to be supporting the other side.

I couldn’t ask for clearer evidence than not accepting Saudi Arabia as authoritarian to demonstrate that “free vs authoritarian” are just propaganda terms and that how “free” a country allegedly is is really just a function of how aligned it is with the US.

In what universe is Saudi Arabia more free than Cuba?

Correct, whether it’s about countries or parties.

No u.

if you’re a global power, you’ve got a body count in the millions.

Very true. But is this an inherent trait of the world, or is there some path forward that would change or mitigate this fact?

Wait, are you saying “both sides bad?” “Both sides are the same?” Am I hearing this right?

Look, if either Xi Jinping or Donald Trump is going to emerge as leader of a global hegemon, then any and all criticism of Xi Jinping is the exact same as being a Trump supporter. When are we going to do something about all these secret Trump supporters pretending to be leftists?

At least, that’s what I’d say if I accepted the absurd logic of lesser evilism the liberals were constantly berating everyone with.

I see, my mistake.

deleted by creator

Yeah, full support for the Trump administration to have the power to say which social media is acceptable, that’ll fix everything! /s

I don’t understand why people think in these terms, “If you approve of violence being done by your side, you must also approve of violence done against your side.” I’m not taking a principled stand in favor of violence for violence’s sake. I support that which hurts the enemy and oppose that which hurts friendlies.

Stealing from the rich? Good. Stealing from the poor? Bad. Killing exploiters? Good. Killing the exploited? Bad. There’s no contradiction here because my stance is based on self-interest and the interest of my class, not on any sort of categorical moral claim about some particular form of action.

MFers will be like, “I’m a pacifist, it’s easy, if I ever see a dangerous situation, I just move to safety and call the cops,” that’s not pacifism, you’re just bragging about being privileged enough to have others do violence on your behalf.

Is it murder to shoot someone who’s in the process of murdering people in order to stop them from committing murder?

Those poor rich people have to deal with so much hatred and discrimination😢

That’s why I’m personally volunteering to take their money so they can no longer be rich and subject to such hate. I may be hated instead, but I’m willing to bear that cross and take up the Rich Man’s Burden. Some may call me a hero, but I ask for nothing in return, no praise, no monuments in my honor. The only thing I ask for is to take over the burden of owning a mountain of unearned wealth.