Not to defend Dems by any means, but there are some groups (e.g. our trans comrades) who are targeted by reactionary policies by Republicans that Democrats aren’t doing
Okay but the US is 4% of the world’s population. There’s millions more who don’t get to be trans because they get killed by the USA. In the past two decades alone is estimated (by US bodies) that they’ve killed 4.5 million people and displaced tens of millions more. It makes no difference who is in power, red or blue. In fact some argue that the blue are the more warmongering of the two.
When you support them, you enable them. This is what people mean about culture wars and identity politics. Trans issues are miniscule and have an inordinate focus because they don’t threaten anything. People arguing about them does the square root of zero to affect the status quo of a vastly greater evil. They steer discussions away from real things and into LGBTQ stuff.
I don’t want you to misinterpret me. I do agree with you. Certainly, the U.S.’ impact is unacceptable regardless of who is in power.
Certainly, the best thing a US President could ever do is ensure that the U.S. will not live to see another day.
The truth is though, I might be a citizen and all, but no matter what I do, I don’t get a say in voting for someone other than the warmongers. I don’t get to vote for the communists, and even if I did, anyone who would propose a serious threat would be eliminated in some fashion.
Anyways, it’s getting late, but there are people for whom the tiny marginal difference between ordinary liberal and hyper-reactionary liberal is a big deal. To say the tiny marginal difference affects “no one” isn’t correct, although it may very well be close to a rounding error in the grand scheme of things.
Does it make any difference to the millions of people bombed abroad whether the bombers supported trans rights? Of course not, and we both know that.
How has it helped anyone to have had Jim Crow Joe in power? Any examples at all?
Not to defend Dems by any means, but there are some groups (e.g. our trans comrades) who are targeted by reactionary policies by Republicans that Democrats aren’t doing
Okay but the US is 4% of the world’s population. There’s millions more who don’t get to be trans because they get killed by the USA. In the past two decades alone is estimated (by US bodies) that they’ve killed 4.5 million people and displaced tens of millions more. It makes no difference who is in power, red or blue. In fact some argue that the blue are the more warmongering of the two. When you support them, you enable them. This is what people mean about culture wars and identity politics. Trans issues are miniscule and have an inordinate focus because they don’t threaten anything. People arguing about them does the square root of zero to affect the status quo of a vastly greater evil. They steer discussions away from real things and into LGBTQ stuff.
I don’t want you to misinterpret me. I do agree with you. Certainly, the U.S.’ impact is unacceptable regardless of who is in power.
Certainly, the best thing a US President could ever do is ensure that the U.S. will not live to see another day.
The truth is though, I might be a citizen and all, but no matter what I do, I don’t get a say in voting for someone other than the warmongers. I don’t get to vote for the communists, and even if I did, anyone who would propose a serious threat would be eliminated in some fashion.
Anyways, it’s getting late, but there are people for whom the tiny marginal difference between ordinary liberal and hyper-reactionary liberal is a big deal. To say the tiny marginal difference affects “no one” isn’t correct, although it may very well be close to a rounding error in the grand scheme of things.
Does it make any difference to the millions of people bombed abroad whether the bombers supported trans rights? Of course not, and we both know that.
Okay I get it but be wary of falling into the trap of actually supporting them and knee jerking when someone criticise them etc.