Message from @Durtle02
Discord ID: 454430512447094804
Tulsi is #OurGal
IF IF IF
I have to fight for a woman
for a Democrat
but for now
I'm in this corner
<:covfefe:440543908846632980>
Broo wants 6 more years of Trump
then maybe Tulsi Vs Cruz
AND I have no idea
which corner I'd be in
She a thot
no u
Donβt be a thot apologist
tulsi is not perfect
but she's the 'goodest' democrat we have right now
No one is
Yep
At least she doesnβt want to abolish capitalism or some other stupid communist shit
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/221171 Petition to the UK gov #savetheinternet on link tax, censorship filters and data mining ban (petition.parliament.uk)
Issue statement on the draft Directive on copyright in the Digital Single Market
Woke'
not a faggot
Isn't that photo from 2015?
Anyone around who gives a fuck bout the Ontario provincial election
Ontario is a shithole @King Canuck
@King Canuck My eyes are literally bloodshot red from crying for the last hour, and I just threw up from the stress. I can't believe we lost again. The premier sells hash to people, the PC Candidate in Brampton East steals people's data, and this bitch in Kanata-Carleton wants to genocide all Muslims. And the worst part is people still vote for them! It's happening. We are in 1930s Nazi Germany. We must resist.
Look to be honest
I hear Doug is a bit of an idiot
But we got this
I had an interesting thought
Populism could be Realpolitik in ideological form
What are your opinions on this ?
Posting this here too
by definition yes
Not really. Populism is basically just another form of feels-over-reals in ideological form. It's just a feels-over-reals that doesn't adhere to any structured philosophical thought, and instead simply appeals to what is popular rather than what is actually correct.
There's often a non-zero overlap between popular thought and actual truth, but it's certainly not always the same thing. Mindless populism is as destructive to a country's long-term goals as mindless adherence to any other form of ideological thought.
Feels over reals? You mean the people effected most by, let's say, illegal immigration have less valid concerns over its effects than the upper class elite who advocate for it from a completely detached moral and ideological perspective?
That isn't populism in and of itself.
Populism has always been an a-ideological appeal to the lowest common denominator.
The fact that the complaints of very significant portion of the population directed towards illegal/mass migration are entirely valid is irrelevant to it's usage by populists. Even if it actually indeed wasn't a problem, purely theoretically, but a significant portion of the population would see it as such anyway, populists would still use it as a platform.
A good example of that is climate change. It's a demonstrable fact that the climate is in fact, changing, and there is more than sufficient evidence to believe that anthropogenic pollution is, at least in part, powering that change. Never the less, populists throughout many countries have openly denied the existence of climate change (not questioned, which is just fine in my book, simply openly stated it is not occurring or that anthropogenic pollution is not a part of it), purely to gain votes from the parts of the population that also denies climate change, despite the poorer parts of the population, the people appealed to by populists, being the ones mostly affected by aforementioned climate change.