Ralsei is so "internet-friend" coded it kinda makes me wanna explode in grief

Telling Susie to “forget about him” and to make some “real friends” who, unlike him, can actually be there for her in important moments and not solely during moments of escapism. Completely disregarding his own isolation in favor of allowing someone else to be happy. His impermanence and conditionality in his friend’s lives, only interacting with them when they need to have an escape from their problems, thus never wanting to divulge his own problems lest he spoil the only reason he could possibly perceive anyone wanting to be with him. To relish in that, loving his "role" as nothing but a prop and a servant for their escapism, because that's the only way he gets any connection. Any thought given to him while "offline" and "touching grass" is pointless, and it's selfish for him to ever want that, ever want The Lightners to take a moment out of their awesome real lives to care about him.

This is just one elaborate metaphor for a friend on discord. by god she's even a trans woman.

shadow of the colossus' protagonist is a cute girl. why didn't anyone tell me

shadow of the colossus is like celeste but for bpd instead of depression

wait noe i need to actually play that

shadow of the colossus' protagonist is a cute girl. why didn't anyone tell me

shadow of the colossus is like celeste but for bpd instead of depression

Donald trump impregnated a 13 year old girl then had the baby killed and dumped in lake michigan, if you dont believe me, look it up. its in the epstein files.

why are we not in violent revolution already, our government is run by child rapists and predators. we arent angry enough

Violent revolution rarely works.

And even when it does, it's usually the marginalized and vulnerable who suffer and die the most, because of course it is. They don't have as much protection against sudden upheaval, or as many options to escape or protect themselves. Often, they may have none at all.

There has never been and will never be a violent revolution where only the rich and powerful get hurt.

The idea that violence is an inherently more effective means of change is actually one propagated by dictators and war mongers like Tr*mp. When in fact what statistical evidence there is on the subject suggests that non-violent resistance is more effective, on average.

(Yes I know someone will read this and go, BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS TIME VIOLENCE WORKED- I am not arguing violence can never ever lead to positive change, only rejecting the deeply-ingrained authoritarian propaganda that it is inherently the most effective or only way of doing so. Thus, cherry-picking the odd example where it worked changes nothing about my overall point.)

It should also give us pause to consider that Tr*mp and MAGA VERY clearly want escalating violence. What ICE is doing is designed to provoke. Of course, they'll lie anyway, labeling nonviolent resistance as terrorism, as they did with Renee Nicole Good. But note how much pushback there has been to that obviously ridiculous claim, not just from activists but from state and local officials and national politicians as well. Because it was obviously not true.

They want armed risings so they can declare martial law and deploy regular military with shoot to kill orders on the streets.

Lastly, keep in mind that a few small-scale acts of violence will not topple the US government. To do that by force would require a large-scale civil war. Probably lasting years or decades, on the scale of a continent, which would in fact be the world's first nuclear-armed civil war.

So, what can we do, besides nothing?

Economic warfare.

There is no system on Earth that can function if workers aren't working. And no capitalist system that can function if consumers aren't buying. And while there are certainly costs to such actions, they are easier to build support for than getting people to sign up to wage war on the US military, and difficult to break by force.

Sustained boycotts and strikes will do far more right now than fantasies of violent revolution. It just isn't as emotionally satisfying to angry, frustrated people.

ice doesnt need reasoning, and martial law will never be declared. they'll just kill us without ever acknowledging the complete government takeover. ice will continue to kidnap and kill the members of our communities unless we physically stop them.

will a boycott save ice from breaking down your door and sending you to cecot? no. yes, people will get hurt, that comes with the goddamn territory. people are already getting hurt, theres unknowable casualties on our side and none on theres.

yes, economic protest is necessary, that doesnt mean that violence isnt necessary. ice isnt a military, ice is a fuckton of incels who've been handed a gun and tactical gear.

destroying their infrastructure and killing them for attempting to take our people is one of the only ways to end this. saying yhat peace is the only option is a liberal talking point to keep us down. the black panther party made the cops scared, the workers of the early 20th century fought with blood and tears and we earned workers rights, we cannot beat them with mild inconveniences

I already addressed the "they'll kill us anyway argument," and "they'll never declare martial law" is an assertion you cannot prove, and made no effort to even try.

Will a boycott stop someone breaking down my door? No, of course not. But breaking down my door won't end the boycott, either. And its not boycotts alone- its telling you ignored probably the most powerful example of economic warfare I raised, the General Strike.

No regime, no system in existence can function if the companies that make their equipment and vehicles and weapons and the infrastructure that transport them are shut down. None. What'll they do, shoot the workers? That won't make the machine run again. Automation may change that one day, but it hasn't yet.

Yet you ignore all that entirely and cherry-pick your examples, as per usual for the "violence is the only answer" crowd. And dismiss this argument by claiming I am arguing that "mild inconveniences" will stop them- an outrageous straw man that reveals only you own dishonesty, or profound ignorance.

You also completely ignored the point that the methods you are advocating for, to actually succeed, would require the world's first nuclear-armed civil war. Or are you actually going to pretend that a bit of small-scale terrorism will topple the US government?

Look, I know I'm not going to convince you- this argument is purely for the benefit of any third parties who might happen to read it. You've made it clear that you are arguing in bad faith, and that you will ignore, dismiss out of hand or straw man anything that doesn't fit your narrative of HARD MEN WITH GUNS ARE THE ONLY ANSWER. Your assertion that non violence is "a liberal talking point to keep us down" is right out of the Marxist/anarchist/Tankie Left's "liberals are the same as Nazis" propaganda, and I'll bet right now that you were out there telling people in November 2024 that Harris and Tr*mp were the same and to stay home or "protest vote," in which case this current blood is VERY MUCH on your hands, including the half million or so dead kids from cutting USAid.

Given your blasé handwaving of the mass suffering and death of marginalized people that a US civil war would entail, however I doubt that it weighs heavily on your conscience.

And now people like you are trying to argue that violence is the only answer, having created this situation precisely so you could make that argument. In short, my conclusion is you are most likely an accelerationist who believes actively making society worse is ideologically necessary, and doesn't care how many people get fed into the fire in the name of your imagined future utopia.

In any case, you are clearly not operating off of facts or reason, but off of emotion or ideology- my guess is that at the end of the day you just want the emotional catharsis of retributive violence, which makes you not that much different from the sort of men who join ICE.

This is, by the way, the charitable interpretation of your motives.

The other is that you are a deliberate MAGA saboteur trying to provoke Left-wing violence to give Tr*mp EXACTLY WHAT HE SO OBVIOUSLY WANTS (another point that you completely ignored).

oh you believe in horseshoe theory nvm why am i even bothering with you centrists

and to clarify, i believe in violence not out of accelerationism, but out of the fact that men women and children are being pulled from their homes and that PEOPLE ARE BEING FUCKING MURDERED. liberals do nothing in office or just make things considerably worse. even the best democrat presidents of the modern era continued to fund israel, fund ice, fund wars for the sake of oil, fund dronestrikes on the innocent, fund the mass starvation and exploitation of the global south, fund violent regime changes in independent countries, fund malignant prison systems, and so much more. and the republican party have been bought by corporate backers and fascists for the last 200 years.

if you think i dont care about the american people then you're dead fucking wrong, i care about this countries people more than shithead nonviolent activists like you ever will. ypu continue to fall for propaganda around nonviolent activism that was loudly placed into our schools post civil rights movement because they were SCARED OF THE PEOPLE. the black panthers didnt sit around and do nothing, they built community, they kept eachother safe, they fed the weak and needy; they also made sure that the police knew they were armed, knew that they would fight for their fellow man.

you cannot beat fascists by sitting around and waiting. yes, the usa is had nuclear armaments, but i want to ask ypu a question. if your power can only thrivr on the backs of the people, if you kill millions of your people, i dont think the rest of them will continue to follow you. if the entire usa organizes collectively and supports eachother during the fight, then they physically cant stop us. even the military is tired of trump. if the nation works together, and hopefully with the support of other nations, change can be made. a general strike can work when you're protesting things within the system, like fair wages or the right to maternal leave, it doesnt work when you're protesting state sanctioned killings.

the us system is corrupt and has not and will not be fixed by voting, it is a fundamentally racist, exploitative system that will stop at nothing to keep the working man down. it cannot be kept.

srry i was writing a course paper

i luv slugs

whoever said hardship makes you grow lied i fear

i have the mind of a scared child 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Donald trump impregnated a 13 year old girl then had the baby killed and dumped in lake michigan, if you dont believe me, look it up. its in the epstein files.

why are we not in violent revolution already, our government is run by child rapists and predators. we arent angry enough

Violent revolution rarely works.

And even when it does, it's usually the marginalized and vulnerable who suffer and die the most, because of course it is. They don't have as much protection against sudden upheaval, or as many options to escape or protect themselves. Often, they may have none at all.

There has never been and will never be a violent revolution where only the rich and powerful get hurt.

The idea that violence is an inherently more effective means of change is actually one propagated by dictators and war mongers like Tr*mp. When in fact what statistical evidence there is on the subject suggests that non-violent resistance is more effective, on average.

(Yes I know someone will read this and go, BUT WHAT ABOUT THIS TIME VIOLENCE WORKED- I am not arguing violence can never ever lead to positive change, only rejecting the deeply-ingrained authoritarian propaganda that it is inherently the most effective or only way of doing so. Thus, cherry-picking the odd example where it worked changes nothing about my overall point.)

It should also give us pause to consider that Tr*mp and MAGA VERY clearly want escalating violence. What ICE is doing is designed to provoke. Of course, they'll lie anyway, labeling nonviolent resistance as terrorism, as they did with Renee Nicole Good. But note how much pushback there has been to that obviously ridiculous claim, not just from activists but from state and local officials and national politicians as well. Because it was obviously not true.

They want armed risings so they can declare martial law and deploy regular military with shoot to kill orders on the streets.

Lastly, keep in mind that a few small-scale acts of violence will not topple the US government. To do that by force would require a large-scale civil war. Probably lasting years or decades, on the scale of a continent, which would in fact be the world's first nuclear-armed civil war.

So, what can we do, besides nothing?

Economic warfare.

There is no system on Earth that can function if workers aren't working. And no capitalist system that can function if consumers aren't buying. And while there are certainly costs to such actions, they are easier to build support for than getting people to sign up to wage war on the US military, and difficult to break by force.

Sustained boycotts and strikes will do far more right now than fantasies of violent revolution. It just isn't as emotionally satisfying to angry, frustrated people.

ice doesnt need reasoning, and martial law will never be declared. they'll just kill us without ever acknowledging the complete government takeover. ice will continue to kidnap and kill the members of our communities unless we physically stop them.

will a boycott save ice from breaking down your door and sending you to cecot? no. yes, people will get hurt, that comes with the goddamn territory. people are already getting hurt, theres unknowable casualties on our side and none on theres.

yes, economic protest is necessary, that doesnt mean that violence isnt necessary. ice isnt a military, ice is a fuckton of incels who've been handed a gun and tactical gear.

destroying their infrastructure and killing them for attempting to take our people is one of the only ways to end this. saying yhat peace is the only option is a liberal talking point to keep us down. the black panther party made the cops scared, the workers of the early 20th century fought with blood and tears and we earned workers rights, we cannot beat them with mild inconveniences

I already addressed the "they'll kill us anyway argument," and "they'll never declare martial law" is an assertion you cannot prove, and made no effort to even try.

Will a boycott stop someone breaking down my door? No, of course not. But breaking down my door won't end the boycott, either. And its not boycotts alone- its telling you ignored probably the most powerful example of economic warfare I raised, the General Strike.

No regime, no system in existence can function if the companies that make their equipment and vehicles and weapons and the infrastructure that transport them are shut down. None. What'll they do, shoot the workers? That won't make the machine run again. Automation may change that one day, but it hasn't yet.

Yet you ignore all that entirely and cherry-pick your examples, as per usual for the "violence is the only answer" crowd. And dismiss this argument by claiming I am arguing that "mild inconveniences" will stop them- an outrageous straw man that reveals only you own dishonesty, or profound ignorance.

You also completely ignored the point that the methods you are advocating for, to actually succeed, would require the world's first nuclear-armed civil war. Or are you actually going to pretend that a bit of small-scale terrorism will topple the US government?

Look, I know I'm not going to convince you- this argument is purely for the benefit of any third parties who might happen to read it. You've made it clear that you are arguing in bad faith, and that you will ignore, dismiss out of hand or straw man anything that doesn't fit your narrative of HARD MEN WITH GUNS ARE THE ONLY ANSWER. Your assertion that non violence is "a liberal talking point to keep us down" is right out of the Marxist/anarchist/Tankie Left's "liberals are the same as Nazis" propaganda, and I'll bet right now that you were out there telling people in November 2024 that Harris and Tr*mp were the same and to stay home or "protest vote," in which case this current blood is VERY MUCH on your hands, including the half million or so dead kids from cutting USAid.

Given your blasé handwaving of the mass suffering and death of marginalized people that a US civil war would entail, however I doubt that it weighs heavily on your conscience.

And now people like you are trying to argue that violence is the only answer, having created this situation precisely so you could make that argument. In short, my conclusion is you are most likely an accelerationist who believes actively making society worse is ideologically necessary, and doesn't care how many people get fed into the fire in the name of your imagined future utopia.

In any case, you are clearly not operating off of facts or reason, but off of emotion or ideology- my guess is that at the end of the day you just want the emotional catharsis of retributive violence, which makes you not that much different from the sort of men who join ICE.

This is, by the way, the charitable interpretation of your motives.

The other is that you are a deliberate MAGA saboteur trying to provoke Left-wing violence to give Tr*mp EXACTLY WHAT HE SO OBVIOUSLY WANTS (another point that you completely ignored).

oh you believe in horseshoe theory nvm why am i even bothering with you centrists