Hardkill

That's what I've been saying. I think the only three social issues that they should stay left-wing on is ending police brutality on racial minorities, unjust criminal sentencing on blacks and latinos, putting an absolute end to all voter suppression on all racial minorities, and getting major long overdue immigration reform. Addressing inequities between whites and non-whites in America such income inequality, employment disparities, education inequality, housing inequality, redlining, healthcare disparities, and what have you would be addressed by left-wing economics. After all of that, I think that we will have established virtually every kind of civil right, social justice, and equal opportunities that any black and brown person in the US could ever want and need.

Should Harris be running with Biden again 2024 or should it be someone else given how much she has been struggling to be an influential or likable enough VP?

I don't believe in a such a conspiracy theory like that. I sincerely doubt that the Biden administration would've wanted that pipeline destroyed. In fact, I am sure that Biden and everyone in his admin wish that the destruction of the pipeline didn't happen because ever since that happened, the US has been forced to exports a significant amount of oil and natural gas to Europe, thereby having made the inflation problem in our country even worse than it already was after Russia began its invasion of Ukraine. Furthermore, Biden and all of the people working under him are not the kind of people who would take any pleasure in seeing any of our European allies suffer economically or suffer in any at all for any reason.

Well, then I don't know why he is trolling me. I mean to be clear, the more I learn about how government, politics, international affairs, economics, business, and finances works in the world the more I realize how complex and nuanced all of it is. The military-industrial complex can't, for the sake of constantly making profits, just always force our government to order our military to go to war with another country or even coerce the government to send military equipment and other kinds of foreign to our foreign allies. However, they a lot of times are able to pressure our political leaders in doing so depending what the circumstances are. One reason does have to do with the US wanting/needing to bolster our economy overall, but there are several other reasons such as those pertaining to geopolitical issues, ideological situations, etc.

What are you talking about? How is what I just said a conspiracy theory? The US military-industrial complex is a massive business for our country and whether we like it or not it is still an essential part of the US economy.

Ahh, So, if Ukraine can successfully win this war in some way, then America could make a serious profit off this war, correct?

What if they have the same level of state interference they have but transition towards having the level of democracy and freedom that Europeans have?

Why is some state interference in business not a great thing there? Isn't what they are doing working? Plus, isn't better than the government being laissez faire about their economy? Plus, China already has some some things that the US doesn't even have such as high speed rails throughout the whole country, much greater funding for all kinds of public works and public schools, universal health care, forcing all citizens to get vaccinated and wear masks during COVID emergencies, COVID price controls, limiting children from wasting so much time on video/computer games, high trust in all of their institutions, and more.

I really don't see how he can win the 2024 primary. He's already deemed by too many Republican voters as a traitorous establishment GOP politician, especially after what happened with the Jan 6 event.

But Biden needs to get out there more to sell himself a lot more. He so far hasn't been doing nearly as many interviews as Clinton, Bush, Obama, or Trump did during their first 2 and a half years of their presidencies. Furthermore, most Americans are still not aware of all of the tremendous accomplishments Biden has made. I wonder why VP Harris hasn't been able to do enough to promote the Biden administration.

That's why I don't get why there is a sizable amount of Americans who wants us to stop funding Ukraine for this war. We have way more than enough aid available for the Ukranians and no American soldier or US citizen is getting hurt by this at all.

It really does seem to be the case that if progressives want the level of transformation they seek for our country then we really are going to need have: 1. The supermajorities of liberals/progressives that presidents TR, WW, FDR, and FBJ had. 2. Much greater political bipartisanship consensus and unified political climate that TR, WW, FDR, and FBJ had. 3. Historic levels of violence in our country like in the Civil War, Gilded Age, Great Depression, and Civil Rights movement. 4. Extremely powerful nonviolent mass protests and civil disobedience like the Civil Rights movement or Abolition movement. 5. Liberal/progressive media outlets with political influence that rivals or surpasses all of the right-wing echo-chambers in America. Plus, for extra push, we could use another brilliant and charismatic liberal/progressive president who is not too deep in the pockets of their corporate donors. With the BLM riots, abnormal levels of mass shootings, occasional racial unrest, growing anger and resentment over the growing economic inequality problem in our country, increasing amount of calls for tackling climate change, it really is looking more and more like widespread riots in America are inevitable. I wonder how we should all prepare for that.

I mean that in the US, third party votes are a complete waste of votes. They cannot be used to add on to any other major party ticket, not like in a multi-party system? Now, if enough democrats, liberals, poor, working class, and people of racial minorities created a nationwide movement on stopping the rich and corporations from stealing endless amounts of money then that would probably generate enough pressure on Congress, the presidency, governors, state legislatures, and the courts to enact policies much needed liberal/progressive legislation for the country.

What Leo said below are key factors to choosing the right side. Also, the more spirally developed the person or party is the wiser and more sophisticated they are. There is a reason why there are more intelligent and more compassionate people per capita in the higher spiral stages of the spiral than in the lower spiral stages.

Does that mean that no amount of Americans who are against funding this war will be able to dissuade the government from continuing to fund Ukraine?

That's really tragic.

Yeah, that's generally true. Although, that didn't seem to be the case with FDR who was president for 12 years followed by his Democratic VP Harry Truman for another 8 years. Also, most people apparently weren't tired of 8 of years Ronald Reagan as presidency and his Reagonomics, which is why his VP H.W. Bush got elected in a true landslide and immediately succeeded Reagan. If you go even way back to the early 1900s, after Teddy Roosevelt was president for 8 years, Taft, who was TR's Secretary of War, succeeded him as the next Republican POTUS. So, why did such instance of multiple successive terms in a row for the Democratic Party or Republican Party respectively happen in US history? In fact, why do Republicans and conservatives even still to this day still idolize Reagan as their messiah more than 34 years after he left office? Even with Obama and Clinton, who were two charismatic and successful Democratic presidents, most Democrats and liberals in America have never even worshipped those as saviors or even recognize them as one of or two of the greatest presidents to the extent that Republicans and conservatives have with Reagan. Is it because TR, FDR, and Reagan were the most transformational presidents ever since 1900, whereas Obama and Clinton and the rest of the presidents since 1900 were not?

Wow! It's amazing that the legalization of psychedelics is really beginning to happen in the US.

Was one reason why Trump won was because people were tired of 8 years of Obama?

I am sure that women feel that men are often a burden on them. lol I get that women can really feel like a pain in the ass a lot of times and men have of course become increasingly insecure about their power and status in the world with the continuing rise of feminism in the world. Honestly, a lot of days, I get very irritated and frustrated with women and sometimes get insecure about my power and place in the world as a man. But according to history, even though there have undoubtedly been more men than women who have made positive contributions and constructed all kinds of great new things for the world, there have also been undeniably more men than women who have committed atrocities and destroyed countless things throughout the whole world. There have always been way more men than women in history who have done all kind of monstrous acts such as excessive violence, physical and verbal abuse, assault, rape, murder, genocide, annihilate civilizations, join or lead a racist/hate organization, join or lead an extreme right-wing organization or a violent extreme left-wing organization, join or lead a criminal gang or scummy cartel, sell illegal drugs or illegal arms, steal money, commit fraud, evade taxes, contribute and facilitate corporate greed, gamble away money and other resources that belong to or that was supposed to be for their whole family and/or relatives, and so on and so forth. There are still more women who have been murdered or at the very at least whose lives have been ruined by horrible men than vice versa. Plus, there must be a reason why even in developed country such as the US approx. 9 out 10 prisoners are men.

So, then why are progressives like Bernie bothering to fight like hell for greatly increasing labor power in the US?

Ohhh...... what about labor unions? Progressives such as Chomsky, Bernie, Warren and AOC and top economists talk about the great urgency for much greater labor power than we have today. Is there any hope that labor unions in the US will ever regain the size and power they had in the early to mid 1900s?

Well, I don't know what they minimum wage is in the Uk in the UK or in any other European country, but the federal minimum wage here in the US is 7 dollars an hour. Now, employees in the East Coast, West Coast, Northern States, and some Midwest states such as Illinois do have state laws that have made the minimum wage in each of their states be about 11 to 15 dollars an hour. Also, some big banks like Bank of America or JP Morgan Chase actually have made their minimum wage policy to be 20 dollars per hours and have committed to increasing it to 25 dollars per hour eventually. However, most employees in the Southern states, states in middle America, and several areas of rural America have been paid unacceptably low minimum wages ranging from about 7 to 9 dollars per hour. If you visited any of the states including Mississippi, Louisiana, West Virginia, Kentucky, Alabama, South Carolina, North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Kansas, Nebraska, Indiana, Texas, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota you would meet tons and tons of people suffering from either homelessness or not being able to make rent or living paycheck-to-paycheck.

When do you think there will be widespread labor strikes for higher pay like what happened in the 1800s?

I think that most corporations have been using that excuse too many times. Too many people out there are getting very angry about being able to barely survive while the fat cats at the top keep stuffing their pockets with way too much money for themselves. Corporations are indeed essential for every society, but they must all be held accountable much more than they have been.