MyMindIsLikeAnOcean

It drives me insane. Most of the top so called leftists are fully addicted to it and treat it like it’s an essential medium.

If you hate Musk…stop using fucking twitter. Nothing grinds my gears more than all these leftists who are still fully addicted.

I mean…I don’t expect a war…what I expect is some made-for-TV explosions and some fake body counts. Then I expect the right wing to start attacking, killing, and exiling the leftists with impunity.

I don’t think he really ever had them. He was making what…250 grand a month from the Russians (some ridiculous number)? When he lost that cash he immediately changed his format from Russian propaganda to toxic centrism to try and steal viewers from people like Candace Owens…and it’s didn’t work.

“Calling out Trump” is clearly a rhetorical tactic to distract from your incorrect assessment of Maduro. It should be noted that you’re aligned with Trump when you say that, and it should give you pause.

You don’t seem to remember your own comment. You used the most extreme straw man, adorned with sarcasm, to asses Maduro…there was no reality in your reply.

Meh, the fact that you think you’re talking to liberals is pretty amusing. Why defend an argument when you can attack the messenger, right?

Tim Pool is struggling for relevance after he got his spigot of Russian money cut off.

I don’t know if somebody fired a gun or made some sort of noise near his home…but I certainly know that Tim is disingenuous and a liar and I don’t doubt he would sensationalize, exaggerate or completely invent an event to improve his ratings now that he has to rely on listeners to make money.

ETA: never mind…he didn’t even call the cops. It’s made up.

Far-out.

By “neutral” they mean “don’t try to reflect your visitors in the gift shop, make sure everything is for white people”.

I can’t comment on the various toxicities…but I was a high-end chef for 20 years. Stainless (proper stainless, with a high quality underside) and cast iron pans were essential for their respective purposes. Non-stick pans generally weren’t used outside of breakfast in kitchens without a flattop. Copper was a gimmick for homeowners…never saw one in a kitchen. My understanding was the copper was on the outside and the shtick was it was supposed to regulate heat better…BS AFAIK…it just made them look slick and therefore easier to sell.

Stainless are the go-to for searing and sautées…nothing is going to stick if you know what you’re doing and monitor the pan. Cast iron was for things you started on the stovetop and moved to the oven to finish…and/or for things you blacken or crust. In my experience the same effect can be achieved with a stainless pan (never buy a pan with a plastic handle that can’t go in the oven and always cook with a hot-cloth)…but some chefs swear by cast iron for niche purposes and they’re certainly easier to clean and last longer, even if they’re useless for sauteeing (square shape).

Oh…woks can compliment stainless pans for sauteeing if you have people who know what they’re doing with them…you pretty much can’t leave a wok unattended…but they get the best results for what they’re made for (stir fry, fried rice, etc).

Gas is the only choice for proper heat regulation. All the other elements are out of the question for proper cooking.

Can we tho?

You’re so far off reality I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic.

Right? Never mind half of the corruption in Ukraine is likely perpetrated by people who would flourish in Putin’s Russia.

I don’t know man. This crap gives such ammunition to the “both sides are corrupt” argument.

Do we really believe things in Ukraine would be better or even the same under Putin? What are we even talking about here?

Your position is there has never been a benevolent leader? Power corrupts universally and equally? That’s nuts, quite frankly.

It’s absurd to suggest that Trump and Maduro are equivalent. They’re not equal in a single way, even if you believe they’re both bad.

Yes I have listened to his speeches and read his lefislation…that’s why I’m saying what I’m saying.

You’re citisizing things I didn’t say…I know Maduro is popular there. I don’t know how else to say it: I believe he has the best interests of the working class in mind.

Agree wholeheartedly.

It should be obvious to far more people that this country should get to decide it’s own destiny. We have no idea what a Chavismo…or even Castro Cuba would have looked like unmolested. It should also be obvious that what’s feared most in the west is the success of those systems.

The thing that absolutely floors me is that Trump had a Bay of Pigs…and nobody (in the mainstream) talks about it.

We also get it from Maduro and the rest of the Chavanistas: his party rules by supreme power and decree. The way his party allocates power as a matter of internal affairs, may be another story.

Please, let’s not talk in absolutes. This notion that any and all narratives that you deem negative are part of a grand conspiracy just isn’t true.

I implied in my original reply that I believe Maduro may be benevolent, along the lines of Castro. I don’t really have a problem with dictators…the problem with dictators is they’re usually fascists. That isn’t the case in Venezuela.

It’s interesting that I agree with you, here. A major difference I see between Venezuela and the USSR is that the USSR generally tried to assimilate, arrest or murder the resistant capitalist classes (ie dekulakization), while Venezuela seems to be generally exiling or marginalizing them.

It’s my understanding that Venezuela has kept its political assassinations and imprisonments low and targeted, which was not the case in the USSR.

Yes he’s certainly an authoritarian. Authoritarian doesn’t automatically mean bad…there’s such a thing as the concept of a benevolent dictator.

What evidence do you have that “the country went to shit” or “Venezuela is not a nice place to live in” or that he’s a “corrupt dictator”?

This original post, presumably, attempts to scratch slightly beneath the surface of what we hear on the news and suggest that your above statements only apply to a certain “deserving” class.

I don’t actually know a lot about Venezuela, and I’m asking these questions in earnest. I started to ask questions a lot earlier, but certainly looking into Maria Machado (this years Nobel Peace Prize winner) made some alarm bells go off. Could it be that the narrative is controlled by Machado and her neoliberal/right wing ilk, and she actually represents a large minority class of people that was purged/displaced in Venezuela?

I’m still investigating.

If you believe culture war spin defines policy…there’s your issue.

Harpers’ culture war posturing wasn’t policy. He was bad, but no worse than Justin - who’s trade and corporate policy was to the right of Harper. Justin, of course, was a culture war liberal with his gender equal cabinet etc

Oh? Not McKenzie King who brought in UI and the Baby Bonus? Not Diefenbaker who mass-funded hospitals? Not Pierre that brought in the Charter of Righrs on Freedoms? EtcEtc. Justin governed right of centre…a boiler plate neoliberal just like Harper was. Pardon me, but you don’t have any idea what you’re talking about.

Seem like he’s a typical academic. I get it…you prefer to muddy the waters and shoot the messenger then engage with the content. Alternate view to…something you didn’t read? I assure you it doesn’t “demonize socialism”…it just chronicles events according to disclosure/a “data dump” of declassified files. It’s not ideological…it’s for eggheads who don’t want to read thousands of documents. When I read it it just helped me understand the playing field better.

The problems with the USSR weren’t with socialism, you’re missing my message. They were with capitalists corrupting it from within. There’s certainly an argument to be made that too much control was allocated to regional bureaucrats - when targeted positive/idealistic authoritarianism was more appropriate while socialism was in its infancy. But this in the context of just Russia, because I don’t agree with the expansion that created the USSR: my opinion is it created an unmanageably large state with too many “distracting” regional issues that were ripe for capitalists to exploit. Those faithful to the cause were simply stretched too thin and they couldn’t deliver a meaningful improvement to enough people, largely because the guilty regional bureaucrats weren’t loyal to the cause and they created systematic exploitation of the people they were tasked to help. Obviously I’m being unrealistic…just trying to get closer to 20/20 hindsight.