Literally Holden Bloodfeast

Eh, the 80s and 90s were a marked shift towards usefulness. Gotta maximize shareholder value, dontcha know.

You and me both buddy, although “sprinkling” somewhat understates my general approach.

if it ain’t broke

Ironic choice of words

There’s just really not a very useful reason outside of “because we can”, so it hasn’t really been a priority. Still, that’s kinda the point of the Artemis program, so we’re getting there.

There are a few that you can buy, they just aren’t cheap. KAT Walk is a usable omni-“treadmill”, FreeAim has their motorized shoes. Again, not cheap, but still within the budget of a motivated enthusiast.

Yeah but he’s probably going to run for another term and I’m not confident he’ll be prevented from doing so. I don’t wanna be stuck with his VP, but I’d love to see the right scramble to try and replace him in under a month

Have you seen a superhighway? It’s still accurate.

I honestly hope he lives until October 2028.

“Whilst you lack the strength to do away with bourgeois parliaments and every other type of reactionary institution, you must work within them because it is there that you will still find workers who are duped by the priests and stultified by the conditions of rural life; otherwise you risk turning into nothing but windbags.”

The mistakes of others do not magically make your alternative successful just because it’s different. Success isn’t a feeling of moral superiority, it’s improvements in material conditions. I see no improvement in material conditions.

You can’t claim horoscopes are successful because you think prayer doesn’t work. You need actual measurable results.

This is succeeding? I’d hate to see what failure looks like.

So to recap: the revolutionary approach isn’t succeeding because it’s under attack by liberals, except the liberal attacks are ineffective as evidenced by an 18% approval rating (nevermind that polling actually shows 34%). Not sure how low approval ratings for liberals is evidence for the efficacy of revolutionaries. Also lowering approval for liberals only empowers the more virulently fascist conservatives.

How, pray tell, does any of that demonstrate the strength of revolutionaries? None of that implies positive support for revolution, or organization necessary to implement that revolution, much less any likelihood of revolution securing the desired end goal.

This approach just seems like toothless reactionary bluster.

Shifting focus to avoid answering a question is the exact definition of deflection. Answer the question.

There you have it indeed, any excuse to deflect and ignore the actual point. Alright champ, assume words mean whatever you think they mean and anyone left of Lenin is a fascist. If you can’t handle a segment, how on earth do you have the organization and numbers to overthrow the whole system?

Even if that were true it wouldn’t refute my point. If you can’t handle attacks from a segment, how are you going to overthrow the whole thing?

If you can’t weather liberal attacks, how do you expect to overthrow fascists? If it was organized and adequately staffed, the attacks from liberals would be ineffective.

“Your opinion has no value”, or some variety thereof. Then get on with your day.

Harry Coin

Depends on the deregulation. I haven’t read the bill, but bans on mixed-use zoning could definitely go.