you’re watching us hula hoop the ourobouros.

I am absolutely loving this bit. Very strong phrase, and as a bonus, excellent mental imagery!

I agree, but this is still a good opportunity to interrogate our assumptions about this, and particularly to listen to folks born out of wedlock to check if those assumptions are at all accurate to their experiences.

Late response (sorry!) but wanted to let you know that I appreciated the comment and details. Personally, this doesn’t convince me he’s a tankie, but that’s largely because I’m not familiar enough with Hakeem to know he’s a tankie, nor do I know what video you were referring to. Which is not to say you’re outright wrong — just that I would want to see more specifics to change my opinion, is all. All the same, I appreciate the effort and am happy to better understand your position.

I do somewhat agree with your definition of a tankie, for what it’s worth. I don’t think saying the GOP and DNC are both bad is necessarily tankie behavior, but the rest makes sense. This said, I’ve personally seen extremely little defense of Russia from any far-left discourse, including communities close to Second Thought, and from what I hear from those communities China is still very divisive. You’ve clearly encountered worse though, and my experiences are limited, so take them for what you will.

Unfortunately, I don’t think voting is going to be what changes any of this, sadly. At least, not on a federal level.

That, and I don’t think I want to see the Libertarians win either, if I’m honest.

I genuinely think now you’re a paid lobbyist. There is so much evidence

Look, I get you strongly disagree with them, but please don’t fall into the trap of thinking people who disagree strongly with you aren’t real.

Anti-capitalists have many, many issues with the Biden admin and Democrats generally, for a whole host of reasons. It doesn’t mean we want Trump to win, think he’s equally as bad, or want you to not vote. And it most certainly doesn’t make us paid shills. It just means we want better, and we are often frustrated at how “better” is never an option.

I can’t speak for what Flash Mob’s beliefs are directly, but I can absolutely say I’ve been in a similar position. It is beyond aggravating to have no options that actually represent your beliefs, but to nonetheless have so many people around you insist that you should be happy about one of the awful options because the candidate in question – who is doing the things you hate – sometimes pays lip service to what you actually wanted. Or because it’s a woman doing it, now. Or, most frequently, because the Republicans managed to dig to an even deeper circle of Hell this time.

Our options are terrible, and we’re pissed about it. But it doesn’t make us not real. All that accusations like that do is prevent people from being understood.

Worth remembering that many responses in politics are made impulsively due to frustration, and angry, impulsive arguments tend not to be well-researched. We’re all tense, here — it’s hard not to be, these days.

I’m not who you were replying to, but:

It’s not so much that Trump and Kamala are the same. They aren’t, obviously – and for the record, the video agrees – it’s more that the Democrats here don’t really fix anything the Republicans break. Sure, Kamala is pro-abortion, et cetera, but how certain can I be that she’ll actually act on the principles she espouses? If the Biden admin is anything to go by, I can expect the occasional half-measure at best. Meanwhile, there are solid odds that she will continue to fund or otherwise enable the genocide in Gaza, at least tacitly.

I’m going to vote for her, but not because she’s going to help me or anyone I care about. I’m voting for her because it is harm reduction; Kamala may be a neoliberal pro-cop warmonger, but the alternative is neo-Hitler. As far as presidential tickets go, I don’t have much of a choice, here.

This is something I occasionally hear and keep not understanding, and it makes me wonder if the word “tankie” is being thrown around a bit fast and loose. Last time I heard this, the reasoning referenced a Vaush video, which is… less than convincing.

My working definition of “tankie” would be someone who unironically full-on likes China*, which is not a take I’ve ever known J.T. to have. Do you use a different definition than me, or do you have specific things you’re upset about?

^{* Bear in mind I mean "likes China" here, not "thinks China and the U.S. are equally bad."}

I’d argue the road to fascism started a hell of a lot sooner than 2016. Capitalism in decay, and all that.

I’m saying that if you think you said “that is a stupid position to take and here is why,” you missed the mark severely, and you should be more careful with your phrasing if you don’t want people to get upset at you in future. It’s not about people “willingly” misinterpreting anything — whether you realized it or not, what you said wasn’t the level-headed response you may have intended it to be.

I saw that one. It’s what I was referring to when I said “saying you want to ‘avoid alienating people’ when closing a PR that aims to improve inclusivity is more than a little pathetic.” Criticizing the maintainer response there was one of the good parts of the blog post.

But the outcome of that doesn’t really much change the fact that the sarcastic PR was sarcastic, and thus calling that PR spam is reasonable, whereas claiming they called the trans woman herself spam is not. To be clear, however: I’ve no issue with the sarcastic PR itself, only the framing of it in the blog post.

It is absolutely a reasonable interpretation to assume you were referring to the people making the decision you didn’t like. And even if it wasn’t, calling an idea a group of people have “incredibly fucking stupid” isn’t much different, as it carries an implication of how you see those people.

If you feel other people are getting offended too easily at what you say, I recommend spending extra time on your posts to ensure you avoid saying derogatory things you don’t intend for. Something that looks good to you can be incredibly insulting to others who read differently from you, and since conversation is a two-way street, that’s the kind of thing we all need to be aware of.

I’ve no love lost for the developers in question. But between the original two PRs and associated comments being from over three years ago, and the “trans woman [being called] 'spam” comment being said about a PR that seems pretty strongly to me to be meant as a sarcastic insult rather than a genuine contribution, I can’t help but find it a little unconvincing.

It’s not without merit by far. I feel that Kling’s blog post not addressing the drama was in poor taste and may indicate a lack of self-improvement regarding the initial fuckup, and saying you want to “avoid alienating people” when closing a PR that aims to improve inclusivity is more than a little pathetic. I also understand not wanting bigots to be able to just bury their past and pretend they were never bigoted. It’s just that the fiery response this has gotten still ends up feeling a bit disproportionate given how old the truly insulting issues were. Am I missing something?