imaqtpie

It's remarkable how effective that strategy has been.

Reagan/Bush run up the deficit by 300%+ due to tax cuts and massive military spending, foreign wars

Clinton pays off the deficit, gets the economy booming, scales back military spending and foreign entanglements

GWB campaigns on a platform of tax cuts and increased military spending, along with denying climate change, barely wins

deficit skyrockets due to tax cuts, multi trillion dollar wars, lack of financial regulation collapses global economy

Obama has to save the economy again, extricate us from foreign entanglements again, while fighting against a republican establishment that refuses to pass any legislation

Trump administration completely fails to deal with COVID pandemic and tanks the economy yet again

Biden has to clean up that mess, and the resultant inflation is blamed on the Democrats

How many times are people going to fall for this shit?

Ok I still think it's wrong to criticize nonviolent resistance but I appreciate the data and links. It is true that I didn’t read the linked article at first.

I'm extremely confused. The civil rights movement in the 1950s and 60s, led by MLK, had massive, sweeping success. Brown v. BOE, Loving v. Virginia, Civil Rights Act of 1964, Voting Rights Act of 1965, Fair Housing Act of 1968, etc. The non-violent strategy succeded in striking down segregation, Jim crow laws, and nearly all forms of legal racial discrimination within a couple decades.

Securing legal rights for minority groups to be treated equally under the law and courts is a losing strategy? What exactly is your objective if you see the civil rights movement as a loss?

I understand that you're probably not American so you may not have an extensive knowledge of American history. But this is pretty important stuff, and acting like MLK failed because of his non-violent strategy is 1,000,000% wrong. Literally could not be further from the truth.

What did the Black Panthers accomplish with their violent strategy? They committed a few terrorist acts and all ended up dead or in jail. They didn't secure any major, permanent victories for future generations.

Saying that MLK failed because of his non-violent approach is like saying Julius Caesar failed because he was an ineffective military commander. It's so incredibly incorrect that I don't understand how you could ever come to think that.

Well I mostly was already familiar with "if and only if" terminology from some math class many years ago. So once you said iff stands for "if and only if" I didn't really look too close at the rest of your comment because I felt like I already understood.

Cool, TIL

I agree with you on that.

But alternatively: humans can only see a portion of the whole reality of a given situation, and that specific angle can often be misleading.

Are "Iffs" a thing? I've been missing out.

You had a lot of really good comments in this thread. And also in general. Thank you for being here 🫡

It also has less users than sh.itjust.works and lemm.ee. And way less compared to lemmy.world but I guess they aren't linked on the joinlemmy site for some reason

Yeah that's what I meant, very true. But the setting is much easier to optimize.

Rule 1 of tripping. The setting dictates everything.