This just in, water is wet and the sky is a shade of violet.

Considering its apparent that those with massive amounts of capital have hijacked the system, if you you look at the wall street war profiteering industrialists relationships with our DOD, as well as every branch of our government and historical events such as the business plot, nixon shock and 8 years of the Regan administration i think its evident we live in a fascist authoritarian police state that works to violently suppress any leftist policy that Benefits working people. We have no left party in the US only a far right and center right. violent tactics are regularly used against peaceful demonstrators so anyone with a brain knows the system will use whatever tools are at its disposal to thwart change. So luigi seems to have said the quiet part out loud if he is indeed the perpetrator of the acts he allegedly committed.

So there is really only one option besides violent revolution and thats a massive general strike. If at least 25% of the labor force refused to produce labor for as long as was needed to get demands met then that could work but i feel even that will be met with violence and martial law. So that puts us back to square one / the drawing board

You’re right! But so many times i hear the wrong phrasing used to protect the institution of modern policing. Language matters. Which is why I believe “defund the police” was chosen after the george floyd and brianna taylor(and all the other mostly brown casualties of police brutality) inspired protests. It was chosen because it was destined to fail even though the police do need to be defunded and demilitarized however the proper language should have focused around ending drug prohibition which is the main factor allowing racist attitudes to continue permeating police culture and a majority of police tax payer funding goes to the enforcement of draconian drug laws that have blatantly failed their stated purpose. (Althiugh I personally believe the stated purpose of drug prohibition was never the true purpose and the true purpose was actually to increase the black market price of narcotics and funnel poor and mostly minority people into for-profit prisons despite the fact that affluent wealthy white people are the largest consuming and distributing demographic of narcotics.

Either way you are correct. one bad apple does indeed spoil the entire bunch and there are far more than one bad apple within all the collective bunches we have that comprise our modern militarized policing apparatus

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

More tools. A knock off power probe, a set of wrenches, mid length metric sockets and a few more pairs of pliers from amazon.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

ACAB. All those people saying “one bad apple does not spoil the whole bunch” would feel Differently if someone made them an apple pie and one or two of the apples used were either completely rotten and moldy or one had been contaminated with industrial or radioactive waste or poisoned. Knowing that the majority of the apples were good apples and the existence of one or two bad apples mixed in shouldn’t ruin the pie itself im pretty certain those arguing this aphorism would refuse to eat a poisoned or tainted pie despite trying to force the rest of society to bend the knee to the rotting pie of modern policing

If the universal law became such that those being systematically exploited and ultimately sickened and or killed by systemic injustice could target those benefiting from the injustice then those incentivizing and committing the act of social murder would be incentivized to rethink their approach to profiting off the death and suffering of poor and marginalized people.

We seem to overlook that FDR’s new deal and the Fair Labor Standards act of 1938 was enacted as a compromise to prevent more violent rioting by the frustrated and exploited laborers during the gilded age. It was either the robber barons acquiesced to what was good for those doing the work giving them a fairer deal or those they were exploiting ruthlessly would have dragged them out into the streets and beaten them senseless or worse in front of their wives and children.

Removed by mod

Not only is it that murder is ok for everyone at a certain point but its that we are conditioned to praise retributive violence and killing so long as the ones being beaten maimed and or killed are marginalized people whom the ultra wealthy see as sub human and their casualty benefit their end goals. Like all the non violent labor and civil rights protestors who have ended up bludgeoned by batons and less than lethal munitions, or targeted by extra judicial unconstitutional surveillance and suppression tactics such as yale used against pro Palestinian demonstrators over the last year. There are too many examples of this double standard to go over without writing a book as thick as the king james Bible.

Imagine all your shits becoming the grout that holds this stone toilet together after a decade of dumps.

1990 kid here, im so old i died yesterday

The principle being complete subservience to a group of wall street military and prison industry profiteers who have used their wealth to hijack our social institutions, our representatives and transformed the vast majority of news media in our country into propaganda dissemination outlets While also enforcing a system that legislates and bureaucratically incentivizes the deaths of poor and working class people including American citizens for profit while denying the reality that this is called social murder and is murder none the less. A principle completely lacking in principle. Id love to know what you consider to be moral with principles such as those.

I pretty much see any person claiming to be nakamoto wether the claim is legitimate or not to be treated exactly as they are treating this guy. Governments In collusion with the military and prison industry profiteers who control all the major financial institutions want to do whatever they want with BTC’s blockchain technology and arent about to let any pesky copyright claims become a hindrance regardless of the validity or lack thereof.

Yeah they are probably lying. They can not know with 100% certainty that these giant asian hornets have all been eradicated in the us. They couldn’t get rid of something as benign as the spotted lantern fly or the marmorated stink bug but sure lets believe they got rid of a hornet as big as a humming bird that has facial recognition capabilities and can unalive people with a swarm no larger than 50 to 100 of the fuckers

LMAO. Its sad that this is so funny because its true.

There is no law mandating that charities have to give any specific amount of the money they collect which is why many charitable organizations can get away with siphoning as much as they they can to executive pay and administrative costs 5-15% may be a lowballed generalization there are likely some people in these roles who do better. Red cross claims 90% goes to the cause but thats highly unusual. There are 42 different charitable non profits in the us where their ceo alone is paid over $1,000,000. The ceo of the sloane kettering cancer research center, Selwyn Vickers earns an annual compensation of just over $5.7 million. Now thats not much for a charity that takes in 7.3 billion but i would be surprised if more than 1.5 billion of that actually went to cancer research My favorite argument against charity is by Slavoj Ziezek in “first as tragedy then as farce” who argues that charity demoralizes and degrades it is immoral to use private property to alleviate the issues caused and exacerbated by private property society instead needs to be reorganized so that poverty is impossible.

Here is some good reading on how the system of charitable non profit organizations is abused bh the wealthy to further enrich themselves

https://ips-dc.org/report-true-cost-of-billionaire-philanthropy/

I used to have a 2 year old account with a bunch if meaningless karma on reddit but those basrards IP banned me 6 months ago for a comment that said international law states indigenous populations have a right to defend themselves from occupation by any means.

I might be wrong, but my gut tells me something smells fishy and only one of these documents sounds like it was written by an ivy league cum laude graduate. ill admit I put too much stock into irrelevant factors. However my gut is still pulling me towards believing this other manifesto seems more believable.

And its not that i don’t think Klippenstien is a good reporter or that he’s not trustworthy. Its that i think cops and the reporters working for legacy media are both extremely untrustworthy. I guess only time will tell and if I’m wrong ill eat my words.