103
Solarpunk
(thelemmy.club)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2026
103 points (71.4% liked)
Memes
54254 readers
1719 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Lol. Lmao even.
I would say "lol, lmao even," but the horrors inflicted on all the non-whites in the US is not a laughing matter.
Sure would be better if it was.
Everything I said is true and you didn't refute any of it. You do realize that, if you have nothing to say, you don't have to post, right?
Trump has been leader for 5 years, and will cease leadership in 3 years. Xi has been in power since 2012 and can be leader for the rest of his life.
Now please explain how US is NOT less isolationist than China. This should be good. 🤣
When you order beef and the waiter brings chicken, you point out the mistake. When the waiter bites your nose, what do you do?
This is a leftist space. Debunking is something done in general forums, when you're trying to inform the audience. No one here is gonna waste their precious time debunking any of that for the 100th time lol
To be fair, this isn't an explicitly leftist space, just a space with a lot of leftists and moderated by them. Clear debunking of anti-communist mythos does have value, as many anti-communists and other liberals do come here.
You imply that it is good to have term limits, despite the fact that it is clearly un-democractic to limit who the people can vote for. If the people like someone and think they should continue their work, they should be allowed to do so. [EDIT:] And if China did have term limits... what would it change? Xi ends his terms and then what? Someone else will simply step up.
I didn't say it wasn't. I said it would be better if it was.
No. I implied that it's not fascistic to have term limits (or less fascistic). I don't think I said anything was good or bad.
You're implying that being un-democratic is a bad thing. The US Constitution is also un-democratic, as it doesn't permit the voting majority to violate the rights of the minority. And I doubt you would consider such mob rule of the majority to be a good thing. Or do you?
Do you think so?
So not allowing the majority to enslave the minority is bad? It's clearly un-democratic.
Well, I'm against slavery. So I guess our preferences just fundamentally differ.
It is not undemocratic to ensure the rights of the people.
And I do not want the enslavement of people.