Yeah, I think he's basically playing chicken with them.

It also begs the question of how seriously you're taking your own message: you're really putting "genocide denialism" in the same style you would use to remind kids that veggies are fun?

Even more embarrassing: she obviously hasn't seen Avatar 3

that’s a human being across from you who may or may not want to do the things they’ve been ordered to do

"Just following orders!"

It's the country a lot of people in the U.S. have known, too. "They're executing people in the streets" yeah that's what the whole Black Lives Matter movement was about, dating all the way back to Ferguson.

This shit is going to ring more and more hollow as libs get radicalized by ICE violence. You can't get to the point where libs are talking about protesting while armed (or doing it) and simultaneously punch left because they aren't pacifists.

I'd go with Cuba. Closer, more people know some of the history and speak the language, easier to find credible reporting, there's widespread international condemnation of the embargo, tons of good sources on how bad Batista was and how popular the Revolution was, well known for medicine and education.

It's a much easier starting point, and learning about Cuba reveals a lot of parallels to more propagandized countries like the DPRK.

It should be clearer now than ever before that the Democratic strategy of reaching across the aisle is useless. You can't reason with these people because they didn't reason themselves into their positions to begin with. There's nothing you could do for these people or say to them that won't be outweighed by ten types of brain-poisoned propaganda within a week. If any of them change their politics it will be due to some inscrutable internal calculus, not anything you could reveal in a focus group and target.

Articles like this and the obvious futulity of this approach could be a good radicalization talking point for libs. Goes hand-in-hand with "why aren't Democrats running on any of the stuff that's popular with their own constituents?"

I agree

The slogan should be "imprison ICE"

I think the best leftist approach to crime is "the best way to reduce crime is to reduce poverty." This covers a lot of the same ground as the OP, but does a better job of setting you up to have a more productive discussion.

Why is the state so terrifyingly effective at times, and so bumblingly incompetent at others? One reason is that when you're the state -- especially when you're the feds -- you can get away with a ton of stuff an individual or a small private group would get absolutely nailed for. This is partly because you have so much influence over investigating and prosecuting everything, and partly because you have so many resources to begin with. You're on easy mode most of the time, so most of your personnel don't have to be too sharp.

Back in the 00s or earlier, a lot of people said the r-slur basically as a way of saying "dumb" with emphasis. There wasn't always the connotation of an edge to it, or a direct understanding that you were demeaning people with intellectual disabilities. Even when it was directly mocking those people, you hadn't had an extended period of mainstream reflection on punching up/punching down, or on how fucked up mainstream language can be (e.g., the former name of the Washington Commanders).

But all those cats are out of the bag now. People who say that slur today are at best trying to be edgy, and are at worst consciously being mean. The edginess only kind of works -- everyone knows you weren't saying this a few years ago, so how edgy are you, really? I'm not even sure it works well anymore as performative meanness, because the whole idea of "we're bringing this back" so strongly emphasizes how uncreative it is.