NoneOfUrBusiness

Are you fucking kidding me? First, like I said I’m not the OP. Second, scroll through their (or my, if you’re going to focus on me for some reason) post/comment history yourself. I’m not doing your work for you.

In terms of getting to do science without harassment, it absolutely is. Now I wouldn’t go myself because I’m basically allergic to authoritarianism, but if I was another “I just wanna make rockets” guy it’d be a pretty tempting offer.

I don’t think that’s necessarily the case, but either way the firewall isn’t impregnable if you put your mind to it.

First of all I’m another guy, but also that’s a non-sequitur. Even if their post history only talked about Gaza, that wouldn’t mean anything except that they follow news from that genocide exceptionally closely. To answer your “question,” though: Sudan.

Those downvotes… Liberals did not like this one.

[Citation needed]

Maybe if you pinch Mark Zuckerburg’s coin purse hard enough you’ll get him to flinch.

Too late. Trump doesn’t need them anymore.

The fuck?

Even if you choose to call it something, it isn’t.

It literally is. Nationalism is a relatively new idea, emerging during the late 18th century. The concept of a French nation or a Chinese nation is a very recent thing, and either way I was very clearly talking about the modern PRC not the fucking Qing dynasty.

“Internet atheist” is just another term for “online militant atheist.”

But what is the answer? In my country the left has allowed in so many people through various programs but has failed to increase the infrastructure which causes more problems.

Force them to build infrastructure. Electoral democracy never works without direct action by the people being “represented” in it. So the answer is: Organize.

China didn’t just discover bigotry. They’ve been dealing with it since before the founding of the United States or capitalism for that matter.

Good thing I didn’t say “bigotry,” then, I said “rightwing nationalism.” Also I think it was clear I was referring to the modern PRC, not past Chinese polities. It’s no coincidence that the Uighur genocide, an aggressive posture towards Taiwan and budding pro-natalism all came within the same general time period. China will eventually have to deal with fascism, but they’re not barreling towards it like Western capitalist countries are because their history under capitalism is shorter and fascism hasn’t had time to metastasize yet.

South America full of thriving democracies?

Again literally not what I said. I said there are plenty of thriving democracies in the world, and gave an example of one place where they exist. The existence of non-democratic countries in South America doesn’t contradict this statement.

Or is it the one that got lucky and woke up enough last minute to unseat their burgeoning fascist and take him to trial?

Yes, that one.

But still chock full of the descendants of nazi german expats.

That has nothing to do with what we’re talking about. Like, at all. What’s even your point here?

That have to deal with all of them and the narco cartels.

Fun fact: Homicide rates across South and Central America has been decreasing hard this last decade. Sure the cartels are a massive problem, but they’re a massive problem that’s getting better

It’s got nothing to do with the west or capitalism.

Authoritarianism has nothing to do with the West or capitalism, but fascism specifically is a phenomenon that requires established capitalism.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement

The whole system of travel between countries being a privilege rather than a right is insanely authoritarian and is the basis of a lot of oppression worldwide (see: the whole concept of an illegal immigrant). Now that doesn’t mean exceptions can’t exist (like the person in the OP), but they should be that: exceptions.

Freedom of movement is a human right, true, but exerting pressure on people so they exert pressure on their governments is a tried and true strategy of effecting change. Doubly so when it’s something like travel, which mainly affects wealthy people more like to have clout and influence.

That’s assuming the Democrats would even allow fair primaries. That shit has been rigged since forever.

…and that means retirees will literally starve and live on the streets? I don’t think it will. It will just be less luxurious.

They won’t starve and live in the streets because something will change before society reaches that stage, but theoretically it’s not impossible. In Japan, for example, a significant chunk (unsure if a majority) of homeless people are elderly men.

It’s not a pretty thought but it’s hard to blame them when the US is looking less and less like an ally and trading partner on the world stage.

This has nothing to do with geopolitics and everything to do with xenophobia and poor governance. Japan’s economy has been in a slump since its bubble burst in the 90s and the center-right LPD (which they for some reason keep electing) has been unable or unwilling to fix it, leading to a recent surge in third parties as people finally decide to look for alternatives, and due to xenophobia et al the far-right was able to market itself as a compelling alternative.

Is there nowhere in the world now that fascist racists are not on the rise?

Yes. This is a Western capitalism thing; Chinese politics has only recently discovered rightwing nationalism and there are plenty of non-Western thriving democracies in, say, South America.

Post-election polls say Bernie would’ve won if he was the candidate against Trump in 2016. America would definitely vote for a progressive. I mean, hell, Obama ran as a progressive and destroyed the Republican candidate.

Internet atheists who consider themselves progressive will say the most unhinged shit once religion is involved.