It’s not what you would expect.
I don’t want to be a target.
If Trump wins, “cis-gender straight white males” will be blamed – perhaps also “gay” ones like me. We have had 8 years of attempted reeducation of the population to try to prevent the election of anyone like Trump ever again. Schoolchildren have been told in no uncertain terms that they are guilty for our bad, bad society. Trump paints a target on me.
Evidently, cis-gender (straight) white males are the largest market for masochism. They are gluttons for punishment. Also for sadism. At least in fantasy. But I’m not – not so privileged. It’s a turn-off, actually. But, evidently, it turns on so much of politics.
Pure
masturbation. This is just the “white man’s burden” of false humility. Add an unwaranted victim complex for good measure.I want Kamala to win so I can get a break from the madness, an end to the intimidation and blackmail, the manipulation and the mind-games. What they promised 4 years ago: getting back to normal – going back to the “new normal.” That is the reason – the only reason – anyone will vote for her. Dare I hope for it? But they have lied about everything else, so why should we believe they’re not lying about this, too? Will they finally leave us alone? The promise of an end to the drama might be enough to elect Kamala. I want it to be true.
But it is a lie*
This person claims to be a Marxist, but is operating on 40k Ork logic, openly admitting to projecting their idealist hopes onto reality. He admits Kamala is lying, and yet he is trying to pretend the status quo of pre-2016 is fine, and that “normalcy” is desirable! Absurd.
Edit: added “But it is a lie.” I personally believe it to be redundant, but it can be seen as misleading to not include it. My point is that the author knows Kamala is lying and it won’t get better but hopes for it anyways.
Haven’t gotten around to trying to really read this article in full but it looks like you’ve got a pretty serious misquote.
That last paragraph you quote, which is at the end of the article, is followed by a single sentence given its own paragraph. So it actually reads as follows:
The promise of an end to the drama might be enough to elect Kamala. I want it to be true.
But it is a lie.
Emphasis mine.
So he’s not saying it’ll actually happen. Of all things he’s rejecting the “40k Ork logic” that you’re trying to pin on him. It sounds more like he’s lamenting that ‘If Democrats weren’t lying, maybe Kamala Harris winning would lead to better circumstances, but they are lying.’
Cutrone has had some completely garbage takes (e.g. Palestine) but we don’t need to stoop to the level of misreading him so carelessly. That benefits no one.
That’s a fair point, but that’s the article as I understand it. Maybe I read it wrong, but he spends the entire time acknowledging it to be a lie, that’s why I said he admits Kamala is lying. He is at one step rejecting it, and the other embracing it. I think the issue here is a disconnect on what I meant and how you interpreted it, I probably could have worded my point better. Thank you for pointing that out.
So he’s not saying it’ll actually happen. Of all things he’s rejecting the “40k Ork logic” that you’re trying to pin on him. It sounds more like he’s lamenting that ‘If Democrats weren’t lying, maybe Kamala Harris winning would lead to better circumstances, but they are lying.’
Emphasis mine.
This is more or less what I’m saying. He writes this as he wishes it to be, he says he wants Kamala to win so he’s no longer a target and hopes everything gets better, even if he knows better. That’s the 40k Ork logic at work.
That being said, I’ll add the final “but it is a lie.” I left it out because I believed it to be redundant, but for transparency I’ll include it.
on one hand she’s the people’s accelerationist candidate (cause she will implement austerity), on the other hand this will show demonrats that american piggies will accept genocide if it means cheaper borgers. So land of contrasts.
Apparently not hearing msnbc screeching is also a cause worth supporting (in fucking chicago)
too much cracker, not enough soup
