10-22-2025, 05:36 PM
In some respects, they're just very results or ends oriented and the means or process or method is entirely irrelevant. I think this is why they can't grasp that the means is often what really matters. So you get, for example, Nepenthe talking about ACAB and abolishing prisons and telling people they need to never trust and do violence to cops. Then she turns around and praises imprisoning a comedian for nearly a decade and says the lack of that thing is why America/Europe is so terrible. To her, the entire complaint about police or the criminal justice system is that they're doing their things to the wrong people not that they're doing those things. The wrong isn't the things we're saying are wrong.
They don't want to ever place some means off the table for use against their enemies. It's a very different "progressive" mentality from "we don't do this because we're better than them." You could see it in some of replies about this candidate, that the problem is Democrats aren't as bad as Trump and it's not fair that Trump is allowed to be.
It's a complaint that somewhat says that the only immoral things are those you can't get away with. They point to how some people can get away with things as a justification for throwing out standards completely. You can see this elsewhere in things like the trans stuff. The "systemic analysis" is never actually about the system it's about how the person doesn't perceive "the system" to be fair and by fair they mean to their advantage at all times. Until things are fair, anything goes.
I don't actually think most of these people entirely dismiss the means, it's just there's a culture in their circles that allows for it. If challenge was actually allowed I think it would be a minority that are like Nepenthe and truly willing to defend the position that means are irrelevant. She's so dishonest I'm skeptical she wouldn't, she clearly feels that being told to eat their whole ass is beyond the pale even if someone is telling you that you should let yourself die rather than vote for a Black woman.
They don't want to ever place some means off the table for use against their enemies. It's a very different "progressive" mentality from "we don't do this because we're better than them." You could see it in some of replies about this candidate, that the problem is Democrats aren't as bad as Trump and it's not fair that Trump is allowed to be.
It's a complaint that somewhat says that the only immoral things are those you can't get away with. They point to how some people can get away with things as a justification for throwing out standards completely. You can see this elsewhere in things like the trans stuff. The "systemic analysis" is never actually about the system it's about how the person doesn't perceive "the system" to be fair and by fair they mean to their advantage at all times. Until things are fair, anything goes.
I don't actually think most of these people entirely dismiss the means, it's just there's a culture in their circles that allows for it. If challenge was actually allowed I think it would be a minority that are like Nepenthe and truly willing to defend the position that means are irrelevant. She's so dishonest I'm skeptical she wouldn't, she clearly feels that being told to eat their whole ass is beyond the pale even if someone is telling you that you should let yourself die rather than vote for a Black woman.

4 users liked this post: