• PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    What she’s saying is to use the word “kings” instead of “oligarchy”. Which I get. Sure - do that. Makes sense. Same argument, same vitriol, more punch.

    Still don’t agree with that. Oligarchy is a very specific thing that we are currently living in. We don’t have a king, not even by the most new-speak of definitions.

    Detailing her plan, Slotkin – a former analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)

    Also hard pass. The CIA should be shuttered they will never be able to provide solution to the problems of capitalism, because their number one goal is to secure “US Interests Abroad” meaning, prop up the oligarchy.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Well you can argue the words or the pronunciation thereof but I don’t think you’re on the right side of that one. Language is central to reality and you’re talking about a wide swath of people’s reality where oligarch has little meaning but king has a lot.

      As for CIA-bad, no argument there but CIA-bad-therefore-anyone-who-worked-there-bad I’d also disagree with. We gotta have someone to run and if she’s progressive and firey, I’ll take it. If the left wants to primary her for someone else, fine - so long as they can win. But in most cases they don’t have anyone.