Once in a while, the New York Times runs an article that reveals what this media conglomerate really represents. People often call the Times “liberal.” That’s because it seems to oppose some of the most reactionary politicians, like president #45, and gives ample opinion space to diverse voices.
  • Alteon
    25·
    2 years ago

    POINT IN MY POST WHERE THE FUCK I REMOTELY DEFENDED THE TIMES YOU DENSE MOTHERFUCKER.

      • Alteon
        13·
        2 years ago

        This is ridiculous. Social Democracy is not remotely colonialist. Just because I don’t want a political paradigm shift in my country (anarchy) vs a gradual change (stability) doesn’t mean I’m colonialist in the slightest.

        That’d be like me saying that anyone that doesn’t agree with me is an authoritarian-loving conservative. You leave no room to have a good faith argument about literally any political ideology.

        • m532@lemmygrad.ml
          2·
          2 years ago

          Socialdemocrats want a larger share of the juicy imperial slavery loot. They’re benefactors of colonialism.

          • Alteon
            11·
            2 years ago

            No, you label them as colonialists because they are socialist-lite. They aren’t socialist enough for you because they want to retain their standards of living whilst simultaneously making changes for the better. But that’s not good enough for you. You want a paradigm shift in ideology, but are too stupid to realize the dangers of it.

            Call me colonialist all you want. The insults of a fool are entirely harmless and void of merit.