If someone can correctly identify actual socialist policies as socialist, they’re probably already a socialist, so there’s nothing to defend. You can just innocently say “Oh is it? Huh, maybe those socialists are onto something then”.

The whole reason socialist terminology is poisoned is because the people have been told that “socialism” means the government owning everything, forcing you to live in commie blocks, and taking all your money to give to party insiders and freeloaders.

In either case, promoting the policies without the terminology is still the best course of action. The socialists will understand what you’re getting at, the masses will get to consider the policies without the baggage of propaganda.

You’re not a robot, you aren’t forced into the defensive by questions. Conversations are free response, you aren’t forced to follow a logical script. Logic is for coming to conclusions, not sharing them. That’s the job of rhetoric, and rhetoric relies on directing the conversation, not being directed. Persuasion is more important than reason here.

How do you figure? People in general don’t listen to well thought out arguments, they’re mostly driven by pithy quips, buzzwords, and emotional arguments. And positioning ourselves on the defense just makes us look weak, and weakness is a poor emotional argument.

Progressive, socialist policies are extremely popular. Progressive, socialist terminology is extremely unpopular. What we actually need is a full-throated promotion of socialist policy without hobbling ourselves by using socialist language. Keep that shit in the cadre, meet the proletariat where they actually are.

Hello babies. Welcome to Earth. It’s hot in the summer and cold in the winter. It’s round and wet and crowded. On the outside, babies, you’ve got a hundred years here. There’s only one rule that I know of, babies - “God damn it, you’ve got to be kind.”

Can’t access my old Yahoo account, so the oldest is Feb 15, 2007 signing up for StumbleUpon

I remember playing web games and looking up Pokemon cheats

Don’t tell us, tell your representatives

Exactly. My library consists of books I haven’t read but will when the need arises, and books I have read and will either re-read or recommend to others. What’s the point of just keeping books you’ve already read?

Perhaps “physically” is a better descriptor than “canonically”. “Physically and mentally” if you want to be thorough.

This isn’t that though. This is a canonical adult, with the mind of an adult, in the body of an adult. Sure it’s used as an excuse for weird pedo shit, but in this case it’s just an accurate observation.

I followed your instructions and used my functional eye to see “Diane Foxington” in the description. I continued to use my eye to read information on that character, who is canonically very much an adult.

What are you seeing that we aren’t?

I can clap with one hand, but it’s impossible to do without looking mentally challenged.

I’ve got a good Smeagol and a good Stitch. Never comes out

Argh, that be rough matey.

A physicist, an engineer, and a mathematician are staying in neighboring rooms at a hotel for a conference.

In the middle of the night, a faulty outlet sparks a fire in the hallway. The physicist wakes up, sees the fire, fills the ice bucket up with water and uses it to extinguish the fire. He goes back to bed satisfied.

A bit later, another fire breaks out. This time, the engineer wakes up, sees the fire, does a quick calculation and fills his ice bucket 3/4 full. He just barely extinguishes the fire, and goes back to bed satisfied.

Later yet, the fire starts again. This time the mathematician wakes up, sees the fire, sees the ice bucket, announces “A solution exists!” and goes back to bed satisfied.

We don’t do purity tests between the primary and the general election. The voting is over, this is the perfect time to make demands.

It can be multiple things, but read up on the psychological effects of early childhood lead poisoning, it’s basically a line-by-line description of modern conservatives.

Thanks, leaded gas.

I can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few shops slops in my time

Would they though?

Maybe more common than many think, but I know a lot of former servicemen. I struggle to think of one who has a positive perception of any of our military actions.