Republican = not believing in science and/or data

Jokes aside, what a weirdly leading question that doesn’t actually lead anywhere— the only reason it is given a name is because the social dominance of theism necessitated the distinction.

There are also plenty of phrases regarding the rejection of something. Put “anti” at the front of plenty of philosophies or systems and boom, there you go.

I need a version of this with Zuma

You’d rather pay money AND watch ads than sign into a private tracker once a month?

Yup, fuck organized religion

One doesn’t have to think that all humans are trash and deserve to die in order to think that it’s not cool to bring a whole ass human into a shitty situation so that the labor pool stays stable.

Jesus Christ

Honestly at this point I consider those who peddle this narrative either bots or literally worse than those who are captured by the cult of MAGA — because they have “reasoned” that giving MAGA free reign makes them morally superior to those who voted for the Democrats. But I have to ask:

Do you basically just… Not believe in harm reduction?

Because the argument seems to hinge on the idea that you’d refuse to engage in behaviors that reduce TOTAL harm because there would still BE harm.

I agree that none of us are truly free until we all are, but I fail to see how outright christofascism AND genocide are the preferable outcome for you here. How exactly does sending people to El Salvadorian work camps and secreting away protesters improve our foothold on this issue, exactly?

If your idea is that, if gets bad enough, people will have enough anger to fuel your dreams of an uprising of some kind… At the end of the day you’re STILL using human suffering as a bargaining chip while patting yourself on the back for being exactly the kind of non-resistance that MAGA relies on to gain power and momentum.

Tl;Dr: I really fucking hope you’re an account made for astroturfing and not a real person because “dogshit take” is too soft a descriptor for this line of thinking.