There will be more of this. Candidates will have had easy access to the internet at younger ages. Edgy polarising shit is encouraged on the internet, it’s all gas no brakes here. So we’ll see more candidates with edgy polarising history that they may, or may not still believe.
Maybe I’m sympathetic because I was an insufferable know-it-all antithesist that, like antithesist of the time, shared my fair share of bigoted shit.
Maybe I’m sympathetic because I’ve found myself on the fringes of society due to my belief that genocide is bad actually.
Maybe, I’m sympathetic because the poor are getting poorer, the rich are getting richer, and perhaps there’s a connection there.
I dunno, we have to figure out what we’ll do about this stuff. To lead the sanitized adolescence/ young adulthood, that is void of attack lines, makes you unfit for office I think.
It’s probably a sign of the time. I want someone radical enough to make the changes I think are so desperately needed. This hypothetical person has to have pushed at the boundaries of society, otherwise they wouldn’t be radical enough. In pushing at boundaries they will have inevitably crossed them. Someone that has never done drugs, never been to protests, never said BLM, or eat the rich, or ACAB, never spoke positively about Luigi, they aren’t going to effectively handle wealth inequality. I don’t mean the candidate has to have done all those things, all gas no brakes, but to have not done any of them?
All of which to say, she unequivocally attacked Indian men. Will she attack them today? Because we’re voting for the person today, not the 13 years younger one. The real question is could Indian men be comfortable/feel safe with this person as their candidate. Not one I can answer.
There will be more of this. Candidates will have had easy access to the internet at younger ages. Edgy polarising shit is encouraged on the internet, it’s all gas no brakes here. So we’ll see more candidates with edgy polarising history that they may, or may not still believe.
Maybe I’m sympathetic because I was an insufferable know-it-all antithesist that, like antithesist of the time, shared my fair share of bigoted shit.
Maybe I’m sympathetic because I’ve found myself on the fringes of society due to my belief that genocide is bad actually.
Maybe, I’m sympathetic because the poor are getting poorer, the rich are getting richer, and perhaps there’s a connection there.
I dunno, we have to figure out what we’ll do about this stuff. To lead the sanitized adolescence/ young adulthood, that is void of attack lines, makes you unfit for office I think.
It’s probably a sign of the time. I want someone radical enough to make the changes I think are so desperately needed. This hypothetical person has to have pushed at the boundaries of society, otherwise they wouldn’t be radical enough. In pushing at boundaries they will have inevitably crossed them. Someone that has never done drugs, never been to protests, never said BLM, or eat the rich, or ACAB, never spoke positively about Luigi, they aren’t going to effectively handle wealth inequality. I don’t mean the candidate has to have done all those things, all gas no brakes, but to have not done any of them?
All of which to say, she unequivocally attacked Indian men. Will she attack them today? Because we’re voting for the person today, not the 13 years younger one. The real question is could Indian men be comfortable/feel safe with this person as their candidate. Not one I can answer.