44
The cost of freedom, according to Jon Stewart (twitter.com)
submitted 8 months ago by Rojo27@hexbear.net to c/the_dunk_tank@hexbear.net
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Jon Stewart unironically tells Tucker Carlson that the reason why the US can’t have clean functioning subways or cheap grocery prices like they do in Moscow is “the literal price of freedom”

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] BeamBrain@hexbear.net 28 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It is difficult for me to imagine what "personal liberty" is enjoyed by an unemployed person, who goes about hungry, and cannot find employment.

Real liberty can exist only where exploitation has been abolished, where there is no oppression of some by others, where there is no unemployment and poverty, where a man is not haunted by the fear of being tomorrow deprived of work, of home and of bread. Only in such a society is real, and not paper, personal and every other liberty possible.

/
stalin-pipe

[-] frauddogg@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 8 months ago

Jon Stewart returning to bear water for the Democratic establishment ten months out from an election, the DNC must be desperate.

[-] SacredExcrement@hexbear.net 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Imagining Obama on the phone telling Stewart that 'America needs him more than ever'

May have actually happened lmao, but

kombucha-disgust

[-] DragonBallZinn@hexbear.net 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Democrats sounding like 2000s republicans over there. "You want life to NOT be a luxury, what are we a bunch of freedom-hating Asians!?"

[-] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 8 points 8 months ago

As an aside, I kind of need to wonder what people who wrote and reviewed that line actually imagine the "freedom" in question is when it is set against the many having a materially better life (which is a little bit of an exaggeration, but Stewart doesn't substantially challenge Tucker's claim there either). Like, they never specified what Navalny was killed for beside merely being "opposition" and some insinuation of him being against the invasion, so is their line "We need shitty conditions so we can have the right to protest war and be ignored by our government rather than killed"? It's very difficult to make a coherent argument out of what they are saying even if you grant them a bunch of their blatantly false premises.

[-] DragonBallZinn@hexbear.net 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

In the 2000s, at the very least Republicans would say that 'freedom' is for the bourgeoisie. Affordable housing = telling porky what to do = bad.

But here, it inadvertently plays into chuds trying to blame California's woes on insufficient racism or god economically punishing them for being too LGBT friendly. They're saying that civil rights makes things expensive.

[-] Rojo27@hexbear.net 4 points 8 months ago

Yeah I was so confused when I first heard this. And then I thought about it and it's like, this whole statement is shoddily built on anti-Russia vibes.

Paraphrasing "The civilizational (???) battle was between capitalism and communism after WWII. Russia was the enemy." A revisionist statement considering the US sent forces right after WWI in an attempt to put down the Bolsheviks.

Then it bleeds into some bizarre statement that Tucker and other right wingers think that the systems in athe US and Russia are the same... it's because they are! Both are capitalist states. Liberals love to divorce from reality and act like an authoritarian country can't be a capitalist country. I guess it's another demonstration why the term is just a neoliberal invention to make it seem like the baddies are really different from the good ol' US of A.

this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2024
44 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15909 readers
482 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
KiaKaha@hexbear.net
wantonviolins@hexbear.net
itsPina@hexbear.net
MiraculousMM@hexbear.net
corgiwithalaptop@hexbear.net
VILenin@hexbear.net
blashork@hexbear.net
replaceable@hexbear.net
EmmaGoldman@hexbear.net
InsidiousTrackers@hexbear.net