SadArtemis

Thanks! :) fwiw it wasn't that minimal, but I also have had- some practice I guess? Even if not often enough for the longest time, it's always been a hobby..

How about this? (kinda lazily done)

also came to mind but if anyone thinks its emote worthy fire away

Good point. She probably needs a re-edit then.

Good catch, it really is a WWJD moment :o

What if she's a liberation theologist?

Awesome! :D

FWIW- I'm not an accelerationist, and don't really have any good reading to direct you to in that regard.

That said, to my understanding accelerationism is explicitly pushing to agitate/worsen the material conditions and contradictions of capitalism. And how Trump comes off as "less accelerationist" to me (IMO) is because- for the reasons I described- he is faced with more political resistance, from within the US as well as across the rest of the imperial cores. As for the bit about him being less of a warhawk- well, that goes without saying (that it is undeniably less accelerationist).

They're all accelerationist, TBF. Not a single one seeks to change the issues inherent in the system, hell, they all make their living off of exacerbating it.

Trump being a perfect example of a vile human being, incredibly alienating to the rest of the western lackeys, and seeming to have a bit more self-preservation and less interest in plunging the world into WW3 goes a long way in being "less accelerationist," that said (IMO). Not that anyone should support either.

Honestly, hell if I know who would have been more accelerationist (I'd have bet on it being Kamala). Whomever wins things would get worse for the empire either way (not saying it shouldn't be fought or promoting defeatism- but the contradictions will continue to grow), but Kamala strikes me as the more neocon/hawkish of the two, with much more political baggage tagging along that is even worse, and as a more palatable (low bar) face with which the empire could absolutely wreak havoc on the rest of the world and even domestically on its own people with better PR/a more unified western imperialist order, etc.

If you want my opinion? In this context I'd bet it's the former. This is her gig, her livelihood, she has some (probably) genuine opinions but I doubt this is it, and there are a billion other ways she could have parroted her opinion rather than flying over to Georgia for direct meddling.

Think about exactly what you're saying again? The west is literally trying to Ukrainize Georgia. Participating in a foreign country's electoral processes (foreign interference) to agitate for the country to effectively destroy itself for the US MIC/to maintain western hegemony is an utterly shit move no matter how one looks at it..

Where exactly is Russia not a "friend" of the left (outside of its domestic policies and social reactionaryism)?

In resisting the western dominated world order, by necessity Russia is one of the more actively anti-imperialist states out there, for starters.

Their championing the cause of de-dollarization (again, by necessity) and assisting in uplifting/working together with the global south to develop their material conditions (developing the nuclear power plant in Burkina Faso for instance) are also absolutely amazing.

There's no excuse for their domestic reactionaryism, but in almost every aspect otherwise and outside their borders they are a friend- a circumstantial friend, perhaps, and one to be approached with some skepticism- but a friend all th same IMO.