@EricHovagim @bronzeagemantis I mean there was famously one

@EgorKotkin @FrenchComrade @PropaGandalf866 As a fun fact, "Kaiser" comes the same way

@redbullsvviings Especially crazy because Serbia and Israel are famously extremely close allies and support each other's genocidal campaigns when nobody else will

@Kali_de_Armas He’s directionally correct, but historically wrong. Hitler spoke fairly openly about exterminating the Jews, and even more passionately about “removing” the slavs of Eastern Europe for lebensraum, and everyone knew what he meant.

@ParacelsusII @NobleQAli “Marx is good for learning about marxism” is precisely wrong. Marx is good for learning about Capitalism. Lenin and his generation are good for learning about Marxism, which did not exist meaningfully when Marx was writing

@obsolete__units @RichardHanania It's not, though. The study in question has nothing to do with prioritization. You can select the furthest ring in that study and still prioritize your own child over 1000 of your neighbors' children, if you like, and that's completely consistent

@DoyleRudolph @Trionyx27 @DreamLeaf5 @Atomic_dolphins The progression here is kind of weird. I do not really care about amoeba, but I definitely care about a hypothetical alien if it's more complex/intelligent than amoeba. Also, frankly, I definitely care more about a tree than amoeba, though I can't fully justify that one.

@elaifresh @RichardHanania It looks sick though. People keep complaining about this but it is an objectively fun way to present boring data

@robfig @RichardHanania Immediately after this tweet, he wrote a blog post entirely about his direct argument for the real-life position. It's linked right underneath it, if you bothered to check

@SamWest_7 @mnmcsofgp @North_Forebilth @hopes_revenge The hyperbole is unhelpful here because we are actually having a conversation about the realism of specific numbers

@SamWest_7 @mnmcsofgp @North_Forebilth @hopes_revenge Do you actually believe that happened?

@cygnus1625088 @AxelPlasma @pli_cachete Admittedly it looks cooler this way

@mnmcsofgp @North_Forebilth @hopes_revenge I cannot imagine that 13% of the FBI was continuously working on January 6. It is believable that 5,000 people have at various points been assigned to January 6 related cases for a period of time, or handled files related to it, etc

@generic_007 @dklmarxist Yes, thank you for an example

@BlackestofLies @katewillett In the context of a political organization, no, that is not what the word "purge" refers to. That is regular old abuse of power, and it is a constant game of whack-a-mole to prevent it. If you have a problem with a certain leader, though, they can be easily removed by vote.

@BlackestofLies @katewillett Chapter leaders are elected, and so is the NCC, separately. If many people agreed that they were bad, they would not get re-elected. Also, again, what you are describing is not what a purge is.

@thefemagend @bigcommunism @katewillett This is a tautology. Yes, if the members don’t want it to change, then it won’t, that’s how member democracy works. If you think it should change, you can convince people of that.

@BlackestofLies @katewillett There have been messy fights between chapters and members, of course. I know of at least one where the chapter was definitely in the wrong. But that is a different thing from systematic purges, which do not exist in DSA

@thefemagend @bigcommunism @katewillett There is a difference between chapters being dominated by a few people abusing power, which does happen (though National cracks down on it fairly well) and an org being undemocratic at the fundamental political level. DSA is whatever its members want it to be.

@bigcommunism @thefemagend @katewillett Also, again, genuine internal democracy. The Dem Party can't be changed because if anyone started to make progress, they would be frozen out undemocratically. The point of the Party is to maintain a certain ideological stance, the same is not true of DSA