on the anti-US-imperialist left (“tankies”), i wonder if part of Trump’s appeal, perhaps only semiconsciously, is that he’d be openly as bad as they were always sure the United States always was. they’d be proven right, and no more of what they perceived as hypocritical sanctimony.
@interfluidity Both the tankies and #Trump are broadly against war, although tankies are far more principled in that stance than #Trump ofc
I mean, we're talking about a president who made an ally of #TulsiGabbard. You don't see many people more anti-imperialist than her in the #USA government.
@realcaseyrollins anti-imperialist, or pro other empires, our dear Tulsi. Trump portrayed himself as antiwar while campaigning, now he won’t rule out the use of force against Greenland/Denmark and Panama, he promises “all hell is going to break loose” in Gaza Saturday if all hostages are released, openly seeks territorial expansion in a way no US President has for more than a century.
> tankies are far more principled in that stance than #Trump ofc
@realcaseyrollins i’ll believe that when i see more of them disavowing their support for Trump as somehow the lesser evil.
@interfluidity Rooting for the "no new wars" president over the guy who instigated a conflict in the middle east while a completely different one was going on is about at principled as you can be if what you oppose war TBF
@realcaseyrollins i can respect that.
but then i’d expect some expressions of disappointment for a “no new wars” candidate who has now hinted at openly imperialistic military actions that were so far off the table you’d have needed a warp drive to find them a few months ago.
Also keep in mind that so many of Trump's supporters interpret his words in the opposite way.
When his own audience thinks he's emphatically against imperialistic military actions, that has meaning.
In theory, they should understand his verbiage since they're his choir he's preaching to.
@realcaseyrollins
