No, it's actually super easy, barely an inconvenience.
No, it's the notion that you should engage Marx's writings as themselves, not as how people who agreed with them tried to implement systems based on them.
You'll have to do a lot better than this to explain why you think Marx's views are...
I have issues with them, but not regarding "separating from Europe", and this has nothing to do with your claim that they isolated us from Europe.
I'm not sure what any of this has to do with anything. It certainly isn't relevant to what we were talking about.
Also, there's nothing at all vile...
It's always interesting to me to watch the narratives the right comes up with and then spreads. The people at the top create these weird things that make no sense, and then their followers just latch on and disseminate them everywhere.
This has nothing to do with democracy. Stop just buying...
The point is Europe and America were and are only separated geographically. They've always been close as far as culture and society goes. America was not divorced from Europe or the ideas of Freud, Darwin or Marx.
OK, so you mean "cultural marxist", the buzzword of the right that is basically just another way of saying "woke", but you think it sounds better because it sounds more educated.
Ah, there it is, thank you.
None of that made any sense. America's founding fathers followed the Enlightenment...
With all due respect, I have already told you that I don't buy into Putin's propaganda like you do, so I don't care what he has to say about anything, because, you know, all he does is spread misinformation to pump himself and Russia up.
Ah, yes, the videos. And you don't seem to understand the difference between comments on YouTube videos and the views of the general populace. You also ignore the fact that there is a concerted Russian disinformation/trolling effort online.
America was founded to be independent from Britain. It was not founded to be separate from Europe, and there was no such thing as "neo-Marxist", no matter what you're trying to use the term to mean. And why America was founded is irrelevant. It's 250 years later.
I just happen to be watching this video right now:
The models are indeed sophisticated enough to deal with all the variables you can throw at them. I'd suggest actually learning about climate change and how they research and track it. This video is a good start, since it starts with the very...
You seem to be confused. Kathryn was claiming that if Europe increased their military spending, the U.S. would decrease theirs. It's up to her to show that her claim is accurate. It's not up to me to prove her wrong.
Besides, the post you quoted was about a completely different topic: whether...
No, it doesn't. That's based on the assumption that our spending depends on theirs. You have yet to give an example of why that's true. You attempted to with the idea of not having so many bases and troops stationed over there, but then that was shot down (pardon the pun).
Our military...
"Progressive" is not "woke", and neither institution has gotten progressive or woke. The military has begrudgingly moved with the times to some degree, but that's just the nature of time and progress. Is it "progressive" or "woke" that the military is desegregated?
And colleges have gotten...
You'll have to be a lot more specific.
Did you not see the part where this has nothing to do with anything? If the U.S. is going to keep the military presence in Europe regardless of how much Europe spends on its military, then the costs of doing so are irrelevant to your point about wanting...
It could what? You're talking about the U.S. taking measures to save money on their bases and troops in Europe. Not removing those things. The bases and troops would stay, so Europe spending more on their militaries has nothing to do with this. I'm not concerned right now with the U.S. finding...
What does that have to do with how much Europe spends on their militaries? You're getting off track. You said you want Europe to spend more on "defense". It had nothing to do with America finding ways to make their own military endeavors cheaper.
I hear you. I'm just saying the original reason this was brought up was it was used by Kathryn as a reason Europe needs to spend more on military, but if we need to be there anyway, then that point fails.