• chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    As I said, comrade, it’s his fault and it’s clear for everyone to see that he’s a dirty hypocrite liar for trying to imply otherwise. Very terrible president, just like Eisenhower.

      • chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        So, more-or-less equally terrible or would you say that there’s a rough ranking to it? Who’s making it into the list of top 10 worst?

        • axont [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re asking who the best manager was at the factory that turns children into sausages. America itself is ontologically evil and no president can salvage or reform it.

          Abraham Lincoln is the closest a president came to being good, and even he was complicit in genocide. Every other president is equally terrible, on a scale of goofy evil to soullessly evil because the office of president is to administer a genocide machine. Jimmy Carter is one of the former presidents who seems aware that he’s going to hell when he dies and is probably a little remorseful, but that doesn’t excuse him at all. Theodore Roosevelt also seemed aware he was evil, but that might have just been his vanity.

          • chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Fair enough, I suppose with 46 of them they all sort of blend together after a point. I too have a soft-spot for Lincoln… so I suppose it’s some small consolation for me that we’ll one day have a chance to meet each other in hell

            • Honestly just read Liberalism: a counter History. I lost my soft spot once I realized his philosophical underpinnings weren’t any better, he just happened to be positioned in material reality in a way where shitty stuff had small good effects. Critical support was a good idea for him in that time, because he happened to represent a force aligned against the greatest oppressors of the most revolutionary class (the enslaved). But now that he already won, critical support means you can throw him away and realize it was only s tactical correct choice, not any good outside of that

        • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d put Grant at least terrible – he was still a genocidier but at least he tried to push through a real reformation in the South after the civil war. worst? I barely know where to start, there’s so many good choices.

      • chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Correct. I thought it was a funny conclusion and so I made fun of it. What’s the harm in allowing a fool to fool around? I didn’t really think I was doing something so grand as threatening to present a thesis.

        • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You aren’t threatening, you’re just a jackass who is doing the “democratic presidents can’t do anything good, but they do their best for us” routine that we’ve all seen a thousand times

          • chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well, thank you for saying so… sometimes I can get a little self-concious about things like that. Next time I’ll try to bring better material!

    • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The Carter administration is responsible for helping start one of the most devastating proxy wars in recent history, by arming anti Soviet extremists in Afghanistan in July 1979. Whatever happened to those extremists, one might wonder?

      • chaorace@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m sorry, 420blazeit69, it seems like nothing I say will ever convince you guys to like me. I’ll go back to 2010 where I belong now.