This makes sense. Common usage shortened it because everyone knows it, but then it begins to be misunderstood and then misused because the shortened version makes more sense.
Your premise is that China is the lesser evil, therefore liberals should support China because (whatever reason you decided because liberals). Though I do appreciate you looking up the argument to understand it. It’s not a perfect analogy, but close enough.
Ergo propter hoc. Nice try though.
Never. The line must keep moving upwards. If it doesn’t come from productivity it comes from enshittification, layoffs, offshoring, etc.
And profitably shitty.
Hold it. Crypto is senseless. It’ll climb again.
What victory? The selfish one that nobody cared about except the worst of the republicans that actually harmed many republican constituents?
How do these things seem to get turned around? Oedipus, jack of all trades, blood is thicker than water, curiosity killed the cat… so many phrases get truncated and used to mean the opposite of what they originally intended.
The US is in decline. Hastened by Republican ideology, accelerationists, and general willful stupidity and ignorance to varying degrees across the board. The “economy” revolves more and more around the stock market which only serves to enrich the already well off and wealthy while the rest of the ~90% flounder.
Having opinions that all culminate in wrecking things while not bothering to understand any of it, particularly because of personal prejudices or ideology, is a proud Republican tradition.
If they’re that addicted to reddit’s way of doing things they can stay.
RememberTheApollo_
0 post score0 comment score
Are you applying it as a negative to libs? If so, then my reply stands. You created an argument via propter hoc… and it should be discarded. If you intended something different them you should reword your argument to something more substantial than “libs choose less sucky thing so they should like China.”