It pisses me off to no end when people conflate legitimate criticism of Democrats with tankie rhetoric. The Dems are complacent, listless, corrupt, and lazy. They refuse to stand up to the Republicans until it’s too late or doesn’t matter.
The people want progressive politics: universal healthcare, living wage, affordable housing, education, and food. We want a sustainable future and an end to corporate greed.
The donor class, superpacs, and other sources of dark money in politics are what keep nearly everyone corrupt. Its addictive.
It pisses me off to no end when people conflate legitimate criticism of Democrats with tankie rhetoric.
Last election season went something like this:
Progressives: “Please stop sending weapons to a genocidal maniac who is using them to murder children in order to grab land. And stop actively protecting said genocidal maniac from consequences in the international community.”
Establisment: “STFU tankie!”
Maybe if progressives in partisan primary states registered as Democrats and voted in the primaries, they wouldn’t be complaining about all the centrists in office.🤔
Are you implying there was a Democratic presedential primary that didn’t break it’s own rules to make sure Biden was the only candidate on the ballot (edit) in many states (/edit)?
If so, you’re living in a fantasy.
This is the one-two step for Democratic party apologists.
-
Blame leftists for their lack of representation in the party.
-
Rig the processes to make sure that the left wing of the party has no internal representation.
-
Goto step one.
The best part of this dance from their view? Internal party politics and processes are boring, and the media won’t cover it when they cheat.
No. The presidential incumbent primary is a joke. I’m referring to the congressional primary that saw less than 20% attendance. Congress is the primary approval for military aid for Israel. POTUS can use drawdown power, but that can be challenged by Congress.
We have three branches of government, two of which are elected, yet people pretend we have one vote every four years.
Congress is the primary approval for military aid for Israel.
lmfao I love when liberals are fully committed
Firstly, I’m a progressive. Secondly, what is incorrect about that statement?
-
So you’re ok with centrists supporting and actively protecting perpetrators of genocide?
What about my comment gave you that impression? I’m saying that if progressives voted in Democratic primaries with the same conviction they use to criticize the DNC, we wouldn’t have as many centrists in Congress.
Democratic congressional primaries are decided by ~20% of registered Democrats. You can look at PAC funding and vote for the Democrat that isn’t funded by AIPAC, who will have a better chance of winning the election than a third-party protest vote.
My point is that Democrats, whether progressive or centrist, shouldn’t be supporting this. It shouldn’t matter (on this particular topic) if progressives aren’t voting; I’m not willing to give centrist Democrats a pass and will condemn them just the same.
I keep hearing that progressives aren’t voting in the numbers that they should be, but there might be another problem: there simply aren’t that many progressives to get offices. As a “Reddit refugee”, I realized that we are overrepresented in a lot of these online echo chambers.
I’ve been left of the Democrats and stumping progressives/greens/independents since the 90s. Most people don’t even know if they live in one of the 30 partisan primary states. Copious amounts of New Yorkers were turned away at the polls in 2016 because they didn’t know they had to be registered as a Democrat to vote for Bernie in the primary. I’m sure that happened in other partisan primary states as well.
Yet in my experience, asking a progressive to register as a Democrat is the fastest way to get them to stop listening, even though it’s statistically far more effective than voting third-party. People need to stop voting with their feelings and start playing the game that we’ve been losing for decades.
What primary? The DNC shut down real primaries last election. To the point where undecided was the protest vote.
A race between Biden, Williamson, and Phillips isn’t a real primary.
A real primary would have been something like Biden, Newsom, Whitmer, and maybe Shapiro.
There is no point voting in a rigged primary.
The presidential incumbent primary is a joke. I’m referring to the congressional primary that saw less than 20% attendance. Congress is the primary approval for military aid for Israel. POTUS can use drawdown power, but that can be challenged by Congress.
We have three branches of government, two of which are elected, yet people pretend we have one vote every four years.
Accountability is one think these people will not take. Has me questioning where they get off calling themselves progressive. They can’t even handle the mere suggestion which is evident by the number of downvotes that occurs when it’s mentioned.
For sure. It’s also easier to shout into an echo chamber and get an upvote than it is to convince someone in the street to take action. I hold no respect for apathy.
That exactly what you’re doing
Here, yes. This is far from all that I do.
How will you get any of that without tanks?
Are you trying to say we can’t have universal healthcare without leftist authoritarianism or do you not know what a “tankie” is?
A) yes, it is impossible to reform an embedded regime of wealth. You need revolution, which will likely require tanks even in the age of drones.
B) tankie is anything to the left of burning children alive for warmth, at least how it’s used on this site.
A) yes, it is impossible to reform an embedded regime of wealth. You need revolution, which will likely require tanks even in the age of drones.
Plenty of countries managed to enact universal health care coverage, facing down the same embedded regime of wealthy special interests, without full revolution. You’re just flat out wrong.
B) tankie is anything to the left of burning children alive for warmth, at least how it’s used on this site.
Lol k
A) those countries had far less embedded capitalists. They did not reform, they advanced in a linear direction.
B) you’re a north American, half of you are fascists and the other half are conservative Catholics. Don’t you people specifically still kill native women so regularly there’s multiple euphemisms about it?
Don’t you people specifically still kill native women so regularly there’s multiple euphemisms about it?
I can’t say this is familiar to me, at all.
Any Canadian that doesn’t know about ‘starlight tours’ at this point is either sheltered or willfully ignorant to the plight of native women in Canada.
Canada has this nice image and all, but they’re still committing genocide.
A) those countries had far less embedded capitalists. They did not reform, they advanced in a linear direction.
This is based on literally nothing. The way that health care was funded and delivered was reformed completely, many times in many countries, and was opposed on exactly the same lines, and that opposition was overcome. Your insistence that the whole system must be torn down or whatever is without rational or historical backing, and will guarantee failure.
B) you’re a north American, half of you are fascists and the other half are conservative Catholics. Don’t you people specifically still kill native women so regularly there’s multiple euphemisms about it?
Nobody knows what you’re talking about, including you.
A) no it wasn’t. The vast majority of healthcare reforms in the EU took place shortly after WWII and explicitly due to the fact fascism was fresh in everyone’s mind so they could just remind everyone of nazi healthcare practices.
B) Assuming you’re on ca due to your location, look up literally anything about native Americans in your country since you failed to learn about it in school (or went to school before courses on actual Canadians were added). Starlight tours still happen to this day and native women still disproportionately ‘go missing.’
Plenty of countries managed to enact universal
And those countries have tanks
Though some temporary concessions might be had through labor militancy.
Have you said tanks once?
That’s cause “tankie” is right wing propaganda for exactly that reason. It blunts progressive discourse dead in its tracks.
What’s worse is that sometimes I can’t tell if it’s Right Wing trolls or truly insane hard leftists.
I consider myself hard left progressive, but I have caveats like anyone. Tankies are so cartoonish, I don’t know how to react.
Yeah you’ll never know for sure. Actual tankies are what like a small subset of the small percent of progressives. Fractions of a fraction. Statistically they are non-existent. There is an outsized presense online. So one could reason that most of them you encounter are acting in bad faith. It’s been a very effective weapon on information warfare.
My philosophy is to abide by the oldest rule of the internet. Don’t feed the trolls.
and yet they are head and shoulders above the trump cult
anyone that can’t see that or chooses to campaign and vote against the democrats is so corrupted by socialist fundamentalism that they enabled fascism
So when they agree to vote for Trump’s demands, they’re fundamentally better? Gutting Section 230 is the better choice because Trump said it, but they voted for it? Appointing Trump’s batshit cabinet picks? Bombs are inherently less deadly if a D signed off on it instead of a R?
Is my governor, Newsom of California, inherently better for being a democrat as he invites Republicans like actual open nazi and helper of Trump’s rise to power, Steven Bannon? Is he inherently better when he agrees with Charlie Kirk that trans people don’t have a place in society? Giving them not just a soap box, but a microphone and a speaker to the masses, and agreeing with them?
This is better? Agreeing to their demands and pretending you’re not helping their fascism?
you couldn’t see the difference before the election and you still can’t see the difference now?
for real?
come ooooon
at least talk about bernie and aoc or something vaguely convincing
You did not answer my question, please try again with a bit more brain power.
Is my governor better for inviting Republican dipshits and agreeing with them, because he’s a Democrat? Are bombs used for murder better with a Blue pen instead of a Red pen?
And Bernie and AOC are cool, they won’t be any positions of power because of Schumer and Pelosi.
you’re still campaigning so hard for trump, this is what i mean about how corrupt the socialists are
to answer your questions: bombs are all the same. you don’t have to agree with all dems to see they are better than the cult
but you can’t see that?
bernie and aoc are not in a position of power now because you encouraged people not to vote for them
the logic is pretty simple
I literally have never once praised Trump. I am saying “If Democrats are voting yes with his fasicst demands, they are doing a bad job at stopping Trump.”
bernie and aoc are not in a position of power now because you encouraged people not to vote for them
Point to me ever once saying “Do not vote for Bernie or AOC” in my entire account history. Any and all of it. Please, if it’s so clear as day, use my words against me. Screenshot it so I can’t edit or delete it too. Document me lying to you and the public.
Let me make it clear: Trump is evil. If someone agrees with him, they are complicit in his evil. That includes, voting for his demands. That includes giving him what he wants drawn up by Republican house/senators, and voting with it.
I like Al Green. I like AOC. I like Bernie. I like Booker. They have stood up for my kind more than most politicians. If the entire Democratic party was filled with them, I’d have a lot less to complain about. Instead we have Schumer saying he won’t vote yes on Trump’s demands, and then last minute gives Trump what he wants. Instead we have Pelosi in a hospital voting to prevent AOC from gaining rank in the House.
Once again, is my governor, promoting actual, unironic Nazis who enabled Trump’s rise of power good for America because he’s a Democrat? Richard Bannon literally sig heiled to Trump 2 weeks before the podcast episode featureing and agreeing with him. Is this good?
And please try to use grammar and spelling like we do when we speak English.
Booker voted to fund Israel, unfortunately. He’s not the worst, and is in the limelight right now, but he’s got a mixed and spotty voting record.
Some stuff I can forgive, but not supporting genocide.
I say this fully aware that I voted for Harris because I know she’d have been better than Trump.
you seem a little confused; quite typical of myopic socialists that can’t see beyond the current protest
the OP was about how people like yourself raged against the democrats by taking fundamentalist positions that made you predictably blind to the bigger picture of preventing the actual fascists getting to power and shooting the causes you thought you were supporting in the foot, and causing other immeasurable damage
and you’re still doing it!
attempt to wrap your head around that, i know looking more than 1 move ahead really isn’t your forte
Hell lemme help you, here’s a post from 3 days ago, unedited, saying I want more Democrats to be like Bernie and AOC, and stop voting for Trump’s bills.
EDIT: I’m gonna catch some Z’s because I’m not gonna stay up waiting for you to gather a lack of evidence to support claims you made up in your own head. Might as well try to accuse me of being DB Cooper or something else.
lol, hope you had a good sleep, x
Removed by mod
I’m just punching right. Tell the Dems to stop standing there.
And it was the Dems who sued the socialist candidate off of the ballot in my state. Not the GOP. They occupy leftist space to prevent leftward movement, while Dems ally with the GOP to push through fascism.
Yep, generalizations work across the board. /s
Bernie and AOC are democrats. The Republicans and Democrats, although I could understand arguments against this, are humans. They can be greedy, shitty, liars, awesome, for the people and and for the oligarchs.
I’m always a little suspect when someone in the face of the r’s having convicted rapists, some of them pedos, on their platform, taking away constitutional rights, and tanking the stock market, say the left is too right. Are they? Some, but let’s focus on putting out the fire, not the dumpsters paint job.
I don’t really know what to do with this comment.
I don’t know who you think the left is, or what actions you associate with putting out the fire.
I believe that the Democratic party leadership is extremely hostile to socialist policies, despite their enormous populist electoral power. Universal healthcare is good policy and good politics. So are jobs guarantees and basic minimum incomes and paid sick leave and free college. I have found that most Democrats who have the power to decide whether they would like voters to associate them with these policies or would like to avoid being associated with them choose the later.
I’ll vote for the lesser of two evils, because I’m a highly educated supervoter news junkie. But ultimately what costs Democrats their power was not the criticism and anger I and people like me posted online: it was ignoring that criticism when we were warning them that they were running unpopular candidates on unpopular platforms.
As far as I’m aware, conversations like this one are not hindering the good guys. What’s hindering the good guys is their choices and lack of integrity. The reason people like Chuck Schumer can’t stop Trump is not because I point out that he’s incapable of stopping Trump. It’s the other way around. I point that out because despite all efforts on the part of people like me, Chuck Schumer is unable to decide to stop Trump. That’s an internal problem and most critics of Democrats – which now includes most Democratic voters – are just spectators pointing to this problem.
Bernie & AOC are center right at best. They’re both still feverishly advocating for sending more arms to extremists in Europe and the Middle East.
I’m not sure you’ve even seen the left, based on this comment.
…that’s not a right wing policy. That’s just a policy you don’t like.
LoL. So arming far right extremists is a leftwing principle now?
Oh so now they’re far right extremists.
Heard a lot of that said about the IRA as well. Ironically mostly funded by american left wingers.
Sounds like you just generally having an issue differentiating good and evil.
Not really, I just know that the difference between “terrorist” and “Freedom fighter” is usually very very political.
6 months in and Liberals are still trying to blame their election loss on the left.
Ja, this meme is tripe. Tankies are the Lemmy bogeyman, used the same as ‘woke’ by the right.
What are you talking about? It only mentions democrats, republicans, and tankies.
Tankie is what centrist liberals call everyone to the left of them
I’ve never been called a tankie, and neither have any of my friends or girlfriends. And we’re all communists.
Maybe you’re being called a tankie because you’re a radical centrist.
.world definitely has a problem distinguishing between Tankies and leftists. I’ve literally had a guy argue with me that tankie and Bernie Bro were interchangeable because, “definitions change.”
Well I love Bernie. When he told me he wasn’t running in 2024, and he wanted me to support Kamala, I listened. And I’ve never been called a tankie. Maybe it comes down to individual differences.
I also voted for Kamala and I also haven’t been called a tankie (at least yet). But I’ve seen multiple liberals on .world call leftists tankies, often without understanding the meaning. At first, I found it very strange, since I’d only ever seen that term used in leftist circles. It made more sense when I realized they picked it up from .ml, which, to be fair, had a lot of fucking tankies.
Ohhh, so it’s the tankies who are responsible for this. That makes sense.
That reminds me of how Israel tells everyone that killing people is part of the Jewish identity, and then complains when people believe them
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
You’re a tankie, you voted for someone who sent tanks to a genocidal regime, that makes you a tankie.
Now you can’t say you’ve never been called a tankie.
I’ve only ever been called a tankie by a tankie who was making some kind of point
I was once called a tankie just for critiquing the fact that Kamala didn’t clearify her positions on her campaign website, even though I voted for her anyway the fact that I didn’t show unquestioning loyalty to the party makes me a tankie… Wait a minute… Demanding unquestioning loyalty to the party… Where have I heard that before?
Removed by mod
Yeah but caring about that apparently makes me a “single issue voter” and a “tankie”, liberals are absolute jokes
Don’t you, like, run a hate community targeted at her?
No, I run a left wing community thats explicitly left wing in nature. Liberalism is right wing, so naturally we arent supportive. Furthermore my community tends to lean more libertarian left (workers democracy) and anarchist so we arent a big fan of liberal electoralism.
electoralism.
Refusing to vote is how you end up with the worst arrogant politicians who dont care at all about their constituents.
Wow, I wish I didn’t care who the president was. I wanna stop fearing for my girlfriends’ lives.
I’ve never been called a tankie
we’re all communists.
I’ve got bad news for you…
That’s because nobody is called “tankie” in real life. No one has called me a “tankie” either. The term’s contemporary usage is a creature of social media. It’s a dumb, cringey online meme.
Hmmmmmmmmmm… nah. It’s from the 1950s. They didn’t have 9gag back then
Again:
The term’s contemporary usage
But also: JFK Files Reveal CIA Role in the 1956 Hungarian Uprising | The tankies were right
The Hungarian Freedom Fighters were [Central Intelligence] Agency sponsored.
So you’re a tankie in real life?
Isnt radical centrist an oxymoron?
oxymoronYeah, supporting workers and dictators at the same time is pretty oxymoronic. But it’s perfectly balanced, as all things should be
I don’t think you know what communism actually is.
You too, hun.
Removed by mod
No, that’s what I call people who claim to be left but then make excuses for Russia, China.
What do you call people who claim to be to the left but make excuses for Canada and the genocidal Democratic Party?
Removed by mod
Ninety million people didn’t vote. Three million voted third party.
What was the difference Trump won by again?
The arrogance of assuming that anyone who didn’t vote or who voted third party, just automatically owe your party their vote.
The entrenched two-party system has done more to cripple democracy in America than any other factor, and yet it’s so pervasive that y’all whip each other into line trying to shame anyone who tries to break free of it.
I guess we’re all better off now having learned a valuable lesson, aren’t we? So… How exactly would you like your ‘thank you’ presented?
Arrogance indeed.
The only way the dems could have won in 2024 is if they did what is popular with their base. This applies to literally every election. You should be furious that they lost to Donald fucking Trump twice because they thought they could win while enacting policies they knew would decrease turnout.
They have their own polling, they know there’s not a bunch of voters who just hate tiktok and will vote for tax credits to buy healthcare for first-generation college grads who run a small business in an under-served community for 3 years, but won’t vote for free healthcare.
No messaging could have made genocide in gaza popular, it’s not the people telling the democrats to stop giving Israel fucking bombs who made facilitating genocide unpopular. The only people who could have changed whether Palestine hurt the dems or helped them were the dems. They decided unlimited support for a genocidal settler colonial state was more important than winning.
Well it’s a good thing we dodged that bullet, isn’t it?
And yeah, I’m furious that ninety three million people were told what was going to happen and chose to not vote anyway.
Unpopular policy decreases turnout. That’s just how democracy works. The narrative of blaming the voters just serves to distract from the only people who could have changed the outcome of the last election and will be the only ones who can change the outcome of future lessons.
If Trump runs for a third term, and the democrats run on building the wall and defunding the government, the same fucking thing will happen.
Arrogance is believing that for some reason despite everything that happened in the last year of her term in office that magically this person who had no concrete message or goals except the continuation of the genocide of people living in tents would be the savior somehow.
She’s just another corporate politician who takes orders from donors and she’s a COP at that - so keep constructing this fantastical image in your head that you think your choice was the answer. She wasn’t and will never be. That’s why we are stuck with Trump.
DUH.
Again, you keep talking about how bad Kamala is, and side-step the disaster that we currently live under.
But whatever helps you cope, right?
Why are liberals so incredibly dense?
Her platform and being the worst candidate ever is the reason we got Trump, but for some reason you ignore this and blame voters.
The democrats played everyone and where are these staunch defenders of democracy now?
Patting themselves on the back for giving meaningless speeches while Trump disassembles democracy.
And these are the people you thought would save you?
I see on another one of your posts that you are angry 90 million people didn’t vote. What makes you think they would have voted for the fraud Kamala even though they could have and didn’t? What did she offer them? The answer is … NOTHING.
And now that Trump is torching the constitution where is Coconut Kamala?
Why giving speeches at Australian real estate events. Nothing says “I’m defending America” like giving Australian real estate speeches.
Your finger pointing is very devisive and exactly what I would expect out of a pampered liberal. Open your eyes and see the truth.
So, this conversation got me thinking. I’ve been wanting to get in better shape lately, but I’m wondering if doing things like… exercising, is really the right way to go about it.
It seems the best advice from all the people that clearly know how everything works, is to do absolutely nothing at all. Because historically, we all know that great change comes from inaction, right? So why not try it? Let’s see if sitting on my ass and watching other people exercise will help me become more fit.
Wish me luck!
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
“Tankies” made no measurable difference in the 2024 election. There’s next to none of them in the USA. Go ahead: ask real people in your offline life what a tankie is, and see if even one single person has even heard that word.
Unless, of course, you’re just applying that word to anyone whos not a Republican that’s criticizing the dems. Then I suppose you’ll find “tankies” everywhere.
It feels like a word that’s just being used to divide the left.
It’s the lib version of “woke”; it’s not even used for its original meaning anymore
“All the tankie college kids who love Hamas lost Kamala the election” ok Kristen I’m sure they’re tankies. Please just finish watching your DVR of the Today show
Thank you for clarifying, because I was confused. Like… ‘Are the Tankies in the room with us now, OP?’
What you’re saying sounds correct, because I don’t know anyone to the left of Harris who didn’t recognize that Trump was worse. While I think that I might have one friend who refused to vote for her in a swing state, I think that the BlueAnon folks really misunderstood the actual consequences of losing support on the left.
It wasn’t really, imo, that those folks wouldn’t show up. The problem was that I think a lot of folks never realized how much young blue-haired leftists dragged Biden across the finish line in 2020 by knocking on doors and convincing their uncles to vote Dem. I said throughout the election that losing those people wasn’t really a risk of losing their votes, it was a risk of losing the core enthusiasm and turnout organizing that Democrats had largely outsourced to Bernie Sanders’ base. And I could be wrong, but all that I’ve seen seems to affirm that this is exactly what happened.
If someone has evidence otherwise, though. please let me know.
What you’re saying sounds correct, because I don’t know anyone to the left of Harris who didn’t recognize that Trump was worse. While I think that I might have one friend who refused to vote for her in a swing state, I think that the BlueAnon folks really misunderstood the actual consequences of losing support on the left.
I do find it funny that .world and their ilk will swear up and down that Blue MAGA and BlueAnon aren’t real things, but then will swear Tankies are a thing non-stop in American politics when none of them can agree on what they look like or do.
You ask a Republican to define woke, you wont get an answer beyond “Anything I don’t like to the left of me.” You ask a Democrat on here to define Tankie, you won’t get an answer beyond “Anything I don’t like to the left of me.”
So long as the person doesn’t defend authoritarianism and any hypocrisy of their preferred candidate, I’ll consider them an ally to me.
There are definitely tactics being used to divide the left and the word tankie is not one of them. Purity politics is the death of left wing politics. The fact that people moved out of the way of blocking a legitimate facist government because Harris wasn’t quiiite right is utter insanity
There are definitely tactics being used to divide the left and the word tankie is not one of them. Purity politics is the death of left wing politics.
Why, then, are we running around calling people tankies when that is an ill-defined word that tends to change from person to person? I’ve seen it applied to everyone from left anarchists to starry-eyed idealists who call themselves communists, to actual Stalin-Did-Nothing-Wrong types (this last group deserves criticism, all twelve of them).
The fact that people moved out of the way of blocking a legitimate facist government because Harris wasn’t quiiite right is utter insanity
Focusing on an incredibly online, vocal minority is insanity, especially when your previous statement is about purity politics.
Shouldn’t you question why Harris and the democratic establishment couldn’t beat actual fascism? Could it be that Trump used real issues in our political environment for his messaging? He lies constantly about why the cost of living is going up, why good jobs aren’t here anymore, etc, but Harris ran on a platform of “Vote for me, nothing will fundamentally change” and voters didn’t find that attractive for some reason.
Even when voices within the party point out problems they are shouted down. Sure, Bernie is an independant, but he’s been voting with the Dems the entire time, and they even pretended to let him run for nomination for president.
The democratic party has been shifting right for decades, and the only messaging they have to offer is that approved by their donors. It’s bullshit and it repels people.
So you’re just gonna sit there and act like propaganda influence on voters is not a thing
“Oh why could harris not beat fascists why did trump win i guess she just suuucked” is the awareness level of a potato
So you’re just gonna sit there and act like propaganda influence on voters is not a thing
You chose to speak to me, someone who is talking about the word tankie and it’s application here. If you’d like to talk about “propaganda influence” outside of the word tankie, I invite you to make your own top-level comment.
If you’re implying tankies themselves have amazing propaganda brainwash powers that caused Harris to lose the election, I invite you to touch grass.
Are you of the opinion that the propaganda last election made Trump’s victory inevitable? As in, there were no possible candidate or campaign that could have beaten him?
That’s a question that sets up its own answer as a foregone conclusion. Rephrase please.
I’m just interrogating your statement. Yes, oppositional propaganda is a known phenomenon. It isn’t new. If you are campaigning for election, your job is to overcome it somehow and win. Harris wasn’t lacking funds and she had the (arguable) advantage of running from an incumbent administration, as well as the advantage of running against a clown like Trump.
There were loud and numerous warnings to and criticisms of her campaign from the left. She ignored that. I can’t prove that’s definitely what cost her the election, but there is no question that she could have run a very different campaign. Blaming her loss on propaganda is weak and defeatist. Find ways to win, not excuses to lose.
Purity politics is the death of left wing politics.
Having standards isn’t “purity politics”. Having no standards got us here.
What a stupid post. Yeah it’s progressives’ fault mango Mussolini is POTUS /s. This is a talking point manufactured by MAGA handlers that some broadly Dem-supporting people choose to broadcast, now outside the US. This is a type of brainrot that undermines critical thinking, divides the left, and helps elect the right. Canada deserves better
Progressives are separate from tankies. You can have leftist ideals without supporting authoritarians.
You must understand that under first-past-the-post the party that receives the most criticism tends to lose. It’s much easier to pressure democrats into doing the right thing then with republicans.
No one calls themselves a tankie. It is a pejorative term for a progressive. It is used to silence legitimate criticism and helps right-shift politics
(Edit: I think your frustration is really more with the mainstream media and what news they choose to cover and amplify)
It’s the term that describes those communists who cheered on the Soviet Union’s violent crushing of the 1956 Hungary revolution protests.
The term is often used when someone claims they support leftist ideals but pushes for authoritarianism.
I get the original etymology. Nowadays it’s carelessly used and appropriated like ‘woke’
What about “lib” and “zio”?
Those are kind of new and exciting. All the kids are doing it.
I’m pretty sure those are used accurately as specific types of fascists.
the Soviet Union’s violent crushing of the 1956 Hungary revolution protests.
Did you know that was recently revealed (through Trump’s jfk doc dump) to be yet another CIA backed fake color revolution?
Removed by mod
Tankie is in no way a pejorative for Progressive. Hell progressives are usually the ones using it. I wouldn’t even say tankies pretend to be Progressive.
Removed by mod
It’s pretty easy to identify tankies. Here, I’ll draw some out for you:
Mao and Stalin were just as evil as Hitler. China is engaging in a genocide of the Uyghur people. Putin is a genocidal war criminal fighting a war of imperialism.
So anyone who doesn’t engage in Double Genocide Theory, a recognized form of Holocaust denial, is a “tankie”.
deleted by creator
A tankie is anyone who objects when I do this: shits pants
Wow, lots of tankies in here taking the bait lol
deleted by creator
Really not beating the allegations that “tankie” is just an ill-defined snarl word
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
So Bernie and AOC are tankies to you?
deleted by creator
There was a lot of pressure for the most banal, milquetoast, form of representation ever in the form of having a Palestinian speaker at the Democratic national convention with a vetted speech that involved nothing that would have criticized Israel at all.
Even that was too far.
Either the progressives are powerful enough that you have to take them seriously and give them concessions, or they aren’t and you get to ignore them.
What you don’t get to do is give them nothing and blame them when you lose. Or, I guess you do if you’d prefer to lose the general over letting a progressive win the primary.
Huh, funny that, who knew there is a lot of levers and controls that a primary winner, even one that lost the general, gets.
Progressives are not leftists, they are centrist liberals. No matter how many times Sanders calls himself a socialist, he is never going to call for abolishing private ownership of the means of production.
Removed by mod
helps elect the right
Trump, the farthest right viable candidate, was elected because he got the most votes.
Regardless of your feelings about her, Kamala was the most viable opposition to Trump.
Some people were most active being anti-Kamala.
In your opinion, did the anti-Kamala influencers hurt Trump’s election, or did they help Trump’s election?
This is bullshit though, please actually explain how Kamala is the most viable opposition to Trump? Trump is far right, and Kamala is a centrist conservative. America is further right than you think it is, Kamala is in no way shape or form an opposition.
Kamala is right wing. Trump is further right wing, guess who is gonna win?
You mentioned opposition, then where is your opposition party? Trump is a by product, you just explained how you get fascism.
Removed by mod
Just a Wealth tax lmfao, and thats it? Fuck. How’d that work out?
Shes a neoliberal and def right wing. America is so far right wing you think anyone that calls themself a democrat is an opposition. America’s two party system keeps going further right
But demonrats bad, what’s so hard to understand?
“Both parties are the same” is muddying the waters in ways that always benefits the fascists.
They didn’t say both parties were the same. In fact they made a point to distinguish the two I think. They just said both were right wing. There’s lots of different right wing parties in the world. They’re not all the same. Not even remotely the same.
They did not distinguish the parties in any meaningful way. Right and left are just labels, and if you make your entire personality about purity testing most of the world into not being left enough to be in your in-group, you will cultivate no worker solidarity.
Anti- Biden/Kamala influencers helped elect Trump. The biggest of those influencers were the mainstream media. The double standard of reporting (Biden/Harris vs Trump) is very well documented. (And the ring-kissing is approaching authoritarian levels now.) Ideas that actual grassroots would-be Democrat voters sabotaged the the Democrats’ success in the election is much less certain, but perhaps a more attractive version of reality than the big-money-funded pro right-wing system we’re up against. Less in-fighting amongst the left please
Kamala is right wing. Trump is further right wing. Guess who is gonna win?
She was objectively much better than Trump. Hopefully in the future Americans have the single transferable vote for presidential elections so they can vote for other candidates in other parties.
The difference is we don’t expect anything good from Republicans. We expect libs to at least try but they’d rather punch left than effectively govern.
I’m sure appealing to the non-existant moderate republicans will work again.
goes both ways i suppose.
What do you mean by that? What goes both ways? If you’re suggesting that Republicans will attack other Republicans, that’s not what we saw in the presidential race. Maybe if we rewind to 1992, why not.
the bit about punching left i suppose.
Lefties are well known for hating on libs, for any number of reasons.
Anyone that uses the term “Tankie” unironically to refer to people to the left of them and the Democratic party are not a part of the left.
It’s always helpful to identify the liberals that are getting “scratched” though.
Current US: a neoliberal capitalist nightmare being ruined by CEOs
Your most intelligent American: This is definitely the socialists’ fault
I’m punching to the right, it’s not my fault the Dems are always standing there 🤷
If centrists wanted criticism of republicans, they could have done that more.
But then they might not have got the endorsement of dick cheney. establishment democrats punched left and embraced the right.
As always, point me towards someone supporting Trump on here and I promise I’ll give them an earful. There just aren’t a lot of them on here. If I spend less time arguing against voting for Trump it’s for the same reason I don’t spend much time on here arguing against puppy murdering - because most people already agree that murdering puppies/voting for Trump is bad.
Sorry for disrupting the circlejerk, I guess? Like yeah I guess we could spend all our time denouncing puppy murderers and complementing each other over being enlightened enough to recognize puppy murder as bad, but I’d really rather not.
I think that’s kind of the point. In all my time on .ml, I saw daily posts and comments that were anti-Harris/Biden (and for very good reason). I never saw one that was explicitly anti-Trump. I assumed because he is very pro-Putin.
So, to make your analogy more accurate, it’s like everyone focusing on puppy-murder #1 and ignoring puppy, cat and goldfish murderer #2 because he also likes my sports team.
Like, it’s super easy… Fuck Biden because he allowed Palestinian genocide, but fuck Trump too because he has advocated for worse. I rarely, if ever, saw the latter on .ml.
Unless things have gotten better for the Palestinians since he took office. It doesn’t seem to be the case, but I sincerely hope so.
I never saw one that was explicitly anti-Trump.
How many posts and comments did you see that were explicitly anti-puppy murder? I think you’ve missed the point of the analogy.
I assumed because he is very pro-Putin.
What? No, absolutely not. Nobody on .ml is pro-Trump, and anyone who was would be attacked and banned in short order.
This is just liberal brainrot where you ignore everything we actually say and assign us made up stances based on your own preconceptions.
Wow…came out awfully aggressive there (which I guess is part of why ml gets such hate). I’m more than willing to admit I’m wrong. I’m just sharing my experiences in the ml community. Lots of good stuff going on there, but there’s definitely some issues. I’ve seen you a lot and I know you like to pick fights, but I’m mostly on your side. All I said was I never really saw any explicit anti-Trump sentiment. The absence of it is just weird. You cherry-picked a couple lines and never addressed that observation.
You attempted to discredit my claim (with no proof), then said I missed the point of the analogy (with a terrible false-equivalence).
You attacked the idea that ml is pro-Trump (which I never claimed).
Then you brought out the tired liberal brianrot line, assuming incorrectly that I am a liberal. It would be hilarious if it wasn’t so fucking wrong.
If you want to engage in good faith, I’m here. I think you’re a pretty smart dude, but ignoring some of the problems of the ml community doesn’t help it grow and affect more good.
P.S. I haven’t been on ml in a few months. If there are any anti-Trump posts, I would love to read them. I could be way off base here.
You attacked the idea that ml is pro-Trump (which I never claimed).
I never saw one that was explicitly anti-Trump. I assumed because he is very pro-Putin.
Right. So you said that the reason that you didn’t see anti-Trump content on .ml is because he’s pro-Putin, but how could I possibly interpret that as you claiming that .ml was pro-Trump?
then said I missed the point of the analogy (with a terrible false-equivalence).
It’s not a “false-equivalence.” You can’t just drop “false-equivalence” and dismiss any comparison you don’t like, you have to actually explain why it isn’t equivalent.
People don’t say things that don’t need to be said, and things don’t really need to be said if everyone reading them already agrees with the thing. I don’t go around randomly saying things like, “wood comes from trees,” or, “the sun is hot,” or, “puppy murder is bad.” That doesn’t imply that I think wood doesn’t come from trees or that I think the sun is cold or that murdering puppies is good, and if anyone came around saying any of those things, I would very firmly correct them on it.
What you’re trying to claim is that us not circlejerking about Trump being bad - something that’s already widely agreed upon in our spaces - means that we’re pro-Trump. Oh, excuse me, your claim isn’t that we’re pro-Trump, it’s that we give preferential treatment to Trump because he’s pro-Putin, important distinction 🙄. The same logic could be used to argue that we - or .world, or any other instance or community - is pro-puppy murder because there aren’t enough posts denouncing it (even though if anyone who was actually pro-puppy murder came around they’d be banned immediately).
P.S. I haven’t been on ml in a few months. If there are any anti-Trump posts, I would love to read them. I could be way off base here.
Estimated 100 000 In NYC Alone Protesting Today As Part of Nationwide 50501 Protest Against Trump & Musk - 311 upvotes
US stock markets see worst day since Covid pandemic after investors shaken by Trump tariffs - 111 upvotes
Dow drops 1,400 as US stocks lead worldwide sell-off after Trump’s tariffs ignite a COVID-like shock - 102 upvotes
China hits back hard at ‘bullying’ Trump tariffs as global recession fears grow - 73 upvotes
All of those were posted within the last 3 days.
Thanks for the links. THAT is something actually substantive that goes against the narrative in the OP. I’ll try to explain the errors in your interpretation and expand on the false-equivalence claim tomorrow.
I (*very explicitly and vocally not a communist) left .ml because of all the shit flinging from .world and yes sometimes .ca, among others. It was the only negative experience I had in over a year of keeping my account there that was related to where my account was.
@StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world is exactly correct.
And here we are again, the monthly “Tankies are the bane of Lemmy!!11!!” post, wherein we have:
- People who claim to not know what the term means.
- People arguing about what the term means.
- People arguing about what the term should mean.
- People who swear they’ve never met one on Lemmy.
- People who apparently find them so often it ruins Lemmy for them.
- A lot of assumptions about folks just for being members of .ml.
- In sum, a lot of angst over something people can solve themselves if they are truly that aggrieved, by blocking individual users or the entire instance.
Fucking A people, you largely control your own experience on the Fediverse, that’s one of the things that makes it great.
In addition, when choosing an instance (both times) I made sure to pick one that was defederated from Threads, because that was important to me. I’m sure there are instances that are defederated from .ml. If blocking the entire instance yourself or individual users yourself is somehow not enough, no one is stopping you from picking an instance that is defederated from .ml or asking your instance admin (who may very well tell you to FO as is their right) to defederate.
Edit: And you are welcome to search my username at .ml and see how much of what I posted was anti-Trump. Spoiler alert: nearly all of it.
I’m not sure if you meant to reply to me. I never said anything about Tankies, although I can see how offering my observations as a small critique of .ml could be seen as tacitly agreeing with the OP.
First of all, I’m sorry you left ml because of external pressure. That’s not right or fair. I guess there’s some truth in all the leftist infighting memes.
I agree with practically everything you said, particularly the comparison between ‘tankie’ and ‘woke’. I don’t utilize any blocking, though, because I like to be open to all viewpoints.
I hate crawling someone’s history, but since you asked I did take a look. It’s great to see that kind of content. I should have been more specific, but my .ml observations are older than your history (mainly the run-up to the US election). So, admittedly, I’m a bit guilty of “A lot of assumptions about folks just for being members of .ml” since I haven’t been there in months.
Right. So you said that the reason that you didn’t see anti-Trump content on .ml is because he’s pro-Putin, but how could I possibly interpret that as you claiming that .ml was pro-Trump?
Because you became instantly defensive and jumped to a conclusion. I get it. There are a lot of people that are rabidly against ml. I’m offering one small critique based on my observations there. One more time, just to be clear, I saw a ton of anti-Biden/Harris chatter and practically zero anti-Trump. This does not mean ml is pro-Trump. I am not claiming and never claimed ml is pro-Trump. I’m not saying that I saw pro-Trump content. It was just this weird black hole of direct criticism surrounding him. Now, this was all in the lead up to the US election, so I’m happy to see that perhaps this has changed (based on your links).
It’s not a “false-equivalence.” You can’t just drop “false-equivalence” and dismiss any comparison you don’t like, you have to actually explain why it isn’t equivalent.
Sorry, I thought it was fairly obvious. I was speaking about specific anti-Biden/Harris vs anti-Trump content. You tried to generalize it back to puppy murder. Those two things are not equivalent. Let’s ditch the analogy. If I understand you correctly, you are saying it’s good enough to criticize the bad actions the US is taking without having to denounce each and every bad actor and I mostly agree. What I’m saying is I saw specific (well-deserved) criticisms of, for example, how terrible Harris would for Palestine, but most brushed aside comments about how bad Trump would be. I saw people trying to get commentors to say one bad thing about Trump and they just wouldn’t do it. I mean, at that point, it’s dance monkey dance so I can understand how they would dig in their heels.
I really wanted to like it there and I think I’ll give it another shot. It just seemed, at least during the election, the point was more to destabilize than to actually further leftist ideals.
This does not mean ml is pro-Trump. I am not claiming and never claimed ml is pro-Trump. I’m not saying that I saw pro-Trump content. It was just this weird black hole of direct criticism surrounding him. Now, this was all in the lead up to the US election, so I’m happy to see that perhaps this has changed (based on your links).
It just seemed, at least during the election, the point was more to destabilize than to actually further leftist ideals.
I don’t have a lot of patience for this style of communication. If you have something to say, say it. You’re just accusing us of shit while dancing around it and acting all “Who, me? Why, I would never suggest such a thing,” while plainly suggesting it. The accusation that you’re trying to get people to believe is that .ml gave preferential treatment to Trump with the intent of helping him to win and cause instability. So stop trying to split hairs and pretend that you’re not accusing us of being pro-Trump and say it to my face.
You tried to generalize it back to puppy murder. Those two things are not equivalent. Let’s ditch the analogy.
The analogy is valid, so no, let’s not.
If I understand you correctly, you are saying it’s good enough to criticize the bad actions the US is taking without having to denounce each and every bad actor and I mostly agree.
No, this isn’t what I’m saying. Please read what I said again.
What I’m saying is that our opposition to Trump is already understood so there’s not really a lot of reason to just reiterate it over and over, with everyone agreeing with each other. That’s not how discourse works. Uncontroversial, mutually understood points are boring and unnecessary to repeat.
We do, of course, denounce Trump. You know, when it comes up. The same way, if you ask me if grass is green, I’ll tell you yes, but I’m not just going to walk up to you and go, “Hello, grass is green.” I assume that since that analogy doesn’t help your conclusion, it’s a “false equivalence” and you’ll say we should “just ditch it.”
I saw people trying to get commentors to say one bad thing about Trump and they just wouldn’t do it.
Did you now? I’d love to see a link to that. My standard is, “If someone claims something happened on the fediverse without providing a link, they’re lying.”
So stop trying to split hairs and pretend that you’re not accusing us of being pro-Trump and say it to my face.
I’m not sure how I can be more clear. I will try a more direct, succinct approach. I AM NOT ACCUSING YOU (OR ML) OF BEING PRO-TRUMP. I’m saying I observed a lack of anti-Trump sentiment in the run up to the election RELATIVE to the anti-Harris rhetoric. That is all. Lack of “anti” sentiment DOES NOT EQUAL “pro” sentiment.
No, this isn’t what I’m saying. Please read what I said again.
Apologies for misrepresenting you. That’s why I tried to remove the imperfect analogy and talk actual facts.
What I’m saying is that our opposition to Trump is already understood so there’s not really a lot of reason to just reiterate it over and over, with everyone agreeing with each other.
That’s a perfectly reasonable viewpoint. What I don’t understand, then, is that MLs opposition to Biden and Harris were also understood, yet it was reiterated again and again.
Did you now? I’d love to see a link to that. My standard is, “If someone claims something happened on the fediverse without providing a link, they’re lying.”
Being able to remember exactly which approximately 7 month old post it was and dredge up the exact comment is a tall order. I don’t bookmark this stuff to use as gotchas months later. It probably involved a couple of you big dogs like brain or flyingsquid.
This has all gotten wildly off base, though. This is my only claim: In the run-up to the US election, I observed a lack of anti-Trump sentiment in the run up to the election relative to the anti-Harris rhetoric. It was extremely frustrating then as those of us that had to deal with his first term saw the danger and now as I have to deal with these fascists dismantling my country.
Now, you can claim I’m full of shit, that I’m wrong, that there was exactly as much anti-Trump rhetoric as anti-Biden/Harris, that I moved the goalposts by not initially stating this was months ago (fair), but that is what I saw and why I left. Obviously, .world has it’s own issues, but I’ve spent entirely too long on this site already.
The accusation that you’re trying to get people to believe is that .ml gave preferential treatment to Trump with the intent of helping him to win and cause instability.
Edit: I just reread this part and should address it.
The accusation that you’re trying to get people to believe is that .ml gave preferential treatment to Trump with the intent of helping him to win and cause instability.
You’re correct. I’ve posited a couple theories trying to make sense of the imbalance of critiques and that is one of them. I have no proof of that and should just stick to the facts. Thanks for pointing that out.
You talk like a politician and that is not a complement.
I assumed because he is very pro-Putin.
What a stupid fucking assumption.
Perhaps. I’m smart enough to know that, like everyone else, I can be fucking stupid sometimes.
I was deliberate to use the word assumed, because it was just based on a hunch. That hunch, however, was predicated on observations of how nothing critical could ever be said of Russia.
For example, I was confused about how everyone was (rightly) denouncing the invasion of Palestine, but not the invasion of Ukraine. The most explicit reason I ever received was, apparently, Ukraine is just chock full of Nazis and Putin is simply liberating the innocent Ukrainians. I know there is a lot of history to distill and this is not the best forum for it. It just seems like such a waste of lives on all sides.
So, it stands to reason since ml is reticent to criticize anything about Russia and I see a lack of criticism about Trump (who is buddy buddy with Putin), that may be the cause.
I know your main shtick is to be incendiary, but I just thought I would expand on my reasoning just in case you wanted to have a human conversation.
was predicated on observations of how nothing critical could ever be said of Russia.
Well, no, because things critical of Russia absolutist can and are said.
but not the invasion of Ukraine.
Plenty of people would, I certainly do. But the people who don’t certainly don’t not because they’re pro-Putin or anything.
So, it stands to reason since ml is reticent to criticize anything about Russia
We really aren’t.
I see a lack of criticism about Trump
How do you see a lack of something? What would be the acceptable amount of criticism for Trump? certainly you won’t see anyone there unironically praising him. If there’s more criticism of Dems, it’s because opposition to Trump is already consensus, so there isn’t really more to say about the matter, where as people on Lemmy still have some support for the Dems.
How do you see a lack of something?
In regards to Trump, by measuring it relative to the critiques of other liberals, especially when they are in a race for the US presidency.
If there’s more criticism of Dems, it’s because opposition to Trump is already consensus, so there isn’t really more to say about the matter, where as people on Lemmy still have some support for the Dems.
Extremely well said, and a good point. I’m not sure it explains everything, but it’s something I should definitely consider.
Extremely well said, and a good point. I’m not sure it explains everything, but it’s something I should definitely consider.
Keep it in mind and I think you’ll find it does a pretty good job explaining everything. Think about it like this: I have never seen a single person who is openly pro-MAGA, I don’t know if I’ve even seen someone who’s pro-GOP. On the other end, we’ve been in this Trump dominated political purgatory for almost a decade. What’s the point then, of reiterating criticisms that have been repeated ad-nausea, to a community that universally has already heard them a thousand times and already agrees.
To people who view politics as a spectator sport rather than a power structure for changing the material world, you gotta keep cheering for the home team and booing for the away team, until the end of time.
Seriously blaming the tankies again? How bourgeoisie of you lol
If you want to blame something, blame the media. Both news and social media have completely sold out for profit. You CANNOT have a democracy if vast parts of your population is being misinformed. And this started with talk radio in rural areas many decades ago. And the democrats did nothing - because they are not left. Thanks for all the empty “Hope and Change” Obama!
So yeah, blame socialists all you want but their critique was valid.
You need a revolution or reformation. A massive change in who owns the means of communication to have a free press again that is not purely profit driven. Can you even imagine that? Is that something you would say? No. You’d rather blame and denigrate socialists and call them tankies. Look at the mass protests, it seems the libs aren’t even calling for Trump to step down and demand new election lol. People would rather bow to unjust laws and simplistic principles than believe in democracy. Of course they are all being stage managed.
But this is just pathetic.
yeah the like 10 tankies in the US really threw that election…? The takes from people on lemmy are so fucking strange.
Oh no dems are not perfect let’s Satan/Hitler win to teach them a lesson!
Like bruh try won’t learn but let’s get rid of Satan/Hitler first. And ill be first to turn on them.
And that’s the thing, the Dems losing doesn’t teach them any lesson, they’re not going to pivot to the left because they lost, they’ll only double down on neoliberalism.
DNC logic
DNC will throw an election before moving to the left. Particularly when the topic of discussion involves a certain rogue nation in the Middle East.
Yeah i wish I could confidently tell you no you are wrong. Which is why we cant place hopes in DNC. This is not about dems winning. Its about gop losing. Once they are out. Let them dnc get their what they deserve.
From the DNC’s perspective, going left lost against Nixon of all people, during a deeply unpopular war. Going left was crushed by Regan. Both Bush presidents won by attacking centrist candidates from the right. Clinton ran very centrist campaigns and won. Obama was at best more practical than ideological. Carter and Biden picked up the pieces of disasters, but that didn’t translate in to long term gains, and neither of them got credit for what wins they delivered the left.
I agree the DNC should go left, but I understand it’s hard to make the case based on the last 60 years of experience.
Anyone basing strategy on the last sixty years instead of the last four is too stupid to be taken seriously. Hence the US’ reputation as he dumbest nation.
I’d reply that anyone can justify any conclusion if they’re allowed to pick and choose the evidence under consideration. We should aim to produce a political theory that accounts for decades of history and change.
Sure… But that political theory is still explicitly illegal in the US and can get you imprisoned if you manage to get elected. Barring the obvious, we can’t base our political theory on entirely different material conditions experienced by entirely different people. The number of voters that were alive 60 years ago is miniscule, and the number of voters that voted 60 years ago is going to be less than 1% in the next election.
Even supposing those people were physically still alive their material conditions have changed so dramatically they aren’t the same voters.
By ignoring the change of conditions and change of voters mentality, you set yourself up for ‘surprise’ failures, like clinton in 2016, which all leftists knew clinton would lose.
If you just look at the last four years and the material conditions people face, you’re far less likely to overvalue old elections that have nothing whatsoever in common with modern elections.
I mean they still not right. Just diet version. To use cars as analogy, Its like hybrid car is better but than gas but what we want is EV running on renewables. Meanwhile people getting most inefficient gas machine from mad max out of spite.
they’re not going to pivot to the left because they lost
We see that exact thing happening now. They haven’t learned a thing.
Nancy Pelosi was in a hospital in Europe and actively blocked AOC from taking a leadership role right after the election. The fucking Democrats censured the single member of their party that called Trump out on his BS during his victory lap. Then Schumer shit the bed a couple weeks ago.
Establishment Dems are actively preventing any kind of progress, all while whining about how we need to do something!
We need more people involved in primaries and less voting based on TV ads.
If you’re willing to sacrifice one minority group to Satan, why should members of other minority groups not believe they are next?
100% agree.
But just to put in perspective, 1 side said ill f over 1 group and other side said “ill do way more than that casual”. And in fact since 2 months of getting in are actively trying to f over the world.
Voting DNC was also temp truce against GOP. I rather be mildly disappointed than fearing for future. If DNC won ill be pushing for more progressive stuff but now we got to work to get nation back to “normal”. Its like wanting to plant a tree but some jerk poured sand in the hole. Now we got to undo this crap before progress can happen.
If so many people refused to vote for Democrats because they were too far right, then the Dems should have moved left. If Leftists are too small a group to matter and the Dems are right to court the right then stop complaining when Leftists don’t vote for you. You can’t have it both ways.
Dems are not progressive they move to who votes. Team lefty hate the choices so opt out. Meanwhile DNC sees right voters consistently vote and move to court them. DnC is not on our side they are on their side. They said they are not the opposition party. We all know that. But they are opportunists so more left votes since they will move left. Especially if the GOP is no longer a viable option. Hence why I say turn on them after the GOP is voted to hell.
Tankies want Hitler to win and the country to collapse. They are like evangelicals deeply wanting the apocalypse to happen to punish all the people who didn’t agree with them.
So this outcome is perfect for them because despite their whinging, leftists are deeply unpopular in the US amongst the majority of the population.
Tankies want Hitler to win and the country to collapse. They are like evangelicals deeply wanting the apocalypse to happen to punish all the people who didn’t agree with them.
Your analogy is even more apt than that. A lot of them are accelerationists/anti-electoralists too, who hold the faith-based belief that making the world worse will magically cause the working class to unite and overthrow their oppressors. The belief is based upon the words of a dead authoritarian and has no historical data to suggest that it is remotely accurate. They are happy to give vulnerable populations as blood sacrifices because of their faith in it somehow resulting in a better world.
I hate that i agree you are right.
Like bruh try won’t learn but let’s get rid of Satan/Hitler first. And ill be first to turn on them.
The democrats have literally funded far-right republican candidates because they know you’re operating on this logic. Trump himself was part of this “pied piper” strategy.
Yup as other said they will move to lose before they go left. Think about why that is. Cause if the gop is gone they are the next target. So they do crap like everyone mentioned. They just want donations. GOP is their boogeyman.
The strategy outlined is vote to make gop not viable. Then progressive dems will have more free to form new party. Threat of gop prevents this. Afterwards DNC replaces gop as right party. If that plan doesnt sit well with you please vote third party. Its a drop in bucket but oceans are made of drops.
Honestly I don’t understand the logic of that approach at all. What makes you think the GOP will eventually become nonviable? I feel like people making this argument in the past relied on the assumption that young people and minorities would always be consistent democratic voters, but that hasn’t held up, because they blew it. If you recognize them as being shit, then what gives you the confidence in them to think that they’ll achieve total political dominance?
If that plan doesnt sit well with you please vote third party. Its a drop in bucket but oceans are made of drops.
I do, and I appreciate you respecting this choice.
Very fair point and i acknowledge it could 100% be naive if demographics dont age out gop members. But I do. Why? Well personal experience. 2016 I hated dnc and got swooped up in the Donald. 8 years later I tried to explain to everyone this is the same crap and not to be deceived. My message didn’t reach but people may learn the hard way. If next election stays the same demographics then I got to find a new path. Cause you’re right.
As for political dominance, There are only 2 viable choices. At some point age out and constant right moves the DNC will be the less radical right party. Plus mixed with blue no matter who (for a few years anyway), 3 stock market crashes with gop presidents in 20 years, measles out breaks, and I suspect stronger hurricanes etc, they cant keep it up.
If those 20 mil votes for biden came for Harris or even third party there would have been a huge shake up like I described above could have come sooner. Don’t let anyone discourage your vote!
constant right moves the DNC will be the less radical right party.
I don’t believe it works that way, if it did, Kamala and Clinton would’ve both won. The DNC is already the less radical right party.
The problem is that voters are more complex than a fixed point on a left/right axis that votes for whoever’s closer to them. For instance, when Democrats pivoted to the right on immigration and tried to pass themselves off as border hawks, what happened was that they threw away a moral argument that they had previously used to criticize the Republicans. People didn’t say, “Oh, now that the Democrats have come around on immigration, I’ll vote for them,” they said, “You were calling them racist over this not long ago, but now you’re adopting the same stance? So the Republicans were right and your criticism was opportunistic and full of shit. Why should I trust your criticism of them on other points?” They actually tried to criticize the Republicans from the right on the issue, citing the fact that the Republicans didn’t go along with Biden’s anti-immigration bill and saying, “We’re the ones who actually want to secure the border, they’re all talk.” Nobody really bought it, and ofc if you were pro-immigration you were expected to still vote Democrat since it’s taken for granted that they’re the “lesser evil.” Meanwhile, this led to a collapse in support among Hispanics, many of whom were willing to support the Democratic party on the basis that Trump’s anti-immigration stance was racist, but when the Democrats shifted right on that issue, many didn’t see a significant difference on that front and voted Republican because they were more aligned on other, cultural issues.
3 stock market crashes with gop presidents in 20 years, measles out breaks, and I suspect stronger hurricanes etc, they cant keep it up.
I don’t have that much faith in the average voter. The democrats will have an advantage in the next presidential election (although they could fuck it up), but after that, like 7 years from now, people won’t remember or care - just like they didn’t care enough about Trump’s first term to not elect him again.
I mean, that’s the way it works with a two party system where they both suck. People see the Republicans sucking and turn to the Democrats because they’re the only other option. Then they see the Democrats sucking and turn to the Republicans because they’re the only other option. You can’t just rely on the other side being bad because if they’re not in charge, people will forget how bad they are. You have to go all the way back to Reagan and H.W. to find a time with two consecutive presidents of the same party - and recently, people haven’t even been going for incumbents, it’s been switching back and forth every four years.
I agree with your points. Not to sound misogyny but I strongly believe it was too early for women. Need a mass die off of elderly jerks before ill believe it. Black men had voting rights before women and we just got a half black president only very recently.
People just need to see past last 4 years or even few months and know what dems are.
Dem betrayal is expected. Don’t bother holding them to higher standard. They are lesser evil. Don’t get annoyed and not vote. Vote third party if anything. Don’t let the greater evil win ever. We do that we will get ratchet effect. Like you described.
tell me you don’t actually talk to “tankies” without telling me you don’t actually talk to “tankies”.
