(this is a sarcastic post meant to highlight the absurdity of some of the “greater good” rhetoric we’ve been hearing, especially around leaving vulnerable populations like disabled people behind in case of revolution, basically accelerationism)
this is why so many people had an issue with the Democrat party platform of “let’s sacrifice Palestine”
Fight all you want, by all means, bring those in power further left. But at the ballot box come election day, I don’t care if the dem wants to sacrifice puppies on weekends. Guaranteed their Republican opponent has a factory grinding puppies into various consumer products by the millions. And their 3rd party counterpart likely has a greater chance of getting elected to mayor of flavortown than to congress/president (and also still probably kills puppies casually among friends themselves).
Is this system bullshit? Yup. Is it the one we got? Yup. We need to deal within that reality. By all means, let’s work to change that system, but for the love of God, let’s not shoot ourselves in the foot when our favorite candidate doesn’t stand a chance in hell, or the more likely candidate is blatantly flawed (but still better than the alternative)
100%. Prior to Election Day? Get a democratic butt in every race and challenge the people advocating for puppy sacrifices.
Unfortunately we are at a point where only one party can be fixed.
But I was told democrats are worse than hitler
They aren’t worse then Hitler. They just kept saying Hitler has a right to defend himself and selling him the gas for his chambers.
Not the best way to win an election.
I don’t care if the dem wants to sacrifice puppies on weekends.
How’s that been working for you? It looks to me like this attitude brought us Trump. Maybe it’s time the Democrats started demanding better.
I say demanding. Sitting out an election doesn’t count. The system doesn’t change just because you refuse to participate.
I’m really having trouble parsing your suggestion here.
- DEMAND better.
- Don’t just sit out election.
But surely a demand comes with a consequence if not met, right? What is the consequence in an election if not withholding your vote? But you said not to sit it out. Are you arguing in favor of voting 3rd party then? I have to assume that’s your intent, though you didn’t actually say that.
If that is your position, sure, but the problem with voting third party is that, without the mother of all grassroots followings, no third party candidate stands a shadow of a chance. And there was clearly no such popular candidate for president last election. And providing third parties with support is as bad as just not voting if they no chance of winning. It just amounts to not supporting your preferred candidate that does stand a chance.
That is fucked. I know and I agree. But that is the nature of First Past The Post voting and always will be. It’s a lot like the prisoners dilemma. The best possible outcome for you would be to get your most preferred third party candidate, but if you vote for them, and the rest of the voters don’t, you split the vote and end up giving your least preferred candidate an advantage instead. But voting your mosr preferred two-party candidate/popular candidate, or least of two evils as it may well be, comes with some negatives, but is an objectively better outcome.
We need election reform to get rid of FPTP and the two-party system with it. That is no small thing, I know, and there is no quick way to get that done. All we can do is advocate for it, vote for other advocates for it, and hope that eventually it becomes a party platform. But until then, we have to live with the reality and vote strategically. Demand better in so far as you use your voice and your dollars to support better candidates, vote in the primaries for the better candidate, but use your vote on election day with the system we have. Unfortunately, that does sometimes mean voting for a bit of evil to save yourself from a lot of evil.
What got us Trump 2.0 was people refusing to support Kamala. Apathy, protest, contempt, indifference, whatever their reasons, they didn’t show up and give her their votes. A big part of that is her fault for failing to live up to the standards the left expected of her, for failing to excite left wing voters. Those voters were perfectly justified in not being happy about the idea of voting for her, but, ultimately we are worse off because they didn’t. And choosing not to vote at all or to vote third party instead is on them alone.
No, what got us Trump 2.0 was the Democrats running a shitty candidate, on the coattails of another shitty candidate, on the coattails of a shitty presidential run. People were clamoring for a new candidate that actualy gave a shit, and the Democrats told them to sit down and shut up.
The Democrats chose money, war-mongers, and genocide over winning a slam-dunk election. It’s not the voter’s fault that we’re here, as they loudly told the Democrats what they wanted. It’s the Democrat’s fault for ignoring those demands from their base.
Why should people vote for a party that fights against what they want, when they can vote for a third party that is fighting for what they want?
Buddy this post is about leftists. You are not a leftist. You’re a left-leaning liberal. Read a book ffs.
Do you see us electing ourselves out of this mess (that we elected ourselves into)?
I’m not going to lie, this mess will only end with the sitting congress and judiciary growing some nuts and shutting all of this shit down, OR with a military coup. I don’t see either happening. Realistically, we have likely had our last truly free election for the foreseeable future the way this is going. I hope I’m wrong.
I don’t think either of those is very likely. The congress and judiciary are made up of people who used their powers to facilitate the current problems. A military coup is also pretty unlikely but I don’t really have much to base that feeling on. Trump dying might break the spell enough for some congressional action. Outside of that, I’m afraid that civil resistance is the only thing that will impede these deportations. And I don’t mean orderly protests on the weekends.
Organizing takes time, you want to flip a switch and have millions in the streets for a general strike but it’s going to take gradual steps to get there.
I’m pessimistic about a general strike in the US. We don’t have anywhere near the union participation required, IMO. I’m talking about smaller, ad-hoc groups doing real damage, hopefully with broad (if tacit) support. See what’s happening with Teslas as an example. Next should come some serious anti-ICE actions. Sweet username btw.
The problem is, all that fighting, criticizing and finger pointing can be weaponized. That’s why FUD works.
You just amplify any legit concerns until they seem worse than Trump.
I’m convinced most of the leftists on here are either foreign actors or repeating their talking points.
I agree. It’s important to not lose the thread or your sense of reality when focusing on internal problems. Internal problems are usually differences of opinion, perspective, or goals, but with the same or similar basic values behind them. It’s important to keep those shared values in mind even while nitpicking the other stuff when you’re trying to influence the direction of your side. Keep in mind that you are all going generally the same direction while the Right is pulling against every step you take together, and just because your differences among the Left is your focus now doesn’t mean it is a bigger deal than your differences with the Right.
Well said.
But at the ballot box come election day, I don’t care if the dem wants to sacrifice puppies on weekends
Every time a democrat talks like this they lose votes. “Yeah my candidate supports genocide, but-” stop you’ve just smeared your own candidate. If you don’t have anything nice about your candidate then keep your mouth shut.
Any normal american will see the rest of your comment and think they’re better off investing in bullets and silver than worrying about the election. You’re basically doing voter surppression.
Or maybe their candidates shouldn’t support genocide. It’d be much easier to sell the Democrats as a valid party to vote for if they weren’t in support of things like genocide.
Bring them further left how? Why would they need to do anything when you’d vote for them anyways? Every election both parties move a little bit to the right, and you have no choice but vote Dem. What can you realistically do when the only power you have is voting unless you are a billionaire? Your electoral system is truly fucked and the probably of it fixing itself is low, because why would the party in power want to change the system that just gave them that power?
All I can say is leave if you are able to.
Removed by mod
Tbh I think the Republicans get us closer to revolution than the Democrats do. I think the only way out is to break the system.
Means to an end, maybe. But do the ends justify these means? And what makes you think a leftist utopia is even the ends of all this in the first place?
Yeah that’s the biggest problem is I can’t guarantee the revolution would be leftist or that the emerging system would be better than our current system. We need to build a leadership system now.
Anything that gets you to target people with less power than you is a psy-op.
There is only one group of people to oppose. It’s a small group of extremely wealthy people. All their mouthpieces on the internet are irrelevant (and likely bots) and are best ignored/blocked.
There is one small, powerful group who are the only justifiable targets. Everything else is a distraction and likely a divide-and-weaken tactic.
One small group of powerful, wealthy people. That is the enemy. No one with less power than you is worth focusing on.
You’re absolutely right.
The billionaire owner class is at the root of all this. They own the politicians, they buy up the media outlets and bot farms to control the narrative, and they make our lives miserable in order to further pad their already incomprehensibly massive bank accounts.
Working class must look out for each other. We have so much more in common with our brothers and sisters across the aisle than we ever will have with these parasitic elites.
No war but the class war. Everyone you disagree with is an ally in waiting except billionaires.
Until you somehow “deal” with the billionaires. Then you’ll all kill each other.
Lol humanity existed before oligarchs and kings.
It didn’t. Someone is always in charge.
A straight up Moldbug bootlicker. Get bent. No monarchies, no Kings, in America.
Lol, capitalist education system at work.
Hurdur. Name a period in time where people weren’t ruled. Either in a tribe or in an empire there is a leader or group of leaders in charge. There has never been a time when that isn’t the case. People naturally create governing hierarchies.
You know there is a difference between wise people being listened to because of experience or just because it’s been smart and suggesting rules everyone then agrees on and a feudal lord or class thereof that are exploiting a poorer majority with threats of violence and living a lavish lifestyle. There are still existing tribes in Asia or Amazonas that don’t even have words for mine and yours because the concept of owning is so foreign to them. Everything is shared. To say that they are being ruled comparably to medieval and modern systems just doesn’t make sense.
I know that you’re really concerned about being stabbed with knives. But you just need to accept the Hard Truth that you not being stabbed with knives is losing political issue! Really, that’s why we’re losing elections. You can’t have everything that you want. And you need to see where the other side is coming from…
vs
I know that you’re really concerned about being stabbed with knives. One of these candidates is implicitly okay with you being stabbed with knives, and the other wants to personally stab you with even more knives. I recognize the injustice in this and will therefore vote for neither of them! (the worse one won and now you’re being stabbed with even more knives)
Who will win? (spoiler: I don’t know but certainly not you because you’re too busy being stabbed with knives)
The entire concept of “accelerationism” is complete nonsense. First of all, none of the people advocating for it are willing to say, “Yes, I am perfectly happy to become homeless and starve to death in order to foment the revolution.”
And what are people gonna do? Take up arms? We’re just gonna wait until everyone is starving but armed with an AR-15 and then hope the state doesn’t crush us with nukes? It’s highly privileged absurdist faux revolutionary nonsense.
Essentially the ‘left’ on the topic of Palestine
“The left, american left, and right should join hands to fight american right”
Difficult to raise this amongst friends but one 2022 story came to mind
https://www.vox.com/policy/385549/trans-sports-transgender-biden-harris-democrats-titleix
PS: obviously my conflict is about “fight for 1% of athletes vs. lose election to Hitlerguy and harm like 50% of the population”, to oversimplify greatly
Liberals will say shit like this and then be baffled why leftists don’t want to fall in line behind the party of moderate fascists.
You throw trans people under the bus and you also lose, or at least depress turnout, of everyone who supports trans rights. You also make it clear to every minority that if they’re in the crosshairs next, they’ll be sacrificed next for the same reasons of political convenience. Jews represented <1% of the population of Weimar Germany, and you may be familiar with a poem about what happened after they came for them.
Furthermore, by ceding ground to the Republicans on this you make them look correct and you discredit your own side for having previously denounced their position as bigoted, which makes people more likely to support Republicans. We saw this happen with the border, when the Democrats turned from “Building the wall is racist” to “We’re the ones who are actually going to build the wall,” they didn’t win over moderate republicans, instead they lost on virtually every demographic. The people who are pro-immigration hated it and the people who are anti-immigration saw their views as being validated and if they had any lingering reservations about voting Republican, those reservations vanished.
Framing politics as a Trolley Problem is extremely stupid, and fundamentally not how the world works, it’s liberal brainrot and one of the reasons Democrats are worthless. They literally did this “strategic” sacrifice with Palestinians and immigrants (and it’s not like they fully supported trans rights either) and they still ate shit with the worst electoral map since the Republicans took California. When throwing trans people to the wolves doesn’t work, which minority will you sacrifice next?
I bet we could get even more of these conservatives on our side if we promised to repeal gay marriage. Let’s try that, too
Ooh, and we could get even more people if we promised to put the Jews in camps
more of these conservatives on our side
To clarify, screenshot quotes democrats
Trans folx in sports is the most narrow topic - I am discussing it as so. A very specific topic where not every ally is an agreement. A very specific topic that someone very orange did a great job of lying about constantly.
“Force humans into certain bathrooms” = different topic, for example
Once you make one unscientific concession to bigotry, you’ll make another. The problem with your strategy is that the opposition to trans athletes isn’t actually a good-faith attempt at securing fairness in sports. This isn’t some fair debate that reasonable minds can come together and hash out. If you surrender on this issue, the bigots just move on to the next one. And since you’ve already conceded to bigotry once, you’ve established the precedent that it is fine to pass laws based on pure unscientific bigotry. It starts with sports, but it doesn’t end there. Now people’s passports are being revoked because a bunch of cowards thought, “oh, it’s just sports, that’s not worth fighting over.” If you give these fuckers an inch, they’ll take a mile.
And democrats responded by breaking solidarity with a minority they consider disposable.
They sure got a lot of the republican votes they crave by showing simpering cowardice in the face of bigotry.
Referring to the cited source, the screenshot?
If you aren’t going to fight for that “1% of athletes” even though you think they’re right just because they’re too politically inconvenient then I have zero faith you’ll fight for me when I’m politically inconvenient and actually need you to
I think the point there was reasonable disagreements exist amongst us allies so we can focus on the 99% where we agree entirely
I haven’t mentioned… today… how sickening this is. Sorry to be talking so GOPy. That ain’t me
Is our president a political inconvenience?
“fight for 1% of athletes vs. lose election to Hitlerguy and harm like 50% of the population”
Republicans who got on the “Freak out about transgender policy” lost their elections in droves in 2022. Several big swing Senate seats flipped because guys like Blake Masters and Herschel Walker couldn’t stop screaming slurs at campaign rallies. We’ve seen Republicans scrub out over and over again by downing too much of their own kool-aid.
Democrats didn’t lose 2024 because they were too nice to Transgender people. They lost because they were too nice to Liz Cheney. Harris made a big show of aligning with neoconservatives on everything from immigration and trade to military policies against Russia and China to the stubborn endorsement of the Palestine genocide. All of this shit polled worse than support for Transgender civil rights. Harris had no problem throwing the country in front of Hitlerguy to endorse the tear-gassing of Columbia University and the Kids In Cages on the Texas/Mexico border.
Even then… even if you can argue with a stack full of polling papers that Harris knew with perfect certainty and well in advance of the November vote that an impassioned speech in defense of transgender athletes would doom her campaign and subject the US to Hitlerguy, so what? She didn’t do this and she still fucking lost.
So she and the rest of her squishy latte liberal cohort threw away a big chunk of LGBTQ support for what? What did Dems gain by embracing reactionary policy?
Democrats didn’t lose 2024 because they were too nice to Transgender people. They lost because they were too nice to Liz Cheney.
This right here can’t be said enough. The problem isn’t policies that are too leftist. It’s the “liberals” that a working so hard to cozy up to conservatives. If we wanted moderate Republicans we’d vote for 'em. We want fucking leftists goddammit!!!
On one hand I don’t fucking like Liz Cheney… on the other hand… I think you should welcome (almost) anyone against an enemy like Trump. I thought that at the time, and now with the additional information we’ve gained since then (and I personally learned) only reaffirm that to me. We don’t have to glorify Liz Cheney later.
But not voting for Kamala because the coalition allowed Liz Cheney in is probably just as dumb as not voting for Kamala because somehow… Trump isn’t WORSE on Palestine?
There is not a “single issue” that won for them beyond voter manipulation. They did the same thing as 2016 and did targeted ads and segmenting people on social media. Mass voter suppression in the south (Russian bomb threats in Georgia… the disenfranchisement across multiple states…etc) FB & Twitter owned by them. TikTok in question but absolutely started showing even more right wing content after the election. I’m sure one issue (or two) might be more influential, but that’s only because of the coordinated reach of their voter manipulation.
We have ALL been targeted with propaganda and segmented from each other. They continue to do it now. They lie and Fox News, which something like 60% of the country, carries their lies for them. Bots barrage social media every where. Tech-bro toelickers and tankies promote right wing, anti-globalist propaganda everywhere. (Anti-globalism is primarily right wing, Kremlin propaganda to disconnect The Americas (primarily US ofc) from Europe).
Be wary of bots that feel like they’re your ally, too.
"But the 63 per cent of the German people who expressed their opposition to Hitler were much too divided and shortsighted to combine against a common danger which they must have known would overwhelm them unless they united, however temporarily, to stamp it out.”
Excerpt From The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich Shirer, William
I think you should welcome (almost) anyone against an enemy like Trump.
I would much rather have the people who hate the Cheney’s guts in my coalition than have the Cheney’s. How many people do they even represent? Who doesn’t hate them, and with good reason?
But not voting for Kamala because the coalition allowed Liz Cheney in is probably just as dumb
First off they didn’t just “allow” Liz Cheney, they actively campaigned with her. But secondly and more importantly, it’s not about whether it was right or wrong for that to influence people’s decisions, it’s about the fact that it likely did. Call it “dumb” or “irrational” all you want, if voters were all rational and intelligent then maybe we wouldn’t have to think or care about messaging or image at all, but that’s not the world we live in.
The influence of “bots” is highly overstated and is basically just a way of dismissing legitimate criticism and preventing any kind of self-reflection or learning from mistakes.
It was a pathetic attempt to reach “middle of the ground” voters.
Did you not read that I opened with I hate Cheney? I suppose “don’t fucking like” may not have been forceful enough.
I agree they probably leaned too much into it. A “thanks for speaking Cheney.” is probably all I would have given her. If that’s your only point, fine I agree. But I wouldn’t exile her support entirely. If you’re mad about that instead of focusing on Trump, you’re losing sight of the problem.
I didn’t say it wasn’t influential. If you stopped responding emotionally or with the intent to derail and attack, you’d realize I literally said specific topics could be more important than others (once again, Palestine another highly controversial one I see you completely skip past). But it’s the reach and targeting of these messages to those they resonate most with that is why they are so dangerous. Peter Thiel; Trump investor & close to all the tech bros funding things; was the 1st outside investor in Facebook. It was never “liberal.”
Nothing I said implies we don’t think about messaging. By now the inaccuracy of your attacks come off as firehose of falsehoods.
Your dismissal of bots and propaganda is not only stupid, it’s dangerous. Propaganda has influenced EVERY democracy.
Tell me, which of these was not reportedly influenced and pushed by Russia or is not Russia friendly and has it pushed ties with Russia, both by propaganda & by literally influencing people with money? (Both people to lie for them in media, and politicians to vote for them)
MAGA/US, Brexit/UK, Marine La Pen/France, Bolsonaro/Brazil, AfD/Germany, Polliviere/Canada… the list goes on.
Are you blind? A bootlicker?
And absolutely nothing I’ve said has ever indicated we don’t have a lot to deal with internally. But to fail to acknowledge that we wouldn’t be here without our enemies helping these guys get here is to deny reality. I’d rather not drink the Kremlin Tea, thanks.
read the quote at the bottom of my first post again. That is the most important message anyone can take away from these posts.
Did you not read that I opened with I hate Cheney?
I never claimed otherwise? Very confusing reaction.
If you stopped responding emotionally
Excuse me? In what way was my response “emotional?”
or with the intent to derail and attack
By now the inaccuracy of your attacks
What “attacks” are you talking about? All I did was disagree with you on certain points.
Propaganda has influenced EVERY democracy.
They’ve got propaganda, we’ve got propaganda, everybody’s got propaganda, and always has. The Democratic party has plenty of money to get their message out, the problem is their message sucked and didn’t resonate.
MAGA/US, Brexit/UK, Marine La Pen/France, Bolsonaro/Brazil, AfD/Germany, Polliviere/Canada… the list goes on.
All of those were driven by material conditions, yes propaganda had an effect but the reason the propaganda resonates and has influence is because of people being dissatisfied with the liberal status quo.
Every statement you’ve made has been in bad faith, purely attempting to derail the argument and make readers glaze their eyes over.
You’re doing it now, even in this response.
You’re just hand waving things and saying all things are equal. I’m sure the $160 million from cryptobros and $250+? million from Elon made no difference at all. I’m sure Elon’s $1m fake-raffles to convince people to vote didn’t make a difference. Fox News is watched by 60% of the country. Got a similar stat for a “leftist” program you can show is like actually propaganda?
Bet you’ll argue that because we were imperial, we should let Russia and China be imperial and conquer Taiwan/Ukraine too?
No, the NEOliberal status quo. We have never been a leftist nation. Our Overton window is very far to the right. Bernie is like a single step to the left of the center. Check out any other major democracy.
Part of this entire argument we are having HINGES on the fact that many corporate donors are basically conservatives even if slightly “socially liberal”… cause their money comes first. That even, they too, focus on. Both the neocons and neolibs have maintained this order since the 60s until MAGA came along to reshape the presidency into a “CEO dictator.”
You’re basically telling me to choose MY words carefully. Right back at ya, buddy. Attacking "liberal"ism is straight kremlin propaganda.
You, the tech bros, and Russia get along well it seems.
The influence of “bots” is highly overstated and is basically just a way of dismissing legitimate criticism
Ah, bootlicker/propaganda bot it is.
Well, that didn’t take long 🙄
Every statement you’ve made has been in bad faith, purely attempting to derail the argument and make readers glaze their eyes over.
I love when people just say shit. Like, you haven’t pointed to any actual reason why anything I’ve said is “bad faith” or “emotional.” Really just rolling out all the go-to methods of categorically dismissing any and all criticism, huh?
Fox News is watched by 60% of the country
Lmao no it isn’t. You got a source for that number?
No, the NEOliberal status quo. We have never been a leftist nation. Our Overton window is very far to the right. Bernie is like a single step to the left of the center. Check out any other major democracy.
Yeah, no shit? Why are you telling me this as if I don’t already know?
Attacking "liberal"ism is straight kremlin propaganda.
Lmao. A liberal is a supporter of capitalism, as a socialist, of course I’m opposed to liberalism. I guess every socialist in the world is a “Kremlin propagandist” in your view.
Why do you think the right-wing, free market “Liberal Democrats” of the UK are called that?
The problem with this is that it assumes Democrats have no agency. Democratic politicians have treated trans issues like those crusty old male Dems who don’t like saying the word abortion.
Dems have never provided loud and full-throated support to trans issues. Go watch the recent John Oliver video on trans sports. There are very very good arguments on why excluding trans people from sports is incredibly anti-scientific and just thinly disguised bigotry. But Democratic politicians have never bothered developing the talking points to defend trans people, like they have for other core issues.
Look at how Kamala responded when asked about trans issues. She didn’t provide full-throated support to trans people. Her reply was simply, “I’ll follow the law.”
Democrats have completely failed to defend trans people. They’ve quietly passed a few state level anti-discrimination laws, but in terms of rhetoric, they’ve completely ceded the space to conservatives. The only mainstream voices talking about trans issues have been the anti-trans bigots. The Democrats have instead just called the whole issue a distraction and hoped it would all just blow away.
They’re right that it is a distraction, an artificial one concocted by Republicans. But that doesn’t mean they can just ignore it.
Propaganda works. And if you don’t do the hard rhetorical work to fight it, it eventually does change public opinion.
Her reply was simply, “I’ll follow the law.”
Well, that’s more than she was willing to do for Gaza.
and now gaza is safe, and everyone clapped.
oh wait, no, trump wants to annex it.
along with greenland and canada and the panama canal.
something tells me these populations would have preferred the ‘I’ll follow the law’ candidate happily vs the ‘i’ll annex your country unilaterally’ shitbag.
but you don’t fucking care about any of them lol. you got your principled win, good for you, and now the trans folks will be persecuted actively, gaza will be torn apart and sold to the highest bidders, and american kids are going to die invading our former allies.
great fucking work, your principles are fantastic.
gaza will be torn apart and sold to the highest bidders
Sorry, now that’s going to happen? What the hell did you think was happening before?
Propaganda works. And if you don’t do the hard rhetorical work to fight it, it eventually does change public opinion.
yeah it never works on you, no sir… we’re all a lot better because everyone stood by their principles and punished the bad biden/harris team, yep, so much better.
those trans people, they’ll be safe now.
those kids in gaza, I’m sure now that trump’s won he’ll make sure they’re safe.
Yeah this all punishing those bad bad dems you’ll show 'em.
stupid fucking liberals, when will they learn their lesson.
working out great.
Trans people were being maimed and killed under Biden too, nothing changed for the trans people in the red states, violating the 14th amendment under Biden’s watch. Trump won’t care, Biden could have cared and chose not to.
Kids in gaza were being murdered and bombed under Biden too, nothing changed for them when a blue guy signs off on bombs or a red guy signs off on bombs. Trump won’t care, Biden could have cared and chose not to.
One is honest in being evil and hating people. It’s in the name “Republican.” The other pretends to tolerate you, and then throws you under the bus come election season to appeal to the greater evil’s voting base, who wants the most evil and won’t vote for a lesser evil.
keep telling yourself they’re the same bud.
lie to yourself all you want. calling it the same is ridiculous and you know it.
ya done fucked the pooch on this one so bad it’s going to wreck the whole fucking thing, but hey, you stuck to your convictions, no matter how short sighted.
gonna block you now, have a wretched life living through the consequences you brought on yourselves.
I voted Harris and said Republicans are worse, but sure man, your bubble won’t pop when Trump uses America’s decades long polices domestically. Sorry I acknowledge trans people outside of the month of November every 4 years.
Removed by mod
We would have been better off without trump. you’ve empowered the fuckwit.
great fucking work.
Removed by mod
So, how large does a minority have to be before they are no longer disposable?
It’s possible to be willing to jump in front of a bullet to save a trans brother and loudly tell everyone to shut the fuck up about sports until we codify the right protections into the constitution etc.
Back channels baby! Back channel fights on controversial topics. Fox News can’t demonize what they’re ignorant of.
But this is assuming this topic is popular on the left and it’s reportedly divisive (again, amongst those who are not hateful scumbags)
If you think that you can change the Constitution through back channels, then I need to know what you’re smoking.
Backchannel until [super]majority agreement achieved before going public!
Back channels! Where you can say you’re doing something but aren’t actually doing shit!
Back channels are the only place where democrats oppose genocide, support unions, try to keep abortion legal, and are diligently working to make cannabis legal.
reminds me of 2003, when the bush regime convinced everyone that their marriage would somehow be worthless if they let the gays get married.
and it worked, the stupid fucks bought it. iraq paid badly for it tho, whoo hoo…
Removed by mod
Can we please put a pause on the focus on social inclusion, and focus on defeating the fascists trying to own the world?
One does not preclude the other. There is energy for both inclusion and revolution.
In fact, revolution is inclusion, is mutual-aid, etc. It’s a requirement. For every person “fighting” there are 10 more people supporting the people and the community that fascism and its shrinking safety nets leave behind
We are probably fighting the same people anyway, but can we please focus on their actual crimes instead of their harmful rhetoric?
Well, no you’re not really an ally yet, far as i can tell. Fix your head. “Trannies” sheesh son
Edit for the thread: probably best to just block this cat, they’re clearly enjoying themselves
Removed by mod
The portion of the population of trans people in the US is the same as the Jewish portion of the population of pre-Nazi Germany.
You would have happily sat by as the Jews were sent to the ovens.
Removed by mod
People’s passports and other basic identification documents are being revoked, the healthcare people need to stay breathing is being targeted for elimination, and the official policy of the administration is that trans people are pedophiles worthy of the death penalty. And you’re here spouting the T slur and dismissing the genocide that is right in front of you.
Yes, you would have happily sat by, and likely cheered on, as Jews were sent to the gas chambers. After all, Jews in pre-Nazi Germany were as unpopular as trans people in the US are now. You would have probably been throwing a few rocks on Kristallnacht yourself.
Can we please put a pause on the focus on social inclusion,
Ok. You’re no longer included.
oop quick note man it’s “trans people” or whatnot will delete this once ya see
Removed by mod
Bashing?
Analogy - black people tell me not to use the n word, am I at a disadvantage for saying “black” instead of a slur? Would be a little odd to ignore feedback when it makes no difference to me… I ain’t married to “n***er” (censored it painlessly)
I’m irreverent as FUCK by the way ^ 10, quick make a dead baby joke (srsly I don’t give a shit about ouchie topics, I do try to be aight to folks tho)
Removed by mod
This is the ideal perspective that leads to optimal outcomes for the general public?
Removed by mod
While Hitler’s in power, gentleman’s agreement to defer discussion on words might make sense. Use the standard accepted lexicon today, get scofflaws out of Washington, return to this topic in happier times
Tankies justifying slave labor “only 10% of industries were built with gulag forces” calling socialist countries that succeeded with market socialism revisionist “Tito is a revisionist prick delaying global Revolution” and then not even batting an eye to the worse state capitalism that USSR and china engaged in “it improved the lives of people! No, it wasn’t authoritarian! And yes, the party members we sent to gulags and killed were DEFINITELY anti revolutionists and not trying to stop the state capitalism that was forming.”
Tankies… calling socialist countries that succeeded with market socialism revisionist “Tito is a revisionist prick delaying global Revolution”
Hate to break it to you but supporting Tito would make you a tankie in the eyes of most people on Lemmy who use the term (though you may get a pass for denouncing others).
Personally, I like a hybrid system. You know the famous Laffer Curve? Laffer was a hack who just used it to justify tax cuts, but he did have a point. At a 0% tax rate and a 100% tax rate, the government is bringing in zero revenue. However, the shaped of the curve in between is unknown. He just arbitrarily assumed that wherever tax rates happened to be at, the optimal rate was lower. I say we actually study it and harness the principle.
Personally, I like the idea of using this principle not just as a crank tool to justify tax cuts, but as a way to maximize redistributive spending. Figure out what tax rate allows you to have the absolute most generous social welfare system possible, and set your tax policies to that rate. I like the free market, but as a practical tool, not for its own sake. I want to keep the free market around…chained to a treadmill, set to the maximum speed possible that won’t cause it to die of exhaustion.
That curve is so stupid on so many levels, wow.
But also, when we talk about socialism, we don’t mean “capitalism but we tax the rich”. A socialist society would not even need taxes, in the liberal sense. When the means of production are controlled democratically by the workers, by extending democracy from the political to the economic, who would you even tax, and who would the money go to?
It’s a big problem that people have been so convinced that capitalism and liberal democracy are the only way to organize society. We can do better!
Removed by mod
This is why leftists consistently lose elections.
Removed by mod
This post could actually be the psy-op. Spread the idea that infighting is happening to then create it
Infighting amongst leftist has literally existed as long as leftist ideology itself has existed. You can’t learn the history of the left without reading about dozens of examples.
And that’s why fascism seems to win. Seems like they can compromise as long as the people the don’t like suffer
It’s less that they can compromise and more that the only policy that they care about is policy that hurts minorities. They’d happily jump on a grenade or march into an oven so long as they can take a liberal and an immigrant with them.
On the other hand, look at how much effort it’s taken for the fascists to get power again. The groundwork for the current administration was started under Reagan and solidified under Bush Jr. They had to take every branch of the government by force to get to where they are because there just aren’t enough of their supporters to actually get them into office without bending the rules until they break.
I’ve seen enough infighting already, if anything this joke is late to the punch.
I see it quite a lot, personally. Democrats are blaming other Pro-palestine democrats for not voting for pro-Israel candidates.
US Dems are center-right, not leftists.
They’re taking about leftists, not Democrats.
Ah sorry, I’m getting the terms confused.
Kamala voters in a nutshell
deleted by creator
I mean, I voted for Kamala, I pushed for the harm reduction ‘‘best hand available’’ strategy… but like… it was predicated on strategically sacrificing Palestine for the ‘‘greater good’’.
Sure, the alternative was sacrificing Palestine plus a bunch of additional minorities and at risk groups…
But it was still sacrificing a minority group. Less of a braindead take, more of a ‘‘you caught us, we did indeed try to strategically sacrifice as few minorities as possible while abandoning those we thought we had no chance to save even if logically a large scale united front would have potentially meant sacrificing no one’’ take.
I still believe it was our best play, but only because a terrifying percentage of folks left of MAGA felt it was a necessary sacrifice.
deleted by creator
If that was your main issue the options were a) accelerate the genocide with no possibility of slowing or stopping it politically b) continue the genocide with the possibility of stopping or slowing it at least being somewhere in the conversation
No. The genocide was just as “accelerated” under the Democrats, and they were just as steadfastly opposed to slowing or stopping it, as over a year of fruitless attempts to get them to showed. The only difference is that you were a genocide denier when it was your team doing it. In that sense, Trump has been better for Gaza, because at least now you people will actually acknowledge what’s happening.
and probably condemned all of Gaza.
You had already condemned all of Gaza on the alter of lesser evilism, and if you’d gotten your way, you’d still be doing genocide denial and apologia.
I absolutely see your point, even employed more or less the same logic when “deciding” who to cast my vote for.
Though I don’t know if I can fully agree with the logic that having no viable alternative somehow removes the reality that it was still a sacrifice. If you need to sacrifice a pawn to win a game off chess, you still had to sacrifice that pawn. Only in this case the pawn was a group of people that we as a nation theoretically collectively could have helped but didn’t.
This isn’t the only case mind you, voting for Obama meant voting “for” drone strikes that killed children. Being a voter in the United States means constantly trying to collectively push for harm reduction as we all collectively agree that “we had no real say in the horrors wrought in our names”.
I guess it just makes me wonder why we all are so sure all that this harm is “required”. When in all reality, we could stand united against it at any time and push for a better world.
But instead trying to do so gets you told you support Fascism and are just causing “leftist in-fighting”, because the largest semi-left-ish voting bloc says there is no other way. So you just shut up and fall in line lest something worse happens.
It is this cold logic that made me only talk about how bad Trump would be on Gaza, and vote for Kamala, knowing full well that I was still abandoning Palestinians to their fate.
Anyways, sorry for the rant. I agree whole heartedly that voting for Kamala was the only option to stop Trump, and that doing so was the least horrific option most American’s could agree on. The reality of those facts just make me sick to my stomach sometimes.
ETA: To clarify, knowing you have no chance of winning and still pushing for voters to abstain or go 3rd party is also sacrificing minorities regardless of if it was done for moral or strategic reasons, just as you said. I guess I just get mad at the whole world when our options are so shit.
Removed by mod
now that I think of it, it works both ways, you could use it to criticise people who vote for Harris as she obviously didn’t have great policies on things like Palestine.
Or you could use it to criticise people who don’t vote because then they let trump win which is far worse for minorities than Harris.
why would people ever vote for Biden/Harris when they established the legal basis for Palestinians getting deported and mask bans being enacted? they could vote for the proud fascists instead of the fascism-lite.
I also hate the rhetoric pushed by blue MAGA that equates not voting with letting Trump win. I can’t recall a single time in history where voting has defeated fascism. Also the fact that the people most impacted by Trump can’t vote or don’t have accommodations in place to be able to vote.
Couple examples of elections preventing facism:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_legislative_election,_1974 – Marked the end of military junta and blocked far-right resurgence
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_presidential_election,_2002 – Voters united to block Jean-Marie Le Pen, far-right candidate, in second round
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_presidential_election,_2016 – Voters narrowly rejected far-right FPÖ candidate Norbert Hofer
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_general_election,_2022 – Lula defeated Jair Bolsonaro, preventing further slide into authoritarianism
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_parliamentary_election,_2023 – Opposition coalition defeated Law and Justice party, halting authoritarian drift
Theoretically, anytime a facist runs and loses an election and doesn’t subsequently stage a coup into power, voting prevents facism.
why did the system let them run in the first place? this leads back to my original point, electoralism and liberalism are inherently dangerous and normalize fascism by allowing people to vote them into power just like they did for Hitler.
it makes as much sense as “the marketplace of ideas”. we don’t debate or “vote out” fascists, we use force
Who decides what ideas are and aren’t okay? Who decides which ideas are bad enough to use force against? What’s to stop those in charge of making those decisions from being compromised, or plants, or changing their minds, or having morals counter to the morals of their society, seeing as the voting clearly cannot be trusted. All it takes is fascism and conservatism to quietly seep into government and now we’ve created the perfect framework for them to shift the targets to those they oppose.
This week, trans people have been declared anti-party. Next week it’s disabled people. Tune in the week after for nationalism.
This is like building a big gun to protect ourselves from fascists but not putting any checks to make sure it’s wielded in the best interests of the people.
what makes you think someone against electoralism believes in having a state?
That’s a fair point, but the question still stands. In a stateless society, who decides when violence is appropriate and which ideas deserve violence? What differentiates such individuals from the state, seeing as they are acting in lieu of one, enforcing certain ideals and rules via violence? My questions still stand.
equates not voting with letting Trump win
This is MAGA-levels of denying reality. Trump got more votes than Kamala. Kamala did not get enough votes. Bitching and belly aching about Kamala lead to lower voter turnout for her. Therefore Trump won.
If and when the revolution happens, I can trust that blowhards like you won’t even be there. You’ll just be here, terminally online, waiting for the day you get to tell our piles of ashes “I told you so.”
i always get a little chuckle when blue maga resorts to using dogwhistles like terminally online instead of calling me a disabled slur. if you wanna support fascism at least don’t be a coward 😘
blue maga
🤡
Removed by mod
Bitching and belly aching about Kamala lead to lower voter turnout for her.
Kamala lead to lower turnout for Kamala. Although a lot of blame can be placed on Biden for not dropping out sooner. He should’ve been a one-term president.
Bitching and belly aching about Kamala lead to lower voter turnout for her.
Kamala decided genocide and fracking were more important then her constituents. That’s what led to the lower turnout.
I voted for her and was vocal about holding the line and ignoring all the stupidity they were showing, but it’s completely insane to try to spin the lost as anyone else’s fault.
I can’t recall a single time in history where voting has defeated fascism.
Fascists mostly start by winning legitimate elections. Defeating fascism with votes would just look like Clinton winning the election instead of Trump.
You might as well say that you can’t recall a single time when having a visible security presence stopped a robbery.
You’re being absolutely disingenuous. If voting could stop fascists, then in 2020 when Joe Biden got more votes than Donald Trump, he would have been president. There would have been a democrat in office from 2021-2024. And your fantasy world sounds nice, but it’s not what happened here in the real world.
If voting could stop fascists, then in 2020 when Joe Biden got more votes than Donald Trump, he would have been president. There would have been a democrat in office from 2021-2024. And your fantasy world sounds nice, but it’s not what happened here in the real world.
Is this some kind of advanced sarcasm? Because I’m not understanding what you’re trying to say.
the people most impacted by Trump can’t vote or don’t have accommodations in place to be able to vote.
So we’re strategically sacrificing minorities. Got it.
why would people ever vote for Biden/Harris
*Gestures at everything*
looking at you, Sarah McBride 👀
Is that the youtube poop person?
Heh Penis Prager
This is the fart side shat
