Spyke
hansoloreply
lemm.ee

It's not "falling apart." It's being intentionally dismantled.

Rubio's statement at his conformation hearing was basically "the Post WWII order isn't working for us, so we're ending it."

94

Right from when Constantin co-opted the Jesus movement to use it for state control of people's behavior.

6

Nah. Parts of it, sure. But a substantial portion from top to bottom sincerely believes the fairy tale. We're primed to have an old-fashioned power struggle between The Church and The King.

1
lemm.ee

falling apart ➡️actively being destroyed since RBG passed away

89
Glytchreply
lemmy.world

If only she had retired when there was a chance to replace her with a progressive instead of hanging in until she died.

83

"Progressive"!? I wouldn't even be that optimistic. All she had to do was retire when her health was failing and Democrats could get someone fair and nonpartisan appointed.

17

Obviously a very intelligent woman yet so fucking stupid at the end. I wonder if she wasn't already in the clutches of dementia when she decided Hilary was certain to win.

16

Sadly that's what power does to people. It's more addictive than crack, they can't let go.

8
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

One, she should of retired under Obama, and two, the US has failed as a country since bush stole the 2000 election and nobody did shit about it.

35
Bacanoreply
lemmy.world

Didn't Obama have a chance to name a justice and kicked the can until Trump got there? These clowns are working for the same corporate circus.

Some say the US failed when it allowed Nixon to get away Scott free.

-4
gruereply
lemmy.world

Didn’t Obama have a chance to name a justice and kicked the can until Trump got there?

Why the fuck are you blaming that on Obama instead of McConnell? That's some fucking blatant spin.

24
leadorereply
lemmy.world

Wow, so history is already being rewritten to change it into Obama fucking around and not bothering to nominate a Justice (the fondest dream of every president), instead of knowing that McConnell who was Senate majority leader (repubs controlled the Senate), blocke it and refused to allow a vote on Obama's nominee (Merrick Garland). JFC, it wasn't even that long ago and people have already forgotten, or never bothered to pay attention in the first place, or believed some propaganda they came across. We're so doomed.

14

Hand shaking meme:

Fascists 🤝 Leftists

Center: Using misinformation to blame Democrats for literally everything.

Leftists need to grow some damn braincells and accept responsibility for putting the US in this situation.

Russia loves how easily manipulated they are.

3
AppleTeareply
lemmy.zip

If you wanna get mad at Obama, he campaigned on closing Gitmo, but did nothing while in office. You know, that same facility Trump is currently using to detain people.

6

Congress blocked him on straight closure but they went from 250 to 41 detained there under his administration. Trump stopped all closure progress, Biden got the number down to 15, and now we have Trump again.

"Did nothing" is worse than exaggeration, it's not like you have to lie to make Obama look like the massive disappointment he was for progressives.

6
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

And the democrats did nothing to stop the blatant power grab. They always act powerless and republicans do whatever the fuck they want.

-1

The Democratic Party is the Washington Generals. They're part of the show, but they're not there to win.

4
Bizzlereply
lemmy.world

Not punishing the Confederacy, in my opinion, is where this country went to hell.

17

Agreed. They should have hanged the Southern elite, and occupied the former confederate states under martial law for at least three generations.

8

history without President Andrew Johnson, so much could have been different

3
Fungahreply
lemmy.world

In our hubris we put our dicks away. We were warned of the consequences and we didn't listen. Indeed, the only way forward is forward is, once again, DICKS OUT FOR HARAMBE!

16

actively being destroyed since RBG passed away

The Nixon administration.

14
archchanreply
lemmy.ml

Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Though I'd hardly signal her death out as the defining factor or turning point of the US's decline...

30
lemmy.world

Some would say Reagan, but personally I think it was doomed from the wild west days. Rugged individualism bred the selfish nature that's led to where it is today.

11

In theory, if Ruth Bader Ginsberg chose to retire when she was sick, instead of continuing to act on her principles until she died in office, we wouldn’t have a Conservative dominated Supreme Court. It would have changed who got to appoint her successor.

9
lemm.ee

say what you want about the brits, but they wouldn’t have voted for brexit twice.

78
acargitzreply
lemmy.ca

They kept voting for the conservatives for a while after Brexit. They kept voting for Boris fucking Johnson.

90
lemm.ee

To be fair, we don't have only two options. The Greens, Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru, and SNP were all opposed to Brexit.

42
lemmy.world

You could say the same about the US though, but we still have the same shitty voting system that ultimately boils down to 2 parties barring massive upheaval.

3

Not at all, look at the linked map. We've only one party in ultimate control which flicks between the big two but we don't have only 2 parties with any viable chance at politics at all. The SNP etc, despite having no executive power, still manage to influence political thought. The same can't really be said for the USA in any meaningful way.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_election#/media/File:2024_United_Kingdom_general_election_-_Result.svg

6

Except of Scotland none of these got enough votes, I guess it wasn't important enough to sway most voters at that time.

3
sushibowlreply
feddit.nl

You might think that, but the United States exited from the Paris agreement on climate change mitigation twice: Trump first withdrew in November of 2020, then Biden rejoined in February of 2021, and now Trump is withdrawing for the second time.

34

You underestimate Putin's psyops and overestimate people's intelligence.

20

Eh, they just haven't had a second chance yet. That kind of bigotry enhanced stupidity doesn't go away easily.

13

You say that, but don't forget they rejected alternative vote (abolishing FPTP) then voted for Brexit

6
fedia.io

The Roman Empire fell because of a series of invasions by “barbarian tribes.”

I cannot take this author seriously after they wrote this. It was, you know, just a little more complicated than that.

73
Treczoksreply
lemmy.world

I don't think the author meant that seriously. You see the quote around "barbarian tribes"? I think he considered this notion sarcastically, as this is "barbarian tribes" is often used by people less knowledgeble abou the topic.

And for the US to implode within a few weeks, there must have been considerable rot inside. I am really not sure where precisely it started, but I consider Bretton Woods (both the system and it's breakdown), Nixon with the final breakdown of honor in politics, Reagan and his "trickle-down economy" lie Reageanomics, and Bush Junior with his Gulf War key milestones in that process. Notice a trend? They were all Republicans. That Trump puts the final nail into the US' coffin is only consequential.

14

Isn’t it crazy for Nixon to be a point of honor? Recent presidents have gotten away with a lot worse, but there is no resignation in dishonor, there are no consequences, nobody cares any more

This is actually a big part of what keeps pushing me farther left. The party of righteousness, fairness, strict legal enforcement, strictly adhering to the constitution, was always dishonest but they’ve completely dropped any pretenses in favor of outright criminality, corruption, throwing out the constitution, enriching their corporate benefactors. They no longer even pretend that oppression is about family values anymore or that we will be trickled upon

2
skibidireply
lemmy.world

It's a rather complex topic, but the short answer isn't barbarian invasion.

The simplest correct answer is the Roman elite became less interest in preserving the Roman state and more interested in increasing their own personal wealth and influence.

74

What's wild is that "being Roman" persisted a lot longer than the tax system and patronage networks that had collapsed. It wasn't until a large portion of the people who thought of themselves as "Roman" were invaded by the Eastern Roman Empire that the Roman identity was broken up, to be replaced by the regional identities that people rallied around to defend themselves.

I feel like if the ERE's leaders had taken a different approach, they could have stitched the Western Empire back together, but they broke it.

7
rabberreply
lemmy.ca

Also people stopped having enough kids

-8

That’s potentially a global problem. It’s not specific to the US as long as we keep making ourselves an attractive destination for immigrants and keep welcoming them ……….. crap

1

define "enough kids" for me please.

do you mean enough kids that their parents can't feed them off their own little farm, and the kids had to be sent to the cities as slave / poor workers, so that the machines can keep churning for the sake of profit?

edit: sorry but i'm pissed and angry now. "not enough kids" like what? not enough kids to make sausage of them? not enough kids to burn them in the kettle of capitalism? not enough kids to flood the labor market with undervalued workers?

i tell you what, it's capitalist propaganda that "people should have more kids", because they think it makes the wages fall. what it actually does is create poverty, mass unemployment, working poor, and civil unrest. may the empire be intoxicated by its own poison. may the corporations fall due to the civil unrest that they helped create.

0

Like the birth rate was too low overall.

Of course more people makes wages fall. That's why immigration is so popular in western world.

2

It all started with the reform known as the Pax Romana. Rome stopped waging wars that kept the influx of slaves, which were fundamental for their economic model. They didn’t realize the implications of such a decision and didn’t design a viable alternative in time.

2
Randomgalreply
lemmy.ca

It was the barbarian tribes, the kids are just being pedantic lmao

-19

it took 100 or so years to really collapse and effective organization and leadership were big factors in that process. They didn't lose a war and poof, everything was over, they were always fighting several other civilizations for dominance, they started consistently losing when the soldiers started showing up in rags.

16
lemmy.world

Rome eventually fell, All Empires do eventually

60

A more apt comparison is Sparta. The bulk of the work was done by (wage-) slaves, the citizens lived in constant paranoia of an upheaval, constantly fighting real and imaginary enemies both domestic and foreign. Persia (Russia) worked in the shadows to undermine the state, and their frenemies the Athenians (Europeans) are viewed with distrust and contempt. Other city states (China, Israel, the Arab countries) would flip-flop their allegiance depending on circumstance.

2
lemm.ee

Not fast enough. Look at what it did to Gaza and realize that it can still do that to anywhere else it wants.

44
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

What happened in Gaza is a taste of what the undesirables in America are going to face. Especially Israel’s AI targeting tech.

That’s what democrat supporters don’t understand. We can’t accept genocide anywhere, not just for moral and ethical reasons but because genocide will come for us too.

18
lemmy.world

If you're in the US and voted anything but Democrat, or didn't vote at all, then this is your fucking fault.

Fuck the democrats, fuck Kamala. They suck. But look what your rigid morality has made.

11
lemmy.world

All Harris had to do was stand for Palestine, or even something basic like healthcare for all. She would have won and it wouldnt have even been close. But she didnt. You had an extremely unpopular neoliberal that you thought was going to beat Trump?

Was it worth it to throw the election because of zero progressive policy?

10
lemmy.world

No it was not worth it. Biden should have stuck to one term president, there should have been a primary. Kamala was so embarrassing with her line of "fundamentally, nothing will change" when asked how she would be different from Biden.

I don't care for the Democrats. Kamala's campaign was misguided. Continued unwavering support for fascist apartheid Israel. Democrats always reaching right for more votes while the left is right fucking here if you'll throw us a goddamn bone!

That being said, if you didn't vote for her you have literally caused what is happening now.

Palestine saved! USA destroyed! Mission Accomplished!

18
lemmy.world

Run on healthcare and you win, the dems cant even do that yet you blame the people and not the system, pathetic.

Keep burying your head in the sand and see how much better it will get

10

bidens no surprise billing was a significant improvement to obama care. they did not run on it as a single issue but its nuts that anyone would not want to keep stuff like that going as opposed to when trump was last in and kicked out one of the legs.

4
lemmy.world

I'm wide awake. I used to travel for work and now I'm staying home so I have my rifle ready.

Everyone knows what Trump is! I feel like I'm screaming into the void. His cult loves what he is, the other oligarchs love what co prez Elon is up to!

"Blue maga, genocide Joe" has disappeared because it was an op. Leaving us with the useful idiots who parroted that shit.

As I've said several times I hate the fucking democrats! They learned absolutely nothing from when the republicans were the opposition. Do nothing, sit on your hands, threaten to shutdown the government. Over and over.

If you voted for anyone but Kamala you knew what Trump was going to be. Got them clean hands. Hope they stay clean of others' blood and don't end up catching your own life spilling through your fingers when the SS shows up.

4

“Blue maga, genocide Joe” has disappeared because it was an op. Leaving us with the useful idiots who parroted that shit.

No we haven't, we're absolutely still here. And no, it was not "an op", you conspiracy theorist.

0
Jhexreply
lemmy.world

All Harris had to do was stand for Palestine, or even something basic like healthcare for all. She would have won and it wouldnt have even been close

Because the alternative stood for Palestine or better healthcare for Muricans, right? Makes sense...

1
lemmy.world

So was it worth it to throw the election to stand with genocide? You were never going to beat Trump with an unpopular neoliberal candidate.

-5
Jhexreply
lemmy.world

I don't know, was it?

you now get the genocide (even worse actually) and a fascist as president.... good job

4

Then the dems should run on something, like healthcare. Otherwise it's a dying (dead) party.

5

even worse actually

No, you were just denying and downplaying the extent of the genocide when it was your team doing it.

-1

You really think Palestine would have pushed Kamala over?

Most Americans don’t even know what’s going on over there.

TBH I don’t think any policy would’ve mattered, Kamala’s problem was they campaigned like it’s 1950 instead of 2024. Look at any poll exit interview, and you’ll see pretty much everyone has their reality completely warped, and whatever Kamala was proposing did not matter.

1
lemmy.world

You are hallucinating. Harris is a woman and she's black. The racist misogynist US will not elect a woman as POTUS in the years I've got left. Much less a black woman. I saw an interview with some 2020 Biden voters from Philly. When asked if they were going to vote for Harris, they all said something along the lines of "No, it's too much power to give a woman.". They'd rather have a treasonous felon as POTUS than a competent and comparatively honest woman. It's morally laudable that the Dems will run minority candidates, but in these racist misogynistic United States, it's a guaranteed loss.

-5
lemmy.world

Yeah the racism here is beyond fucked, and agree was also another reason she lost. How am I hallucinating? If she stood for anything I said she could have really won. You cant be that unpopular and stand for nothing and expect to win.

6
lemmy.world

If she stood for anything? How about if you read what she wanted to do, you’d not say something so stupid. Granted, it was damn near impossible to find what she wanted to do by the mass media.

1
lemm.ee

OK, you get 4 more years of Biden 2.0, 2028 comes, what's the plan for the elections against Trump 2.0?

0
lemmy.world

Every day, I wake up and hope Trump has died from the most humiliating and painful natural causes imaginable.

10

Once he's hollowed out the entire country, he will do some random thing and someone will give him an award for it. Once he's done masturbating (imagine someone passing you a blunt), he's going to enact his ultimate dream. He's going to get the SS to pick him up ten big macs and ten filet o fish. He will assemble his ultimate favorite sandwich, eat about half of it, and pass out. Two days later he will die trying to take a shit.

3
lemm.ee

I did specify Trump 2.0. It's not Trump, it's the entire Republican party that's gone mask off

6

It's everyone, regardless of politics even, with their mask off.

Even my sentence structure is lawless.

-2

Cry about it. It’s the democrats fault that they love sucking Israel’s cock so much that theyre willing to throw an election to a fascist.

THEY DONT CARE ABOUT WINNING THEY CARE ABOUT PROTECTING CAPITALISTS

-1
finderreply
lemmy.world

No matter how much you want it, the world is not going to destroy Israel on behalf of Iran the people of Palestine.

-8

It's happened before with the South African apartheid government. States change all the time. They're getting increasingly isolated, their leader is wanted by the Hague, they can't vacation abroad, they're being berated on social media in every app, etc. Not saying the time is soon, but people are starting to see Israel for what they are, and it won't help them.

4

Not for long. Their economy is gonna tank soon because they are starting trade wars.

13
feddit.nl

If there was anything the US was good at, it would be marketing. Creating the image that it's the greatest nation on earth, influencing mainstream media to tell their version of the story, keeping up appearances of a strong nation.

The moment these smoke clears and the mirrors break, that is when we see the real US. I think we have Trump to thank to show it to us.

42

The education system has one goal: teach people critical thinking. In the US they deliberately did the opposite, that's why there's so many idiots. That and the fact that mass media is amazing at spewing propaganda

15

Well, you have to drink the kool-aid because there's lead in the tap water.

7
LouNekoreply
lemmy.world

Once, the US was actualy very food at funding innovation. The shit that Bell Labs alone discovered are things that shape the world today. But in the nature of US capatialism, if discovery can't turn I to profit, why bother? It's easier to market 2nd or 3rd place as 1st, then to actually be the 1st, especially if the Chinese are constantly breathing down you neck.

13

One of the stories about the US that I find inspirational is how, during the space race, NASA relied on various experts from somewhat unconventional places. It's what I always think about at times like this, because it's a snippet of what I consider to be genuine greatness, amongst all the propaganda and geopolitical awfulness.

The first example is how the Apollo spacesuits were sewn by seamstresses from an underwear company. This was because they needed craftspeople skilled enough to be able to reliably cut fabric and sew seams within a margin of error of a fraction of a millimetre. Whereas in regular garment manufacturing, you can typically tear out incorrect stitches and try again, this wasn't possible for the spacesuit, so they needed to be perfect first time; many of the fabrics they were working on were so cutting edge that they needed to be locked away in a safe when not working on them. Synthetic fabrics were still fairly new, and this partly explains why an underwear manufacturer had seamstresses who were up to this challenge — the group of sewists who worked on the spacesuit were probably among the most experienced people in the world at sewing synthetic fabrics, and this experience allowed them to be an active part of the design and manufacture process for the spacesuits.

Another example from the same era is when NASA engineers were having difficulty getting the honeycomb insulating material they were using to adhere to the shuttle. This part of the program was happening near Seal Beach, in California, and when it was discovered that the local surfers were already experienced in using a material like this for their surfboards, NASA hired a bunch of the surfers to work with their engineers to figure out the problem. There's a quote I absolutely adore from Donald Binns, a Project Engineer with North American Aviation^[1]:

"[The surfers] did a great job with it. The only downside of those guys was that when the surf was up, there was a big absentee problem — they were out there doing their trick."

I just find this incredibly sweet, because it captures both the strength and the difficulty of working with diverse skill sets. If ever there was greatness to be found in the US, we can see it in stories like this. I think this spirit of innovation has been lost over the years, due to the pressures of capitalism on individuals in particular.

Edit: forgot to add link for quote citation

[1]: Quote is from episode 1 of the 2008 documentary "Moon Machines", accessible via the internet archive. Insulation section starts at around 16:45 https://archive.org/details/moon-machines/Moon+Machines+Part+1+The+Saturn+V+Rocket.mp4

2

Like, as much as i have to complain about the US meddled in other countries, i have to disagree that they only were good at marketing.

Lots of technology have been developed in the US, primarily computer chips and everything that has to do with it, including the internet. That can be a good invention, depending on what you use it for.

You should be fair and give credit where due, and part of the US' power was because of technological proficiency. Of course, other countries also achieved good technological developments, like the Chinese with their solar panels, and the Europeans with lots and lots of scientific groundwork and cultural developments.

3
lemmy.world

It's like watching an old friend sink into senility. The person you know is slowly being replaced by something else and you are powerless to stop it.

40
Azalreply
pawb.social

Living in it is like that individual, but that individual is head of the household, has all the money and keys, has locked the door and is wildly armed.

30
lemmy.ca

I feel bad for the innocent Americans who are gonna suffer... people who honestly didn't ask for or want any of this.

39
the_qreply
lemm.ee

We may not have wanted any of this, but none of us are innocent. We all play our parts whether that's the sociopathic capitalist or the empathetic commoner, with the consequences of our actions/inaction causing harm and suffering to the world. The very devices we're having this discussion on were created with suffering.

6

We've collectively destroyed this entire planet - that was intended to sustain us all - so none of us are innocent, except the children who've no idea yet what right and wrong even mean. As for the rest of us, there are very real degrees of guilt and also sincere ignorance, and also repentance... if not, we would all deserve to just lay down and let evil roll over us.

6
lemmy.world

I mean the conservatives definitely asked for this, as did the democrats who didn’t vote, and the majority of Americans who don’t vote at all.

3
lemmy.ca

So you don't believe there are any Americans who don't deserve to suffer for what's happening?

2

It was something like 48.5% of voters, maybe over 49% depending how you count third party voters

2

I mean, everyone who voted for Hillary/Biden in primaries wanted this.

They would rather have Trump than Bernie, so that's what they got.

-3
lemmy.world

I feel like saying it's normal for empires to fall due to external causes is not accurate? It's usually the exception. Maybe the external factor is the final kick, knocking over a rotting house of cards, but the cause is almost always division, internal conflict, or unsustainable growth. An empire is much more likely to collapse under its own weight than it is to have Alexander the Great kick its teeth in. The Ottoman Empire was called "The Sick Man of Europe" for a reason.

37
lemmy.world

It's absolutely not. It's their very internal policies that force them into destroying themselves. They start believing their own propaganda. For both Rome and Constantinople it was wasting huge amounts of it's power on fighting Persia and trying to extend its borders in ways that outran it's logistics capacity. For the Ottomans it was the rise of nationalism and their ham fisted attempts to combat it. For the modern Western imperialists it was the base fact that direct colonial rule was always a monetary drain for the state and only made businesses money. Making these stupid decisions was because each empire had created a web of political commitments and internal propaganda that was unsustainable.

18
lemmy.world

The Roman Empire took centuries to eventually collapse and a lot of it was corruption, hyperinflation, and complacency. It's happening here but at a much quicker rate.

12

Maybe the external factor is the final kick, knocking over a rotting house of cards, but the cause is almost always division, internal conflict, or unsustainable growth.

Rome was a place where power consolidated, but the various eras might as well have been different empires.

The system collapsed, dissolved, reconstituted, and expanded several times during the 1400 years it existed.

Same with China. 5000 years of history emerging from Beijing, but each dynasty was distinct.

Even the US has reinvented itself several times over by now. Antebellum America might as well have been a different country. New Deal America was radically different from it's Coolidge Era predecessor. Reagan's America became it's own thing in turn. Trumpian America is a new thing, not an end point.

2
lemmy.ml

Didn't Constantinople outlast the Persian empire by quite a while?

2

They did, and were so weak and ineffectual afterwards that they even got sacked by the crusaders. It was essentially a long decline.

2

Anacyclosis, Polybius was motivated by the fall of the Hellenistic society. When Rome conquered Greece it was unfathomable to them that they could ever even be conquered, let alone so quickly. They were swept aside in such a rapid fashion that it was a cultural shock.

The US has this image of being unassailable, but the reality is that apathy is the greatest enemy we have ever faced. We have no faith in our leadership, and we're short on supply of actual warriors despite what the keyboard warriors would have everyone thing.

All the gun toting rednecks driving large pickup trucks shrink when they're actually confronted with anything, and we've devolved into a system of cowards.

The day America stands up and puts the ruling class heads on spikes, that's the day the rest of the world should fear, but the rest of the world can just live comfortably knowing we're all weak and worthless.

Seriously, just look up "peopleofwalmart", that's the insanely low bar we go by these days.

4

but the cause is almost always division, internal conflict, or unsustainable growth.

I refer to it as atrophy. Once it becomes easier and more profitable for the empire to exploit its own populace instead of others, this is what we get.

3
Bloomcolereply
lemm.ee

LOL empire. They haven't lasted for even a century. It will be a footnote in history.

-7

This fucker just swings at everyone.

I think someone shit on their waffle this morning.

6
lemmy.world

As it should. The rise of fascism shouldn't go unnoticed. The United States is capable of better but, the rot of capital needs to be expelled first.

37

It's a cultural problem which is why Americans would rather have Trump over Bernie.

Even liberals prefer this because Trump isn't going to make any effort to reduce the disparity in wealth.

0
lemmy.ca

Its Been falling apart for decades already, it's just being torn apart faster now

29
kroniskreply
lemmy.world

As someone watching from the outside, there's definitely a qualitative difference these past few weeks. It's very obvious there's no adults left in the room anymore.

43

It’s very obvious there’s no adults left in the room anymore.

Yes, this generation has refused to grow up. We value avoiding conflict above all else.

It's sad. Anyone who tries to legitimately fight back is considered the bad guy.

0

Trump is creating a lot of enemies. Even turning allies into enemies. The reputation usually mostly recovers when there's a Democrat in the WH, but since American voters walked right back into the same chaos again, eyes wide open, it's going to be a lot harder to recover this time around. There's just very little trust and credibility left.

29
lemmy.world

Not falling so much as being torn apart. We are in no way doing this voluntarily

27
lemmy.ca

They voted for the madman twice. This time around he even got a plurality. Not everyone volunteered, but enough to make it happen.

5
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I know it's conspiracy adjacent but I would be very unsurprised to find out Leon helped Trump steal the election.

1

It wasn’t “stolen,” votes weren’t fraudulent. Probably. It was influenced.

It turns out, propaganda is extremely effective on a social media addicted population with no regulation to curve any of it.

1

Americans would rather have Trump than Bernie, so that's what they got.

Anything to avoid reducing the disparity in wealth.

0

In just over three weeks, Donald Trump has been able to redefine the United States’ position in the world from a global power to an international outcast.

This is exactly what people uttering "Make America Great Again" were asking for when they chose Trump to be the figurehead. None should be surprised.

26

America's wealth is tied up in perceptions. When the rest of the world views America the way I currently view Tesla, we're going to have some very big economic problems. And of course we already have huge security and safety issues as blow back for turning on our allies. It's impossible for me to imagine this isn't all a deliberate attempt to destroy America. And we all know which world leader Trump worships who is very very interested in causing that.

25

The United States is imploding. The reign of Donald Trump is not only challenging and threatening the very foundations of its constitutional democracy, it is calling into question the U.S.’s post-World War II hegemonic role. Empires or hegemonic powers rise and fall. Often they are defeated by emerging powers. Sometimes their decline takes place over time. But rarely do they self-destruct as spectacularly as the U.S. is doing. The U.S. implosion is dramatic in its intensity and rapidity. In just over three weeks, Donald Trump has been able to redefine the United States’ position in the world from a global power to an international outcast. Despite whatever military and economic power the U.S. still has, its image and global leadership have been undermined by President Trump’s foreign policy decisions.

I just want to take a short, though probably unpopular, note that while you present it as something negative, to some people on the world, that's actually something positive. There are communities all over the world who have suffered tremendously through the US' global hegemony; and these people (me included) are sometimes actually in a very good mood about the news that have been coming the last few weeks.

21
lemmy.world

The US falling apart would implicate that it was once whole, which it never was. It is just reaping the harsh fruits of half a century of aggressive 2 party campaigning.

16
chaogomureply
lemmy.world

All due to Ordinal voting. First Past the Post is the simplest Ordinal system, and completely broken if you have more than two candidates.

The only solution is a Cardinal voting system. Cardinal systems can handle two or twenty candidates without issues. Approval or STAR are the best options.

The sad part is, in 1780, First Past the Post was the only system available. It had to be adopted before mathematicians could look at it and say, hey shits broken.

The first was Condorcet. A French Mathematician who noticed the first problem with Plurality in the 1780s. But if you know your history, you'll know that being a French Nobleman in the 1780s was not the healthiest thing to be, regardless of how fucking based you were.

As an aside here, Condorcet was fucking based. He was antislavery, and argued for full suffrage for both women and the slaves that he wanted to free. He argued for universal education for all, and thought it would solve so many problems.

Anyway the next guy who saw the problem with Plurality was another French Mathematician and political scientist named Durverger. He proved that First Past the Post voting will always result in two party dominance. And he proved this in the 1950s. So not much to be done about it.

The next guy to put his name to voting science was Kenneth Arrow, an American who in the 1970s, showed that all Ordinal voting systems were flawed.

But again, the data came in far too late to easily fix things.

So here we are. The saying goes, the best time to plant a tree was 20 year ago, the next best time is now. So call your local representative and ask them to sponsor a switch of voting system to Approval or STAR.

11
lemmy.world

No technical system of voting resolved the problem of monopolized media and a population stuffed full of nationalist propaganda.

Implement Cardinal voting at the Vatican and you'll still end up with a Catholic Pope

3
chaogomureply
lemmy.world

Fun fact, the Vatican did use Cardinal voting (Approval) for a few centuries, until some rich assholes took over.

But aside from that, your comment is useless.

The reason why the media can control the narrative is because of the voting system. See, it's super easy to control two sides. Two teams.

But if you have a dozen teams, it's much harder to control the narrative. And with a dozen teams, some of them will be on our side and will break up the media monopoly. Hell, we had Trust busters under or current system, we can have them again.

But I guess defeatism is comfortable for certain people. But it doesn't get anything done, so fuck that shit.

5
lemmy.world

The reason why the media can control the narrative is because of the voting system.

The media exists independent of the electoral system.

you have a dozen teams, it’s much harder to control the narrative.

ESPN would argue otherwise.

defeatism is comfortable for certain people

It's only defeatism when you assume Cardinal voting is the only viable solution.

Obviously, that's not the case.

-5

ESPN, famous for controlling who goes to the Super Bowl... Oh wait, they have no control over that because there are 32 teams.

They can't even control who fans cheer for. Again, because there are 32 teams. And dozens of sports that aren't football.

0
slrpnk.net

I agree that the media landscape is a huge problem that won't be directly solved by a different voting system, but I think that a changed voting system is a reasonable step towards solving the wider constellation of problems. A fairer voting system is a far more straightforward thing to solve than the media problem, which is probably better understood as a web of lots of different, but tightly linked problems.

If we imagined a world where the media/propaganda problem were solved, then that wouldn't make First Past The Post (FPTP) voting fair i.e. it would still be something we'd need to solve.

Of course, this isn't an either/or thing. I agree that we shouldn't expect Cardinal voting (or any other alternative voting system) to magically solve this fucked up situation, because problems like media will still exist. However, I do think that FPTP is reinforcing the problem of media monopolies and nationalistic popularism. Even if implementing Cardinal voting (or similar) doesn't directly improve the media problem, it would change the shape of the problem, such that we could tackle it on new fronts.

3

I think that a changed voting system is a reasonable step towards solving the wider constellation of problems.

If we're forming a governing body from scratch, I agree. No reason to start the democratic process suboptimally.

But we've experimented with alternative voting schemes in the US before. Eric Adams was elected under Cardinal Voting, ffs. The rationalist theory of voting doesn't work in districts or elections where one candidate has an outsized war chest or media presence.

However, I do think that FPTP is reinforcing the problem of media monopolies and nationalistic popularism.

I would argue it's a symptom more than a problem. Systems that favor incumbents and reinforce entrenched interests are going to be championed by incumbents.

Past that, I don't really need ten mid candidates. I need one good one, with a coalition ready to rally behind them. Raising the intensity of competition and the number of competing factions makes for better TV drama than an election system.

1

I think the biggest problem I can cook up is that it's sort of hard to campaign on cardinal voting, especially at the federal level, because it's sort of an apolitical and nerdy topic that people don't know about and don't give a shit about. You'd probably have to campaign on giving people healthcare, or, responding to the economy, or any number of other issues that might come up in that particular cycle. You'd have to pass it as a total footnote to something else, which, at the federal level, probably wouldn't happen, precisely because it would threaten the power monopoly that both parties have as different sides of the same cardboard cutout. You'd get no votes congressionally to get that passed. You'd probably have to do a bunch of legislation before that, leading up to that, probably you'd have to get rid of citizen's united, yadda yadda. If you were the president theoretically you could add a lot of rhetorical pressure to specific members of congress, but that's more useful if you have like, a narrow margin, if you're outweighed by most then you'd probably ironically end up doing a lot of what trump is doing right now even though he has a majority.

1

I'd say Direct Voting is the best solution if you care about democracy.

This "representative" bullshit needs to go.

2

Article about how the states is falling apart.

Uses picture of a house no middle class family could reasonably afford.

15
lemm.ee

In three weeks, Donald Trump has imploded whatever positive image the United States might have had internationally.

If you were born in the last three weeks it may seem that way, but Joe Biden did the US' reputation abroad no favors, nor did Trump 1. Obama is less bad than those on either side of him, but his admin at best still represents stagnation, as he failed to address Bush's crimes and added to them in places like Libya. And before him was the guy who really got the ball rolling downhill after the high point that was the Clinton administration, Bush Jr.

14
Obelixreply
feddit.org

Just to give you the perspective from Germany: Reagan is viewed as an idiot, everybody forgot about Bush Senior, people kind of loved Clinton, viewed GWB as an idiot and warmonger, Obama is seen as a great guy and Binden was also not viewed negatively by most people. Trump, however, is seen as the dangerous clown that he is.

16

Same here, in the more”European” parts of the US

2
kent_ehreply
lemmy.ca

Obama is less bad than those on either side of him, but his admin at best still represents stagnation, as he failed to address Bush's crimes

Just a reminder that it's a lot faster, easier and cheaper to break things than it is to build or repair them. A "bull in a China shop" like Trump can do a lot of damage in a few seconds, but it takes years to repair.

Bush had 8 years to cause the damage he caused, it's not reasonable to expect the next administration to fix all that in the same amount of time, no matter how well intentioned and capable that president is.

Same with Trump1-> Biden.

And then you add in obstructionists in congress and senate slowing the process of repair.

9

Whatever his effect was, Obama was perceived exceptionally well. They basically have him a Nobel for just getting elected.

2

Look the U.S. was kind of past our prime already, and we were settling into a slow decline. President Elon and his lapdog Donald just decided to shake the table so all the dominos fall at once, instead of slowly over time.

7

Sorry for being cheeky, but the title is silly and obvious. Of course the world is taking notice at the richest and biggest market because it will affect their livelihood.

-2
Alteonreply
lemmy.world

Oh yes. That's the only reason they're noticing...not the threats the Greenland (and our ally Denmark), not the threats to Canada (our largest bordering ally), not the threats to Mexico, or the threats the Panama, or the threats to pretty much anyone of our allies (whilst cozying up to Putin), or any of the absolutely moronic tarrifs. No, couldn't be any of that.

What do they have you guys huffing over at Fox? Your okay with a billionaire soft through the government, through all of our most secret information, to cherry pick whatever says he wants? A billionaire getting his hands in our governments Treasury? You think the billionaire is going to look out for the interests of you or me?

1

I forgot about the geopolitical aspect to it.

If you go to Asia and ask many Asians, a lot of them are more worried about investments in the US and how it might affect them, especially with tariffs (even though some Asians kinda like Trump for his macho politics). For countries who send their diasporas and rely on remittances, they are worried about their countrymen and women being deported and/or harassed. But aside from that, as long as Trump is anti-China, many Asian countries are comfortable enough with the current administration. Otherwise, they would be as nervous as the Europeans about the withdrawal and threat of US military.

1

whatever positive image the United States might have had internationally.

What positive image lol.

-3

call me when people start starving, power utilities stop producing power, and people no longer have water in their taps.

Until then, we're probably fine, rattled, but fine.

-24
leadorereply
lemmy.world

call me when people start starving, power utilities stop producing power, and people no longer have water in their taps.

OK, but I don't think I'll be able to get a signal at that point.

21
lemmy.dbzer0.com

fair enough, but then you would actually be experiencing what people claim is currently happening, even though practically nothing has changed in day to day life, federally it might be a fucking mess, but you can suffer a lot of harm before things actually start getting bad, especially as a bureaucratic body.

-17
lemmy.world

what we have here is a failure of imagination.

(and a lack of basic understanding of historical trends and long term forecasting)

5

i assure you, my imagination works just fine, i tend to rely on reality, and facts, when talking about uh, real world things that actually happen, rather than made up statements and vibes, so.

1
lemmy.dbzer0.com

that's literally what im saying lmao, it's only been one month, we literally have no time for any significant change to set in, come back in a year, when people are starving and dying (if they are) and tell me then.

1
lemm.ee

I think most of us see the writing on the wall, and are waiting for you to catch up and stop being in denial.

1

look man, i will be the first to admit that this is going downhill fast when it starts happening, my problem is that it hasnt yet happened, this is all speculative.

1

yeah, that's my assumption, i assume we're going to be "weathering a storm" so to speak, but nothing on the level of war torn countries in south africa for example. That's just not likely.

1
commanderreply
lemmings.world

It's a gradual decline, but it will continue to happen for decades.

The sad part about this is people who are wasting away waiting for the day that never comes. We should realize today that America will not improve or do anything to reduce the disparity in wealth so we're not disappointed in the future.

0

Alternatively, as a little side-hobby, we can be more politically active locally, voicing our opinions and trying to educate the local populace of the immense wealth disparity and the issue of corporate money in politics. No doubt those are easy concessions to agree on and no doubt things are just going to get worse as the rug slowly gets pulled. It's only going to be easier with time to win over more folx with the fact that they're in the same boat as us and it's sinking. We can be proactive with small amounts of our time to involve ourselves in (local) politics. Spreading ideas and voicing opinions has always been the defacto way to progress. Change starts locally and spreads from there.

2
commanderreply
lemmings.world

This is the real, "I don't spend all my life on internet forums" answer.

Most of this really is just optics. Even with the first Trump presidency, my life did not meaningfully change aside from having to hear about him nonstop.

It's when people's regular lives start to change for the worse that we'll start to see them fighting back against someone like Trump. Like it or not, most of what Trump does is affecting people other than Americans.

0

real shit.

People don't go outside, this is why things like setting a bar for "oh shit oh fuck" is important, a litmus test if you will.

2
lemm.ee

Another "I'm personally doing fine, so everything's okay." joker

20
lemmy.dbzer0.com

i mean literally, nothing has happened, sure some things have happened, but my point is, nothing to the scale of "THE US IS FUCKING DISSOLVING INTO ATOMS RIGHT FUCKING NOW"

when the government no longer recognizes my ID, i will believe that claim, but up until then, very little has happened.

-15
lemmy.world

In your short comment you went from "literally nothing" to "something" to "very little" has happened. Which is it?

Just because not much has affected you individually doesn't mean that nothing has happened and that other people aren't affected.

Don't let the world descend into chaos before you finally decide to give a damn. By then it's already too late

11
lemmy.dbzer0.com

literally nothing, to "something" and "very little" are not very large swings, especially when taking account of context.

Just because not much has affected you individually doesn’t mean that nothing has happened and that other people aren’t affected.

then go post about those things, stop making shit up and lying about the state of the US, post about actually bad things that are happening to actually real people.

Don’t let the world descend into chaos before you finally decide to give a damn. By then it’s already too late

unfortunately, i used to care, until i comprehended the sheer stupidity of the general public, unfortunately now my apathy far exceeds any desire for the human race to continue, and i hope for everybody to die a painful death as retribution for their stupidity.

1
lemmy.world

Then I'd hate to see how painful your death is going to be....

Nice to know you're ok with being part of the problem.

1

Then I’d hate to see how painful your death is going to be…

that's ok, assuming it actually mobilizes people into doing something about it, instead of me just dying in a cold dark hole where nobody hears about it or cares about it because trump executive order 2134 has passed and it states that "everyone who wears a hate must wear a hat of this specific shade of red"

Nice to know you’re ok with being part of the problem.

i'm not part of the problem, i'm part of the result of the problem. You guys all had your chance, and didn't manage it. Don't come crying to me when i die a martyr.

1
lemm.ee

Well a lot of people had to go to court before Transpeople could start getting passports and I'm not sure all of us can

1

i'm not sure what that holds for the future either, but ultimately if you exist as a citizen of the united states, you must have SOME form of legal identity that exists in SOME level of authority to grant you a passport. I'm not sure it would abide international law, or human rights to deny that. Maybe it doesn't, north korea is notoriously restrictive after all.

And at that point, i would assume you can manage something like asylum, outside of the states. Because at that point, things are getting desperate.

2
lemmy.world

fr tho - in one of the richest countries in the World, why should it need to get that bad before people start wanting something better? Not just for themselves, but for every American: coworker, neighbor, friend, family. Why should we (or a majority of Americans) just get the bare minimum on the standard of living and just accept that as normal?

When are we going to start recognizing Action, Causation, and Consequences over lip service? America has ~400 Billionaires.

12
lemmy.dbzer0.com

because when you're talking about mass heuristics like "the united states is falling apart" it definitionally, should be falling apart when you say that.

When people are saying that "the US is fascist" there better be some fascist government shit ACTIVELY going on when that statement was made, right now, we're definitely closer to fascism, than we are to not fascism, but it's hard to say until some shit actually happens unfortunately.

the most correct way to define this is that "The US is in deep political turmoil"

why should it need to get that bad before people start wanting something better?

TL;DR because otherwise you're lying, and i expect factual accuracy from people who hate disinformation and misinformation. There are problems to talk about, but we are hardly "falling apart at the seams" currently, more so, there are several loose threads, and if something isn't done about it, it will probably fall apart at the seams eventually, given enough thrashing.

-15
lemmy.world

when you’re talking about mass heuristics like “the united states is falling apart” it definitionally, should be falling apart

Hard disagree. That downplays the importance of the issues at hand, at the time, whatever they may be. If it's "mass hysteria" as you claim, maybe it's something important that should have some attention brought to it , and discussion, at looked at with an open, but objective mindset. Discussion at minimum.

the most correct way to define this is that “The US is in deep political turmoil”

It's both.

but we are hardly “falling apart at the seams”

My man, a downfall is a fall. Let me explain.

What's happening in the U.S. is an important moment. A Multi-Billionaire was seen addressing The Nation through the States allowed Media literally behind the Oval Office Desk. This has never happened and really shows the intense influence money in politics has, for better or worse. Multiple factors has led the U.S. in a deficit (debt) of close to 2 Trillion. Instead of raising taxes on the Billionaires (~400 Americans), 4 of whom sat Presidents inauguration were worth north of 900 Billion. One of whom has had direct access to the American National Treasury without Congressional Approval or Independent Oversight. Federal employees are being cut. Eyes on Federal Programs that help the most low-income and vulnerable to be cut next.

This doesn't even get into the international issues such as Gaza, Ukraine, Elon Musk influencing German politics, the aggressive and unnecessary negotiation tactics with our neighbors and long-time allies. It's a long list of anti-teamwork, anti-peaseant, and quite frankly unAmerican actions that The United States haven't seen at this extent in arguably 50+ years, over half of many of our lives.

In short, if you're a fan of the ideas of Democracy and ensuring working people are taken care of, and you're living in the American Democracy, then this is an important timespan.

7

Hard disagree. That downplays the importance of the issues at hand, at the time, whatever they may be. If it’s “mass hysteria” as you claim, maybe it’s something important that should have some attention brought to it , and discussion, at looked at with an open, but objective mindset. Discussion at minimum.

that is a misreading of my comment, my problem is that we're doing the meme the republicans do, and then make fun of them for doing.

"they're transing the kids" LMAO HOW COULD THEY BELIEVE THAT!!!!!

"trump just killed the investigation into himself" THE US IS LITERALLY GOING TO FALL APART AT ITS SEAMS ANY FUCKING MOMENT NOW!!!!

1
Jtothebreply
lemmy.world

People you can relate to better than the ones who’ve been starving? Did you miss that Flint still doesn’t have safe tap water and that the state no longer considers it an emergency so they’ve lost their bottled water funding?

10
lemmy.dbzer0.com

classic misdirection gaming, Flint has been a mess for like, a decade or more, this is old news, considering it no longer an emergency is definitely a big problem, the biden admin allocated a shit ton of funding to fix that exact problem during his term, perhaps that's why the state delisted it's status? Who knows, i'm not politically informed on the local state politics of flint michigan unfortunately, because i do not live there. On the previous account of it being a fucking shithole.

-11
Jtothebreply
lemmy.world

Gotcha. Disputing you is classic misdirection, existing traumas are old news, fresh traumas just rattle us (“us”), and of course anything that’s wrong happened somewhere you don’t think about with a shred of care in your heart. I think I can hear the goalposts moving again

1

well yeah, if we're talking about the recent trump admin fucking shit up, of course existing trauma is old news. Fresh traumas have barely begun to play out, we don't even know if they're truly happening or not, it's all up in the air currently. Is it a good sign? No, does that mean the US is crumbling? Also no.

and of course anything that’s wrong happened somewhere you don’t think about with a shred of care in your heart. I think I can hear the goalposts moving again

bad things have been happening for like 5 years now, most of this isnt new, in fact most of the things trump instated were previously instated under his 2016 term, anything outside of that is unlikely to get anywhere due to his sheer incompetency, unless corruption cooks really hard. Which will inevitably take a little while.

I'm trying to figure out where we went from "damn bros" to "we're so joever, it's never happening again" in literally 4 months.

1

the first one talks about a trend starting in 2022, the second one is referring to a long awaited grid capacity issue that's now starting to become a problem. The third one has literally been around since the discovery of climate change.

The second one isn't even a huge problem, we can easily fix it within the next 10-20 years. The third one is harder, but it's a global problem, and realistically, spurred on heavily by agricultural water use rights, which are really stupid.

0
Sauerkrautreply
discuss.tchncs.de

Literal prisoners have food, electricity, and clean water... So maybe your standards are too low. Our children being reduced to wage slaves for the oligarchs is something we should fight to prevent

8

literal prisoners are not "literal people" they have no literal freedom or autonomy, they have literally no rights.

Giving them food, electricity, and clean water (which isn't even a guarantee, the prison industrial complex is a disaster, do some research on that one) is quite literally the minimum you can do to not violate human rights.

1
yarrreply
feddit.nl

How am I going to call you if we have no power?

6

probably from your mobile phone, running on battery power, assuming the grid works. Realistically, if you can't call anybody, i probably can't either, so we'll both know at the same time, ish, approximately what is happening anyway.

1
lemmy.world

good old lefty progressivism reduced to: "look at what trump is doing!"

if you're truly progressive or left, you have as much ire for the democratic party-- if not more.

-39
ORbituaryreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

You're getting downvoted by the same people who got upset by calling out that Kamala and Biden were not good candidates.

If they were, they would have beat this idiot.

The DNC has no idea, nor does it care, what people really need or want. They don't represent our reality. The only Dems who do are... You guessed it: Progressive.

AOC, Bernie, Ro Khana, Cori Bush, Nina Turner... None of them are supported by the establishment wing of the Democratic Party. All of them have people in mind over reelection.

It's time for a sea change.

71
Zaktorreply
sopuli.xyz

I think Kamala was an embarrassment that deserved to be called out, Biden is evil, and the establishment often cares more about suppressing progressives than beating Republicans, but I absolutely downvoted that dumb as shit comment.

The Democrats can be responsible for failing to defeat fascism, complicit in genocide and the backsliding of civil rights, and a problem in need of active and forceful change without saying stupid things like they're just as bad as the guy empowering Nazis, destroying the civil service, and persecuting trans people with deadly results.

That's fucking stupid online edgelord politics.

24

complicit in genocide

stupid things like they're just as bad as the guy empowering Nazis

They're the same picture

5
lemmy.dbzer0.com

The people you're arguing with and you always seem to want the same progressive candidate, but it ain't reflecting in the vote counts. I'm not even gonna argue from my viewpoint anymore, cause it doesn't matter when we want the same thing. What can we do together to make sure that changes? Especially in local and state elections, that seems to be where we can make the most impact.

You're going out and voting for every primary for progressive candidates, right? Cause we both gotta do it, cause there's just that many Nazis out there. And we need our friends and families to do so too, and I imagine you are just the same as I am and talking with them.

So if everyone is doing their best in their small world, what's the next step, or what are we missing in your opinion? And I'm asking this with sincerity, whether you believe it or not.

And since it's a while to the next voting time, do you see any worthwhile plan of resistance? There's a couple of general strike/don't work days planned coming up, but pessimism seems strong there. How are you feeling about them or other options?

0

They don't even want the same candidate. Whenever those candidates come up they complain that they sold out or they're not radical enough. Whatever the deeper motivation is, their only perceivable act seems to be to complain.

As to action, I do agree with the general sentiment that it needs to be sustained. The protests need to have a cost and disrupt regular life beyond just people taking a day off. But I think things are tense enough that something like BLM could kick off again. People just need to believe it's time. A protest day after day, or a multiweek protest on a specific day, could convince people it's real. A one and done protest following the prescribed route isn't useless (it reminds people that basically half the country hates the guy), but it's something people see and think they did their resistance and now it's back to regular life.

6
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

We’re not voting again. There won’t be another election. There hasn’t been free and fair elections since 2000 but most have their heads in the sand about electoral theft.

I’m done protesting. I’ve been protesting since the Iraq war. The people organizing protests are lame, want the protest to be peaceful and not annoy anyone. Fuck that. They’re such fucking losers. Completely brainwashed since birth that non-violence is the answer. The government is violent towards us every goddamn day and holds a monopoly on violence. There was a protest by me with a set time of a few hours and then everyone goes home. Total fucking losers. About as useful as making a social media post.

Give me a gun and some coordinates on where the capitalists are hiding and I’ll shoot. That’s the only way forward now. More Luigi.

-6
Zaktorreply
sopuli.xyz

Your actions are indistinguishable from someone trying to suppress progressive action. You call for something no one is going to do (take up arms) and make moronic absolutist statements to drive rancor within progressive action.

You don't need someone to give you coordinates or get you a gun. You could do that yourself. If you're serious, just go do it, and mention Lemmy so we all get to say we interacted with the guy online. You don't need our help or approval if you think that's the next step. But you're not going to do anything, just bitch about everyone else doing things you say are pointless. You're just here to talk a big game and criticize everyone else to kill any sort of organizing or solidarity.

6
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Protesting does not work. if it did we wouldn’t be in this fucking position.

You know what the right does? They show up fucking armed.

-5

If you're going to be a martyr, that's a huge commitment. Right now, folks like you and I are just toeing the line and hoping someone else makes the decision for us. But if you're going to toe that line and you're not already armed, you're just volunteering to be slaughtered. Get armed, train, and be ready for when your rights are violated.

4
yarrreply
feddit.nl

Give me a gun and some coordinates on where the capitalists are hiding and I’ll shoot.

You're so smart but you don't know where they are? Looks like another Internet Tough Guy.

0

Uhh, you could just post up within 5 miles of Wall Street and see about 15,000 of them on an average day. Is the US short of capitalists? Are you really not acting only because you have no targets?

Although, I guess your original message DID say "Give me a gun...". So it seems like your only asset is some vague ambition to do something, but you seem to lack the equipment and motivation. Keep it up with your tough guy internet posts though, it's really making an impact.

0

The Democrats can be responsible for failing to defeat fascism, complicit in genocide and the backsliding of civil rights, and a problem in need of active and forceful change without saying stupid things like they're just as bad as the guy empowering Nazis, destroying the civil service, and persecuting trans people with deadly results.

No, they’re literally the same thing. They’re the genociders. Backsliding of civil rights? No they cynically campaigned off roe v Wade for fifty fucking years. Persecuting trans people? Oh they’re now pivoting further right because they learn all the wrong lessons in service to capital and are helping the republicans with anti trans bills of their own.

Your defense of the indefensible and irredeemable is fucking pathetic.

-1
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I have a very real fear that even if a truly progressive democratic candidate runs for president, they still won't win.

Don't get me wrong, they still should actually give it a shot. There's literally no other winning alternative for the Dems.

Instead, I think you're very right about the DNC not knowing what people want. There is a huge, mildly surprising amount of support in this country for bigotry. There is a surprising amount of people locked into the Nazi vote, and you know I'm not exaggerating. This is what people actually want. As it turns out, they chose fascism over treating specific people as people, same as last time, and times before.

This is America. And it has allies with other bigots and land grabbing warmongers.

May we both survive, and here's to hoping we can get a progressive candidate next time, if we get a next time. It's always worth it to fight for someone's right to just exist.

17
fedia.io

I have a very real fear that even if a truly progressive democratic candidate runs for president, they still won't win.

I get what you mean, but remember that many people voted for Trump because they wanted change, not because they were exceptionally thrilled about his bigotry. The Bernie-Trump pipeline is a very real phenomenon (see also AOC-Trump voters) and makes the GOP seem like they have more popular support than they really do.

18

I don't see it that way, where are these supposed trump regretting folk? I haven't seen them. I thought I saw one in a friend I miss, and then he spews the qanon bullshit that passes for doge talking points.

By overwhelming majority, they're cool with this. This is America, when someone shows you who they are, believe them.

10
ORbituaryreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

So, what then. Continue this mindless pendulous torture? You think what we've done until now has been effective?

I think I was being a bit reactive because I'm so used to the knee-jerk negative. You make good points, in your third paragraph especially. That said, I don't think you're entirely wrong about the Nazi vote there, even though it's tongue-in-cheek. There are Dems reaching across the aisle to vote for Trump's nominees. They need to be blockading the same way the GOP did for legitimate good-faith votes proffered by Dems. Merrick Garland for SCOTUS under Obama comes to mind. (I feel like Garland as a Justice would have done less harm than his milquetoast performance as the Attorney General.)

12
lemmy.dbzer0.com

You seem to think I'm arguing with you. Fight the good fight. Progressive or bust, encourage everyone to vote in primaries. There's literally no other alternative for a future. We either resist from here at every point, or we're done. Let's see how the lawyers do over the next few days, reevaluate, and let's see how far we get until we get enough public outcry to actually do something.

What else do you think we could do?

9
ORbituaryreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

My apologies. I think I was just flying off the cuff. Amending my initial reply to you, as I see you were indeed being constructive.

see above.

4

Valid points on Merrick Garland too. He was disappointing in many respects, but yeah, they fucked him hard on the supreme court nomination didn't they.

Fuck them back, let's be entirely clear, if the pendulum does swing... This is how it's supposed to go, right? Living wage is gonna get a whole lot easier when you can just throw executive orders at private business, and launch lawsuits for not listening good enough. No takes backsies for the fucking pigs this time.

5

The democrats will never give people what they want because they work in service to capital.

-1
infosec.pub

That sea of change is coming whether it's DNC-approved or not. That change appears to be in the form of a far-right authoritarian regime in part for its failure to participate in change in more meaningful ways that actually mobilizes voters.

15

Yup. Nazis for the next 50 years. Great move America. We can cry all we want about the Dems, the party is dead. We need to focus on the future.

20
lemmy.world

It’s time for a sea change.

Well, you're getting your wish. The only problem is we're chained to the rock on the beach and your requested tide is rising. We're not going to survive your sea change.

3
lemmy.ca

If they were, they would have beat this idiot.

I love the shifting of blame. I worry we'll still have to repeat "Binary choice with one option between a 34-time felon and insurrectionist" and people will still blame the dems for not fielding Mother Theresa. A can of spiced ham should have won.

-3

Shift? I predicted that shit from the start. They were always to blame and destined to fail because they were asleep at the wheel.

"Oh, how could we lose to him twice?"

11
Glytchreply
lemmy.world

You forgot that the other choice was a genocidal corporate stooge who barely hid his racism before bowing out too late to have a primary and sticking us with brown Hillary Clinton.

They didn't even try to win progressive or working class votes and instead doubled down on genocide and courted the endorsement of the Cheney family.

If you can't even pay lip service to the working class and instead just constantly talk down to them and blame them for their problems, why would they ever vote for you?

Also choosing a religious zealot who promoted suffering a sacred as you example of a perfect candidate shows how out of touch you are.

5
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Brown Hillary Clinton

😭

I actually think that’s offensive to Hillary clinton, she had more substance in her fucking pinky than Kamala had at all. Kamala was the definition of an empty suit but she checked all the demographic identity politics triangulating democrat bullshit that they’re well known for. She was the ultimate DEI hire. No substance, no platform, minimal experience, and didn’t win a single fucking vote to be nominated.

If 1990s Hillary ran I would of voted for her. She genuinely seemed to want to make a positive change in the world back then, especially with healthcare.

-5
Zaktorreply
sopuli.xyz

She was the ultimate DEI hire.

DEI is something leftists use as an epithet. You're definitely here to advance leftism.

-2

She was shoved down our throats because she’s a black and Indian woman. Not because she has popular support, not because she has vision, not because she has a platform. She received zero votes for the nomination and was anointed in back room deals.

She’s the ultimate DEI candidate, an empty suit who checks all the diversity boxes while not pissing off the capitalists in charge.

There’s plenty of other minority women out there far more capable than her but they’re probably too uppity for the capitalists.

Nothing will fundamentally change.

That’s the biden and Harris campaign in a nutshell. Vote for me I’m a black Indian woman who isn’t trump! Not vote for me I’m gonna work towards universal healthcare, raising the minimum wage, or ending wars. Nope.

Edit - right off the top of my head I’d love to see NY AG Leticia James in a larger position of power, such as president. She’s a black woman and she fucking gets shit done. And she’d greatly piss off the capitalists so it’s never going to happen.

0

I’ve seen this DNC shill talking point before.

Your irredeemable party only cares about the capitalists it represents, stop simping for a party that doesn’t give a fuck about you and will happily throw you in a meat grinder if they get something out of the deal.

-3
lemmy.world

is the democratic party currently destroying every american institution at record pace?

27
ORbituaryreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

No. They're the ones who could not beat the most deplorable piece of shit to run and win the US presidential elections.

We all need to recognize this if we ever get a chance to vote fairly again.

40

I mean that advantage should have been counteracted by the very existence of Trump. The fact that the DNC failed to capitalize on that is unequivocally their fault.

14
lemmy.world

But with a decades long concerted effort by the billionaire class which owns pretty much all relevant media to undermine democracy and gaslight uninformed citizens (and outright bribe them in some cases) it wasn’t exactly a fair fight.

Sounds like something for the democratic party to have considered when they had the power to do something about it

13
slrpnk.net

I think the comment above hits on some important truths:

  • The country wanted more, not less, populism. Kamala offered good economic populist policies, but failed to message them to the populace in a way that mattered
  • The entire political machine failed to respond to that the people on the ground are either in support of ending genocide, or at least are indifferent to genocide. No votes were ever won by supporting a genocide. Yet there they were, supporting a genocide and acting like it was the only way. The people indifferent to genocide were far more likely to vote republican in the first place
  • The democrats failed to hold the republicans responsible for the January 6th insurrection accountable, enabling them to just simply come back and do what they're doing right now
  • The democrats failed to use the blueprint the republicans handed them for passing legislation without full bipartisan support because they're a bunch of decorum addicts
  • The democrats are now failing to use the blueprint republicans handed them for how to obstruct the shit out of things (why the fuck is anyone voting "yes" on any of trump's nominees regardless of whether or not they're good, they fit into an overall system of bad
22
fedia.io

Kamala offered good economic populist policies,

She kind of did, kind of didn't. A trend that could be observed during her campaign (I saw this quantified somewhere but for the life of me can't find it again) was that while she started with economic populism, as the campaign progressed she watered down, took back or outright ignored her early promises and tried to fill the gap with "orange man bad". This wasn't a coincidence; corporate representatives would systematically ask for "clarifications" and "explanations" about her policies and have her walk them back one by one into something acceptable to them. So anyway, the result of this was that the Kamala of election day was not running on an economic populist platform.

19

The democrats failed to use the blueprint the republicans handed them for passing legislation without full bipartisan support because they're a bunch of decorum addicts

And instead of standing up their still holding on to the decorum. Almost like they're complicit and getting rich being complicit.

3
Tm12reply
lemmy.ca

I only agree with half your statement. I can be appalled by the majority government and still think the Dems are dumb as stumps. What do you suggest “lefty progressivism” talk about?

16
fallowseedreply
lemmy.world

it is the framing of the article that set me off because it is so typically one-sided. "The United States is imploding. The reign of Donald Trump is...."

as though the democrats weren't funding genocide in gaza and spending hundreds of billions on nato expansion and the predictable (essentially promised) war that ensued.

3
ORbituaryreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I hope the people who refrained from voting over the genocide stance feel proud of what they accomplished.

-3
yarrreply
feddit.nl

I hope the people who refrained from voting over the genocide stance feel proud of what they accomplished.

If Gaza didn't exist the Democrats would still have lost.

4
fallowseedreply
lemmy.world

spoken like a true democrat.. you lot love to blame the voters for the party's bad policy. (unless i am misreading you-- you're criticizing people who hold genocide to be a red-line?)

-1

I haven't been a democrat since 2017. I registered with the DSA. I vote progressive left when possible or against the gop when it's a toss up. Don't presuppose my affiliation based on a couple of posts and your own sour grapes.

-1

Say I'm given a choice to have a finger cut off, or my hand. I can choose the finger without being happy with it; nor does my choice imply I'm "defending" the act: I'm merely choosing the least bad of the options I'm given. Protest voters are like people choosing a toe; sure, they can certainly voice that opinion, but the fact is the person doing the cutting is going to ignore them and they'll lose a finger or a hand and they'll just be fucking lucky if it's only a finger. Abstainers are just pretending that they're not going to lose something, and then act all indignant and shocked when their hand is cut off.

I think a lot of Democrat voters would like to have more progressive options. The issues are that the US has (a) primaries, (b) the electoral college, and (c) a first-past-the-post voting system for the presidency. In this system, your only choice is to vote for the lesser of two evils.

Primaries ensure party leaders choose who gets to be nominated.

The electoral college gives more weight to votes by voters in the middle of the country - the less populated states.

FPTP is recognized by voting experts as among the worst systems of voting, with the worst outcomes.

The only thing protest votes achieve is as a tool for one of the two major parties to draw votes from their opposition. It has absolutely no value for "sending a message" to any party. Protest voters are tools.

Abstaining from voting is similar, but worse as it both allows one party to capitalize on unpopular positions while also abdicating the individual's moral responsibility to participate in government in almost the only way they can. Abstainers are contemptible.

The founders made several mistakes; they got close enough that democracy had a pretty good run in the country, but it's not surprising given the deficiencies that it would fall apart after only 250 years.

  • We need to abolish the electoral college
  • We need to establish proportional representation in Congress
  • We need to replaced FPTP with... well, almost anything. STV. IRV/RCV. STV would be a good choice because it could be used for both proportional and single-winner elections, and voters would have to understand only one system. IRV has the benefit of already being used by many countries and in several local elections within states, and it's simple enough both to explain & understand, as well as being not too complex to perform by hand if necessary. But we need to be quit of FPTP.

Until we have electoral reform, the only rational voter choice is strategic voting for the lesser of two evils. For a great many progressives, that's the Democratic party.

3
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

This is where liberals lose the plot. The fascists don’t give a fuck about laws or procedure or democracy. Pay attention. The United States has already fallen.

Your reforms - well intentioned and probably workable under an opposition that believed in democracy - aren’t going to work. The fascists couped the government and the only fight left is economic by mass strikes (not going to happen or it would of already) or by violence.

2

Oh, I agree; I'm not sure there's any non-violent path to reform anymore. Maybe before Trump was re-elected there was a small window where the Pubes come back center a little and we'd have more time. I believe reform at the national level would only have been possible after widespread reforms at the state level, when the general population was already comfortable with RCV; there's been a lot of progress in many states to implementing some form of IRV, always with positive outcomes.

But I think we missed that window. Trump's busy wrecking what he can so that in four years there's no organized resistance to him forcing himself a third term. Unless people get off their asses and there's a wave of Mangiones; unless the middle and lower class realize the only war is class war, and combine to fight the oligarchs, we're on a path to dictatorship. With the media controlled by the oligarchy and efficient messaging pitting the middle and lower classes against each other, that's not going to happen.

I don't see a French Revolution in the US. Too much bread and circuses. I don't think we'll see an uprising because people are too busy having arguments on Lemmy.

4
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

We missed most of the off ramps. There’s a very real chance that trump will ignore the courts and do whatever the fuck he wants. He’s said as much.

We’re out of time because of technology. The israel genocide? They used AI to come up with targets based on social media and other stuff. Look at the sheer death toll this time vs the last time israel attacked Palestine. The numbers are crazy and it’s because of the new targeting method.

What gives me hope is I think musk is actually fucking dumb enough or incompetent enough to fuck up social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and snap, that people will revolt. Three days without food is a revolution. So many people on social security are barely scraping by, and many of them voted for him and are gun owners. They just didn’t think the fascism would hurt them.

I think if trump defies the courts or starts threatening the profits of major corporate industries (like RFK going after big pharma) there’s a chance the capitalists will turn on him if he makes things too ugly.

But the technofascists want to destroy the US so they can create a bunch of “network states” and genocide the poor

Also, it’s not because people are too busy arguing on lemmy, it’s because people are too busy trying to survive. They’re stuck on a hamster wheel and don’t even realize they can get off.

0

social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and snap, that people will revolt.

My wife points out that a bunch of geriatrics revolting sounds anticlimactic. OTOH, the visuals of cops beating senior citizens would be an interesting media event.

I think if trump defies the courts or starts threatening the profits of major corporate industries (like RFK going after big pharma) there’s a chance the capitalists will turn on him if he makes things too ugly.

This is a really good point that I hadn't considered. I think he's a smart enough grifter to avoid pissing off people with actual money-based power. But who knows. Corporations are sniveling Quislings at the best of times. You'd think Apple, one of the richest companies in the world, would be able to resist, but no: they went belly-crawling back to X to lick Elon's boots as soon as he won the Presidency. I mean, as soon as his puppet won the Presidency.

Also, it’s not because people are too busy arguing on lemmy, it’s because people are too busy trying to survive. They’re stuck on a hamster wheel and don’t even realize they can get off.

Agree to disagree. Bread and circuses, man. Bread and circuses. TikTok, X, Meta, Lemmy, Mastodon... people think being indignant on social media is going to cause change.

1

My wife points out that a bunch of geriatrics revolting sounds anticlimactic. OTOH, the visuals of cops beating senior citizens would be an interesting media event.

A whole lot of them have guns and also family members that will be resentful that they have to take them in like abandoned animals when their funding dries up. Also a bunch of armed people with nothing to lose is dangerous even if they’re old and disabled.

Agree to disagree. Bread and circuses, man. Bread and circuses. TikTok, X, Meta, Lemmy, Mastodon... people think being indignant on social media is going to cause change.

Well yeah. All of social media, sure. Although x and meta both block leftists. I’ve been banned from both and Reddit too for “inciting violence” by being anti fascist. But liberals are far too happy to make snarky clap backs and change their profile picture than take over the federal judiciary.

1

I 100% blame everyone who voted for Hillary over Bernie in the primary for why we have 2 Trump presidencies.

1
PanArabreply
lemm.ee

I used to think that the Democrats were the lesser evil, now I know they are a more insidious evil with polite rhetoric.

0
jimmy90reply
lemmy.world

were you saying this throughout the election or only after it?

0
PanArabreply
lemm.ee

A few months after I voted for Biden and having realized I was fooled. But the realization came into full force after the insulting response I got from my Democratic representative in November 2023.

2
PanArabreply
lemm.ee

No, I helped get Gaza flattened. I never voted Republican and never will. I think the DNC helped get Trump reelected.

1
jimmy90reply
lemmy.world

so you think criticizing the DNC and not voting for them is the best way to keep trump out of the whitehouse?

-2

The best way to keep trump out of the Whitehouse was Bernie. Dems refused that and joined a genocide, Trump is the consequence that Americans have to sadly suffer.

3
jimmy90reply
lemmy.world

were you saying this throughout the election or only after it?

-3
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I’ve been saying this since they let bush steal an election in 2000 and go on to commit war crimes without any repercussions. Or how Obama also expanded the executive branches power and authorized drone strikes on Americans abroad without due process (trump will use this in America, just wait). Or how Obama filled his cabinet with Goldman Sachs thieves and refused to hold a single banker accountable for 2008, and worse, bailed out Wall Street and let Main Street rot. Gee, I wonder where the support for trump initially came from. Can’t imagine. Couldn’t be democrats complete and utter failure to be an effective political party for the masses.

Meanwhile, the rich got richer, the government got more powerful, and our lifespans have dropped from deaths of despair and most of us are one emergency away from homelessness.

But yay! Let’s paint rainbows in the street, put pronouns in our bio and fly blm flags and kneel in congress wearing Kente cloth! (I’m queer so miss me with the hOmOpHobIc TrAnsPhObIc bullshit) That’s all the democrats have to offer anymore. Performative bullshit. They -just like the republicans - work to serve the capitalists that own them.

2
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Your inability to hold democrats to account is how trump got elected, genius.

-1
jimmy90reply
lemmy.world

so are you happy with trump in the whitehouse, would you rather have Harris?

-1
inv3r5ionreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

I’d rather the United States dissolve at this point. I feel like I’ve lived under a dictatorship of capital my entire life and as someone who doesn’t live in a “swing state” I’ve had no say on federal matters my entire life.

The US has fallen. It’s time for individual states to do what’s best for them. I want mine to leave and join Canada.

2

in fact supporting the fall of the US makes perfect sense. of course you campaigned against harris in the guise of protecting gaza. so you could get trump elected. so putin and all the enemies of the US could profit from your treasonous actions.

-1

you'd sacrifice the country in the dream that the individual states would not become little capitalist fiefdoms? apart from that quite a few states could not function on their own.

why wait to become part of canada when you can just pop over the border?

maybe you can find another way to get politically involved in the country rather than hastening its demise

-3