Quick reminder that there were other things going on in the 20s and 30s. You know, the height of socialism in the West, a strong labor movement willing to burn down factories, stuff like that. The New Deal didn't come because leftists played nice.
I feel like Western labour just doesn't have any leverage anymore. The rich simply do not need us. They have outsourced enough labour that they really don't care if we strike en masse. Like, shut down which factories? They're all overseas.
That's what they want you to think. Their own lives depend on Western labor. That's who runs the ports, the railways, the warehouses, etc. Also a lot of high-tech stuff is still in the West.
No, the new deal only came to be after violent protests, and was largely a betrayal of labor groups because it gave a much watered down version of what was actually demanded, all while Roosevelt broke the strike he promised to support while campaigning. Read "Labor's Giant Step Forward" by Art Preis if you want a more detailed accpunt
In addition to the points raised by some of the other comments I'd remind you of one uncomfortable truth. The business plot was attempted fascist takeover of America. That was thankfully put down because remarkably there was one honorable ex-marine they tried to involve the plot. That's Smedley Butler. In the wake of that that attempted fascist coup basically nobody was punished. In large part because Roosevelt told them as long as they kept their mouth shut and didn't block the New Deal he wouldn't go after them. That's basically the only reason it got through. Truncated as it was even then. Because most of the richest and most powerful people in the country we're looking down the barrel of a gun otherwise.
Well, they will still try. They won't give it up. But it's not possible to win it against them, like the Tea Party won against less extreme establishment Republicans
If you had to go back almost a hundred years to find any kind of example, I'm just going to gesture broadly at the next hundred years and rest my case.
Roosevelt was the least bad president and was ruling during a time where the US ended up on the right side of a conflict. He still did not abolish capitalism or the American empire, nor did he have any intentions to.
But that doesn't make the democrats good, it doesn't make one side better, it doesn't make the US good.
There is no debate which side is better if you're even remotely interested in facts.
You take the side that is better and you reform it by primarying the reps that won't play ball for their constituents., sending a clear message to the reps that remain. That is how democracy works in its most effective form.
Both sides are varying degrees of the same ideology, give all the money to the economic elite so they bribe both parties into maintaining that policy above all other considerations.
One side shrugs and calls it free market forces(D) as you suffer under that policy goal, the other points and laughs at you and says you deserve it(R). That is the extent of our "freedom" under American democracy.
With unintelligent comments like yours and all the discussions happening below meme threads, conflicts and violence is where we are heading to. I encourage you to learn more about the things you are talking about.
Both sides are functionally the same when it comes to the world. There's barely a difference between domestic policy between the two American parties. One uses sweet nothing's to try assuage your fears and the other uses Force and strongman techniques.
Yeah the FDR Reformation came directly from FDR and we pushed through at his behest. According to my understanding of these politics at a time if The president hadn't been FDR we would not have gotten those Reformations. Besides they hardly matter nowadays when they're practically entirely Stripped Away. The last surviving one is social security and they're pretty gung-ho about getting rid of that too.
People who are unable to read are one of the reason the United States is in the toilet.
People who use fallacies so they don't have to engage with the objective facts of an argument they're not able to impeach are another reason the world is falling to facism
All the keyboard warriors talking about revolution need to either pick up and gun and do it or get off their asses and help primary bad Dems to send a message and start the reformation process.
No one who made it out of high school should be saying "both sides" because it's a profoundly stupid and unproductive thing to say. Did we have masked squads disappearing people before January? Did our allies all hate us? Were we threatening fucking Canada? Were we paying tariff taxes?
What is the point of this meme? I feel like the only thing this can produce is people to not try to reform and improve the democratic party and take it over (like the tea party took over the republicans). Kind of like these "give up climate change it can't be stopped" posts that just benefits the big fossil fuels companies
That's the point, I've noticed a lot of the loudest, most active posters on Lemmy ultimately want one thing, which is progressives not to vote. Weird how that's what the conservatives have relied on for every presidential victory they've achieved in the past half century or more.
First off, it's four years, get your math right. Secondly, we only bomb browns, we just sell the bombs to anyone wanting to bomb whites. "Foreigner" and "non-foreigner" really have nothing to do with it. I think mainly we just feel really secluded over here and we don't want to be left out of all the cool Europe and Asia and Africa happenings, this is just the only way we can express ourselves.
These memes communicate to Democrats and their supporters that we're sick and tired of their mask-off conservative rule when they promise us the world and do nothing once elected. You want praise? You want votes? Then do something.
Since, you know, not voting for them apparently isn't enough to inspire meaningful change. Just once in my life I want to see Democrats fight harder for the working class and poor as they do against socialists and third parties.
You want praise? You want votes? Then do something.
Time for you to educate yourself. Look up Dem's economic stats compared to Republicans. Look up the Dem's voting history.
They aren't doing EVERYTHING, but they do a lot more than the other viable option.
If you want them to do more, then stop wasting your time doing what you're doing and start focusing on getting people to primary Dems who aren't doing what we want, because that's how you get Democrat party reform.
This meme is utter trash and only serves to fracture liberals and prevent the reform I just described.
Just once I want liberals to come together and primary bad Dems to send a message instead of fucking whining and not voting or voting 3rd party so fascists can take over.
That's exactly it. This is the meme and attitude of tankies that are chomping at the bit for violence and doing everything they can to help push the country to the Right. This is because of their faith-based belief that it will magically create class consciousness and a revolution to overthrow the global bourgeoisie. They don't give two shits about the LGBTQ+, POC, medically vulnerable, etc people that they have to sacrifice in the process.
You are correct. The OP has an agenda and that agenda is to fracture liberals.
The answer is not to give up. The answer is not to vote for a worthless 3rd party with zero chance of winning. The answer is to reform the Democrat party and history has shown us, repeatedly, that it is completely possible. And it literally just happened with the Republican party in the last 2 decades.
You should not attempt to reform something which is not reformable.
Pick up a fucking history book.
Political party reform is entirely possible and has happened repeatedly in American history. Conservative voters just did it to the Republican party.
Scrapping an established party with national sway for a 3rd party with NO clout and NO representatives in the House or Senate is fucking stupid. Especially when we have a national party in power currently attempting to dismantle our federal government to replace with an authoritarian one.
Revolution is the way forward.
Then do it. Big talk on the internet. If you think modern Americans are going to start a revolution, think again.
We need to capture the dems and turn them into a socialist party, just like the fascists captured the reps and turned them into a anti-worker. I spent way too long in the army to have the illusion that the american people are capable of changing anything through other means. It will not happen.
Not to be ignorant but I highly doubt you have the training, funding, or even the intestinal fortitude to do any of the things a revolution would entail. I also think that if you did find the courage it wouldn't matter because when they drop a non-explosive shredder warhead through your window it's all over. You have no idea what your asking people to do when there is a better way.
This reform is simply not possible. You cannot use the same methods as the far right and expect the same result but for a different ideology. They work differently, they're based on different systems and beliefs.
And you seriously underestimate the power of revolutionary warfare. Technological advances in military warfare have made things harder, but not impossible.
In 93 Russians were in the streets fighting the Russian military to overthrow Yeltsin. They had the courage, even without the military training. On Vietnam a nation and it's people successfully defended their freedom against a technologically superior army.
And I don't think I need to list how many coups and revolutions have appeared over the past 100 years. You can't think it's impossible looking at history.
I am no billionaire able to fund a milita, nor am I a general. But when the time arises or rather if it arises while I live, I do have the zeal to kill and die for what I believe in.
No, as I said I was in the military for almost a decade. I promise you I'm way more versed in the art of turning people into fertilizer than you ever will be. 1993 was 30 some years ago. The techg for killing people has improved drastically. You have no idea how many ways the US has to kill you. I saw things in 2005 that would still blow your mind.
Technological advances do not change societal upheaval.
Revolutions don't fight the military in symmetrical warfare.
Militaries can defect, they can be sabotaged, their bases besieged, their supply lines disrupted, their forces stretched too thin, etc.
In ideal circumstances no revolution would have to fight one united military. Parts would defect or declare neutrality. Those who fight have finite supply and finances. What will a soldier do when he runs out of bullets and more importantly rations?
But in the absolute worst case, it will either lead to a more bloody victory or the military would have to literally depopulate the country with lethal force to establish their rule.
Also the 90s are not so far from your 2005.
The majority of the military equipment Russia uses today in Ukraine is the same as during the Black October in 93.
China produces ~65% of global smartphones. At worst US companies simply re-brand products from overseas OEMs, at best they're using Chinese produced semiconductors and components to create original products.
The rest of the consumer electronics market is pretty similar. If you believe modern China is communist then they are "doom-scrolling on their communist-produced smartphones" through a communist produced network infrastructure which you are, most likely, reading through a communist-produced screen.
I would argue however that modern China largely split the difference between the USSR, which you are McCarthy-ing about, and the modern Russian Federation, which explicitly reformed into a liberal democracy with a capitalist market economy.
This is a right-wing troll talking point. Don't listen to it.
Go to the Democratic primaries and move the party left. And then, no matter who gets the nomination, vote Dem in the general election. This is exactly what the nazis did to move the GOP to the right and it worked great for them, and it's something we can emulate.
While I mostly agree with this, I have one significant hurdle I am unable to overcome. What other choice do I have?
I can't stand most Democrats. They suck! But they are a far cry better than voting Republican. And voting for a third party feels like wasting my vote.
If there was a third party candidate that focused on climate change and social issues and had even the slightest chance of winning, I would vote for them in a second. Until then, I am stuck voting for the lesser of two evils.
But they are a far cry better than voting Republican. And voting for a third party feels like wasting my vote.
You just answered your own question.
Democrats are FAR, FAR, FAR better than Republicans. We know this because the data shows they are better for our economy. We know this because their voting record shows that they regularly vote in favor of the middle and lower classes. We know this because they never attempted to violently overturn an election or send masked squads into our towns to abduct people off the street.
No 3rd party is viable or will be viable anytime in the near future. It will take YEARS and YEARS for a 3rd party to start winning local/state elections and getting reps in the House and Senate. And that's IF a 3rd party actually starts putting in the work, which none are doing.
So if you want to be smart, and actually help protect our democracy, then you should vote Democrat in national elections and maybe vote 3rd party in local elections to help them gain some traction and see if they can do anything with it.
We know this because the data shows they are better for our economy
We know this because the data shows they are better for our economy rich people's money.
FTFY.
They're definitely not good for "our" money, meaning the 99% that works for a living, unless you're of the opinion that outright ignoring food and rent becoming cost-prohibitive is somehow good for "our" money.
You are giving consent when you vote. You are saying this choice is fine.
Actually, when you vote, you just vote.
That's it. It's not a magic ritual, you don't telepathically send your message to the Holy Ghost of Democracy when you vote, Anubis isn't going to weigh your ballot against a feather before deciding on the fate of your soul.
You circle something or you don't and then you deal with whatever happens however you want.
If you vote for someone in an electoral democracy you're showing support for them, directly. Your vote is a translation of your democratic political power (in theory). It is the same as stating "I want this person in power/control". For that reason, yes voting for someone is literally endorsing them.
Yeah, "(in theory)" - that doesn't have to be inside brackets, all you speak of is a theoretical, ideal democracy. But what we have is, for many good and bad reasons, not even close to that (as can be seem from the actual process of any elections), and it is delusional and useless to act like it is.
So youre simultaneously saying you dont live in a democracy, and also that your vote matters?
I'm pretty sure I didnt say either of those things; I don't wish to argue about the semantics regarding the first statement, and the second statement is definitely correct for large parts of the population in some nominally democratic western countries (specifically US and UK whose electoral systems are a fucking disgrace).
Also yes i am speaking about the notion of democracy itself, that’s why I put the words in theory there lol
Alright, but it's clear that I dismissed this idealist/theoretical mode of dealing with politics in my first comment, and I don't really see any arguments for reestablishing it.
They're all happy to gaslight themselves into thinking that they're the virtuous side, just like MAGA.
Meanwhile tens of millions of Americans are working three jobs at 100 hours a week just to be able to rent a roach-infested studio, which in the minds of Democrats, is apparently a-okay because they did nothing meaningful about it.
Also, everything you're seeing now, from normalized police brutality, to ICE raids, to black torture sites, to government-sponsored abductions ("extraordinary renditions"), to unilateral presidential warmaking... was all also done and supported by Democrats. Obama even killed an American with a drone strike. And, for more fun, go look up which president it was that appointed Tom Homan.
The only difference is one side gives nicer speeches.
Then cry and abstain from voting or vote 3rd party and see what it gets us.
Oh wait, it's already fucking happening.
When I was younger the Dems fought a protracted battle to get me affordable healthcare, with the Republicans trying to block it at every turn. The result is I got affordable healthcare when I had NONE before.
You should do yourself a favor and educate yourself. Look up how our economy fairs under Dems compared to Repubs. Look up both party's voting history and find out which one actually regularly votes in favor of the middle and lower classes. Look up their criminal conviction histories.
If you educated yourself you'd find out that one party is INFINITELY better for us than the other and if we actually got off our fucking asses and primaried the Dems that weren't onboard with what we want, they'd become even better for us.
Instead you're crying on the internet and trying to get people to give up.
Dems fought a protracted battle to get me affordable healthcare
No. They pretended to, and then when the cost of health care rose to where it was unaffordable they shrugged their shoulders and left you and others to die in ER's. The 'access' Dems like to talk about disappears if you can't pony up for some health care CEO's superyacht.
You should do yourself a favor and educate yourself.
You should stop making excuses. The last six months under Donald Trump have proven that every time you pretended Democrats were powerless, you were wrong.
You are part of the problem.
No, you're the problem, because Democrats cannot fail badly enough to get you to change.
How are things now compared to when the American revolution happened?
hahahahaha!!!1!
Yes, that's totally a meaningful comparison. Like, let me put on my trilby*, check on my slaves while I ride a horse to town, and discuss the broadsheet nailed to the side of the tavern with the other white land-owning men.
You are giving consent when you vote. You are saying this choice is fine.
No, you are saying "Of the realistic choices I have I'm choosing what is BEST".
Maybe America is at a point where voting is not the solution.
Then do something about it. Talking about it on the internet is easy. You think modern Americans are going to revolt? Lol. Have fun with that.
people downvote this but ‘voting for the lesser of two evils’ is. What. Has. Got. You. Here.
No, what got us where we are right now is people crying about not wanting to vote for the lesser of two evils and allowing the real evil to waltz the fuck into power.
yes. the numbers are roughly the same, in the 20-35% range of the population.
but because our systems are generally more robust, it's easier to fight back, while the US has become completely captured because their system is antiquated and easily gamed.
haha yeah, i mean, whatever ppl want, i just want them to be realistic about this, rather than pretending suddenly a plurality of the American voting populace in enough states are going to start voting DSA. XD
Americans are too pussy to violently revolt. If it was going to happen it would have already happened.
So the next, actually realistic option, is to change the Democrat party by primarying the shit out of the reps that won't get onboard with what liberals want.
How do I know this is possible? Because conservative voters just did it to the Republican party over the last decade or two.
If Zohran Mamdani gets elected and actually follows through with his campaign promises, this is factually incorrect. I am holding on to that last glimmer of hope.
actually follows through with his campaign promises
Don't count on it. Not for any bad reason, just that things are harder to implement than campaign promises, whether it's city council in the way or just practicality.
I'm just saying he can be a success without implementing all of his campaign ideas.
I can almost guarantee you that both corporations and the right wing will try to stop or reverse anything he does. If he shows that the Republicans oppose these extremely popular initiatives, it might cause a massive swing of voters, who believed trump's campaign promises, to shift over to the left.
This isn't what would happen.
Realistically all that will happen is the party ignoring him and continuing to pander to the right.
The last time the democrats were progressive was under Roosevelt. Not much longer and that will be 100 years ago.
And that would be your opinion. Do you belive there is another path of action that can be taken that would result in better living standards for the majority of people in America?
You know Marx wrote several books about that. And he's by far not the only person who has.
The first step in the right direction is delegitimising the state and its institutions. Protest, normalisation and strategic use of political violence. Disruption and sabotage of the economy as much as that's possible for an individual or group. The building of mass movements, not necessarily political parties, with a concentrated vanguard leadership.
I am volunteering at my local DSA chapter to try to affect positve change in the direction of my views. So, what steps are you taking in the real world to make real change in the US?
It is great to have ideals, but if all you do is talk about how, "X is not possible and we actually need to do Y", you discredit those who are actually putting in effort to make a change and discourage people from even trying.
I am actively engaging in a political party that seeks a departure from the US and NATO. It uses populist policies to polarize and at the same time weakens the far right by drawing from their ranks with said populist rhetoric and policies.
We are doing what we can, but to topple any government, conditions first have to worsen.
As I've said before the best we can basically do is stoke the flames until the right conditions arise for real change.
My issue is not with people trying to act. It's with people who act wrong either out of malice or just ignorance. That is what reform is. Capitalism has never been overthrown via reform and never will be now. Liberals are too brainwashed to realise that capitalism needs to be overthrown for any meaningful lasting change, so instead they act to feed it, thinking they can reform it into being good. Something which is not possible, as it goes against it's structure and ideals.
No, I expect liberal voters to get off their asses and keep primarying establishment Dems that aren't serving their constituents so we can reform the Democrat party.
I'm expecting Hope and Change 2.0. Mamdani is almost certainly going to quickly be informed of how wealthy he and his kids can be and turn his back on New Yorkers if he gets elected, just like Obama.
They've always needed help to lose. The Republicans are so horrible, voting for literally anything else is a no brainer. That's why they hire strategists and consulting firms to help them lose.
There's no way to win political power in the United States without the Democratic Party or the Republican Party.
Socialists and progressives will always have an easier time infiltrating the neoliberal Democratic Party over the fascist Republican Party.
The longer the fascists are in power the harder it will be remove them from power because they will change the rules to maintain power.
The optimal strategy remains to vote for neoliberals when the alternative is fascists because that is how to create time for socialists and progressives to primary neoliberals in the Democratic Party and win general elections.
This meme is a continuation of the accelerationism we saw during the 2024 election. It supports the fascist cause by attempting to sabotage leftist's best strategy and thus is pro-fascist. The user is prone to self-sabotage as they publicly admitted to not voting for Harris in 2024.
If a fascist drinks at your bar and you don't throw them out it's a fascist bar. If a fascist meme ends up in your community and you don't throw it your a fascist community.
I am reporting this meme. And you all should too. I'm sick of self-described leftists backstabing me and every other minority group they pretend to care about because they're mad about the 2016 election. I'm a trans, atheist, Jew. I'm close enough to the death camps for my liking thanks. You don't have to like the Democrats, I don't, but we do need to vote for them.
I refuse to go quietly. I refuse to tolerate memes that shrug at my right to exist and throw fuel to the fire in the hopes that the fascists kill everyone faster. That's not a real political position. It's black pilled bullshit and it can fuck off.
Hope that helps people stop tolerating this bullshit going forward.
What the fuck are you talking about I've heard it a million fucking times already. Its all anti-Harris lefties talk about.
Having fun with the fascism we've got instead? Thanks for that BTW. Real good. Really makes me motivated to fight for my rights when my follow lefties keep empowering fascists through inaction in the most simplistic and basic fucking democratic function of going to a polling place and voting once every 4 years for the lib that'll beat the fascist.
I really wanna go fight ICE in hand to hand combat and get shot in the fucking face knowing this probably could have been prevented.
Also if you are going to complain that I'm not bagging on the centrist/liberal dems for losing because they refused to budge left: I fucking hate them too, you can both suck shit directly out of my asshole.
Yeah, there are a lot of stupid fucking idiots out there, including on Lemmy, that are going to do the same stupid fucking thing they did last time and either not vote or vote for a 3rd party candidate that cannot, under any circumstance, win. And we'll descend even further into fascism.
Lot of stupids. But as I scroll down these comments, the majority are calling this meme out for the stupid fucking bullshit that it is. So I still have a little hope. I'm sure that'll get destroyed in the near future.
Progressives do vote for centrists. Centrists do not return the favor and vote for progressives. Harris didn't lose because the left staying home; the left held their nose and voted for her, even though that loyalty is a one-way street. She lost because she was such a dog shit candidate that she couldn't drive enough people who aren't highly politically engaged to the polls. The only reason she lost the election was because of her own poor decisions. Stop blaming the left for the failures of centrist democrats.
This is the same frustrating conversation we had to have when people blamed Clinton’s loss on Bernie bros staying home.
Even when we had concrete data that showed that a higher percentage of bernie voters voted for Clinton in 2016 than Clinton voters voted for Obama when he won the primaries.
The data tells us over and over that progressive and demsoc voters show up in higher numbers for candidates they prefer less than centrists will when presented with someone ideologically further left.
Are there people that wouldn’t vote for the centrist candidate, sure. But Mamdani is currently seeing how many centrists are happy to say “fuck strategy, I’m supporting cuomo!”
I get why those that still have faith in the Democratic Party are upset about the defeat. But I also understand why leftists are tired of being told “vote for this compromise candidate” in every election and even when we do turn out getting scape goated for them running garbage candidates that fail to capture the further left elements AND tons of non-left voters who sat at home and didn’t bother to vote.
Giving a shit is more work than not giving a shit. But voting for a candidate doesn't mean you like them and it doesn't bind you to supporting them. I can post "Harris is a cop fuck cops >:-(" after I voted for her.
IMO the key is: how long does it take you to vote, and if you don't vote what are you doing with that time that is more valuable and progressive?
If someone told me, "I didn't vote last election because I was campaigning 18 hours a day for native land rights and there was no way to get mail or reach a polling place" OK. I'm not blaming that person. They're working way the fuck harder than I am to make the world better. If someone told me, "I didn't vote last election because I barely survive on my three jobs and the GOP has made my polling place a 6 hour line that I have to drive to. I can't even afford the gas to get there." Yeah, that makes sense.
But I never hear that from online progressives. I hear, "oh I didn't vote because both parties suck." "I didn't vote because they didn't support ." "I didn't vote because there's no point." These are all shitty answers. Better answer is: "I did vote for the Democratic candidate and I'll always vote for the most progressive candidate available." That's the minimum effort.
She lost because Dems stayed home, low turnout in key Democratic areas. No matter how bad you think she was as a candidate you're not going to convince me that she was worse than the dog shit candidate that won, and that's on the people that stayed home.
She was objectively worse. Trump represented his base. Kamala didn't. Trump is objectively the better politician. He gave his base exactly what they wanted. She refused to, preferring to pander to wealthy conservatives instead. You can argue she had better policies, but you cannot argue that she wasn't an absolute dogshit candidate. She was simply bad at being a politician and had no business being at the top of the ticket.
You need to separate quality of policies from quality of candidate. You'll never make any progress as long as you keep conflating the two.
Today I learned a prosecutor with a doctorate in law who has committed no crimes and ran a campaign primarily focused on unity and inclusion is objectively worse than a convicted felon and adjudicated rapist who illegally attempted to overturn an election after inciting an insurrection and ran a campaign based on hate and fear.
She refused to, preferring to pander to wealthy conservatives instead.
She refused to lie through her fucking teeth to her base or make enemies of our fellow Americans to win an election. And she gave a podium to a prominent conservative that spoke out against Trump. Maybe not a great move, but not some betrayal.
She also ran with virtually no preparation out of necessity.
We can keep blaming Harris or we can start blaming stupid fucking Americans that jeopardized our democracy because she wasn't the best candidate ever. Like, what kind of broken fucking brain thinks "well, she's not that great, so let me gamble with a felon rapist traitor instead"?
Reading comprehension. You're confusing policies for candidate quality. Trump was a good politician with shitty policies. Kamala was a dog shit politician with ok policies.
It's pointless to blame the electorate because they're not going anywhere. Or are you more of a Zionist type, who would prefer just killing the electorate if they don't vote your way?
She was in-arguably the worst candidate because she lost. She wouldn't have been the worst president.
The bullshit is centrists blaming it on the left. We told them how to win, and they went a different way. We showed up for her anyways, but the shitty candidate lost.
Any American that isn't braindead stupid knew what was on the line this election.
And any American that knew what was on the line voted for Harris.
You can blame Democrats all day, and they do shoulder some blame, but the majority of the blame falls on stupid fucking Americans that couldn't rub some brain cells together, not a party that isn't great at messaging.
And what do you hope to accomplish by blaming the electorate? They're not going anywhere. You can bitch about the voters all you want. But ultimately, if you fail to appeal to them, that just means you're a bad politician. Complaining about voters is like complaining about the weather.
I'm blaming anyone who choose not to vote for her who were center or left of center. Anyone. As stated: if you are to my right or to my left and you explicitly choose not to vote for Harris and could have, you can suck shit.
If you discouraged people from voting for her: you can suck shit. If you constantly criticized her and barely talked about how fucking dangerous Trump is in general political discourse: you can suck shit.
The typology groups at either end of the political spectrum, Faith and Flag Conservatives and Progressive Left, are also the most politically engaged – that is, they voted at the highest rates in the 2020 presidential election, and they are most likely to say they post about politics on social media and that they donated to campaigns. The groups in the middle of the ideological spectrum have much lower levels of political engagement.
So quit uncritically accepting the mainstream establishment excuses. Harris lost because she was a shitty candidate, not because the left doesn't vote.
you can both suck shit directly out of my asshole.
Gosh, were you out campaigning for Harris? I just can't understand how she didn't attract more voters. Scolding voters seems like such a solid strategy. /s
Uh, no. This anti-Harris lefty, like the vast majority of anti-Harris lefties, knows an outside strategy is insane and mostly right wing propaganda.
I meant anti-Harris lefties who actively wanted her to lose to Trump. (Which TBH, if they were vocally anti-Harris when it was clear it was her or Trump, they did)
Maybe if there had been more anti-Harris lefties in the party, we would have had a viable candidate.
How? How would you propose that could have realistically happened?
Nope. The following is from a Pew Research study.
So quit uncritically accepting the mainstream establishment excuses. Harris lost because she was a shitty candidate, not because the left doesn’t vote.
Did I say it was specifically because "the left doesn't vote"? No.
Its partially because more of them don't vote compared to the last election.
The ratios of progressives vs centrists who normally vote anyway is irrelevant. What is crucial is the percentage shift in voting behavior within groups election to election. Clearly this election centrist Democrats, Progressive Democrats, and left leaning indies failed to get out and vote compared to previous elections.
Its not hard to figure out why but its not a singular reason.
Now does some of the blame go to the Democratic establishment? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY. But not all of it.
Fuck everyone even remotely responsible. Just fuck them. I legitimately hate them. (Including Harris and Biden themselves)
Gosh, were you out campaigning for Harris? I just can’t understand how she didn’t attract more voters. Scolding voters seems like such a solid strategy. /s
I did actually, I traveled 5 hours out of state to canvass for her in a swing state. I was a different person then.
I can tell you, I'm done now. Political action is dead for me. I don't want to swim up a fucking waterfall anymore. I'm done spending my own time and money on this shit. Not enough people give a flying fuck. If it takes things getting critically apocalyptic-level bad for average people to move their dumb-fuck-asses and be politically conscious about what is going to happen to them when fascists win I can't bring myself to care about them anymore.
So you can go ahead and choose to not vote next election. I don't care enough to argue with you on that now. Because now it wont be arguments convincing people, it'll be catastrophic damage done to the country and their ability to put 2 and 2 together.
The time of bickering for positive change is over. Now we get to see some mass death and material suffering. I already tried. I not putting more of myself in for a ride I very much did not sign up for and in fact tried very hard to avoid.
At this point I'm just screaming into brick wall for a sliver of catharsis.
I meant anti-Harris lefties who actively wanted her to lose to Trump
If you think that's a large enough group that it had any impact whatsoever on the election, then you are insane.
How? How would you propose that could have realistically happened?
Well, for one we wouldn't have nominated Biden and never would have been in that position with Harris. We might have also held Biden's feet to the fire more, thus discovering his mental state long before election time.
Its partially because more of them don’t vote compared to the last election.
None of that says that "lefties" in particular didn't vote for Harris. Left policy sells, so a further left Harris would have done better, but that's the establishment's fault, not leftists. It also doesn't take a leftist to be against genocide.
Now does some of the blame go to the Democratic establishment? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY. But not all of it.
That's funny, because nothing you said before gave them any fault at all, and you definitely seemed in the mood to throw fault around.
So you can go ahead and choose to not vote next election. I don’t care enough to argue with you on that now.
Bernie is too liberal for all those big donors who pump up the Democrats via Super PACs. He might get in the way of them profiting off the American people. Bernie would have been the best choice for this country at beating back the MAGA movement before it became what we have now.
he’s not as popular in real life as he is on the internet.
Not exactly true. In both 2016 and 2020, the number one reason voters gave for choosing Clinton or Biden over Sanders was electability. They preferred Sanders, but didn't think he could win the general. He didn't lose because he wasn't popular, he lost because people thought he was unpopular.
On the other hand, I feel like I only ever see people arguing this on the Internet using examples of other people from the Internet. Every liberal person I know IRL loves Bernie, and many of them even say " But I understand that the party can't run him because a lot of democratic voters think he's too far to the left". Like, are these voters in the room with us right now?
There's a serious flaw in using your personal connections to gauge an entire electorate. That said, those acknowledging him not being able to win are in the same boat with me. I'd love for him to be president.
I just think it's funny that Bernie Bro "progressives" helped Trump come to power despite Bernie directly and publicly telling them to vote for Harris. All of a sudden they don't care what he says. Bernie understands that any improvement is better than drastic regression. Wish I could say the same for about 10 million extremely stupid people.
You're right, and I really appreciate you bringing up the statistical angle there. I am a bit of a stats nerd and indeed am aware of the multiple biases present in that sample of insufficient size. However, since the Internet is so full of bots and I don't really trust the news on this, I don't have much more to go on. It sucks, but polls seem like straight up misinformation at this point to me
Downvotes from the people who don't know Bernie lost in both the 2016 and 2020 primaries because not enough people voted for him.
You are correct. As much as I like the guy, he is not as popular in reality as he is on the internet. But you can sure hurt a lot of feelings by pointing out that reality on the internet.
I hold nothing against Bernie. He does have real integrity.
The problem I have is the portion of his supporters that are essentially left-wing Trumpers. They don't care about the truth. They don't care about what's best for the country. They make lies about electoral cheating.
The only difference is that Trump is a fucking scumbag and Bernie has integrity. I say that because each time he lost in the primaries, he publicly endorsed the Democratic candidate. Because he's not a fucking moron and knew how destructive Trump presidencies would be. I find it interesting that THIS is the one issue Bernie Bros disagree on with Bernie. All of a sudden, he should NOT be listened to? He has also never claimed to have been cheated.
If people start voting in primaries that can change.
Am I optimistic that it will? No. But the problem is that people who want to see change aren't voting in primaries and then they complain that their choices suck.
Right…the primaries. Like when Jessica Cisneros ran in Texas, and Pelosi backed Henry Cuellar instead (voted with Trump >80% of the time) and poured tens of millions of DNC money into that race to ensure the progressive Cisneros lost.
Or perhaps more recently, when the DNC anointed candidates for the presidential nomination TWICE without holding a primary election in good faith. Then lost in spectacular fashion.
Establishment dems don’t play fair when they get challenged from the left, hell they completely throw democracy out the window when that happens. The party is lost and the real “Republican agents” are the ones saying “no no, keep voting blue you can change the party from within!” It’s a fool’s errand.
Yeah, the establishment has their thumb on the scale, and that sucks. It means that it will take more primary voters to overwhelm their influence. Like I said, I'm not optimistic.
But it is still the most viable path to change at this time. Unless you have a better suggestion? (Or do you just want to complain?)
Yeah, we’ve got to get rid of it. Could have been done easily with voting rights act on Biden’s day 1, but golly gee just couldn’t find the votes for any of that “supporting democracy” initiative now could we. Now look at what’s become of American democracy just a few short years later. Pathetic.
Get rid of it and replace with star voting as a national standard. Abolish the electoral college. If Congress wont represent us in these initiatives, hold an article V convention for the states to directly amend the constitution with these new voting regulations.
Now let's move on to the part where you have some suggestions.
Because if your suggestion is voting 3rd party you need to understand some things.
Which 3rd party? Cuz Americans splitting their votes among multiple 3rd parties guarantees a further decline into Republican fascism.
No 3rd party, at all, is ready to start winning national elections. They aren't even really winning any local or state elections. It's going to take a long time before a 3rd party is viable IF one decides to start putting in the hard work. So what would you suggest doing in the meantime when it comes to national elections?
You don't need to keep telling us everything is shitty. We get it. Start telling us what you think should be done about it that actually makes sense.
Anything left of center. Honestly I don’t care so long as it meets that requirement. Anything is better than the corporate uniparty ruling over us today.
Seems like you may not be familiar with PSL, check them out and then you can come back to tell me what you’ve learned.
In the meantime, here are some things you can do to help move us in the right direction:
organize locally against the fascist regime which is presently stealing everything from working class voters and is imminently coming to place many of us into slave labor camps. Whatever you do - don’t give money to democrats unless they’re part of the squad or endorsed by rebellion pac.
work towards getting money out of politics. If we don’t outlaw the presently legalized bribery, we simply have to take politicians at their word when they say they won’t take corporate pac money to control their votes. See Kirsten Sinema or John Fettterman for how well that tends to work out. Wolf PAC is non partisan and has been working towards this goal for years.
if you absolutely refuse to look outside democrats for representation, at least support ones who are intent on changing the system to end corruption and help the working class. Rebellion PAC is endorsing these type of candidates, very selectively. David Hogg’s leaders we deserve is doing something similar, but with more of a focus on ousting crusty establishment Republicrats from their too-long-held seats.
I don't think voting in a DNC primary will result in the most popular candidate being the chosen candidate to run as president. I beleive the DNC will choose the winner before the primary starts like they have for decades.
I don't beleive a canidate hand picked by the DNC will create positive change
Because we haven't put enough pressure on them yet.
Did you think this would end with David Hogg winning a vice chair position?
Gonna take more than that to change a party. But it's better than everyone splitting the vote for various 3rd parties that have absolutely no presence at all, whatsoever.
Let's see what happens with this NYC election. That's a bigger deal than David Hogg.
I was talking about after Trump's 1st election. The rnc was about to repeal Obamacare (without a replacement) and McCain did his thumbs down before voting to not repeal it.
You can do what the tea party did: capture a small enough portion of your voting base that covers the margin of victory (aka: the short hairs) and demand the party do your bidding.
If they cared about victory, you'd be right. But it's becoming pretty clear they care far more about money. If they're paid to lose anyway, this tactic is utterly useless.
Dumb doomer attitudes like this and the rest constantly plastered all over Lemmy (always by the same handful of users I've noticed) certainly isn't helping. "American" Lemmy is a small community, it's a lot smaller when you take out the bad faith "memelords" incessantly both-sides-ing and advocating for non-participation.
Depends, do like fascist cock shoved down your country's throat? Cuz I hate it. But if you don't, just keep arguing for electing fascists like you currently are.
The only people I routinely read on here bringing up non-voting are centrists. All the progressives, aside from a few performative tankies, I read on here said, "I'll hold my nose and vote for Kamala, but her choices are going to cost her the election."
The progressives showed up and voted for Kamala. And just like the progressives predicted, her shit policies meant that large numbers of low-engagement voters simply saw no reason to vote for her. Her democracy message fell flat because if you're in the poorest 90% of the US, you do not live in a democracy.
Not really. The Tear Party replaced a pro-business party with an even more pro-business party. Or they replaced the pro-business party with a more bigoted pro-business party. They made no fundamental challenge to the power of wealth and influence within the Republican party. And they were not a real grass roots organization.
capture a small enough portion of your voting base that covers the margin of victory (aka: the short hairs) and demand the party do your bidding.
Now I have no idea if that's what the Tea Party did as I was way too young for politics at that time, but American progressives regard this particular strategy as nothing less than anathema to their very existence.
No, because most progressives would never make that threat, let alone follow up on it. I mean would you say "they didn't do what we want, don't vote Democrat"? Exactly.
I think progressives could easily run in Republican primaries and just start harping on labor and unions since no one else in that party does and tons of Union members vote Republican. What the worst that could happen? Collusion of the national party against the most popular left leaning or presidential candidate in the US, oh wait, the DNC already did that.
You cannot reform the United States of America because at it's core it is a capitalist and imperialist country that will always put corporate interests over human interests.
Oh shit, now the whole project is hopeless. Let me try again.
You cannot reform humanity because at it's core it is selfish and self-serving.
I guess we are all fucked. Or maybe we grow the fuck up and deal with the reality of what's in front of us and the work involved in making things better. If we can't reform the Democrats, then we have no chance in hell of shepherding a new party from nothing to national powerhouse without losing it to the same corrupting forces that hold the Democrats. Never-mind the realities of what it would take to take over the country with a third party in a first past the post system.
Okay, one still should vote for a Democrat president. Because why would you vote for a more hostile government? Unless of course you want everything go-to shit but you should lead with your intention.
So let me guess. The solution is to vote for a 3rd party that has absolutely no presence in our federal government at all, hoping that magically one of their reps can become president and save the country, despite having absolutely no support within the federal government, at all? And we'll just all agree to pretend like they won't become susceptible to corporate interests as well so they can actually accrue enough money to start winning elections.
Ok, so enough of that stupid bullshit. Let's hop on back to reality.
In reality, we have to vote Democrat for the time being because WE JUST FOUND OUT WHAT FUCKING HAPPENS IF WE DON'T. Meanwhile, we hope that a 3rd party can get off its fucking ass and start winning local/state elections so they can start getting MORE THAN ZERO representatives in the House and Senate, so that someday they can actually have a real shot at running a candidate for president.
This meme is grade school level dogshit. It only serves to split the vote more on 3rd party candidates that can't win and ensure Republican control of our government for even longer. We don't live in fantasy land. 3rd parties can't recite magical incantations and gain control of our federal government. There's a really fucking long process for a road to the presidency for a 3rd party, and in the meantime, we fucking vote Democrat because HAVE WE FUCKING LEARNED NOTHING?
Corporate interests are human interests. They are the interests of the few. Its class. The class of the wealthy - the class of the few. Its always class we need to break down. Nothing maters more.
It may not be worth the effort to reform it, but claiming that it "can't" be reformed is asinine. A political party is not some higher order being, timeless and unchanging, nor even one with a fundamental permanent set of core tenants that all else springs from. It's a group of people with a bit of bureaucracy that influence and decide somewhat collectively on their shared goals. Of course that can change fundamentally.
In fact it has changed fundamentally in the not too distant past. Look at the Democratic party (and the Republican party) of the Jim Crow era compared to today. They essentially flipped to the other side of the political spectrum. It's absolutely not easy to change a party fundamentally and not quick to do so, either. Old minds are not easily swayed with the times. The primary way to change party ideals is through new minds and perspectives joining the party and the old ones leaving it. Generational change is slow AF but it does definitely happen. Concerted effort for young people with new ideals to join the party is the best way to induce this change. Again though, that is a lot of effort and takes times. The bigger he ship, the harder to steer. There are alternatives, all of which also take a ton of effort, probably a lot more effort really, but might be faster if it works out.
I don't know why we keep having to have this talk about why reformism doesn't work. Rosa Luxembourg addressed this pretty well.
We aren't likely to get Reformations, the problems with the Democratic party are baked directly in to the institution.
Anything offered as Reformation is a token to ensure that the masses don't revolt at least until the Reformation can be clawrd back by the powers that be.
The Democrat Elites thought of that which is why they use super delegates which ensure that a candidate cannot be too radical.
Not only that the situation surrounding both parties is entirely different. People saw Donald Trump initially as a harmless moron. People in the DNC see radicals and progressives as an enemy to be contained
We aren’t likely to get Reformations, the problems with the Democratic party are baked directly in to the institution.
What's the difference between the Democratic party and the United States of America in this regard? If the Democrats can't be reformed, why can the USA be reformed? If the USA can't be reformed, then what's the point of this discussion?
Well theoretical the DNC is not baked directly into the government and continues its stranglehold by trying to kill all 3rdparty prospects pretty aggressively.
If a group was able to pull it off and build a completely new political party it could change the fabric of the government the same way MAGA is now however this is not Reformation. Its a soft power Revolution similar to what happened with Adelle in Chile.
I mean functional what's occurring with the Trump administration is a soft power revolution.
The point of this discussion is to encourage people to put down the DNC in favor of other organizations like local ones that actually benefit the community by helping the impoverished or to look at other organizations like the DSA or PSL or FSRO which at least help encourage people to learn anarchist or Marxist theory which is significantly better at predicting and helping people navigate the political landscape then the neoliberal theory that lead us here in the first place.
Well theoretical the DNC is not baked directly into the government and continues its stranglehold by trying to kill all 3rdparty prospects pretty aggressively.
No, it's not aggressive at all in trying to kill 3rd parties. That's because 3rd parties aren't a threat to power in this country. It uses 3rd parties as an excuse for their losses, and uses that to go after the left (something it does do aggressively).
Its a soft power Revolution similar to what happened with Adelle in Chile.
Chile is a parliamentary system with proportional representation, not a first past the post winner takes all system. Totally different animal.
I mean functional what’s occurring with the Trump administration is a soft power revolution.
Yes, executed through an inside strategy of taking over the Republican party. Imagine that.
The point of this discussion is to encourage people to put down the DNC in favor of other organizations like local ones that actually benefit the community by helping the impoverished or to look at other organizations like the DSA or PSL or FSRO
If that were the point of this discussion, it would seem like that might have been something to mention before now.
Yep because allowing the DNC to blame third parties certainly doesn't create animosity towards third parties nor does it push the illusion that voting anything other than democrat or republican is handing the country over to your opponent.
Somebody doesn't know about the Socialist Revolution in Chile in the 70s... or the role the United States played in ending that.
Pretending that parliamentary systems aren't first past the vote is something else. They just happen to have a system where coalitions have a little more power. Definitely hasn't helped in France or the United Kingdom where the two major political parties continue to consolidate power.
Yes the Republican Party allowed themselves to be taken over since they believe anything for power which Trump is more than happy to oblige.
As I said before the Republican party did not take Trump seriously until it was too late and did not attempt to remove power from him. Where as the Democratic party actively stamps out Progressive politicians and policies.
Regardless of how other people feel I'm using this as an opportunity to talk about how the Democrats have failed us at every level politically and are now enabling the fascists take over of the United States and that it's time to abandon the Democrats and find a new party and a new type of political organization. Which is why I suggest talking to the DSA Or the psl or the FSRO.
Anything these guys teach you will be light years ahead of any political Theory you learn from a Democrat.
Most people use "can't" for things that are impractical, not just strictly impossible. But yes, let's argue about phrasing rather than the issue. That ought to fix everything.
There are so many Americans that don't grasp that this change can happen. Or understand the concept but outright refuse to have patience. And like you said, it's A LOT less effort, a LOT less time, and WAY more possible to primary and change the Democrat party than to cross our fingers for a random 3rd party to start actually doing something and winning some elections and getting reps in the House and Senate.
I've been alive for a while. I watched conservative voters change the Republican party to the fascist traitor party it is today. You can absolutely change political parties.
I know you're just being reductive, but that's a silly statement. They are objectively a political party. They also fundraise. They're not mutually exclusive.
The point is they measure success not by winning elections but by fundraising. "Harris couldn't have been wrong, she raised record amounts, it must be the the voters or something"
I see your point, however, the Democratic party is not fascist. It does provide a clear difference from the GOP. Wether we like it or not, USA is a two party system. We need to be practical here, not ideological, or we just go fascist forever.
No party cares about people that don't vote. Genuinely, they don't care at all. They're not going to find out what you wanted, because you didn't go against them. A non vote says "Yeah, whatever".
If you want to look at an example of how to break into a two party system, you need to look at UKIP in the UK.
The idea being not that you get enough votes to win (because that wouldn't happen), but attract enough votes to make the other parties steal your policies, so your voters go to them instead.
So if you want actual socialist policies, you all need to bury your leftist differences (hard I know, some of them don't even use Linux), set up a party that represents more or less what you want, and vote for it. Maybe that party is the Green party. Maybe it's something else.
"We'd rather have a convicted felon pedophile be president because the Democrats don't want to dismantle capitalism entirely and replace with... well we don't know what with".
You're arguing against your own masturbatory fantasy.
The left came out and voted for Harris. They held their nose and voted for the shit pile centrist, as they always do. We've seen with Mamdani that this loyalty is a one way street. Progressives hold their nose and vote for centrists, but centrists do not return the favor.
Harris lost because she couldn't drive enough politically unaligned, low-engagement voters to the polls. The average person who isn't that involved in politics simply didn't think it was credible that Harris would improve their lives in any way.
Aside from a few performative tankies, the message I kept reading on lemmy was "I'm going to vote for Harris, but her dog shit policies are going to cost her the election." And those progressive voices were ignored. Their desperate warnings were drowned out by people like yourself, sticking their fingers in their ears and going, "BLAH BLAH BLAH CAN'T HEAR YOU, VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO! IT'S YOUR FAULT IF THE FASCISTS WIN, I HOLD NO RESPONSIBILITY HERE!"
Harris lost because she couldn’t drive enough politically unaligned, low-engagement voters to the polls.
If those low engagement voters couldn't make it to the polls to protect our democracy and prevent a felon rapist traitor from becoming President, then the problem lies primarily with those fucking fools, not Kamala Harris.
Why do you expect anyone to care about democracy. Only the wealthiest 10% of the population lives in a democracy. 90% of the population has zero actual democratic power. You don't live in a democracy.
And Kamala, a candidate who was annointed, not elected, could credibly run on a platform of democracy.
We need to get involved at the primary level, not lament the choices we are left with when primary election turnout is hilariously low. I'd be surprised if the average voter even knows what a primary election is.
I can’t stand this faux leftist bullshit. There’s a reason why I call this right wing nonsense: it impedes the improvement of people’s material lives. We don’t have to like the Democrats in order to reject this absolute nonsense.
And your attitude in turn is why there’s no party who represents the views of most people. You’ve already decided it’s impossible without trying, even though the majority of democracies in the developed world today are not trapped in two-party systems.
Most modern democracies don't enforce First Past the Post by law, and don't have a winner-takes-all system. A better strategy is to primary democratic representatives as much as possible, and take over down-ballot positions as soon as possible. That way we can make steps towards dismatling Citizen's United, repealing all the laws that prevent moving away from FPTP, and implement RCV.
I am more than willing to try, if not for the fact that splitting the left would cede electoral victories to the right for several cycles while people figure out what "the new left" is. If we do this in our current era, Republicans will actually kill us while we sit on our ass and convince ourselves to split our vote (as has been shown with the most recent administration)...
This has been shown in history-- every time a third party tries to get made, the opposition party wins for several cycles. The most notable of which is (imo) Theodore Roosevelt's Progressive party in 1912. It got 27% of the vote (2nd in terms of popular vote and won several downstream races). But, the left vote was split by 27%, so the right won by a very large majority. They decided to ultimately dissolve and infiltrate the left wing party.
You are 100% correct, but I fear this is too complex for most Americans to understand and too much of a "long game" thing for the rest to be willing to get onboard with. I have very little faith in our electorate.
There are two paths, an inside and an outside strategy. The inside strategy is far simpler, has far greater potential for success, and will harm the least people along the way. Acknowledging that isn't "giving up", it's picking strategy like a grown-up, not some kid afraid to turn down a dare.
without trying
This is the most idiotic thing about third party advocates. There have been third parties running consistently for decades, and we are somehow supposed to pretend that that lengthy record of dismal failure doesn't exist. Meanwhile, inside strategists haven't won everything yet, so we are supposed to switch to a strategy with a far worse track record.
This is the most idiotic thing about third party advocates.
One interesting thing I've noticed in these discussions is how quickly the two-party advocates will bring out words like "idiotic" and attack the person not the argument... it really is a movement driven by fear.
Yeah it's fear. Fear that fuckwits are going to drive the country into the hands of fascists. Is that not worth a bit of concern, or is that just too far fetched an outcome?
And don't act like it's one sided mate. Calling me a coward by coming at it sideways doesn't change your meaning.
Maybe we want a 3rd party to start actually doing something and winning local/state elections instead of randomly showing up every 4 years to try to win a national election.
The smart move, which we just got a hard lesson on, is to vote Democrat until a 3rd party becomes viable, because the other option is Republican fascism, which is what we got.
The Democrats used to be the racist pro slavery party. Then it got captured and turned into Roosevelts New Deal Democrats, which were obviously to the left of the Republicans. Not perfect, but they really did a lot of good.
also like to point out that many of them are DINOs, and are republicans that wouldnt be electable otherwise in a GOP primary, so they have to put a democratic facade to just get elected.
I'll go further: It wouldn't be enough to simply reform one political party, anyway. The U.S. Constitution is a dead document, and its system of government is obsolete. The black hats have discovered the exploits, and everybody now knows how to game the system. We can't repair the system from inside the system, since it at the bottom line it runs on trust, and that trust in the system is gone. Just like in any relationship, it takes some material change to get people to trust again.
The Republican party was a party of radical abolitionists and it was captured by the capitalists. The Democratic party can likewise be changed to something it is not currently.
You can't convince me of what may be by talking about what is.
While the new progressive "MAGA" forms, we have to get MAGA/GOP out. Look to the good Dem primaries and pick the more progressive Bernie Sanders types.
MAGA needs to go though, if most of the country turns on the GOP, could probably have enough seats to impeach and remove Trump. Then do the same to Vance, then a dem speaker of the house could take over.
ITT is some progressives who put more time, energy and anger into bullying other progressives not to vote for a genuinely progressive candidate, than they do into trying to sincerely convince Republican voters not to vote Republican.
There’s a logical fallacy at play in their minds where they think “Republican voters aren’t reasonable but progressives are, so I’ll spend my time trying to whip progressives into holding the Party line. Maybe cussing them out and accusing them of being complicit in the rise of fascism will help…”
The Tea Party fundamentally and radically transformed the GOP. It can be done.
Unfortunately, the Democratic constituency is too impatient and too distractable and stupid to do it. The GOP has been playing the long game since Reagan, and they are good at messaging and good at being happy with incremental wins. Dem constituent groups are great at swinging for the fences every 4 years and failing, and great at circular firing squads of blame and purity testing. They suck at having allies that agree with them on 95% of the issues. They suck at getting on the bus come election time. They have been trained to be this way by the GOP.
Time was, unions were the counterweight to the capitalist forces, and were the effective counterweight. Everyone let GOP/Libertarian philosophy and talking points get a foothold, and that union power has disintegrated. Reagan made union-busting his first priority, and the air traffic controllers were the object lesson; now people think unions can't do shit. Now Dem blame the unions for shit, when really, they should be built back by anyone with a shred of liberal leaning, because that's where liberal power comes from. Liberals pout when their most favored candidate doesn't survive the primaries, and they complain about how The Man is keeping them down.
Hey the DNC is a private org and the courts have affirned their right to run and rig their internal elections(which include primaries) anynway they want, including simpy ignoring the outcome. Idk why you think their self run elections are fair or free but thats a massive huff of copium.
Surely you can become a member of the democracy party and have a say in its direction?
No one seemed interested in that suggestion.
Also, Americans don't seem to understand that the dems have become conservative because they're trying to steal votes from the republicans. They can't afford to differentiate because they already struggle to win.
Like a business with executives at the top that have argued in court that what the constitutes want doesnt matter.
Its mostly a massive political network that Dems used to push ineffective policy that won't offend their billionaire donors like Mark Cuban based on old outdated ideas of austerity and altruism.
Their primary function seems to be collect money from the vulnerable utilizing predatory donation collecting that results in seniors finding all their money "donated" and in bankruptcy.
To ensure the constitutes can not force a change in the party the same way Trump did the DNC uses super delegates which are appointed automatically by holding various positions in the party itself. This prevents radical candidates like Bernie Sanders from getting the presidental nomination along with the fact they just ignore the will of the voters which they've argued in court successfully that they do.
Seems to me the primary purpose of the Democrats right now is to waste people's time fighting for ineffectual political policies that will be blocked by the single token "moderate" politician.
They dont do a lot but what they do seems designed to prevent the left from winning.
See the "abundance" agenda for an example of rightwing economic policies wrapped into a liberal dressing.
I just want to point out that they are, including and especially the current pos, I mean Pota, business people, and businesses are, with one exception, authoritarian in nature. The exception? A co-op.
Orders are barked from the top, and that shit rolls down hill until it lands on someone with the skills necessary to execute on those orders.
Now take that, and build an entire political party on it, and for the likes and subscribes, throw in a religious element because the religious books can be "interpreted" whatever way we want to justify whatever we want to do, and that will garner some extra votes.
At this point we need to create a mechanism that allows public pressure on a party.
Switching from FPTP voting (one-person, one vote) to something else will allow for other parties to have a chance but that will take time to brew.
We're not ready for sortition (selection of officials by lottery) but that would end the career of politicians. And having barbers and coal miners govern is better than what we got now, even if they'll need a lot of handholding, and an institution to swat away lobbyist pests.
The voters really did a number breaking open Pandora's jar in November. It's a fine mess they've brought upon us, and one we may not survive to clean up.
If all Democrats were members of the Democrats (party), then you could just have real elections inside the party. Then when the Democratic party wins against the fascist party, it could be democratic policy to make your country democratic.
Welcome to reality, where adults pick the BEST available option instead of crying about morality while they allow the least moral future to take place.
Roosevelt did great things for Americans while still being capitalist. The needle can be moved left without violent revolution.
"Both sides bad" is weak sauce.
Quick reminder that there were other things going on in the 20s and 30s. You know, the height of socialism in the West, a strong labor movement willing to burn down factories, stuff like that. The New Deal didn't come because leftists played nice.
The coal wars threatening to kick off a second civil war, y'know small things.
Blue Morpho apparently never learned about the Battle of Blair Mountain or the Railway Strikes.
So there ARE conditions by which reform can occur, neat.
Yes, but you have to be willing to crack bourgeoisie skulls.
A socialist movement independent from either of the major parties too!
I feel like Western labour just doesn't have any leverage anymore. The rich simply do not need us. They have outsourced enough labour that they really don't care if we strike en masse. Like, shut down which factories? They're all overseas.
That's what they want you to think. Their own lives depend on Western labor. That's who runs the ports, the railways, the warehouses, etc. Also a lot of high-tech stuff is still in the West.
No, the new deal only came to be after violent protests, and was largely a betrayal of labor groups because it gave a much watered down version of what was actually demanded, all while Roosevelt broke the strike he promised to support while campaigning. Read "Labor's Giant Step Forward" by Art Preis if you want a more detailed accpunt
In addition to the points raised by some of the other comments I'd remind you of one uncomfortable truth. The business plot was attempted fascist takeover of America. That was thankfully put down because remarkably there was one honorable ex-marine they tried to involve the plot. That's Smedley Butler. In the wake of that that attempted fascist coup basically nobody was punished. In large part because Roosevelt told them as long as they kept their mouth shut and didn't block the New Deal he wouldn't go after them. That's basically the only reason it got through. Truncated as it was even then. Because most of the richest and most powerful people in the country we're looking down the barrel of a gun otherwise.
Prescott Bush and his cronies should have been hanged.
And Smedley Butler Day should be a national holiday.
Have fun wasting your time doing this. If they only fucked over Burnie once I might agree with you.
Well, they will still try. They won't give it up. But it's not possible to win it against them, like the Tea Party won against less extreme establishment Republicans
If you had to go back almost a hundred years to find any kind of example, I'm just going to gesture broadly at the next hundred years and rest my case.
Roosevelt was the least bad president and was ruling during a time where the US ended up on the right side of a conflict. He still did not abolish capitalism or the American empire, nor did he have any intentions to.
But that doesn't make the democrats good, it doesn't make one side better, it doesn't make the US good.
One side IS objectively better.
That's proven by economic stats.
That's proven by voting history.
That's proven by criminal conviction history.
There is no debate which side is better if you're even remotely interested in facts.
You take the side that is better and you reform it by primarying the reps that won't play ball for their constituents., sending a clear message to the reps that remain. That is how democracy works in its most effective form.
can it be done again without another series of protests and pain the current era of capitalism?
Both sides are varying degrees of the same ideology, give all the money to the economic elite so they bribe both parties into maintaining that policy above all other considerations.
One side shrugs and calls it free market forces(D) as you suffer under that policy goal, the other points and laughs at you and says you deserve it(R). That is the extent of our "freedom" under American democracy.
One side appoints Justices that voted against Citizens United and one appoints Justices that voted for it. That's a huge distinction.
With unintelligent comments like yours and all the discussions happening below meme threads, conflicts and violence is where we are heading to. I encourage you to learn more about the things you are talking about.
Both sides are functionally the same when it comes to the world. There's barely a difference between domestic policy between the two American parties. One uses sweet nothing's to try assuage your fears and the other uses Force and strongman techniques.
Yeah the FDR Reformation came directly from FDR and we pushed through at his behest. According to my understanding of these politics at a time if The president hadn't been FDR we would not have gotten those Reformations. Besides they hardly matter nowadays when they're practically entirely Stripped Away. The last surviving one is social security and they're pretty gung-ho about getting rid of that too.
Instant downvote. Lazy trash.
Couldn't be bothered to read. Ad hominem attack. Excellent representation of the American voter.
People who type the words "both sides" and then post don't deserve to have their comments read.
People who are unable to read are one of the reason the United States is in the toilet.
People who use fallacies so they don't have to engage with the objective facts of an argument they're not able to impeach are another reason the world is falling to facism
Yep.
All the keyboard warriors talking about revolution need to either pick up and gun and do it or get off their asses and help primary bad Dems to send a message and start the reformation process.
No one who made it out of high school should be saying "both sides" because it's a profoundly stupid and unproductive thing to say. Did we have masked squads disappearing people before January? Did our allies all hate us? Were we threatening fucking Canada? Were we paying tariff taxes?
What is the point of this meme? I feel like the only thing this can produce is people to not try to reform and improve the democratic party and take it over (like the tea party took over the republicans). Kind of like these "give up climate change it can't be stopped" posts that just benefits the big fossil fuels companies
That's the point, I've noticed a lot of the loudest, most active posters on Lemmy ultimately want one thing, which is progressives not to vote. Weird how that's what the conservatives have relied on for every presidential victory they've achieved in the past half century or more.
Votes are earned not freely given. Your vote is your voice. Definitely vote at the local and state levels where your voice can be the loudest.
And if you only want to give half a vote, give it to Trump and JD.
(Because not voting is very similar to half a vote for the other guy.)
Not voting wasn't a vote for Trump. Did not voting for Trump mean a vote for Harris?
It was.
It would mean you wouldn't have minded a Harris victory. The comment even explicitly said "half a vote" to reflect this.
This commentary is frequently also accompanied with blaming Harris voters for things that Trump is doing...
don't worry bout dat
First off, it's four years, get your math right. Secondly, we only bomb browns, we just sell the bombs to anyone wanting to bomb whites. "Foreigner" and "non-foreigner" really have nothing to do with it. I think mainly we just feel really secluded over here and we don't want to be left out of all the cool Europe and Asia and Africa happenings, this is just the only way we can express ourselves.
These memes communicate to Democrats and their supporters that we're sick and tired of their mask-off conservative rule when they promise us the world and do nothing once elected. You want praise? You want votes? Then do something.
Since, you know, not voting for them apparently isn't enough to inspire meaningful change. Just once in my life I want to see Democrats fight harder for the working class and poor as they do against socialists and third parties.
Time for you to educate yourself. Look up Dem's economic stats compared to Republicans. Look up the Dem's voting history.
They aren't doing EVERYTHING, but they do a lot more than the other viable option.
If you want them to do more, then stop wasting your time doing what you're doing and start focusing on getting people to primary Dems who aren't doing what we want, because that's how you get Democrat party reform.
This meme is utter trash and only serves to fracture liberals and prevent the reform I just described.
Just once I want liberals to come together and primary bad Dems to send a message instead of fucking whining and not voting or voting 3rd party so fascists can take over.
They did.
That bad candidate was Joe Biden.
The Democratic Party just ignored it. Democratic primaries are a worthless exercise.
Joe Biden was not primaried.
Yes he was.
Read the link I embedded there. Also, there was Marianne Williamson.
Not that it would have mattered, as Democrats rig their primaries anyway.
That's exactly it. This is the meme and attitude of tankies that are chomping at the bit for violence and doing everything they can to help push the country to the Right. This is because of their faith-based belief that it will magically create class consciousness and a revolution to overthrow the global bourgeoisie. They don't give two shits about the LGBTQ+, POC, medically vulnerable, etc people that they have to sacrifice in the process.
Smart. Having one's echo chamber and worldview contested can be terribly inconvenient.
You are correct. The OP has an agenda and that agenda is to fracture liberals.
The answer is not to give up. The answer is not to vote for a worthless 3rd party with zero chance of winning. The answer is to reform the Democrat party and history has shown us, repeatedly, that it is completely possible. And it literally just happened with the Republican party in the last 2 decades.
You should not attempt to reform something which is not reformable. Instead start something new.
In general, you should not reform. Revolution is the way forward.
Pick up a fucking history book.
Political party reform is entirely possible and has happened repeatedly in American history. Conservative voters just did it to the Republican party.
Scrapping an established party with national sway for a 3rd party with NO clout and NO representatives in the House or Senate is fucking stupid. Especially when we have a national party in power currently attempting to dismantle our federal government to replace with an authoritarian one.
Then do it. Big talk on the internet. If you think modern Americans are going to start a revolution, think again.
Easy to say from your parents basement.
Instead of projection, try self-reflection.
We need to capture the dems and turn them into a socialist party, just like the fascists captured the reps and turned them into a anti-worker. I spent way too long in the army to have the illusion that the american people are capable of changing anything through other means. It will not happen.
Not to be ignorant but I highly doubt you have the training, funding, or even the intestinal fortitude to do any of the things a revolution would entail. I also think that if you did find the courage it wouldn't matter because when they drop a non-explosive shredder warhead through your window it's all over. You have no idea what your asking people to do when there is a better way.
This reform is simply not possible. You cannot use the same methods as the far right and expect the same result but for a different ideology. They work differently, they're based on different systems and beliefs.
And you seriously underestimate the power of revolutionary warfare. Technological advances in military warfare have made things harder, but not impossible. In 93 Russians were in the streets fighting the Russian military to overthrow Yeltsin. They had the courage, even without the military training. On Vietnam a nation and it's people successfully defended their freedom against a technologically superior army. And I don't think I need to list how many coups and revolutions have appeared over the past 100 years. You can't think it's impossible looking at history.
I am no billionaire able to fund a milita, nor am I a general. But when the time arises or rather if it arises while I live, I do have the zeal to kill and die for what I believe in.
No, as I said I was in the military for almost a decade. I promise you I'm way more versed in the art of turning people into fertilizer than you ever will be. 1993 was 30 some years ago. The techg for killing people has improved drastically. You have no idea how many ways the US has to kill you. I saw things in 2005 that would still blow your mind.
Technological advances do not change societal upheaval.
Revolutions don't fight the military in symmetrical warfare.
Militaries can defect, they can be sabotaged, their bases besieged, their supply lines disrupted, their forces stretched too thin, etc.
In ideal circumstances no revolution would have to fight one united military. Parts would defect or declare neutrality. Those who fight have finite supply and finances. What will a soldier do when he runs out of bullets and more importantly rations?
But in the absolute worst case, it will either lead to a more bloody victory or the military would have to literally depopulate the country with lethal force to establish their rule.
Also the 90s are not so far from your 2005. The majority of the military equipment Russia uses today in Ukraine is the same as during the Black October in 93.
What steps have you taken to start the New American Revolution, champ?
China produces ~65% of global smartphones. At worst US companies simply re-brand products from overseas OEMs, at best they're using Chinese produced semiconductors and components to create original products.
The rest of the consumer electronics market is pretty similar. If you believe modern China is communist then they are "doom-scrolling on their communist-produced smartphones" through a communist produced network infrastructure which you are, most likely, reading through a communist-produced screen.
I would argue however that modern China largely split the difference between the USSR, which you are McCarthy-ing about, and the modern Russian Federation, which explicitly reformed into a liberal democracy with a capitalist market economy.
Let me simplify: iPhones are built and designed by, what you consider, Communists.
Android is capitalism appropriating the largely anarchist project of Linux. Which if capitalists had their way would've been strangled in its cradle.
Aaaaand, you have no arguments to the contrary...
This is a right-wing troll talking point. Don't listen to it.
Go to the Democratic primaries and move the party left. And then, no matter who gets the nomination, vote Dem in the general election. This is exactly what the nazis did to move the GOP to the right and it worked great for them, and it's something we can emulate.
While I mostly agree with this, I have one significant hurdle I am unable to overcome. What other choice do I have?
I can't stand most Democrats. They suck! But they are a far cry better than voting Republican. And voting for a third party feels like wasting my vote.
If there was a third party candidate that focused on climate change and social issues and had even the slightest chance of winning, I would vote for them in a second. Until then, I am stuck voting for the lesser of two evils.
You just answered your own question.
Democrats are FAR, FAR, FAR better than Republicans. We know this because the data shows they are better for our economy. We know this because their voting record shows that they regularly vote in favor of the middle and lower classes. We know this because they never attempted to violently overturn an election or send masked squads into our towns to abduct people off the street.
No 3rd party is viable or will be viable anytime in the near future. It will take YEARS and YEARS for a 3rd party to start winning local/state elections and getting reps in the House and Senate. And that's IF a 3rd party actually starts putting in the work, which none are doing.
So if you want to be smart, and actually help protect our democracy, then you should vote Democrat in national elections and maybe vote 3rd party in local elections to help them gain some traction and see if they can do anything with it.
We know this because the data shows they are
better for our economyrich people's money.FTFY.
They're definitely not good for "our" money, meaning the 99% that works for a living, unless you're of the opinion that outright ignoring food and rent becoming cost-prohibitive is somehow good for "our" money.
Time for you to go back to high school econ. The healthier our economy, the more everyone benefits.
Totally, man.
Trickle-down economics has worked wonders.
Actually, when you vote, you just vote.
That's it. It's not a magic ritual, you don't telepathically send your message to the Holy Ghost of Democracy when you vote, Anubis isn't going to weigh your ballot against a feather before deciding on the fate of your soul.
You circle something or you don't and then you deal with whatever happens however you want.
If you vote for someone in an electoral democracy you're showing support for them, directly. Your vote is a translation of your democratic political power (in theory). It is the same as stating "I want this person in power/control". For that reason, yes voting for someone is literally endorsing them.
Yeah, "(in theory)" - that doesn't have to be inside brackets, all you speak of is a theoretical, ideal democracy. But what we have is, for many good and bad reasons, not even close to that (as can be seem from the actual process of any elections), and it is delusional and useless to act like it is.
So youre simultaneously saying you dont live in a democracy, and also that your vote matters? Those 2 ideas are entirely incompatible with each other.
I'm pretty sure I didnt say either of those things; I don't wish to argue about the semantics regarding the first statement, and the second statement is definitely correct for large parts of the population in some nominally democratic western countries (specifically US and UK whose electoral systems are a fucking disgrace).
Alright, but it's clear that I dismissed this idealist/theoretical mode of dealing with politics in my first comment, and I don't really see any arguments for reestablishing it.
Also yes i am speaking about the notion of democracy itself, that's why I put the words in theory there lol
Would you mind pointing me to somewhere where I could be educated on this matter?
They're all happy to gaslight themselves into thinking that they're the virtuous side, just like MAGA.
Meanwhile tens of millions of Americans are working three jobs at 100 hours a week just to be able to rent a roach-infested studio, which in the minds of Democrats, is apparently a-okay because they did nothing meaningful about it.
Also, everything you're seeing now, from normalized police brutality, to ICE raids, to black torture sites, to government-sponsored abductions ("extraordinary renditions"), to unilateral presidential warmaking... was all also done and supported by Democrats. Obama even killed an American with a drone strike. And, for more fun, go look up which president it was that appointed Tom Homan.
The only difference is one side gives nicer speeches.
Then cry and abstain from voting or vote 3rd party and see what it gets us.
Oh wait, it's already fucking happening.
When I was younger the Dems fought a protracted battle to get me affordable healthcare, with the Republicans trying to block it at every turn. The result is I got affordable healthcare when I had NONE before.
You should do yourself a favor and educate yourself. Look up how our economy fairs under Dems compared to Repubs. Look up both party's voting history and find out which one actually regularly votes in favor of the middle and lower classes. Look up their criminal conviction histories.
If you educated yourself you'd find out that one party is INFINITELY better for us than the other and if we actually got off our fucking asses and primaried the Dems that weren't onboard with what we want, they'd become even better for us.
Instead you're crying on the internet and trying to get people to give up.
You are part of the problem.
No. They pretended to, and then when the cost of health care rose to where it was unaffordable they shrugged their shoulders and left you and others to die in ER's. The 'access' Dems like to talk about disappears if you can't pony up for some health care CEO's superyacht.
You should stop making excuses. The last six months under Donald Trump have proven that every time you pretended Democrats were powerless, you were wrong.
No, you're the problem, because Democrats cannot fail badly enough to get you to change.
hahahahaha!!!1!
Yes, that's totally a meaningful comparison. Like, let me put on my trilby*, check on my slaves while I ride a horse to town, and discuss the broadsheet nailed to the side of the tavern with the other white land-owning men.
*tricorn
Tricorn. Trilbys wouldn't be invented for at least another century.
You're correct. Edited.
No, you are saying "Of the realistic choices I have I'm choosing what is BEST".
Then do something about it. Talking about it on the internet is easy. You think modern Americans are going to revolt? Lol. Have fun with that.
No, what got us where we are right now is people crying about not wanting to vote for the lesser of two evils and allowing the real evil to waltz the fuck into power.
you have no choice except this or violent revolt because your election system is garbage.
Have you paid attention to how european countries with various election systems (some non-garbage) are voting?
yes. the numbers are roughly the same, in the 20-35% range of the population.
but because our systems are generally more robust, it's easier to fight back, while the US has become completely captured because their system is antiquated and easily gamed.
don’t threaten me with a good time. (fully aware that a revolt is not a good time)
haha yeah, i mean, whatever ppl want, i just want them to be realistic about this, rather than pretending suddenly a plurality of the American voting populace in enough states are going to start voting DSA. XD
Lol.
Americans are too pussy to violently revolt. If it was going to happen it would have already happened.
So the next, actually realistic option, is to change the Democrat party by primarying the shit out of the reps that won't get onboard with what liberals want.
How do I know this is possible? Because conservative voters just did it to the Republican party over the last decade or two.
i agree that i don't think Americans have what it takes for an actual revolt.
i also agree that the actual Left should stop clutching their pearls and take over the Democratic party.
If Zohran Mamdani gets elected and actually follows through with his campaign promises, this is factually incorrect. I am holding on to that last glimmer of hope.
Don't count on it. Not for any bad reason, just that things are harder to implement than campaign promises, whether it's city council in the way or just practicality.
I'm just saying he can be a success without implementing all of his campaign ideas.
If he legitimately tries, that is enough for me.
I can almost guarantee you that both corporations and the right wing will try to stop or reverse anything he does. If he shows that the Republicans oppose these extremely popular initiatives, it might cause a massive swing of voters, who believed trump's campaign promises, to shift over to the left.
https://gothamist.com/news/how-voters-in-trump-districts-helped-mamdani-win-the-democratic-primary
And you expect the party to simply follow suit and embrace his policies?
This post is talking about co-opting the D party. Which is exactly what Mamdani would be doing if he follows through.
This isn't what would happen. Realistically all that will happen is the party ignoring him and continuing to pander to the right. The last time the democrats were progressive was under Roosevelt. Not much longer and that will be 100 years ago.
And that would be your opinion. Do you belive there is another path of action that can be taken that would result in better living standards for the majority of people in America?
You know Marx wrote several books about that. And he's by far not the only person who has.
The first step in the right direction is delegitimising the state and its institutions. Protest, normalisation and strategic use of political violence. Disruption and sabotage of the economy as much as that's possible for an individual or group. The building of mass movements, not necessarily political parties, with a concentrated vanguard leadership.
I am volunteering at my local DSA chapter to try to affect positve change in the direction of my views. So, what steps are you taking in the real world to make real change in the US?
It is great to have ideals, but if all you do is talk about how, "X is not possible and we actually need to do Y", you discredit those who are actually putting in effort to make a change and discourage people from even trying.
I am actively engaging in a political party that seeks a departure from the US and NATO. It uses populist policies to polarize and at the same time weakens the far right by drawing from their ranks with said populist rhetoric and policies.
We are doing what we can, but to topple any government, conditions first have to worsen. As I've said before the best we can basically do is stoke the flames until the right conditions arise for real change.
My issue is not with people trying to act. It's with people who act wrong either out of malice or just ignorance. That is what reform is. Capitalism has never been overthrown via reform and never will be now. Liberals are too brainwashed to realise that capitalism needs to be overthrown for any meaningful lasting change, so instead they act to feed it, thinking they can reform it into being good. Something which is not possible, as it goes against it's structure and ideals.
No, I expect liberal voters to get off their asses and keep primarying establishment Dems that aren't serving their constituents so we can reform the Democrat party.
I wish I could.
I'm expecting Hope and Change 2.0. Mamdani is almost certainly going to quickly be informed of how wealthy he and his kids can be and turn his back on New Yorkers if he gets elected, just like Obama.
This is GOP propaganda
Absolutely.
It's Democrat propaganda too. OP is helping the dems lose, just like they want
Since when do they need help to do that?
They've always needed help to lose. The Republicans are so horrible, voting for literally anything else is a no brainer. That's why they hire strategists and consulting firms to help them lose.
somebody said it nicely yesterday in a lemmy comment:
we need to capture the dems and turn them into a socialist party,
just like the fascists captured the reps and turned them into a nazi party
There's no way to win political power in the United States without the Democratic Party or the Republican Party.
Socialists and progressives will always have an easier time infiltrating the neoliberal Democratic Party over the fascist Republican Party.
The longer the fascists are in power the harder it will be remove them from power because they will change the rules to maintain power.
The optimal strategy remains to vote for neoliberals when the alternative is fascists because that is how to create time for socialists and progressives to primary neoliberals in the Democratic Party and win general elections.
This meme is a continuation of the accelerationism we saw during the 2024 election. It supports the fascist cause by attempting to sabotage leftist's best strategy and thus is pro-fascist. The user is prone to self-sabotage as they publicly admitted to not voting for Harris in 2024.
If a fascist drinks at your bar and you don't throw them out it's a fascist bar. If a fascist meme ends up in your community and you don't throw it your a fascist community.
I am reporting this meme. And you all should too. I'm sick of self-described leftists backstabing me and every other minority group they pretend to care about because they're mad about the 2016 election. I'm a trans, atheist, Jew. I'm close enough to the death camps for my liking thanks. You don't have to like the Democrats, I don't, but we do need to vote for them.
I refuse to go quietly. I refuse to tolerate memes that shrug at my right to exist and throw fuel to the fire in the hopes that the fascists kill everyone faster. That's not a real political position. It's black pilled bullshit and it can fuck off.
Hope that helps people stop tolerating this bullshit going forward.
What the fuck are you talking about I've heard it a million fucking times already. Its all anti-Harris lefties talk about.
Having fun with the fascism we've got instead? Thanks for that BTW. Real good. Really makes me motivated to fight for my rights when my follow lefties keep empowering fascists through inaction in the most simplistic and basic fucking democratic function of going to a polling place and voting once every 4 years for the lib that'll beat the fascist.
I really wanna go fight ICE in hand to hand combat and get shot in the fucking face knowing this probably could have been prevented.
Also if you are going to complain that I'm not bagging on the centrist/liberal dems for losing because they refused to budge left: I fucking hate them too, you can both suck shit directly out of my asshole.
Yeah, there are a lot of stupid fucking idiots out there, including on Lemmy, that are going to do the same stupid fucking thing they did last time and either not vote or vote for a 3rd party candidate that cannot, under any circumstance, win. And we'll descend even further into fascism.
Lot of stupids. But as I scroll down these comments, the majority are calling this meme out for the stupid fucking bullshit that it is. So I still have a little hope. I'm sure that'll get destroyed in the near future.
Progressives do vote for centrists. Centrists do not return the favor and vote for progressives. Harris didn't lose because the left staying home; the left held their nose and voted for her, even though that loyalty is a one-way street. She lost because she was such a dog shit candidate that she couldn't drive enough people who aren't highly politically engaged to the polls. The only reason she lost the election was because of her own poor decisions. Stop blaming the left for the failures of centrist democrats.
This is the same frustrating conversation we had to have when people blamed Clinton’s loss on Bernie bros staying home.
Even when we had concrete data that showed that a higher percentage of bernie voters voted for Clinton in 2016 than Clinton voters voted for Obama when he won the primaries.
The data tells us over and over that progressive and demsoc voters show up in higher numbers for candidates they prefer less than centrists will when presented with someone ideologically further left.
Are there people that wouldn’t vote for the centrist candidate, sure. But Mamdani is currently seeing how many centrists are happy to say “fuck strategy, I’m supporting cuomo!”
I get why those that still have faith in the Democratic Party are upset about the defeat. But I also understand why leftists are tired of being told “vote for this compromise candidate” in every election and even when we do turn out getting scape goated for them running garbage candidates that fail to capture the further left elements AND tons of non-left voters who sat at home and didn’t bother to vote.
Liberals being dumb isn't an excuse for us to be dumber. We're supposed to be better than them.
Giving a shit is more work than not giving a shit. But voting for a candidate doesn't mean you like them and it doesn't bind you to supporting them. I can post "Harris is a cop fuck cops >:-(" after I voted for her.
IMO the key is: how long does it take you to vote, and if you don't vote what are you doing with that time that is more valuable and progressive?
If someone told me, "I didn't vote last election because I was campaigning 18 hours a day for native land rights and there was no way to get mail or reach a polling place" OK. I'm not blaming that person. They're working way the fuck harder than I am to make the world better. If someone told me, "I didn't vote last election because I barely survive on my three jobs and the GOP has made my polling place a 6 hour line that I have to drive to. I can't even afford the gas to get there." Yeah, that makes sense.
But I never hear that from online progressives. I hear, "oh I didn't vote because both parties suck." "I didn't vote because they didn't support ." "I didn't vote because there's no point." These are all shitty answers. Better answer is: "I did vote for the Democratic candidate and I'll always vote for the most progressive candidate available." That's the minimum effort.
She lost because Dems stayed home, low turnout in key Democratic areas. No matter how bad you think she was as a candidate you're not going to convince me that she was worse than the dog shit candidate that won, and that's on the people that stayed home.
She was objectively worse. Trump represented his base. Kamala didn't. Trump is objectively the better politician. He gave his base exactly what they wanted. She refused to, preferring to pander to wealthy conservatives instead. You can argue she had better policies, but you cannot argue that she wasn't an absolute dogshit candidate. She was simply bad at being a politician and had no business being at the top of the ticket.
You need to separate quality of policies from quality of candidate. You'll never make any progress as long as you keep conflating the two.
Today I learned a prosecutor with a doctorate in law who has committed no crimes and ran a campaign primarily focused on unity and inclusion is objectively worse than a convicted felon and adjudicated rapist who illegally attempted to overturn an election after inciting an insurrection and ran a campaign based on hate and fear.
She refused to lie through her fucking teeth to her base or make enemies of our fellow Americans to win an election. And she gave a podium to a prominent conservative that spoke out against Trump. Maybe not a great move, but not some betrayal.
She also ran with virtually no preparation out of necessity.
We can keep blaming Harris or we can start blaming stupid fucking Americans that jeopardized our democracy because she wasn't the best candidate ever. Like, what kind of broken fucking brain thinks "well, she's not that great, so let me gamble with a felon rapist traitor instead"?
Reading comprehension. You're confusing policies for candidate quality. Trump was a good politician with shitty policies. Kamala was a dog shit politician with ok policies.
It's pointless to blame the electorate because they're not going anywhere. Or are you more of a Zionist type, who would prefer just killing the electorate if they don't vote your way?
She was in-arguably the worst candidate because she lost. She wouldn't have been the worst president.
The bullshit is centrists blaming it on the left. We told them how to win, and they went a different way. We showed up for her anyways, but the shitty candidate lost.
Any American that isn't braindead stupid knew what was on the line this election.
And any American that knew what was on the line voted for Harris.
You can blame Democrats all day, and they do shoulder some blame, but the majority of the blame falls on stupid fucking Americans that couldn't rub some brain cells together, not a party that isn't great at messaging.
And what do you hope to accomplish by blaming the electorate? They're not going anywhere. You can bitch about the voters all you want. But ultimately, if you fail to appeal to them, that just means you're a bad politician. Complaining about voters is like complaining about the weather.
I can't call Kamala Harris an idiot to her face, but I can call lots of voters idiots to their faces.
I'm blaming anyone who choose not to vote for her who were center or left of center. Anyone. As stated: if you are to my right or to my left and you explicitly choose not to vote for Harris and could have, you can suck shit.
If you discouraged people from voting for her: you can suck shit. If you constantly criticized her and barely talked about how fucking dangerous Trump is in general political discourse: you can suck shit.
Uh, no. This anti-Harris lefty, like the vast majority of anti-Harris lefties, knows an outside strategy is insane and mostly right wing propaganda.
Maybe if there had been more anti-Harris lefties in the party, we would have had a viable candidate. The hardline centrists did this.
Nope. The following is from a Pew Research study.
So quit uncritically accepting the mainstream establishment excuses. Harris lost because she was a shitty candidate, not because the left doesn't vote.
Gosh, were you out campaigning for Harris? I just can't understand how she didn't attract more voters. Scolding voters seems like such a solid strategy. /s
I meant anti-Harris lefties who actively wanted her to lose to Trump. (Which TBH, if they were vocally anti-Harris when it was clear it was her or Trump, they did)
How? How would you propose that could have realistically happened?
Did I say it was specifically because "the left doesn't vote"? No.
Its partially because more of them don't vote compared to the last election.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/harris-gaza
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/kamala-harris-moved-right-did-it-cost-her-the-election
https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-underperformed-three-demographics-1981222
The ratios of progressives vs centrists who normally vote anyway is irrelevant. What is crucial is the percentage shift in voting behavior within groups election to election. Clearly this election centrist Democrats, Progressive Democrats, and left leaning indies failed to get out and vote compared to previous elections.
Its not hard to figure out why but its not a singular reason.
Now does some of the blame go to the Democratic establishment? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY. But not all of it.
Fuck everyone even remotely responsible. Just fuck them. I legitimately hate them. (Including Harris and Biden themselves)
I did actually, I traveled 5 hours out of state to canvass for her in a swing state. I was a different person then.
I can tell you, I'm done now. Political action is dead for me. I don't want to swim up a fucking waterfall anymore. I'm done spending my own time and money on this shit. Not enough people give a flying fuck. If it takes things getting critically apocalyptic-level bad for average people to move their dumb-fuck-asses and be politically conscious about what is going to happen to them when fascists win I can't bring myself to care about them anymore.
So you can go ahead and choose to not vote next election. I don't care enough to argue with you on that now. Because now it wont be arguments convincing people, it'll be catastrophic damage done to the country and their ability to put 2 and 2 together.
The time of bickering for positive change is over. Now we get to see some mass death and material suffering. I already tried. I not putting more of myself in for a ride I very much did not sign up for and in fact tried very hard to avoid.
At this point I'm just screaming into brick wall for a sliver of catharsis.
If you think that's a large enough group that it had any impact whatsoever on the election, then you are insane.
Well, for one we wouldn't have nominated Biden and never would have been in that position with Harris. We might have also held Biden's feet to the fire more, thus discovering his mental state long before election time.
None of that says that "lefties" in particular didn't vote for Harris. Left policy sells, so a further left Harris would have done better, but that's the establishment's fault, not leftists. It also doesn't take a leftist to be against genocide.
That's funny, because nothing you said before gave them any fault at all, and you definitely seemed in the mood to throw fault around.
WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING TO?
They had their chance in 2016 to include Bernie Sanders, Democrats blew their chance by ditching Bernie.
Bernie is too liberal for all those big donors who pump up the Democrats via Super PACs. He might get in the way of them profiting off the American people. Bernie would have been the best choice for this country at beating back the MAGA movement before it became what we have now.
"Too liberal" for all the people who didn't vote for him. Because he's not as popular in real life as he is on the internet.
Not exactly true. In both 2016 and 2020, the number one reason voters gave for choosing Clinton or Biden over Sanders was electability. They preferred Sanders, but didn't think he could win the general. He didn't lose because he wasn't popular, he lost because people thought he was unpopular.
I'm not sure what that exact figure would be but I suppose it's true for some percentage.
On the other hand, I feel like I only ever see people arguing this on the Internet using examples of other people from the Internet. Every liberal person I know IRL loves Bernie, and many of them even say " But I understand that the party can't run him because a lot of democratic voters think he's too far to the left". Like, are these voters in the room with us right now?
There's a serious flaw in using your personal connections to gauge an entire electorate. That said, those acknowledging him not being able to win are in the same boat with me. I'd love for him to be president.
I just think it's funny that Bernie Bro "progressives" helped Trump come to power despite Bernie directly and publicly telling them to vote for Harris. All of a sudden they don't care what he says. Bernie understands that any improvement is better than drastic regression. Wish I could say the same for about 10 million extremely stupid people.
You're right, and I really appreciate you bringing up the statistical angle there. I am a bit of a stats nerd and indeed am aware of the multiple biases present in that sample of insufficient size. However, since the Internet is so full of bots and I don't really trust the news on this, I don't have much more to go on. It sucks, but polls seem like straight up misinformation at this point to me
Downvotes from the people who don't know Bernie lost in both the 2016 and 2020 primaries because not enough people voted for him.
You are correct. As much as I like the guy, he is not as popular in reality as he is on the internet. But you can sure hurt a lot of feelings by pointing out that reality on the internet.
I hold nothing against Bernie. He does have real integrity.
The problem I have is the portion of his supporters that are essentially left-wing Trumpers. They don't care about the truth. They don't care about what's best for the country. They make lies about electoral cheating.
The only difference is that Trump is a fucking scumbag and Bernie has integrity. I say that because each time he lost in the primaries, he publicly endorsed the Democratic candidate. Because he's not a fucking moron and knew how destructive Trump presidencies would be. I find it interesting that THIS is the one issue Bernie Bros disagree on with Bernie. All of a sudden, he should NOT be listened to? He has also never claimed to have been cheated.
Bernie Sanders lost the primaries. This bullshit has to stop.
Imagine being so immature that you throw a decade-long temper tantrum allowing a FELON PEDOPHILE to be president because you didn't get your way once.
The DNC are the ones who lost to the felon pedophile. Don't let them blame the left in order to avoid taking accountability.
No, Bernie was cheated out of winning the primaries by collusion between Hillary and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.
Never underestimate the ability of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. They will find a way.
This isn't what happened. Centrists blame the left for all their failures, but the left keep showing up.
Welcome to America. There are A LOT of those immature fools throwing decade-long temper tantrums.
These same fools simply don't grasp that the guy lost primaries, both times, because not enough people were voting for him.
Children.
We just witnessed an internal party takeover in the Republican party. What dumbass thinks the same couldn't possibly happen in the Democratic party?
David Hogg won a legitimate party election to become vice chair because he was popular and then was removed by tje DNC for having the wrong ideology.
They have shown us many times they will not allow themselves to change
If people start voting in primaries that can change.
Am I optimistic that it will? No. But the problem is that people who want to see change aren't voting in primaries and then they complain that their choices suck.
Right…the primaries. Like when Jessica Cisneros ran in Texas, and Pelosi backed Henry Cuellar instead (voted with Trump >80% of the time) and poured tens of millions of DNC money into that race to ensure the progressive Cisneros lost.
Or perhaps more recently, when the DNC anointed candidates for the presidential nomination TWICE without holding a primary election in good faith. Then lost in spectacular fashion.
Establishment dems don’t play fair when they get challenged from the left, hell they completely throw democracy out the window when that happens. The party is lost and the real “Republican agents” are the ones saying “no no, keep voting blue you can change the party from within!” It’s a fool’s errand.
Yeah, the establishment has their thumb on the scale, and that sucks. It means that it will take more primary voters to overwhelm their influence. Like I said, I'm not optimistic.
But it is still the most viable path to change at this time. Unless you have a better suggestion? (Or do you just want to complain?)
New party, simple as.
FPTP. Simple as.
Yeah, we’ve got to get rid of it. Could have been done easily with voting rights act on Biden’s day 1, but golly gee just couldn’t find the votes for any of that “supporting democracy” initiative now could we. Now look at what’s become of American democracy just a few short years later. Pathetic.
FPTP says hi. Won't work.
Get rid of it and replace with star voting as a national standard. Abolish the electoral college. If Congress wont represent us in these initiatives, hold an article V convention for the states to directly amend the constitution with these new voting regulations.
Pigs can fly, simple as.
Enjoy descending further into fascism then, because that’s clearly the direction we’re ratcheting towards.
Ok.
So we've established that you like complaining.
Now let's move on to the part where you have some suggestions.
Because if your suggestion is voting 3rd party you need to understand some things.
Which 3rd party? Cuz Americans splitting their votes among multiple 3rd parties guarantees a further decline into Republican fascism.
No 3rd party, at all, is ready to start winning national elections. They aren't even really winning any local or state elections. It's going to take a long time before a 3rd party is viable IF one decides to start putting in the hard work. So what would you suggest doing in the meantime when it comes to national elections?
You don't need to keep telling us everything is shitty. We get it. Start telling us what you think should be done about it that actually makes sense.
In the meantime, here are some things you can do to help move us in the right direction:
organize locally against the fascist regime which is presently stealing everything from working class voters and is imminently coming to place many of us into slave labor camps. Whatever you do - don’t give money to democrats unless they’re part of the squad or endorsed by rebellion pac.
work towards getting money out of politics. If we don’t outlaw the presently legalized bribery, we simply have to take politicians at their word when they say they won’t take corporate pac money to control their votes. See Kirsten Sinema or John Fettterman for how well that tends to work out. Wolf PAC is non partisan and has been working towards this goal for years.
if you absolutely refuse to look outside democrats for representation, at least support ones who are intent on changing the system to end corruption and help the working class. Rebellion PAC is endorsing these type of candidates, very selectively. David Hogg’s leaders we deserve is doing something similar, but with more of a focus on ousting crusty establishment Republicrats from their too-long-held seats.
I don't think voting in a DNC primary will result in the most popular candidate being the chosen candidate to run as president. I beleive the DNC will choose the winner before the primary starts like they have for decades.
I don't beleive a canidate hand picked by the DNC will create positive change
Obama was an upset candidate. Hillary was the DNC choice in 08.
Didn't Bernie Sanders lead in 2019 and dems decided to go with Biden for safety?
If you mean that democratic primary voters in subsequent states voted for Biden after Sanders had the early lead, yes.
Yeah, I think you're right. So it's the people that suck, not just the parties.
Bingo.
At least the people currently voting in primaries suck. The solution is for more people who don't suck to start voting in primaries
Because we haven't put enough pressure on them yet.
Did you think this would end with David Hogg winning a vice chair position?
Gonna take more than that to change a party. But it's better than everyone splitting the vote for various 3rd parties that have absolutely no presence at all, whatsoever.
Let's see what happens with this NYC election. That's a bigger deal than David Hogg.
Right. And trump didn't take over the rnc in one go. It takes constant pressure. Keep fighting.
By his first election he absolutely owned the RNC
Not completely. McCain was blocking him.
McCain is still alive?
I haven't seen him since he ran against Obama.
I was talking about after Trump's 1st election. The rnc was about to repeal Obamacare (without a replacement) and McCain did his thumbs down before voting to not repeal it.
Exactly. We need to fix the entrenchment, and we can fix this stupid two party system.
You can do what the tea party did: capture a small enough portion of your voting base that covers the margin of victory (aka: the short hairs) and demand the party do your bidding.
If they cared about victory, you'd be right. But it's becoming pretty clear they care far more about money. If they're paid to lose anyway, this tactic is utterly useless.
That'd require progressives to have something resembling spine. Good fucking luck.
Dumb doomer attitudes like this and the rest constantly plastered all over Lemmy (always by the same handful of users I've noticed) certainly isn't helping. "American" Lemmy is a small community, it's a lot smaller when you take out the bad faith "memelords" incessantly both-sides-ing and advocating for non-participation.
That's why I support candidates, not parties.
Helping what? What do you want me to help?
PS: I'm not American.
Depends, do like fascist cock shoved down your country's throat? Cuz I hate it. But if you don't, just keep arguing for electing fascists like you currently are.
It would require progressives to actually vote in the primaries, which 90% of people on here discourage at every opportunity.
The only people I routinely read on here bringing up non-voting are centrists. All the progressives, aside from a few performative tankies, I read on here said, "I'll hold my nose and vote for Kamala, but her choices are going to cost her the election."
The progressives showed up and voted for Kamala. And just like the progressives predicted, her shit policies meant that large numbers of low-engagement voters simply saw no reason to vote for her. Her democracy message fell flat because if you're in the poorest 90% of the US, you do not live in a democracy.
I mean, that's fine too but not really what the parent comment is talking about.
It's not? That's literally what the Tea Party did.
Not really. The Tear Party replaced a pro-business party with an even more pro-business party. Or they replaced the pro-business party with a more bigoted pro-business party. They made no fundamental challenge to the power of wealth and influence within the Republican party. And they were not a real grass roots organization.
Now I have no idea if that's what the Tea Party did as I was way too young for politics at that time, but American progressives regard this particular strategy as nothing less than anathema to their very existence.
Yes, because it would require them to vote in the primaries to demonstrate the capture of the voting base?
No, because most progressives would never make that threat, let alone follow up on it. I mean would you say "they didn't do what we want, don't vote Democrat"? Exactly.
Well the other option is reforming the Republican Party. That seems harder.
I think progressives could easily run in Republican primaries and just start harping on labor and unions since no one else in that party does and tons of Union members vote Republican. What the worst that could happen? Collusion of the national party against the most popular left leaning or presidential candidate in the US, oh wait, the DNC already did that.
Great way to logic. Let me try...
Oh shit, now the whole project is hopeless. Let me try again.
I guess we are all fucked. Or maybe we grow the fuck up and deal with the reality of what's in front of us and the work involved in making things better. If we can't reform the Democrats, then we have no chance in hell of shepherding a new party from nothing to national powerhouse without losing it to the same corrupting forces that hold the Democrats. Never-mind the realities of what it would take to take over the country with a third party in a first past the post system.
Not true. It can be reformed the same way the republican party was deformed. By gutting it from the inside out and replacing all the dead weight.
Okay, one still should vote for a Democrat president. Because why would you vote for a more hostile government? Unless of course you want everything go-to shit but you should lead with your intention.
So let me guess. The solution is to vote for a 3rd party that has absolutely no presence in our federal government at all, hoping that magically one of their reps can become president and save the country, despite having absolutely no support within the federal government, at all? And we'll just all agree to pretend like they won't become susceptible to corporate interests as well so they can actually accrue enough money to start winning elections.
Ok, so enough of that stupid bullshit. Let's hop on back to reality.
In reality, we have to vote Democrat for the time being because WE JUST FOUND OUT WHAT FUCKING HAPPENS IF WE DON'T. Meanwhile, we hope that a 3rd party can get off its fucking ass and start winning local/state elections so they can start getting MORE THAN ZERO representatives in the House and Senate, so that someday they can actually have a real shot at running a candidate for president.
This meme is grade school level dogshit. It only serves to split the vote more on 3rd party candidates that can't win and ensure Republican control of our government for even longer. We don't live in fantasy land. 3rd parties can't recite magical incantations and gain control of our federal government. There's a really fucking long process for a road to the presidency for a 3rd party, and in the meantime, we fucking vote Democrat because HAVE WE FUCKING LEARNED NOTHING?
I think it can be ship of theseus'd, just replace all the key people in the party and keep the name.
FDR was a democrat, if it could go from that to what it is now, it can be turned back into a socialist party.
Corporate interests are human interests. They are the interests of the few. Its class. The class of the wealthy - the class of the few. Its always class we need to break down. Nothing maters more.
It may not be worth the effort to reform it, but claiming that it "can't" be reformed is asinine. A political party is not some higher order being, timeless and unchanging, nor even one with a fundamental permanent set of core tenants that all else springs from. It's a group of people with a bit of bureaucracy that influence and decide somewhat collectively on their shared goals. Of course that can change fundamentally.
In fact it has changed fundamentally in the not too distant past. Look at the Democratic party (and the Republican party) of the Jim Crow era compared to today. They essentially flipped to the other side of the political spectrum. It's absolutely not easy to change a party fundamentally and not quick to do so, either. Old minds are not easily swayed with the times. The primary way to change party ideals is through new minds and perspectives joining the party and the old ones leaving it. Generational change is slow AF but it does definitely happen. Concerted effort for young people with new ideals to join the party is the best way to induce this change. Again though, that is a lot of effort and takes times. The bigger he ship, the harder to steer. There are alternatives, all of which also take a ton of effort, probably a lot more effort really, but might be faster if it works out.
I don't know why we keep having to have this talk about why reformism doesn't work. Rosa Luxembourg addressed this pretty well.
We aren't likely to get Reformations, the problems with the Democratic party are baked directly in to the institution.
Anything offered as Reformation is a token to ensure that the masses don't revolt at least until the Reformation can be clawrd back by the powers that be.
Want to watch the Democrat party change?
Start primarying left and right.
It'll change.
We've watched conservative voters change the Republican party to the traitor party they are today in less than 2 decades. It's completely possible.
The Democrat Elites thought of that which is why they use super delegates which ensure that a candidate cannot be too radical.
Not only that the situation surrounding both parties is entirely different. People saw Donald Trump initially as a harmless moron. People in the DNC see radicals and progressives as an enemy to be contained
What's the difference between the Democratic party and the United States of America in this regard? If the Democrats can't be reformed, why can the USA be reformed? If the USA can't be reformed, then what's the point of this discussion?
Well theoretical the DNC is not baked directly into the government and continues its stranglehold by trying to kill all 3rdparty prospects pretty aggressively.
If a group was able to pull it off and build a completely new political party it could change the fabric of the government the same way MAGA is now however this is not Reformation. Its a soft power Revolution similar to what happened with Adelle in Chile.
I mean functional what's occurring with the Trump administration is a soft power revolution.
The point of this discussion is to encourage people to put down the DNC in favor of other organizations like local ones that actually benefit the community by helping the impoverished or to look at other organizations like the DSA or PSL or FSRO which at least help encourage people to learn anarchist or Marxist theory which is significantly better at predicting and helping people navigate the political landscape then the neoliberal theory that lead us here in the first place.
No, it's not aggressive at all in trying to kill 3rd parties. That's because 3rd parties aren't a threat to power in this country. It uses 3rd parties as an excuse for their losses, and uses that to go after the left (something it does do aggressively).
Chile is a parliamentary system with proportional representation, not a first past the post winner takes all system. Totally different animal.
Yes, executed through an inside strategy of taking over the Republican party. Imagine that.
If that were the point of this discussion, it would seem like that might have been something to mention before now.
Yep because allowing the DNC to blame third parties certainly doesn't create animosity towards third parties nor does it push the illusion that voting anything other than democrat or republican is handing the country over to your opponent.
Somebody doesn't know about the Socialist Revolution in Chile in the 70s... or the role the United States played in ending that.
Pretending that parliamentary systems aren't first past the vote is something else. They just happen to have a system where coalitions have a little more power. Definitely hasn't helped in France or the United Kingdom where the two major political parties continue to consolidate power.
Yes the Republican Party allowed themselves to be taken over since they believe anything for power which Trump is more than happy to oblige.
As I said before the Republican party did not take Trump seriously until it was too late and did not attempt to remove power from him. Where as the Democratic party actively stamps out Progressive politicians and policies.
Regardless of how other people feel I'm using this as an opportunity to talk about how the Democrats have failed us at every level politically and are now enabling the fascists take over of the United States and that it's time to abandon the Democrats and find a new party and a new type of political organization. Which is why I suggest talking to the DSA Or the psl or the FSRO.
Anything these guys teach you will be light years ahead of any political Theory you learn from a Democrat.
Most people use "can't" for things that are impractical, not just strictly impossible. But yes, let's argue about phrasing rather than the issue. That ought to fix everything.
Yup.
There are so many Americans that don't grasp that this change can happen. Or understand the concept but outright refuse to have patience. And like you said, it's A LOT less effort, a LOT less time, and WAY more possible to primary and change the Democrat party than to cross our fingers for a random 3rd party to start actually doing something and winning some elections and getting reps in the House and Senate.
I've been alive for a while. I watched conservative voters change the Republican party to the fascist traitor party it is today. You can absolutely change political parties.
Problem is this - Dems are not a political party, they’re a fundraising organization.
I know you're just being reductive, but that's a silly statement. They are objectively a political party. They also fundraise. They're not mutually exclusive.
The point is they measure success not by winning elections but by fundraising. "Harris couldn't have been wrong, she raised record amounts, it must be the the voters or something"
It's not the democratic party, it's the US itself that is rotten. The dem are just another manifestation of the issue.
I see your point, however, the Democratic party is not fascist. It does provide a clear difference from the GOP. Wether we like it or not, USA is a two party system. We need to be practical here, not ideological, or we just go fascist forever.
They've drifted so far right that I call them Republicrats, and y'all should too.
I mean the Republicans have been dragging the Overton window right for decades. They just happily went along with them.
Yes because they want that money.
If no one from the far left votes, parties that want to win, will go where the voters are. The parties aren't Republicans, the voters are.
No party cares about people that don't vote. Genuinely, they don't care at all. They're not going to find out what you wanted, because you didn't go against them. A non vote says "Yeah, whatever".
If you want to look at an example of how to break into a two party system, you need to look at UKIP in the UK.
The idea being not that you get enough votes to win (because that wouldn't happen), but attract enough votes to make the other parties steal your policies, so your voters go to them instead.
So if you want actual socialist policies, you all need to bury your leftist differences (hard I know, some of them don't even use Linux), set up a party that represents more or less what you want, and vote for it. Maybe that party is the Green party. Maybe it's something else.
"We'd rather have a convicted felon pedophile be president because the Democrats don't want to dismantle capitalism entirely and replace with... well we don't know what with".
Strawman? Like 3 separate strawman arguments?
Strawgang.
Yeah, people generally want their politicians to help them.
And wealth inequality is the single biggest issue in human society.
We are at a point where if we want to help regular people, we need that to come at the expense of the rich.
That’s literally the definition of taxes.
My taxes don't get spent on helpful things
Fair point
Why the new account? Did your last one get banned for this same bullshit trolling?
You're arguing against your own masturbatory fantasy.
The left came out and voted for Harris. They held their nose and voted for the shit pile centrist, as they always do. We've seen with Mamdani that this loyalty is a one way street. Progressives hold their nose and vote for centrists, but centrists do not return the favor.
Harris lost because she couldn't drive enough politically unaligned, low-engagement voters to the polls. The average person who isn't that involved in politics simply didn't think it was credible that Harris would improve their lives in any way.
Aside from a few performative tankies, the message I kept reading on lemmy was "I'm going to vote for Harris, but her dog shit policies are going to cost her the election." And those progressive voices were ignored. Their desperate warnings were drowned out by people like yourself, sticking their fingers in their ears and going, "BLAH BLAH BLAH CAN'T HEAR YOU, VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO! IT'S YOUR FAULT IF THE FASCISTS WIN, I HOLD NO RESPONSIBILITY HERE!"
If those low engagement voters couldn't make it to the polls to protect our democracy and prevent a felon rapist traitor from becoming President, then the problem lies primarily with those fucking fools, not Kamala Harris.
Why do you expect anyone to care about democracy. Only the wealthiest 10% of the population lives in a democracy. 90% of the population has zero actual democratic power. You don't live in a democracy.
And Kamala, a candidate who was annointed, not elected, could credibly run on a platform of democracy.
I love how it's the fault of the voters and not the fault of the democrats for being shit, centrists, and genocide enjoyers
If Bernie Sanders doesn't want to dismantle the current Democrats then it's entirely Bernie's fault. He's to blame for capitalism.
Bernie created capitalism, he can destroy it. He chooses not to!
We need to get involved at the primary level, not lament the choices we are left with when primary election turnout is hilariously low. I'd be surprised if the average voter even knows what a primary election is.
I can’t stand this faux leftist bullshit. There’s a reason why I call this right wing nonsense: it impedes the improvement of people’s material lives. We don’t have to like the Democrats in order to reject this absolute nonsense.
And your attitude in turn is why there’s no party who represents the views of most people. You’ve already decided it’s impossible without trying, even though the majority of democracies in the developed world today are not trapped in two-party systems.
Most modern democracies don't enforce First Past the Post by law, and don't have a winner-takes-all system. A better strategy is to primary democratic representatives as much as possible, and take over down-ballot positions as soon as possible. That way we can make steps towards dismatling Citizen's United, repealing all the laws that prevent moving away from FPTP, and implement RCV.
I am more than willing to try, if not for the fact that splitting the left would cede electoral victories to the right for several cycles while people figure out what "the new left" is. If we do this in our current era, Republicans will actually kill us while we sit on our ass and convince ourselves to split our vote (as has been shown with the most recent administration)...
This has been shown in history-- every time a third party tries to get made, the opposition party wins for several cycles. The most notable of which is (imo) Theodore Roosevelt's Progressive party in 1912. It got 27% of the vote (2nd in terms of popular vote and won several downstream races). But, the left vote was split by 27%, so the right won by a very large majority. They decided to ultimately dissolve and infiltrate the left wing party.
You are 100% correct, but I fear this is too complex for most Americans to understand and too much of a "long game" thing for the rest to be willing to get onboard with. I have very little faith in our electorate.
That’s the literal opposite of what I believe.
There are two paths, an inside and an outside strategy. The inside strategy is far simpler, has far greater potential for success, and will harm the least people along the way. Acknowledging that isn't "giving up", it's picking strategy like a grown-up, not some kid afraid to turn down a dare.
This is the most idiotic thing about third party advocates. There have been third parties running consistently for decades, and we are somehow supposed to pretend that that lengthy record of dismal failure doesn't exist. Meanwhile, inside strategists haven't won everything yet, so we are supposed to switch to a strategy with a far worse track record.
One interesting thing I've noticed in these discussions is how quickly the two-party advocates will bring out words like "idiotic" and attack the person not the argument... it really is a movement driven by fear.
Yeah it's fear. Fear that fuckwits are going to drive the country into the hands of fascists. Is that not worth a bit of concern, or is that just too far fetched an outcome?
And don't act like it's one sided mate. Calling me a coward by coming at it sideways doesn't change your meaning.
No, not the attitude is the problem, the problem is, that the president has mot to win having an absolute majority.
A d I think, US people would have had bigger chances achieving such rule in the voting system, if dems are in power, vs when trumpist are in power 🤗
But proof me wrong 😁 maybe it needs this dictator-shock in order to mobilise enough people to build enough pressure to get such a rule
Maybe we want a 3rd party to start actually doing something and winning local/state elections instead of randomly showing up every 4 years to try to win a national election.
The smart move, which we just got a hard lesson on, is to vote Democrat until a 3rd party becomes viable, because the other option is Republican fascism, which is what we got.
If THAT'S what you got out of this then I guess the US are fucked
The Democrats used to be the racist pro slavery party. Then it got captured and turned into Roosevelts New Deal Democrats, which were obviously to the left of the Republicans. Not perfect, but they really did a lot of good.
This can be repeated, but it takes a lot of work.
You also cannot replace it with a third party. So I guess we’re just fucked?
Oh, I can't wait until you all find out what the OG Democratic party liked. IMO there's a reason Bernie doesn't put a (D) after his name
Because then he'd be Bernie Sanded?
berniesandersdis a daemon process that runs in the background…you didn't say fascist…
Maybe you’re not ready to hear this: Both sides are not the same.
also like to point out that many of them are DINOs, and are republicans that wouldnt be electable otherwise in a GOP primary, so they have to put a democratic facade to just get elected.
The real battle is in the primaries.
I'll go further: It wouldn't be enough to simply reform one political party, anyway. The U.S. Constitution is a dead document, and its system of government is obsolete. The black hats have discovered the exploits, and everybody now knows how to game the system. We can't repair the system from inside the system, since it at the bottom line it runs on trust, and that trust in the system is gone. Just like in any relationship, it takes some material change to get people to trust again.
The Republican party was a party of radical abolitionists and it was captured by the capitalists. The Democratic party can likewise be changed to something it is not currently.
You can't convince me of what may be by talking about what is.
While the new progressive "MAGA" forms, we have to get MAGA/GOP out. Look to the good Dem primaries and pick the more progressive Bernie Sanders types.
MAGA needs to go though, if most of the country turns on the GOP, could probably have enough seats to impeach and remove Trump. Then do the same to Vance, then a dem speaker of the house could take over.
Can there be another Whigs party
ITT is some progressives who put more time, energy and anger into bullying other progressives not to vote for a genuinely progressive candidate, than they do into trying to sincerely convince Republican voters not to vote Republican.
There’s a logical fallacy at play in their minds where they think “Republican voters aren’t reasonable but progressives are, so I’ll spend my time trying to whip progressives into holding the Party line. Maybe cussing them out and accusing them of being complicit in the rise of fascism will help…”
this instigates infighting
Not saying capitalism is the best form, but which economic form is better given human greed and tendency for corruption?
More people should re-watch house of cards
Only when they AI Spacey's performance into SpongeBob, someone's been working on that right?
Spacey's performance was pretty great. He makes an excellent creep.
Yeah well he's coming from a place of close personal experience with that, that's exactly why I don't care to watch it.
That would be funny, still I'm talking about Republicans being just as utilitary as their oposite party
The Tea Party fundamentally and radically transformed the GOP. It can be done.
Unfortunately, the Democratic constituency is too impatient and too distractable and stupid to do it. The GOP has been playing the long game since Reagan, and they are good at messaging and good at being happy with incremental wins. Dem constituent groups are great at swinging for the fences every 4 years and failing, and great at circular firing squads of blame and purity testing. They suck at having allies that agree with them on 95% of the issues. They suck at getting on the bus come election time. They have been trained to be this way by the GOP.
Time was, unions were the counterweight to the capitalist forces, and were the effective counterweight. Everyone let GOP/Libertarian philosophy and talking points get a foothold, and that union power has disintegrated. Reagan made union-busting his first priority, and the air traffic controllers were the object lesson; now people think unions can't do shit. Now Dem blame the unions for shit, when really, they should be built back by anyone with a shred of liberal leaning, because that's where liberal power comes from. Liberals pout when their most favored candidate doesn't survive the primaries, and they complain about how The Man is keeping them down.
Naw, dawg. You're just easily played.
Hey the DNC is a private org and the courts have affirned their right to run and rig their internal elections(which include primaries) anynway they want, including simpy ignoring the outcome. Idk why you think their self run elections are fair or free but thats a massive huff of copium.
I have zero idea how you can look at the democratic party's behavior, leadership and priorities over the past 20 years and believe this in good faith.
I posted about this in another similar thread.
Surely you can become a member of the democracy party and have a say in its direction?
No one seemed interested in that suggestion.
Also, Americans don't seem to understand that the dems have become conservative because they're trying to steal votes from the republicans. They can't afford to differentiate because they already struggle to win.
Somebody doesn't know what a super delegate is. Or how the DNC is actually run. 🙄
Like a business with executives at the top that have argued in court that what the constitutes want doesnt matter.
Its mostly a massive political network that Dems used to push ineffective policy that won't offend their billionaire donors like Mark Cuban based on old outdated ideas of austerity and altruism.
Their primary function seems to be collect money from the vulnerable utilizing predatory donation collecting that results in seniors finding all their money "donated" and in bankruptcy.
To ensure the constitutes can not force a change in the party the same way Trump did the DNC uses super delegates which are appointed automatically by holding various positions in the party itself. This prevents radical candidates like Bernie Sanders from getting the presidental nomination along with the fact they just ignore the will of the voters which they've argued in court successfully that they do.
Seems to me the primary purpose of the Democrats right now is to waste people's time fighting for ineffectual political policies that will be blocked by the single token "moderate" politician.
They dont do a lot but what they do seems designed to prevent the left from winning.
See the "abundance" agenda for an example of rightwing economic policies wrapped into a liberal dressing.
Better not try then....
Samo for all political parties
What would an anarchist party be named, that would not scare people who think "anarchy" is synonymous with "total chaos?"
Mutual aid party
Cooperation party
...
Lemmy gearing up to sit out another election and then bitch about who gets elected while taking no accountability? Na.
No. You see, the Democratic Party was holding them at gun point to ensure that they didn't oppose fascism. /S
I just want to point out that they are, including and especially the current pos, I mean Pota, business people, and businesses are, with one exception, authoritarian in nature. The exception? A co-op.
Orders are barked from the top, and that shit rolls down hill until it lands on someone with the skills necessary to execute on those orders.
Now take that, and build an entire political party on it, and for the likes and subscribes, throw in a religious element because the religious books can be "interpreted" whatever way we want to justify whatever we want to do, and that will garner some extra votes.
Yay!
Gosh Lemmy is so refreshing after my Reddit marathon yesterday
At this point we need to create a mechanism that allows public pressure on a party.
Switching from FPTP voting (one-person, one vote) to something else will allow for other parties to have a chance but that will take time to brew.
We're not ready for sortition (selection of officials by lottery) but that would end the career of politicians. And having barbers and coal miners govern is better than what we got now, even if they'll need a lot of handholding, and an institution to swat away lobbyist pests.
The voters really did a number breaking open Pandora's jar in November. It's a fine mess they've brought upon us, and one we may not survive to clean up.
Forward party checking in.
The Republicans move politics to the right by passing bills, and the Democrats block movement to the left by losing on purpose.
If all Democrats were members of the Democrats (party), then you could just have real elections inside the party. Then when the Democratic party wins against the fascist party, it could be democratic policy to make your country democratic.
For the meme, in that scene he lies to her. That said, this community is ready for that message.
i see mostly pushback actually, but hey i am still scrolling
Same coin different sides, the policy is the same, dems have a bit more style and subtlety though, a bit more Thomas Shelby than Jesse James
Liberals are so fiesty these days. Like a crab in steam.
Ship's sailed. Dems are done. Good riddance.
I gladly note, that maker of this propaganda meme is fuckin stupid xD
But lesser evil!!!!
Evil is still evil.
Yawn.
Welcome to reality, where adults pick the BEST available option instead of crying about morality while they allow the least moral future to take place.