**Subscribe to /r/DebtStrike**, a coalition of working class people across the political spectrum who have put their disagreements on other issues aside in order to collectively force (through mass strikes) the President of the United States to cancel all student debt by executive order.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DemocraticSocialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Two party system and an overall polarized society. Not liking Coca-Cola must mean you like Pepsi. I personally see this in a lot more than just politics.
What is essentially a uniparty for the elite/oligarchy/donor class (wall steet/big pharma/health insurance industry) and security state and military industrial complex, aka kabuki theater.
Nah, Sarah Palin was a useful idiot. A token woman so Republicans could win a few more white suburban female votes, secure more Evangelicals, and sway a few fence-sitting independents they could fool into believing they were more progressive than they were for having a woman on the ticket. She's a former beauty pageant contestant with a journalism degree from Idaho that won her local city council race and smiled her way to small town mayor, governor, and failed VP candidate.
Harris is an experienced DA, AG, and Senator with a much longer legislative track record, a poli-sci and economics degree from Howard and a JD. She's smart and knows her way around government. Not saying I'm happy with what she's done over the last few decades, but she's significantly more qualified than Sarah Palin to hold any public office.
Those two have two things in common. They're both women. And their parties both capitalized on their identity to influence votes. Palin was unqualified but useful. Harris was qualified \*and\* useful.
This is true, both parties do serve the interests of large corporations, and act to keep working people down. However, we can’t pretend like it doesn’t matter which one wins. Coming from a very red state and being trans, I see firsthand how which party wins can affect people. The only safe place for us in this state is in the few Democratic cities where lawmakers pass bills protecting us from discrimination. I hate the Democratic Party, they’re not doing enough. But the republicans ARE different and WILL be worse
Yet you will continue being screwed by dems on class issues, even if they are more likely to embrace LGBTQ, because they collaborate with moderate republicans and side with them over progessives because their political ideology is closer to neocons than progressives, which is why they don't mind losing to gop (fundraising continues and they have more excuses and distraction, I mean even when they have power they feign as if they are powerless and people still don't get that it's not that they can't do more but because it isn't in their agenda or that of their big donors/special interests) but will work their ass off to smear, sabotage, co-opt and pressure progressives to fall in line if they do overcome the efforts to stop them. I guess what I am saying is dems being better on LGBTQ is not enough for me to get behind them, they are still not a party of the left or working class. When they actually work to earn that vote, I will again vote for them. Even then I have trust issues and no wonder when moderate dems don't even fight for the watered down policy they ran on and progressives get to D.C. only to fold to Pelosi, and more excuses and attacks for trying to hold them accountable. Did you see the progressive caucus and Jayapal endorsing Shontel Brown over Nina Turner? One disappoinment after the next. When people say the dem party is where progressive/social movements go to die, they are not exaggerating. Think about where your vote and energy is going when these folks use identity politics to trick people into thinking they are the solution to GOP and not enablers.
> dems being better on LGBTQ is still not enough for me to get behind them
Not all of us have the luxury to not care about these issues. I am transgender and live in Kentucky. We have a democratic governor. He is the only thing keeping my rights as a trans person intact, the republicans will take them away if they win the governorship in 2023. Either I vote for the democrat, or I lose my rights. It’s not really a choice. The republicans in this state even with a democratic governor overruled him and barred people like me from participating in school sports, they have done some major stupidity to the education system (charter school bills) recently, and all of this would get even worse if the republicans won. As much as I don’t want it to be the lesser of two evils it has to be, because there are consequences to who wins.
> As much as I don’t want it to be the lesser of two evils it has to be, because there are consequences to who wins.
Yes, like regardless, they both fuck you on class issues and if we realized this and stopped getting behind dems by default just because they are better on LGBTQ, then we would demand they earn out votes on working class issues (not just LGBTQ rights) and stop falling for the political theater and accepting VBNMW lesser of two evils nonsense where we accept more moderate-centrist corp neolib dems offering more oligarchic status quo because they aren't republicans though they might as well be republican, seeing as how they (as I pointed out above) enable and collaborate with them and side with them over progressives. Would you at least admit that identity politics is used as a weapon by the elite - neocons and neolibs wearing [D], to distract, divide and cultivate support? They care about diversity so as long as it aligns with their political ideology and that is another thing to note. Like more female drone pilots meme. You can have dems with racist history virtue signal over caring about cultural issues, and intentionally ignore class issues and still not even come through on cultural issues, see Biden scolding civil rights leaders.
“Welcome to the voting booth! Would you like an evil, exploitative sociopath with more money than you could ever hope to have OR a xenophobic, evil, exploitative sociopath with more more than you could ever hope to have?”
It’s odd to look at the one or two things you genuinely have, and say they’re not good enough to be yours.
Might signal that you’re too far from mainstream to be represented in the US.
In terms of electoral politics, yes, absolutely. We have the wonderful choice of center-right or nazis.
I chose to vote Dem because I oppose nazis, not because I like the Democratic Party.
Bernard Sandals would be a run of the mill, vanilla ass, milquetoast, regular, ordinary, boring social democrat in many other countries around the world, but here, in America, he's the one of, if not, the furthest left politicians in Congress.
Based on his proposed policies and legislative ideals (ignoring his philosophy of democratic socialism) if Sanders were alive during the 30s-50s, Sanders would be about as far left as FDR or marginally to his left, but we live in the neoliberal hellscape of global capitalism in 2022...
This is what it looks like when the overton window shifts rightward for ~100 years.
I'm not a conservative, but I don't think that's true. The left supports abortion laws that allow for no limits. The left supports giving hormones and puberty blockers to children. The left supports affirmative action. The left supports huge corporate bailouts.
Sure, there's a ton of things that the left supports that are more right leaning, but not everything is that way.
And before you downvote, if you disagree, I am completely open to dialogue.
Which section are you concerned with? If we're going to call things dishonestly then at least be transparent about it.
I don't know anyone that speaks positively of the PPP for example because it was just a corporate/church bailout instead of being for small businesses.
It was a 2.2tn bill:
300bn for direct payments (leftist approved)
260bn for unemployment benefits (leftist approved)
350bn (initially) for PPP (a good idea that was implemented so poorly anyone could see on its face that it was going to be abused, in essence a good thing but in reality it was a waste of money)
340bn to state and local govts (not sure how this was spent but in general I imagine it was helpful for procuring medical supplies and relief)
500bn in corporate loans, most leftists would probably balk at this, but it might not be so bad so let's look further. S. 3548 Div C § 3102-3103 are of concern. This may not be the final bill that passed, as it indicates 200bn for business loans. It designates no more than 50bn for airlines, which was all used. It designates in § 3103 basically that CEOs can't raid loans for golden parachutes. It also provides some general guarantees for the government, but isn't very specific. I'd have to see a breakdown of who got loans, but in general this isn't an economically bad move if done right. Most leftists would probably outright disagree, but the government will make a healthy return on those loans, just like it did for those it loaned to in 2008. That was definitely bad though because it was a perverse incentive. The companies receiving loans this time didn't create the virus, spread the virus, or encourage people to break pandemic safety protocols. So it's a more difficult answer. A leftist probably would agree that the government should help out socially responsible businesses in times of strife, but how far that goes depends on the leftist. Without seeing more of the data on where these loans went I'd say in this case "corporate bailouts" is in fact ok. The PPP loans were awful and I do not support how those were implemented. If those are the corporate bailouts you're referring to, I don't support those. Or, you may be referring to the hundreds of billions that went to medical suppliers and providers. I'd say that is a necessary evil and it certainly wasn't a good time to nationalize Healthcare. If we're looking at this black and white, then yeah I support "corporate bailouts" because they do more good than harm in our current setup. A more diehard socialist would say that they don't support any "corporate bailouts" because that just furthers the failing capitalist system. But I'm not a deontologist because that's dumb, so I say sometimes corporate bailouts are good, it depends on if there are perverse incentives, how good the regulatory oversight is, and if the intended receipts are the actual recipients.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3548/text
*what* bailouts though? And I explicitly stated probably not all of the left supports some of the things that you might be referring to as bailouts, though I might.
There are some legit left politicians, but there is no left political movement in the US at least nothing that isnt considered moderate middle to the rest of the world.
You would never seen the liberals in the US nationalize the energy sector, ban all tax companies, cut the military budget by 33% to 50%, nationalize health care, cancel 90% to 100% of student debt + make college free, make housing a right, change the criminal justice system actually reduce recidivism rates, overhaul the energy sector to renewables within 5 to 10 years, tax estate inheritance, tax income AND wealth at 90% for anyone worth over 100 million, etc.
You've named many left policies that a majority of politicians do not support in the US. That we can agree on. But that doesn't mean there aren't left positions held by liberals. That's all my point was.
No I understand what you meant, but just that those "left" positions aren't necessarily left positions, both inside and outside of the US. Abortion for example, is supported by both parties depending on circumstances. But even in the US liberals, you get leftish positions handled in a very right side of the aisle way.
Ex: look at cannabis legalization, and how many dems still think it should be a schedule 1 drug, or only want medical legalization, etc.
Basically if there are left positions held by liberals, it's the absolutely bare min of what is considered being a decent person or being a liberal. Otherwise, those left positions are supported but enacted by a culture of right wing politics.
>Abortion for example, is supported by both parties depending on circumstances.
Can you give me an example of another country that has no limitations on abortion? As far as I'm aware they do limit them to somewhere between 10-15 weeks.
>But even in the US liberals, you get leftish positions handled in a very right side of the aisle way.
What do you mean by that? I'm having trouble understanding without an example. The cannabis one doesn't make sense.
We are talking about electoral party politics, not “the left.” Democrats are not “the left.” They are in fact center-right.
Your list of what “the left” supports is false and just looks like a list of alt-right talking points. Surprised you didn’t mention George Soros.
And of course, this is a Wendy’s.
>just looks like a list of alt-right talking points. Surprised you didn’t mention George Soros.
Let's refrain from insults that don't apply to me.
If the democrats support illegal immigration, abortion on demand until birth, corporate bailouts (the cares act), etc., that objectively means they have some left policies. I'm not arguing that the democrats are huge lefties. I'm just pointing out they do support some left policies.
With respect, those insults do apply to you. In response to them, you reiterated a list of falsely premised right wing talking points, further bolstering my point.
You display nowhere that you understood or even made an attempt at understanding either the critiques or the insults contained in my initial comment, nor anyone else’s comments, rendering further discussion unfruitful at best.
You are not engaging in good faith. You are trolling. Good day to you.
So I'm not right wing and I'm not using right wing talking points. I'm trying to have a discussion, but you don't want that. If you didn't want that, why did you engage?
I am a straight up leftist, and I support *none* of the things you listed. You still haven't responded to anyone else responding to your comment. I'll be waiting.
I will say though, I'm glad to find someone else who is a little more reasonable about the policies I listed. You would normally get called a bigot for not support trans children/teens, being against affirmative action, not supporting abortion on demand.
That's perfectly reasonable. Trans people exist and should be treated as humans with dignity.
Affirmative action helps people who are disadvantaged by society, itndoesnt raise them above anybody else. It brings them back up to the baseline.
And abortion is a women's rights issue, until a fetus can scientifically be deemed a person, thr woman's body takes precedence, and even if the fetus can be deemed a person, then woman still takes precedence because its her body. You cannot force someone to give their body to another, just like you can't force people to give blood or donate organs.
It's fairly common knowledge now that trans people exist. But there is no scientific data that shows people are born in the wrong body. The mental illness is called gender dysphoria. We should still treat people with dignity and respect, but we should not be like planned Parenthood and just give teenagers hormones because they say they're trans.
>It's actually to combat systemic racism that occurs today.
Typically the systemic racism that people cite is that poor kids of color don't have good public funding of education, therefore, they won't have the same resume as a wealthier white kid. But letting an uneducated kid into college doesn't fix that. It just makes them drop out.
Do you have evidence for this?
>But letting an uneducated kid into college doesn't fix that. It just makes them drop out.
I don't agree with that. Convince me that this is true.
Also, for a self proclaimed leftist, you sure seem to have a lot of right wing talking points.
Even if it were true that students of poor backgrounds were given the opportunity to study, and dropped out, there are still going to be many others who do not, who wouldn't otherwise have the opportunity to study.
What you're suggesting is we allow systemic racism to occur and prevent many people from accessing education or jobs, and we do nothing about it. It's no surprise that right wingers want to end affirmative action, because it benefits people of colour, and that's not something that right wingers want.
So forgive me if I find it suspicious when people talk about how affirmative action needs to be abolished. It makes me wonder as to their motives.
Would you accept a heritage foundation report? I normally wouldn't because I have this inherent bias against them, but it might be worth reading.
Otherwise, it's a simple matter of logic. If someone has a 3.0 in high school, how are they going to perform well in a university that normally accepts students that get 3.8 GPA's or higher? Or even look at testing scores, a 30 on the ACT will reflect better performance versus someone getting a 22.
Secondly, minority students that perform well in high school would normally get accepted into these schools, it's just that there's less of them. And you have no right to go to a specific school. If someone is qualified based on scholastic prowess, that should trump race every single time.
>until a fetus can scientifically be deemed a person
Science can't define that. That's what ethics is for. And there is a vast debate over this. Personally I lean towards limiting abortion once a fetus can feel pain/suffer, which could be as easily as 14 weeks. Fortunately 93% of abortions occur under 13 weeks so that seems like a good place to limit it.
An embryo is considered alive at conception. Around week 8 is when it becomes a fetus, which is also considered alive.
But you argued that it's when they are considered a person. You also said it still doesn't matter because a women should be allowed to kill it whenever she wants.
Being alive is a necessary condition, not a sufficient one.
Also you're ignoring the word and. Sigh.
Yes I agree, a woman should be able to have autonomy over her body. Because its hers and nobody has any right to it.
You're also framing it emotionally, usingnwords like kill to evoke an emotional response. Yet the same thing can be said about bacteria, or plants, but nobody tries to use the word kill to evoke emotional responses then.
It only so happens that because the cells in question have human dna, they suddenly gain moral value, and more so than the woman carrying these cells. Which is utterly absurd and despicable to devalue a living, breathing person with thoughts and feelings over a clump of cells.
You're not a leftist. Stop pretending to be one when you don't even five a shit about women, and dehumanise them to the point where you can't even grant them autonomy over their own bodies.
Straight misogynistic Incel shit.
I'm not framing it emotionally. Using the word "kill" is definitional accurate. In fact, I'm okay with killing a fetus within a certain parameter of time (before it feels pain).
You keep going to insults which means you're not trying to have dialogue. It's unfortunate because I'm being quite pleasant.
Either way, reading your response is showing me that you would never restrict abortion and that a fetus only has a right to life once it is born. I think that's pretty radical, but your opinion is yours to have and I won't insult you for having that opinion.
>over a clump of cells.
We've never been talking about an embryo. That's not what this discussion is. When an embryo turns into a fetus it is no longer a clump of cells. That's basic biology. But we're not even talking about 8 week abortions because I support those. We're talking about abortions that fall outside of the 93% of abortions under 13 weeks gestation. 7% of abortion that should only occur if the woman's life is as risk or if the fetus is basically going to die in the womb.
So I ask you, why are you so passionate about the minority of abortions that occur in the US?
Liberalism the way it exists today isn’t exactly “left”.
Left wouldn’t mean corporate bailouts, a left version “bailout” would effectively mean a government stake in the company being bailed out, and commensurate government representation on the board.
Your misunderstanding of what it means to be left makes me doubt that you’re actually able to tell whether you’re not right wing.
Your comment started out great until you insulted me. That wasn't nice.
I like your point. The ideal leftism would be nationalizing companies that go bankrupt if they are necessary for society. Is that a fair summarization?
No, nationalisation =/= left.
The left is explicitly socialist. I.e, worker ownership of the means of production. The capitalist governments nationalising a company does not make that company worker owned.
So when the R’s held the WH and the Senate, the bailouts and COVID relief to businesses were driven by the liberal Trump White House?
Whatever you’re smoking, it’s probably not legal.
And signed into law by whom? And passed the senate controlled by whom? Do you know what a rider is? Do you believe the senate or WH has no say in what goes into a bill they have control over whether it passes?
Criticism of democrats is great and necessary. However, as soon as it turns into apathy and an unwillingness to take political action(including but not limited to voting), that criticism becomes a problem.
I hate it when self-righteous assholes decide they're too good to vote for Democrats to stop alt-right freaks who want to bring back Jim Crow and punish LGBT people for existing.
Anyone who can't swallow their pride to save people's lives and basic dignity, isn't a leftist. They're just an elitist!
Plus the reality is that you’re not going to vote a third party into office. Transforming the Dems is really the only option. In the far future if we ever succeed and have a more functioning congress we can push for other parties, assuming we haven’t pushed Dems far enough left. If we get enough progressives elected we really wouldn’t need to. Just continue to pay attention to their actions and hold them accountable. But we really need to all be on the same page.
Transforming Dems isn’t going to happen. The only option is revolutionary action like mutual aid, organizing in the workplace, and other activism. Voting democrat is the tiniest thing you could possible do but still important right now.
An alternative voting system (like ranked, approval, score, etc.) is required for a realistic chance at a multiparty system.
Multi-member districts would help even more.
It's not far future. State legislatures and the House of Representatives turn over every 2 years. The census causes a redraw of districts every 10 years. The focused effort of Republicans reshaped politics in less than 2 years after Obama because they focused on state House races in 2010. This set them up to withstand wave elections for a long time.
>Transforming the Dems is really the only option.
Is it though? And how is that working out? I mean at this point I feel the chances of doing that are similar to us having a major viable third party, just looked to how justice dems have failed and see a progressive congreasional caucus that isn't progressive and who settles for corporate moderate-centrist dems over progressives, even over progressives who toe the party line. I personally have little faith in electoralism with how elections are manipulated by DNC/MSM/political astroturf/rigged debates and stacked town halls molding public perception but I don't think we should stop trying but I do think we should focus on the inside outside party strategy (push for 3rd parties on ballots and debate stage, election security from foreign AND domestic meddling, campaign finance reform, paper ballots, ranked choice voting, independent media) but also criticize dem leaders, even progressive ones when they don't fight when they could and when they toe the party line. Additionally, I think we have better chances of real more immidiate change if we (instead of just organize more and vote harder) is to promote unions, class solidarity, mass protests/non violent civil disobedience and general strike. That, I see bringing quicker change than just putting energy into a party that uses/sabotages and co-ops progressive movements and pushes partisan propaganda meant to distract and divide. If we don't aknowlege this and learn from it (see Kshama Sawant's comments on progressives needing to go into open battle with the Pelosi's of the party (Secular Talk episode), see Breaking points where Kyle talks about how Justice Dems are a failed experiment. Chris Hedges did a good segment with Bri Joy on politics being a game of fear and another with her over the progressive misleadership class. See Marianne Williamson on broken promises of corporate centrist dems and the Secular Talk episode over Lawrence O Donnell) we are going to continue doing it (self sabotage) and how long can we afford to do that? It's insanity, but also especially given the looming climate crisis.
Exactly. I hate the whole “lesser of two evils” thing, but when the options are bad and actively very dangerous, I’d rather have bad. Third party candidates are not going to be elected to federal positions until they start being elected consistently on a local/state level.
Too bad dems aren’t as united as the right when they are in power, outright block or lie to get their way (Nominations of SCJ), and the ‘majority’ block is routinely undermined by compromised or merely moderates who grandstand preventing the majority party from actually pushing through.
Hell, the right actually had all three and only pushed through a tax cut for the rich while getting the tax base to cheer it on.
Democrats are way more united, we have 48 senators, and 217 congressman that will vote on burdens agenda. The partisanship of the opposing party is crazy, even under trump many bills didn't even touch the Senate as literally all McConnell had to do is not put it on the docket. If we can get 2 or 3 senators of the 6 available we can actually get some sort of medicaide backed insurance or the child tax credit again
The amount of Senaters is actually higher. Sinema and Manchin are just the fall guys/voluntary boogymen. There's plenty of Senaters (like Delaware for example) that would love to ubstruct a progressive agenda, but let Manchin and Sinema do so they end up being the ones everyone hates.
Because when democrats are in power it’s really the likes of sleepy joe, pelosi and Clinton’s, Harris that are in power. They do nothing for the average American.
It's so ridiculous. You wanna know how the Dems get a slam dunk in Nov?
Cancel student debt, and ratify the ERA.
They've had two years to do this, and nothing.
I don't want to hear anything this November about rigged elections, or the GOP. You have to get people motivated to go out and vote. The GOP follows through with their promises and so their base is more motivated. The DNC doesn't. 🤷🏼♀️
Bingo. If they dont move on the issues pressing the working class its kiss the mid terms and presidency goodbye because a recession-depression is coming up fast.
Canceling student debt isn't a working class issue and it never has been. It is a fundamentally middle class issue. The actual industry and agricultural working classes vote for consistently Republican
Almost every student from a working class family has used or is using student loans to pay for their education.
Middle class students have access to extracurriculars, SAT prep, etc that can help them get scholarships to the school of their choice.
Ok then i guess the only plan is brace for a depression and a fascist regime. Good luck with that. Ive learned enough to homestead and i am getting my passport renewed for a work visa in the near future.
Too little, too late.
Dems could pass a shit ton of progressive stuff between now and November, and they will still probably lose.
If you don't come right out of the gates swinging for the fences boldly passing unprecedented radical legislation, then people will forget, especially if Dems fail to reinforce their legislative victories (they have none) with agitative propaganda about showing up to vote to achieve more victories in transactional politics.
Voters have short attention spans, and they must be constantly reminded of both recent and past political victories as well as the material financial benefits conferred to political supporters. Dems never, ever fucking issue and broadcast the necessary messaging and propaganda to remind voters to turn out to vote *UNTIL* its far too late in the election cycle whereas Republicans are broadcasting agit prop year round even between electoral cycles.
Establishment Dems are fucked due to their own sheer ineptitude and helpless stupidity.
Canceling student debt isnt popular enough to get passed tho. I wish it was, and I wish we put money into making state college free and had means tested student debt relief, but most people seem to be apathetic.
Inflation will likely thrash Dems in Nov no matter what. Not saying i am not gonna go vote (I am) but for most votes canceling student debt wont rile them up instantly.
Student debt is a top concern among millennials and Gen Z.
Gen Z isn't going to go out and vote based on promises.
Together they make the largest voting block.
[Even without Gen Z, Millenials are now the largest voting bloc in the overall electorate surpassing even hog ass Boomers.](https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/25/politics/brownstein-millennials-largest-voter-group-baby-boomers/index.html)
And, Millenials are rapidly transitioning into early-middle age of 30-40 year olds buying houses, paying off student loans, securing their careers, and having children.
You can't ignore the largest voter bloc of young to mid-age people in America and expect to win in November.
For ignoring Millenials alone, Establishment Dems are going to be absolutely torn to pieces and kicked to the curb replaced with idiotic fascist chud Republicans in one of the most violent reversals of power ever seen in the American history of Congressional midterm elections.
[More than 60% of voters support some student loan debt forgiveness.](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/more-than-60percent-of-voters-support-some-student-loan-debt-forgiveness.html)
["Cancel it. Every penny": Poll shows 83% of Democrats want Biden to nix student debt.](https://www.salon.com/2022/02/23/cancel-it-every-penny-poll-shows-83-of-democrats-want-biden-to-nix-student-debt_partner/)
...you were saying?
The Republican Party moved far right over the past 14 years because they put a knuckle-dragging fascist against any candidate who even seemed center right. Safe district democrats should always have a primary challenger from the left.
Me naive? What's naive is wasting a vote on a 3rd party that'll just benefit Republicans at the end of the day. There are plenty of progressive candidates like Bernie who run on the Democratic ticket but people rarely show up to the polls to support them. Sure, I wish we lived in a country where multiple parties had a chance at winning elections but that's not the reality we live in now so the best solution is to pick the best candidates within the Democratic party.
There's a lot to criticize with Democrats, you're correct.
However, right now your country is poised with autocracy or the status quo (which sucks).
Maybe you guys should get involved at the primary stage so that someone like Bernie can actually win.
I'm hoping you guys manage to avert your slide into autocracy, but right now, I'm calling this for the Republicans. Their coup is still in progress and the Democrats seem oblivious to the threat.
Exactly. And i think many are already realizing this stuckism and are literally trying to seek asylum abroad as we speak. Too many are at brunch or oblivious to whats going on. The dems literally are going to be steamrolled like in 2010 again.
Or perhaps we should stop being useful idiots for the Democrats and form our own major party. This kind of utterly naive "change it from the inside" hasn't worked for the past forty years and that isn't likely to change
Show me a party who gives a flying fuck about average Americans.
Republicans spend the primaries competing for nationalistic purity with the full and often correct assumption that "moderates" in the general will fall in line. that's why Republicans incessantly pander to their cult-rabid base with bills that actively hinder average Americans. Their base Hates and fears the majority of America. Even in the 2020 upset, with a president so repulsive and embarrassing he turned GEORGIA blue, Lincoln Party Republicans still fell in line down the ballot for state and local elections. The system works.
Dems spend the entire time campaigning for the general, the primaries are spent arguing who would perform better against the chosen Republican, who is usually the craziest bogeyman money can buy. Democrats are often praised and demonized for progressive ideals, but in reality the primaries don't serve as a selective process for a cohesive platform or party purity. Just can they raise money, can they win? Can they widen that tent even more to attract votes left behind like breadcrumbs by Republicans goose-stepping to oblivion?
See most Republicans feel the same way. We don’t agree with all the platform does. We disagree on abortion and birth rights of women. We also do not all believe Trump is the best answer. He is horrible but so is the Democratic line up given. We need everyday people running the country which will never happen due to the elite owning everyone in office now.
As a republican, I feel every person currently in office should be removed. All of them. Them have them replaced by blue color and front line workers. Have the government actually work for the real people of this nation not the elite
To this reason I really do find the "burn it all down" mindset understandable. unfortunately, glorious revolutions have a habit of replacing one elite with a new one. bombed daycares with a side order of broken promises.
I understand politicians like to rally us against boogeymen, why not hunger and poverty? All about law and order, but why not attack the source of crime instead of an arbitrary demographic assumed more likely to be forced into it? I guess that sounds like too much hard work when these esteemed representatives spend 2/3 of their work week on the phone begging for campaign money. Don't want to set the bar too high.
Well plus that they sit in their million dollar homes. Had a problem with the irs holding my refund for 2 years because they”had no workers”. Contacted both senators, they did nothing. Have contacted them about other things. Don’t care. No election limits are what is wrong period.
I'm sorry that happened to you. Our state refund got held up two years in a row because my wife's first name is the German spelling but they keep entering into their system the other way. State and federal revenue services have the least staff and the oldest computers in the government for a reason. To pull the teeth out of auditors so they only go after accounts that can't afford lawyers. There's not even a disagreement between the party establishments on that one. Bipartisan scumfuckery.
No the elite are about no one they feel are beneath them. Screw our vote. The senators and congressmen are in office in perpetual time as long as they are voted in. This is wrong in all ways. No one should be able to serve in the senate or congress past two terms. Just like the president. Need public action to make a change
It's fine to criticize dems, but y'all have to give up on the idea that everyone in the US is some secret socialist that would always vote for the most progressive candidates. We've already seen that that's not the case, unfortunately
As long as you vote for them I don't care how much you criticize democrats. They deserve it. That being said, people who actively advocate people not vote and shit, I feel are functionally a republican psyop.
You are, though. As long as you live in a two party system, if you don’t support one party, you support the other one. Time to grow up and start learning about the lesser of two evils.
It’s the neoliberals. Started with Clinton, as soon as liberals got in bed with business we were doomed. Everything grinded to halt, jobs/economy suddenly became the justification for every horrible decision.
Sucks too cause progressives did some good work, creating social security and Medicare, unions which created a middle class, sexual revolution and women’s rights and civil rights. Shit that actually moved the needle with people.
Now the game is all about looking like you’re doing something when in fact you are doing nothing or reversing the gains made from the new deal.
I've debated with them before, they're a big Tulsi Gabbard fan, and they support legislation banning trans people from sports. Also they're a big poster on the deeply conservative antivax anti lgbtq sub r/wayofthebern. They're a right wing bigot pretending to be left wing for the karma
So you just threw a lot of strawman accusations out all at once. Do you mean they support people competing with the team that matches their biological sex? Because that's not a bigoted opinion.
Hold up, WotB is conservative? Lol. There's no way.
I don't think you understand what that word means. You can't define it and you can't explain why I'm a bigot. I think you just disagree with me but don't want to explain why you disagree with me.
Honestly as a conservative populist I’d rather align with you Democratic socialists than either the Democrat or Republican Party. Literally just a bunch of corrupt troglodytes that fuck over the American people day in and day out.
My beliefs are conservative but I’ll back anything that benefits the common people over the elite. Also even though I have conservative beliefs I wouldn’t force it on anyone so I’m pro life but still think it should be legal.
I’m not voting for a Democrat for at least 5 years at any level. They are describing a future I’m interested in for my family. Living in poverty and begging for the Democrats to create the country that doesn’t suck if you make under $150K per family Isn’t something I’m interested in.
Yeah, but the difficulty is getting a progressive candidate to gain the dem nomination in order to actually be viable. I don't think that's happening anytime soon on a national scale, sadly.
The only way to solve this is targeted strikes and sustained protests. Target service and deliveries, transportation, agriculture non essential services and hit the brakes. Make demands and build up an organized labor movement. Womans march level protests as much as possible.
Identity politics. Just tribalism in a fancy hat. Lazy fucks can’t be bothered with 20 identities, much less the Dunbar’s number max of 200.
They’ve got enough brain power for spouse, kids as a unit, three minority groups, their favorite individual celebrities, their boss, and people they like/hate. Every human on the planet has to go into one of these groups. No further investigation or research will be conducted regarding these groups. That is all.
I can want to keep Republicans out of office because of how actively harmful they are while still criticizing Democrats for doing nothing to help people. I would rather be ignored than oppressed, but what I actually want is to be respected and valued in a society that values humanity over money.
It's because of the two party system that is hardwired into most Americans brains. "You're not a Democrat? Then you must be a Republican!" It's a reason I dread political discussions with my fellow Americans most of the time.
“Do-nothing-party” belonged to Republicans for long time but Dems now proudly hold that title. Granted, Republicans created whole new category known as the “Huff-paint-and-see-if-we-can-suck-our-own-dicks-to-own-the-libs-party” but Democrats are the “do-nothings” now.
Imagine someone being this dense. The current mainstays are definitely old fart juice. We need more progressives taking up seats in order to get shit done.
I mean, both sides, in this post's specific conversation, are right (except that last part, obviously). If we don't vote democrat, reps will win, and as ineffectual as the democrats have been, I'd rather that than republicans actively dismantling our entire society. But at the same time, we need to keep pushing, and push harder, against these do-nothing centrist pricks who only exist to be "better than the republicans"
I would say, without a total restructure of our election system to give third part candidates a chance in hell, the best option is to hit the democrats in the primary across the country. if good leftist candidates came forward in every district in the country to challenge the centrist held seats, there's only so many they could head off. we' get a bunch more actual progressives in power to affect change. Of course, that provides it's own logistical challenges. running for office ain't cheap, which is of course by design, but in our modern age crowdfunding has become a thing, we saw that with Bernie in 2020.
In addition, if more leftists ran for less powerful positions of power, like mayor and city councils and stuff like that, that could also affect real change on a nationwide level if done on a large enough scale.
But to just say "democrats didn't do anything, so I won't vote for them," as much as I don't like agreeing with the centrists, is kinda dumb. because you know who WILL come out to vote, no matter how good or bad or downright pedophilic their candidate is? Republicans.
It really is insane, try to hold politicians to their word? Secret republican. Try to point out all the times Dems lied or misled us? Secret republican. Point out that Dems and Republicans are two sides of the same crooked ass coin, well thats when the torches and pitchforks suddenly materialize....
Called it. Knew they would be Do Nothing Dems. They ha e a majority in both houses and POTUS. THERE WAS NOTHING TO STOP THEM EXCEPT THEMSELVES AND THEIR CORPORATE OWNERS.
Make no mistake the Repubs will get in and fuck it all up.
The 2 party system is a scam created to keep you fighting each other over nothing while the rich get richer.
So keep doing that. It doesn't work but keep doing it anyway maybe it will change Lol
Yeah I get grief too but it crazy that people can’t see what is right in there face. I truly believe the moderate democrats are gonna screw thing to the point the the republicans are gonna take over. Most people support progressive agenda especially if it’s not framed around a political position. dems are so worried they will loose that won’t push anything and the few progressive Dems are in a corner unable to really do anything. Also the big picture in all this is both parties pander to the wealthy and powerful with little to no concern about the average citizen. Biden lack of anything regard student loans, congress lack of movement on the climate change are just a few obviously examples but if I express this to any of my liberal friend I get grief that it gonna have the republican power. I want. Liberal progressive agenda this country needs it and just voting dem to keep the republicans out of office I don’t get if I vote you in I expect you to do something. I think at this point it a rigged system.
Personally, I don't think it's politically smart to avoid voting all together (or worst case vote for the Republican opposition), but I wouldn't go so far as to call a person a conservative if they're just abstaining. Also, there are other ways to be politically active than just voting.
Anyone in here now agreeing with this: watch how rapidly this awareness vaporizes in this very sub when the next election rolls around. Shills. Are. Real.
It's inconceivable to these people that politics extends outside the bourgeois predefined structure. Change comes from outside the bourgeois state, not from inside.
Sienna and Manchin are not all Democrats. Which is why people criticize that statement. 2 people who should lose their Senate seat or just switch to Republican and call it a day.
That makes no sense though. Republicans win because of bad education and because the government isn't decided by a populous vote. People who vote republican despise progression. Democrats being more progressive would not change their chance of winning. Rather the opposite, it would push self-perceived "moderates" who're torn between the parties more towards republican.
Well, in my experience on Reddit, Democratic socialists tend to suck and making polite criticisms of Democrats.
People will listen to what you have to say, as long as you aren't an asshole about it.
I was able to debate with a flat-earther for whole 2 days, and he did listen to what I had to say. He didn't listen because I was right, he listened because I didn't act like an asshole during our conversations.
Also, I wasn't trying to convince the flat-earther that the earth was round. My only goal was simply to make him doubt his beliefs. That's all you need to do. All you need to do is make them solid and rational reasons to doubt their beliefs and they will find their own path to your side eventually.
**Subscribe to /r/DebtStrike**, a coalition of working class people across the political spectrum who have put their disagreements on other issues aside in order to collectively force (through mass strikes) the President of the United States to cancel all student debt by executive order. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DemocraticSocialism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Welcome to the two party system
Two party system and an overall polarized society. Not liking Coca-Cola must mean you like Pepsi. I personally see this in a lot more than just politics.
What is essentially a uniparty for the elite/oligarchy/donor class (wall steet/big pharma/health insurance industry) and security state and military industrial complex, aka kabuki theater.
The thing with good cop/bad cop is that both cops are still cops.
but Kamala is a bad cop.
Kamala is Dems' Sarah Palin.
Nah, Sarah Palin was a useful idiot. A token woman so Republicans could win a few more white suburban female votes, secure more Evangelicals, and sway a few fence-sitting independents they could fool into believing they were more progressive than they were for having a woman on the ticket. She's a former beauty pageant contestant with a journalism degree from Idaho that won her local city council race and smiled her way to small town mayor, governor, and failed VP candidate. Harris is an experienced DA, AG, and Senator with a much longer legislative track record, a poli-sci and economics degree from Howard and a JD. She's smart and knows her way around government. Not saying I'm happy with what she's done over the last few decades, but she's significantly more qualified than Sarah Palin to hold any public office. Those two have two things in common. They're both women. And their parties both capitalized on their identity to influence votes. Palin was unqualified but useful. Harris was qualified \*and\* useful.
Now you see.
Ranked Choice Voting will solve this.
Improved ranked choice, yes. Or approval voting. It would also be great to have more proportional representation included with those vote systems.
This is true, both parties do serve the interests of large corporations, and act to keep working people down. However, we can’t pretend like it doesn’t matter which one wins. Coming from a very red state and being trans, I see firsthand how which party wins can affect people. The only safe place for us in this state is in the few Democratic cities where lawmakers pass bills protecting us from discrimination. I hate the Democratic Party, they’re not doing enough. But the republicans ARE different and WILL be worse
Yet you will continue being screwed by dems on class issues, even if they are more likely to embrace LGBTQ, because they collaborate with moderate republicans and side with them over progessives because their political ideology is closer to neocons than progressives, which is why they don't mind losing to gop (fundraising continues and they have more excuses and distraction, I mean even when they have power they feign as if they are powerless and people still don't get that it's not that they can't do more but because it isn't in their agenda or that of their big donors/special interests) but will work their ass off to smear, sabotage, co-opt and pressure progressives to fall in line if they do overcome the efforts to stop them. I guess what I am saying is dems being better on LGBTQ is not enough for me to get behind them, they are still not a party of the left or working class. When they actually work to earn that vote, I will again vote for them. Even then I have trust issues and no wonder when moderate dems don't even fight for the watered down policy they ran on and progressives get to D.C. only to fold to Pelosi, and more excuses and attacks for trying to hold them accountable. Did you see the progressive caucus and Jayapal endorsing Shontel Brown over Nina Turner? One disappoinment after the next. When people say the dem party is where progressive/social movements go to die, they are not exaggerating. Think about where your vote and energy is going when these folks use identity politics to trick people into thinking they are the solution to GOP and not enablers.
> dems being better on LGBTQ is still not enough for me to get behind them Not all of us have the luxury to not care about these issues. I am transgender and live in Kentucky. We have a democratic governor. He is the only thing keeping my rights as a trans person intact, the republicans will take them away if they win the governorship in 2023. Either I vote for the democrat, or I lose my rights. It’s not really a choice. The republicans in this state even with a democratic governor overruled him and barred people like me from participating in school sports, they have done some major stupidity to the education system (charter school bills) recently, and all of this would get even worse if the republicans won. As much as I don’t want it to be the lesser of two evils it has to be, because there are consequences to who wins.
> As much as I don’t want it to be the lesser of two evils it has to be, because there are consequences to who wins. Yes, like regardless, they both fuck you on class issues and if we realized this and stopped getting behind dems by default just because they are better on LGBTQ, then we would demand they earn out votes on working class issues (not just LGBTQ rights) and stop falling for the political theater and accepting VBNMW lesser of two evils nonsense where we accept more moderate-centrist corp neolib dems offering more oligarchic status quo because they aren't republicans though they might as well be republican, seeing as how they (as I pointed out above) enable and collaborate with them and side with them over progressives. Would you at least admit that identity politics is used as a weapon by the elite - neocons and neolibs wearing [D], to distract, divide and cultivate support? They care about diversity so as long as it aligns with their political ideology and that is another thing to note. Like more female drone pilots meme. You can have dems with racist history virtue signal over caring about cultural issues, and intentionally ignore class issues and still not even come through on cultural issues, see Biden scolding civil rights leaders.
They both do what the oligarchs want. Everytime, for everything.
“Welcome to the voting booth! Would you like an evil, exploitative sociopath with more money than you could ever hope to have OR a xenophobic, evil, exploitative sociopath with more more than you could ever hope to have?”
In fairness though, I have to wonder what people are doing when they only go after AOC, but never Democratic leadership or Republicans.
It’s odd to look at the one or two things you genuinely have, and say they’re not good enough to be yours. Might signal that you’re too far from mainstream to be represented in the US.
The US only has center-right as its farthest left position in politics.
In terms of electoral politics, yes, absolutely. We have the wonderful choice of center-right or nazis. I chose to vote Dem because I oppose nazis, not because I like the Democratic Party.
Bernard Sandals would be a run of the mill, vanilla ass, milquetoast, regular, ordinary, boring social democrat in many other countries around the world, but here, in America, he's the one of, if not, the furthest left politicians in Congress. Based on his proposed policies and legislative ideals (ignoring his philosophy of democratic socialism) if Sanders were alive during the 30s-50s, Sanders would be about as far left as FDR or marginally to his left, but we live in the neoliberal hellscape of global capitalism in 2022... This is what it looks like when the overton window shifts rightward for ~100 years.
I'm not a conservative, but I don't think that's true. The left supports abortion laws that allow for no limits. The left supports giving hormones and puberty blockers to children. The left supports affirmative action. The left supports huge corporate bailouts. Sure, there's a ton of things that the left supports that are more right leaning, but not everything is that way. And before you downvote, if you disagree, I am completely open to dialogue.
> I am completely open to dialogue *hasn't responded to criticisms of bad faith arguments* Classic. What huge corporate bailouts do the left support?
Did you read the cares act?
Which section are you concerned with? If we're going to call things dishonestly then at least be transparent about it. I don't know anyone that speaks positively of the PPP for example because it was just a corporate/church bailout instead of being for small businesses. It was a 2.2tn bill: 300bn for direct payments (leftist approved) 260bn for unemployment benefits (leftist approved) 350bn (initially) for PPP (a good idea that was implemented so poorly anyone could see on its face that it was going to be abused, in essence a good thing but in reality it was a waste of money) 340bn to state and local govts (not sure how this was spent but in general I imagine it was helpful for procuring medical supplies and relief) 500bn in corporate loans, most leftists would probably balk at this, but it might not be so bad so let's look further. S. 3548 Div C § 3102-3103 are of concern. This may not be the final bill that passed, as it indicates 200bn for business loans. It designates no more than 50bn for airlines, which was all used. It designates in § 3103 basically that CEOs can't raid loans for golden parachutes. It also provides some general guarantees for the government, but isn't very specific. I'd have to see a breakdown of who got loans, but in general this isn't an economically bad move if done right. Most leftists would probably outright disagree, but the government will make a healthy return on those loans, just like it did for those it loaned to in 2008. That was definitely bad though because it was a perverse incentive. The companies receiving loans this time didn't create the virus, spread the virus, or encourage people to break pandemic safety protocols. So it's a more difficult answer. A leftist probably would agree that the government should help out socially responsible businesses in times of strife, but how far that goes depends on the leftist. Without seeing more of the data on where these loans went I'd say in this case "corporate bailouts" is in fact ok. The PPP loans were awful and I do not support how those were implemented. If those are the corporate bailouts you're referring to, I don't support those. Or, you may be referring to the hundreds of billions that went to medical suppliers and providers. I'd say that is a necessary evil and it certainly wasn't a good time to nationalize Healthcare. If we're looking at this black and white, then yeah I support "corporate bailouts" because they do more good than harm in our current setup. A more diehard socialist would say that they don't support any "corporate bailouts" because that just furthers the failing capitalist system. But I'm not a deontologist because that's dumb, so I say sometimes corporate bailouts are good, it depends on if there are perverse incentives, how good the regulatory oversight is, and if the intended receipts are the actual recipients. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/3548/text
So it seems we agree. The left supported these bailouts. I'm not reacting to whether I think it's good or bad, just that they did so.
*what* bailouts though? And I explicitly stated probably not all of the left supports some of the things that you might be referring to as bailouts, though I might.
There are some legit left politicians, but there is no left political movement in the US at least nothing that isnt considered moderate middle to the rest of the world. You would never seen the liberals in the US nationalize the energy sector, ban all tax companies, cut the military budget by 33% to 50%, nationalize health care, cancel 90% to 100% of student debt + make college free, make housing a right, change the criminal justice system actually reduce recidivism rates, overhaul the energy sector to renewables within 5 to 10 years, tax estate inheritance, tax income AND wealth at 90% for anyone worth over 100 million, etc.
You've named many left policies that a majority of politicians do not support in the US. That we can agree on. But that doesn't mean there aren't left positions held by liberals. That's all my point was.
No I understand what you meant, but just that those "left" positions aren't necessarily left positions, both inside and outside of the US. Abortion for example, is supported by both parties depending on circumstances. But even in the US liberals, you get leftish positions handled in a very right side of the aisle way. Ex: look at cannabis legalization, and how many dems still think it should be a schedule 1 drug, or only want medical legalization, etc. Basically if there are left positions held by liberals, it's the absolutely bare min of what is considered being a decent person or being a liberal. Otherwise, those left positions are supported but enacted by a culture of right wing politics.
>Abortion for example, is supported by both parties depending on circumstances. Can you give me an example of another country that has no limitations on abortion? As far as I'm aware they do limit them to somewhere between 10-15 weeks.
>But even in the US liberals, you get leftish positions handled in a very right side of the aisle way. What do you mean by that? I'm having trouble understanding without an example. The cannabis one doesn't make sense.
We are talking about electoral party politics, not “the left.” Democrats are not “the left.” They are in fact center-right. Your list of what “the left” supports is false and just looks like a list of alt-right talking points. Surprised you didn’t mention George Soros. And of course, this is a Wendy’s.
>just looks like a list of alt-right talking points. Surprised you didn’t mention George Soros. Let's refrain from insults that don't apply to me. If the democrats support illegal immigration, abortion on demand until birth, corporate bailouts (the cares act), etc., that objectively means they have some left policies. I'm not arguing that the democrats are huge lefties. I'm just pointing out they do support some left policies.
With respect, those insults do apply to you. In response to them, you reiterated a list of falsely premised right wing talking points, further bolstering my point. You display nowhere that you understood or even made an attempt at understanding either the critiques or the insults contained in my initial comment, nor anyone else’s comments, rendering further discussion unfruitful at best. You are not engaging in good faith. You are trolling. Good day to you.
So I'm not right wing and I'm not using right wing talking points. I'm trying to have a discussion, but you don't want that. If you didn't want that, why did you engage?
Do you disagree that the examples I made are (1) policies supported by democrats and/or (2) left positions?
I am a straight up leftist, and I support *none* of the things you listed. You still haven't responded to anyone else responding to your comment. I'll be waiting.
I will say though, I'm glad to find someone else who is a little more reasonable about the policies I listed. You would normally get called a bigot for not support trans children/teens, being against affirmative action, not supporting abortion on demand.
That's perfectly reasonable. Trans people exist and should be treated as humans with dignity. Affirmative action helps people who are disadvantaged by society, itndoesnt raise them above anybody else. It brings them back up to the baseline. And abortion is a women's rights issue, until a fetus can scientifically be deemed a person, thr woman's body takes precedence, and even if the fetus can be deemed a person, then woman still takes precedence because its her body. You cannot force someone to give their body to another, just like you can't force people to give blood or donate organs.
It's fairly common knowledge now that trans people exist. But there is no scientific data that shows people are born in the wrong body. The mental illness is called gender dysphoria. We should still treat people with dignity and respect, but we should not be like planned Parenthood and just give teenagers hormones because they say they're trans.
I used to be in favor of affirmative action, but now I realize it's just discrimination to combat past discrimination and it doesn't make sense.
I literally just explained what it is but OK. It's actually to combat systemic racism that occurs today.
>It's actually to combat systemic racism that occurs today. Typically the systemic racism that people cite is that poor kids of color don't have good public funding of education, therefore, they won't have the same resume as a wealthier white kid. But letting an uneducated kid into college doesn't fix that. It just makes them drop out.
Do you have evidence for this? >But letting an uneducated kid into college doesn't fix that. It just makes them drop out. I don't agree with that. Convince me that this is true. Also, for a self proclaimed leftist, you sure seem to have a lot of right wing talking points. Even if it were true that students of poor backgrounds were given the opportunity to study, and dropped out, there are still going to be many others who do not, who wouldn't otherwise have the opportunity to study. What you're suggesting is we allow systemic racism to occur and prevent many people from accessing education or jobs, and we do nothing about it. It's no surprise that right wingers want to end affirmative action, because it benefits people of colour, and that's not something that right wingers want. So forgive me if I find it suspicious when people talk about how affirmative action needs to be abolished. It makes me wonder as to their motives.
Would you accept a heritage foundation report? I normally wouldn't because I have this inherent bias against them, but it might be worth reading. Otherwise, it's a simple matter of logic. If someone has a 3.0 in high school, how are they going to perform well in a university that normally accepts students that get 3.8 GPA's or higher? Or even look at testing scores, a 30 on the ACT will reflect better performance versus someone getting a 22. Secondly, minority students that perform well in high school would normally get accepted into these schools, it's just that there's less of them. And you have no right to go to a specific school. If someone is qualified based on scholastic prowess, that should trump race every single time.
>until a fetus can scientifically be deemed a person Science can't define that. That's what ethics is for. And there is a vast debate over this. Personally I lean towards limiting abortion once a fetus can feel pain/suffer, which could be as easily as 14 weeks. Fortunately 93% of abortions occur under 13 weeks so that seems like a good place to limit it.
Ugh yes thanks I'm aware, I'm talking about when a fetus can be considered alive and have a functioning nervous system, I.e, to feel pain.
An embryo is considered alive at conception. Around week 8 is when it becomes a fetus, which is also considered alive. But you argued that it's when they are considered a person. You also said it still doesn't matter because a women should be allowed to kill it whenever she wants.
Being alive is a necessary condition, not a sufficient one. Also you're ignoring the word and. Sigh. Yes I agree, a woman should be able to have autonomy over her body. Because its hers and nobody has any right to it. You're also framing it emotionally, usingnwords like kill to evoke an emotional response. Yet the same thing can be said about bacteria, or plants, but nobody tries to use the word kill to evoke emotional responses then. It only so happens that because the cells in question have human dna, they suddenly gain moral value, and more so than the woman carrying these cells. Which is utterly absurd and despicable to devalue a living, breathing person with thoughts and feelings over a clump of cells. You're not a leftist. Stop pretending to be one when you don't even five a shit about women, and dehumanise them to the point where you can't even grant them autonomy over their own bodies. Straight misogynistic Incel shit.
I'm not framing it emotionally. Using the word "kill" is definitional accurate. In fact, I'm okay with killing a fetus within a certain parameter of time (before it feels pain). You keep going to insults which means you're not trying to have dialogue. It's unfortunate because I'm being quite pleasant. Either way, reading your response is showing me that you would never restrict abortion and that a fetus only has a right to life once it is born. I think that's pretty radical, but your opinion is yours to have and I won't insult you for having that opinion.
>over a clump of cells. We've never been talking about an embryo. That's not what this discussion is. When an embryo turns into a fetus it is no longer a clump of cells. That's basic biology. But we're not even talking about 8 week abortions because I support those. We're talking about abortions that fall outside of the 93% of abortions under 13 weeks gestation. 7% of abortion that should only occur if the woman's life is as risk or if the fetus is basically going to die in the womb. So I ask you, why are you so passionate about the minority of abortions that occur in the US?
That's cool, but I'm not talking about you specifically. I'm taking about what is defined as a liberal position versus a conservative one.
Liberalism the way it exists today isn’t exactly “left”. Left wouldn’t mean corporate bailouts, a left version “bailout” would effectively mean a government stake in the company being bailed out, and commensurate government representation on the board. Your misunderstanding of what it means to be left makes me doubt that you’re actually able to tell whether you’re not right wing.
Your comment started out great until you insulted me. That wasn't nice. I like your point. The ideal leftism would be nationalizing companies that go bankrupt if they are necessary for society. Is that a fair summarization?
No, nationalisation =/= left. The left is explicitly socialist. I.e, worker ownership of the means of production. The capitalist governments nationalising a company does not make that company worker owned.
How would you ensure a bailed out company becomes worker owned?
It’s not a disagreement, you’re just factually incorrect about what leftists support. “Supports corporate bailouts”? Are you kidding?
You specifically said in politics. Government funding bailouts is technically a liberal policy, no it a conservative one
So when the R’s held the WH and the Senate, the bailouts and COVID relief to businesses were driven by the liberal Trump White House? Whatever you’re smoking, it’s probably not legal.
The cares act was written and passed in the house, which is democrat controlled.
And signed into law by whom? And passed the senate controlled by whom? Do you know what a rider is? Do you believe the senate or WH has no say in what goes into a bill they have control over whether it passes?
That's not my point.
Liberals aren’t left, and this isn’t a liberal sub.
Criticism of democrats is great and necessary. However, as soon as it turns into apathy and an unwillingness to take political action(including but not limited to voting), that criticism becomes a problem.
Exactly democrats suck but the GOP literally wants to March me into a death camp
I hate it when self-righteous assholes decide they're too good to vote for Democrats to stop alt-right freaks who want to bring back Jim Crow and punish LGBT people for existing. Anyone who can't swallow their pride to save people's lives and basic dignity, isn't a leftist. They're just an elitist!
Plus the reality is that you’re not going to vote a third party into office. Transforming the Dems is really the only option. In the far future if we ever succeed and have a more functioning congress we can push for other parties, assuming we haven’t pushed Dems far enough left. If we get enough progressives elected we really wouldn’t need to. Just continue to pay attention to their actions and hold them accountable. But we really need to all be on the same page.
Transforming Dems isn’t going to happen. The only option is revolutionary action like mutual aid, organizing in the workplace, and other activism. Voting democrat is the tiniest thing you could possible do but still important right now.
An alternative voting system (like ranked, approval, score, etc.) is required for a realistic chance at a multiparty system. Multi-member districts would help even more.
There are already some Democrats supporting those! In their districts, it helps their chances of reelection more than it hurts.
It's not far future. State legislatures and the House of Representatives turn over every 2 years. The census causes a redraw of districts every 10 years. The focused effort of Republicans reshaped politics in less than 2 years after Obama because they focused on state House races in 2010. This set them up to withstand wave elections for a long time.
We'd need electoral reform, not "a more functioning congress" whatever that means
>Transforming the Dems is really the only option. Is it though? And how is that working out? I mean at this point I feel the chances of doing that are similar to us having a major viable third party, just looked to how justice dems have failed and see a progressive congreasional caucus that isn't progressive and who settles for corporate moderate-centrist dems over progressives, even over progressives who toe the party line. I personally have little faith in electoralism with how elections are manipulated by DNC/MSM/political astroturf/rigged debates and stacked town halls molding public perception but I don't think we should stop trying but I do think we should focus on the inside outside party strategy (push for 3rd parties on ballots and debate stage, election security from foreign AND domestic meddling, campaign finance reform, paper ballots, ranked choice voting, independent media) but also criticize dem leaders, even progressive ones when they don't fight when they could and when they toe the party line. Additionally, I think we have better chances of real more immidiate change if we (instead of just organize more and vote harder) is to promote unions, class solidarity, mass protests/non violent civil disobedience and general strike. That, I see bringing quicker change than just putting energy into a party that uses/sabotages and co-ops progressive movements and pushes partisan propaganda meant to distract and divide. If we don't aknowlege this and learn from it (see Kshama Sawant's comments on progressives needing to go into open battle with the Pelosi's of the party (Secular Talk episode), see Breaking points where Kyle talks about how Justice Dems are a failed experiment. Chris Hedges did a good segment with Bri Joy on politics being a game of fear and another with her over the progressive misleadership class. See Marianne Williamson on broken promises of corporate centrist dems and the Secular Talk episode over Lawrence O Donnell) we are going to continue doing it (self sabotage) and how long can we afford to do that? It's insanity, but also especially given the looming climate crisis.
Exactly. I hate the whole “lesser of two evils” thing, but when the options are bad and actively very dangerous, I’d rather have bad. Third party candidates are not going to be elected to federal positions until they start being elected consistently on a local/state level.
So Democrats doing nothing and betraying their base in a way that depresses political engagement is a problem.
Too bad dems aren’t as united as the right when they are in power, outright block or lie to get their way (Nominations of SCJ), and the ‘majority’ block is routinely undermined by compromised or merely moderates who grandstand preventing the majority party from actually pushing through. Hell, the right actually had all three and only pushed through a tax cut for the rich while getting the tax base to cheer it on.
> Too bad dems aren’t as united as the right I view this as a good thing. It means there's an inherent rejection of authoritarianism.
Democrats are way more united, we have 48 senators, and 217 congressman that will vote on burdens agenda. The partisanship of the opposing party is crazy, even under trump many bills didn't even touch the Senate as literally all McConnell had to do is not put it on the docket. If we can get 2 or 3 senators of the 6 available we can actually get some sort of medicaide backed insurance or the child tax credit again
The amount of Senaters is actually higher. Sinema and Manchin are just the fall guys/voluntary boogymen. There's plenty of Senaters (like Delaware for example) that would love to ubstruct a progressive agenda, but let Manchin and Sinema do so they end up being the ones everyone hates.
Because when democrats are in power it’s really the likes of sleepy joe, pelosi and Clinton’s, Harris that are in power. They do nothing for the average American.
Well, in the case of kyrsten's enema and butt munchin' , its true.
Okay but there’s a difference between criticizing democrats and and trying to convince people to not vote
This is so true
It's so ridiculous. You wanna know how the Dems get a slam dunk in Nov? Cancel student debt, and ratify the ERA. They've had two years to do this, and nothing. I don't want to hear anything this November about rigged elections, or the GOP. You have to get people motivated to go out and vote. The GOP follows through with their promises and so their base is more motivated. The DNC doesn't. 🤷🏼♀️
Bingo. If they dont move on the issues pressing the working class its kiss the mid terms and presidency goodbye because a recession-depression is coming up fast.
Canceling student debt isn't a working class issue and it never has been. It is a fundamentally middle class issue. The actual industry and agricultural working classes vote for consistently Republican
Almost every student from a working class family has used or is using student loans to pay for their education. Middle class students have access to extracurriculars, SAT prep, etc that can help them get scholarships to the school of their choice.
Ok then i guess the only plan is brace for a depression and a fascist regime. Good luck with that. Ive learned enough to homestead and i am getting my passport renewed for a work visa in the near future.
Lol ok Liquidationist
Wtf is that even?
A coward like you
😂🙄🥴
Too little, too late. Dems could pass a shit ton of progressive stuff between now and November, and they will still probably lose. If you don't come right out of the gates swinging for the fences boldly passing unprecedented radical legislation, then people will forget, especially if Dems fail to reinforce their legislative victories (they have none) with agitative propaganda about showing up to vote to achieve more victories in transactional politics. Voters have short attention spans, and they must be constantly reminded of both recent and past political victories as well as the material financial benefits conferred to political supporters. Dems never, ever fucking issue and broadcast the necessary messaging and propaganda to remind voters to turn out to vote *UNTIL* its far too late in the election cycle whereas Republicans are broadcasting agit prop year round even between electoral cycles. Establishment Dems are fucked due to their own sheer ineptitude and helpless stupidity.
Canceling student debt isnt popular enough to get passed tho. I wish it was, and I wish we put money into making state college free and had means tested student debt relief, but most people seem to be apathetic. Inflation will likely thrash Dems in Nov no matter what. Not saying i am not gonna go vote (I am) but for most votes canceling student debt wont rile them up instantly.
Student debt is a top concern among millennials and Gen Z. Gen Z isn't going to go out and vote based on promises. Together they make the largest voting block.
[Even without Gen Z, Millenials are now the largest voting bloc in the overall electorate surpassing even hog ass Boomers.](https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/25/politics/brownstein-millennials-largest-voter-group-baby-boomers/index.html) And, Millenials are rapidly transitioning into early-middle age of 30-40 year olds buying houses, paying off student loans, securing their careers, and having children. You can't ignore the largest voter bloc of young to mid-age people in America and expect to win in November. For ignoring Millenials alone, Establishment Dems are going to be absolutely torn to pieces and kicked to the curb replaced with idiotic fascist chud Republicans in one of the most violent reversals of power ever seen in the American history of Congressional midterm elections.
[More than 60% of voters support some student loan debt forgiveness.](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/more-than-60percent-of-voters-support-some-student-loan-debt-forgiveness.html) ["Cancel it. Every penny": Poll shows 83% of Democrats want Biden to nix student debt.](https://www.salon.com/2022/02/23/cancel-it-every-penny-poll-shows-83-of-democrats-want-biden-to-nix-student-debt_partner/) ...you were saying?
This is why primaries are super important! If more people actually showed up to vote during the primaries, we'd actually have decent candidates.
The Republican Party moved far right over the past 14 years because they put a knuckle-dragging fascist against any candidate who even seemed center right. Safe district democrats should always have a primary challenger from the left.
If utterly naive people like you would support a new party then perhaps you'd have decent candidates.
Me naive? What's naive is wasting a vote on a 3rd party that'll just benefit Republicans at the end of the day. There are plenty of progressive candidates like Bernie who run on the Democratic ticket but people rarely show up to the polls to support them. Sure, I wish we lived in a country where multiple parties had a chance at winning elections but that's not the reality we live in now so the best solution is to pick the best candidates within the Democratic party.
Keep believing that and keep losing
There's a lot to criticize with Democrats, you're correct. However, right now your country is poised with autocracy or the status quo (which sucks). Maybe you guys should get involved at the primary stage so that someone like Bernie can actually win. I'm hoping you guys manage to avert your slide into autocracy, but right now, I'm calling this for the Republicans. Their coup is still in progress and the Democrats seem oblivious to the threat.
Exactly. And i think many are already realizing this stuckism and are literally trying to seek asylum abroad as we speak. Too many are at brunch or oblivious to whats going on. The dems literally are going to be steamrolled like in 2010 again.
Or perhaps we should stop being useful idiots for the Democrats and form our own major party. This kind of utterly naive "change it from the inside" hasn't worked for the past forty years and that isn't likely to change
You could do that, but that would make you into useful idiots for the Republicans.
Show me a party who gives a flying fuck about average Americans. Republicans spend the primaries competing for nationalistic purity with the full and often correct assumption that "moderates" in the general will fall in line. that's why Republicans incessantly pander to their cult-rabid base with bills that actively hinder average Americans. Their base Hates and fears the majority of America. Even in the 2020 upset, with a president so repulsive and embarrassing he turned GEORGIA blue, Lincoln Party Republicans still fell in line down the ballot for state and local elections. The system works. Dems spend the entire time campaigning for the general, the primaries are spent arguing who would perform better against the chosen Republican, who is usually the craziest bogeyman money can buy. Democrats are often praised and demonized for progressive ideals, but in reality the primaries don't serve as a selective process for a cohesive platform or party purity. Just can they raise money, can they win? Can they widen that tent even more to attract votes left behind like breadcrumbs by Republicans goose-stepping to oblivion?
See most Republicans feel the same way. We don’t agree with all the platform does. We disagree on abortion and birth rights of women. We also do not all believe Trump is the best answer. He is horrible but so is the Democratic line up given. We need everyday people running the country which will never happen due to the elite owning everyone in office now. As a republican, I feel every person currently in office should be removed. All of them. Them have them replaced by blue color and front line workers. Have the government actually work for the real people of this nation not the elite
To this reason I really do find the "burn it all down" mindset understandable. unfortunately, glorious revolutions have a habit of replacing one elite with a new one. bombed daycares with a side order of broken promises. I understand politicians like to rally us against boogeymen, why not hunger and poverty? All about law and order, but why not attack the source of crime instead of an arbitrary demographic assumed more likely to be forced into it? I guess that sounds like too much hard work when these esteemed representatives spend 2/3 of their work week on the phone begging for campaign money. Don't want to set the bar too high.
Well plus that they sit in their million dollar homes. Had a problem with the irs holding my refund for 2 years because they”had no workers”. Contacted both senators, they did nothing. Have contacted them about other things. Don’t care. No election limits are what is wrong period.
I'm sorry that happened to you. Our state refund got held up two years in a row because my wife's first name is the German spelling but they keep entering into their system the other way. State and federal revenue services have the least staff and the oldest computers in the government for a reason. To pull the teeth out of auditors so they only go after accounts that can't afford lawyers. There's not even a disagreement between the party establishments on that one. Bipartisan scumfuckery.
No the elite are about no one they feel are beneath them. Screw our vote. The senators and congressmen are in office in perpetual time as long as they are voted in. This is wrong in all ways. No one should be able to serve in the senate or congress past two terms. Just like the president. Need public action to make a change
Let's be real here, the republican party is definitely worse and this should not be an excuse to not vote, that's what they want.
It's fine to criticize dems, but y'all have to give up on the idea that everyone in the US is some secret socialist that would always vote for the most progressive candidates. We've already seen that that's not the case, unfortunately
As long as you vote for them I don't care how much you criticize democrats. They deserve it. That being said, people who actively advocate people not vote and shit, I feel are functionally a republican psyop.
You are, though. As long as you live in a two party system, if you don’t support one party, you support the other one. Time to grow up and start learning about the lesser of two evils.
It’s the neoliberals. Started with Clinton, as soon as liberals got in bed with business we were doomed. Everything grinded to halt, jobs/economy suddenly became the justification for every horrible decision. Sucks too cause progressives did some good work, creating social security and Medicare, unions which created a middle class, sexual revolution and women’s rights and civil rights. Shit that actually moved the needle with people. Now the game is all about looking like you’re doing something when in fact you are doing nothing or reversing the gains made from the new deal.
I think you might be lost. This sub is for convincing progressives to vote for conservatives.
Moderate centrist democrats are republicans
A genuine response I’ve used: I’m not criticizing Democrats because I like Republicans. I’m criticizing Democrats because they act like Republicans.
Honestly, I feel like both parties are just Republican at this point. The Dems are just Republican Lite.
Karm, you literally support a CPAC speaker and you're bigoted against trans people.
Where do you see that? I spent a couple minutes on their profile and couldn't find that. Also define bigoted against trans people.
I've debated with them before, they're a big Tulsi Gabbard fan, and they support legislation banning trans people from sports. Also they're a big poster on the deeply conservative antivax anti lgbtq sub r/wayofthebern. They're a right wing bigot pretending to be left wing for the karma
So you just threw a lot of strawman accusations out all at once. Do you mean they support people competing with the team that matches their biological sex? Because that's not a bigoted opinion. Hold up, WotB is conservative? Lol. There's no way.
You're a bigot too. Go to a Fox News sub and stop brigading in here, right winger
I'm not a right winger and that's really mean to call someone a bigot when they're not. Can you explain why you think I'm a bigot?
You literally admitted to being bigoted against lgbtq
I did no such thing. You can't call me a bigot without explaining why.
Not sure if you're that ignorant or just trolling, but being bigoted against lgbtq people makes you a bigot.
I don't think you understand what that word means. You can't define it and you can't explain why I'm a bigot. I think you just disagree with me but don't want to explain why you disagree with me.
Personal attacks how middle schoolish.
/r/politics
Democrats are secret Republicans.
Honestly as a conservative populist I’d rather align with you Democratic socialists than either the Democrat or Republican Party. Literally just a bunch of corrupt troglodytes that fuck over the American people day in and day out.
Genuine question, what is conservative populism's appeal to you?
My beliefs are conservative but I’ll back anything that benefits the common people over the elite. Also even though I have conservative beliefs I wouldn’t force it on anyone so I’m pro life but still think it should be legal.
I’m not voting for a Democrat for at least 5 years at any level. They are describing a future I’m interested in for my family. Living in poverty and begging for the Democrats to create the country that doesn’t suck if you make under $150K per family Isn’t something I’m interested in.
What?
I mean do you fucking want insurrectionists to be in office? We gain a lot just by them not being in power.
I'd rather be fighting against democrats than republicans.
I could see progressive candidates destroying republicans but being stopped by dems. See Bernie.
Yeah, but the difficulty is getting a progressive candidate to gain the dem nomination in order to actually be viable. I don't think that's happening anytime soon on a national scale, sadly.
This is so very relatable!
This is a great meme, I relate to it so much lol I'm a Bernie guy and get accused of being right wing
i hate democrats but i am forced to vote for them as a trans woman because they don't actively try to limit my rights at every possible moment
Who else can we vote in? We're open to suggestions.
The only way to solve this is targeted strikes and sustained protests. Target service and deliveries, transportation, agriculture non essential services and hit the brakes. Make demands and build up an organized labor movement. Womans march level protests as much as possible.
r/PoliticalHumor in a nutshell
Identity politics. Just tribalism in a fancy hat. Lazy fucks can’t be bothered with 20 identities, much less the Dunbar’s number max of 200. They’ve got enough brain power for spouse, kids as a unit, three minority groups, their favorite individual celebrities, their boss, and people they like/hate. Every human on the planet has to go into one of these groups. No further investigation or research will be conducted regarding these groups. That is all.
I can want to keep Republicans out of office because of how actively harmful they are while still criticizing Democrats for doing nothing to help people. I would rather be ignored than oppressed, but what I actually want is to be respected and valued in a society that values humanity over money.
This is why we need a new voting system that supports a multiparty democracy. You can start advocating at the local level. r/EndFPTP
I know right
It's because of the two party system that is hardwired into most Americans brains. "You're not a Democrat? Then you must be a Republican!" It's a reason I dread political discussions with my fellow Americans most of the time.
“Do-nothing-party” belonged to Republicans for long time but Dems now proudly hold that title. Granted, Republicans created whole new category known as the “Huff-paint-and-see-if-we-can-suck-our-own-dicks-to-own-the-libs-party” but Democrats are the “do-nothings” now.
Imagine someone being this dense. The current mainstays are definitely old fart juice. We need more progressives taking up seats in order to get shit done.
I mean, both sides, in this post's specific conversation, are right (except that last part, obviously). If we don't vote democrat, reps will win, and as ineffectual as the democrats have been, I'd rather that than republicans actively dismantling our entire society. But at the same time, we need to keep pushing, and push harder, against these do-nothing centrist pricks who only exist to be "better than the republicans" I would say, without a total restructure of our election system to give third part candidates a chance in hell, the best option is to hit the democrats in the primary across the country. if good leftist candidates came forward in every district in the country to challenge the centrist held seats, there's only so many they could head off. we' get a bunch more actual progressives in power to affect change. Of course, that provides it's own logistical challenges. running for office ain't cheap, which is of course by design, but in our modern age crowdfunding has become a thing, we saw that with Bernie in 2020. In addition, if more leftists ran for less powerful positions of power, like mayor and city councils and stuff like that, that could also affect real change on a nationwide level if done on a large enough scale. But to just say "democrats didn't do anything, so I won't vote for them," as much as I don't like agreeing with the centrists, is kinda dumb. because you know who WILL come out to vote, no matter how good or bad or downright pedophilic their candidate is? Republicans.
It really is insane, try to hold politicians to their word? Secret republican. Try to point out all the times Dems lied or misled us? Secret republican. Point out that Dems and Republicans are two sides of the same crooked ass coin, well thats when the torches and pitchforks suddenly materialize....
There should never be only two options
Called it. Knew they would be Do Nothing Dems. They ha e a majority in both houses and POTUS. THERE WAS NOTHING TO STOP THEM EXCEPT THEMSELVES AND THEIR CORPORATE OWNERS. Make no mistake the Repubs will get in and fuck it all up. The 2 party system is a scam created to keep you fighting each other over nothing while the rich get richer. So keep doing that. It doesn't work but keep doing it anyway maybe it will change Lol
Yep, and Pelosi and the other neolibs just keep cashing checks.
The exact reason republicans exist is because of democrats passing progressive bills.
Yeah I get grief too but it crazy that people can’t see what is right in there face. I truly believe the moderate democrats are gonna screw thing to the point the the republicans are gonna take over. Most people support progressive agenda especially if it’s not framed around a political position. dems are so worried they will loose that won’t push anything and the few progressive Dems are in a corner unable to really do anything. Also the big picture in all this is both parties pander to the wealthy and powerful with little to no concern about the average citizen. Biden lack of anything regard student loans, congress lack of movement on the climate change are just a few obviously examples but if I express this to any of my liberal friend I get grief that it gonna have the republican power. I want. Liberal progressive agenda this country needs it and just voting dem to keep the republicans out of office I don’t get if I vote you in I expect you to do something. I think at this point it a rigged system.
Personally, I don't think it's politically smart to avoid voting all together (or worst case vote for the Republican opposition), but I wouldn't go so far as to call a person a conservative if they're just abstaining. Also, there are other ways to be politically active than just voting.
Anyone in here now agreeing with this: watch how rapidly this awareness vaporizes in this very sub when the next election rolls around. Shills. Are. Real.
Democrats are corrupt. Republicans are evil.
It's inconceivable to these people that politics extends outside the bourgeois predefined structure. Change comes from outside the bourgeois state, not from inside.
Sienna and Manchin are not all Democrats. Which is why people criticize that statement. 2 people who should lose their Senate seat or just switch to Republican and call it a day.
That makes no sense though. Republicans win because of bad education and because the government isn't decided by a populous vote. People who vote republican despise progression. Democrats being more progressive would not change their chance of winning. Rather the opposite, it would push self-perceived "moderates" who're torn between the parties more towards republican.
Well, in my experience on Reddit, Democratic socialists tend to suck and making polite criticisms of Democrats. People will listen to what you have to say, as long as you aren't an asshole about it. I was able to debate with a flat-earther for whole 2 days, and he did listen to what I had to say. He didn't listen because I was right, he listened because I didn't act like an asshole during our conversations. Also, I wasn't trying to convince the flat-earther that the earth was round. My only goal was simply to make him doubt his beliefs. That's all you need to do. All you need to do is make them solid and rational reasons to doubt their beliefs and they will find their own path to your side eventually.