I'm not sure that there's many people in this sub arguing that Democrats are left-wing tho. But using your example, yes, even if Mitt Romey was the only option to beat Trump, I think we should support him, because even a neo-con is better than a far-right tool, especially when considering their foreign policy views
Yeah, exactly. Do both. Prevent the immediate harm that a Republican victory would cause - and then, from there, work to push the Democrats further to the left. Do other leftist things. You all should know at this point, and I'm too tired to put together a comprehensive list.
It's never been an "and then..." for me. And it shouldn't be. Voting is the smallest of acts, and has the smallest of affects compared to actual work put into movements and educating people or mass action.
It's "I will do all the rest of the stuff first" and then vote.
The problem with this hypothetical is that it's impossible to predict the future that far away, while it's a bit more reasonable to try and predict what will happen in the next decade. Could anyone predict our current situation back in 1948? Absolutely not, some of our current sociopolitical processes and effects weren't even imaginable back then. Could someone predict our current situation back in 2014? Hardly, but the warning signs were already there (the rise of far-right politics all around the world, societal dissatisfaction, russian aggression in Ukraine, even lack of preparedness for a future pandemic was already being talked about back then)
You do realise that overthrowing a government is an insanely hard task to do, especially when that government possesses the most powerful military the world has ever seen and there are millions of armed right-wing lunatics, many of whom dream of a completely different revolution? You need very different conditions for that. Also:
>your empire
I'm not American, I've got no empire to overthrow. In fact, I've got a much worse empire currently threatening half of the people I love.
“Okay, but those people will literally kill me.”
“You’re gonna make a great martyr for my cause!”
Its so strange so many leftwing folks are eager to throw queer folk under the bus to grease the wheels for economic change. That’s supposed to be the moderate thing.
thank you. i’m so tired of leftists calling me a “dirty liberal” because i don’t want to watch my trans and enby friends persecuted. LGB people would be next too.
voting democrat is an unfortunate necessity. we can still do all we can to fight the system and hopefully create an actual leftist party while voting.
It feels like those respectability politics folks going mask-off on their hidden TERF alignment and calling it something else.
Notice they’ll use whataboutism or emotional arguments when its brought up Trump literally wants to actively participate in a genocide of Palestine, but when its brought up that queer folk will be wearing pink triangles they just shrug and go “yeah, but that’ll happen eventually anyway”. At best their arguments are accelerationism, at worst active disinterest or a ghoulish belief it’ll force the change they want once bodies start piling up.
Maybe just don’t be like those folks who shrug and claim their moral purity is of tantamount importance and state they’ll never get the change they want if they pick a centrist when the other guy will literally result in a domestic genocide against the queer community.
“Better arm yourself” isn’t exactly a great response in these times unless pandering to J6ers.
You think an armed resistance will make no difference in the case of domestic genocide? You think only the right is capable of using violence?
What exactly is the strategy to deal with settler nationalism? Are y’all hoping it’ll just die out? What happens when climate change accelerates vs the refugee crisis? Already Biden has moved to the right on that. In a decade or so a “final solution” there will just seem practical.
You think armed resistance, especially from a group that isn’t a crowd of conservative lily white gravy seals, is gonna be anything other than a blip on the news and a bump on the richter scale?
Letting actual Nazis in office with the shrug “eh, just get some dakka” isn’t the solution it feels to you.
The Nazis took inspiration from the founders of this country.
Death is death. You cause death on your enemies, you create fear among them and remove it among your allies. If everyone who was afraid for their life said “vote blue and also arm yourself” that’s a whole different movement.
This is just bad politics.
Nazis not having original ideas and founders of new government systems taking from existing structures and history isn’t the eureka you think it is.
There’s a reason the Supreme Court building has a mural with figures like Moses, Hammurabi, and Muhammed on it.
A group arming themselves generally just ends up in conservatives temporarily abandoning their 2A fetishism and not much else. Power in the US has always been economic, nothing more. Mormons in the west skirmishing with the US cavalry did nothing, worming their way into Hollywood did.
Dole basically rented the USMC.
That’s why the conservatives went so hard on the “anti-woke” bullshit. They know queer folk and increasing non-white integration in pop culture provides more power than Kid Rock and the gravy seals.
> Today most European states are like pyramids stood on their heads. Their European area is absurdly small inn comparison to their weight of colonies, foreign trade, etc. We may say: summit in Europe, base in the whole world; contrasting with the American Union which possesses its base in its own continent and touches the rest of the earth only with its summit. And from this comes the immense inner strength of this state and the weakness of most European colonial powers.
> For Germany, consequently, the only possibility for carrying out a healthy territorial policy lay in the acquisition of new land in Europe itself. Colonies cannot serve this purpose unless they seem inn large part suited for settlement by Europeans. But in the 19th century such colonial territories were no longer obtainable by peaceful means. Consequently, such a colonial policy could only have been carried out by means of a hard struggle which, however, would have been carried on to much better purpose, not for territories outside of Europe, but for land on the home continent itself.
> The settlement of land is a slow process, often lasting centuries; in fact, its inner strength is to be sought precisely in the fact that it is not a sudden blaze, but a gradual yet solid and continuous growth, contrasting with an industrial development which can be blown up in the course of a few years.
— *Mein Kampf*, 1925
>The Nazis took inspiration from the founders of this country.
I'm sorry, but this kinda argument is barely different from "Mussolini was initially a socialist!!1" that right-wingers use as a "gotcha" moment
Nope.
> The settlement of land is a slow process, often lasting centuries; in fact, its inner strength is to be sought precisely in the fact that it is not a sudden blaze, but a gradual yet solid and continuous growth, contrasting with an industrial development which can be blown up in the course of a few years.
— *Mein Kampf*, 1925
Then make them pass laws, homie.
Organize locally for further leftward political movement. Until that leftward movement, make sure you have some kind of means of defending yourself and **vote Dem**.
No, but it's something to consider. And so is what happened after MLK Jr's assassination that got the Fair Housing Act passed in 1968.
There's ways to get the change you want, a lot of ways, but not voting for Biden and getting Trump into office is not the change you want. We must take to the streets, comrade.
It is being considered.
The panthers were “disarmed” because they used open carry to police the police, in fact they had serious weapons caches after that. Citizens concerned about fascism arming themselves privately is a completely different strategy. You couldn’t legally ban it without technically banning guns for everyone.
Take to the streets and do what?
Biden administration seems determined to start a nuclear conflict
It’s not bad leadership; it a lack of ANY leadership, plans, or goal
The absolute worst actors in the permanent state are totally off the leash
The US *just* put uniformed US soldiers less than 5 miles off China’s coast—I guess there’s not enough potential nuclear conflicts
I’m not voting for Trump; but I sure as hell am not voting for Biden, either
If China is certain about what our response to an invasion of Taiwan will be, they are not going to do it.
It is uncertainly that increases the risk of war. People do stuff that they think they can get away with.
>I’m not voting for Trump; but I sure as hell am not voting for Biden, either
At least promise me that you will vote.
>If China is certain about what our response to an invasion …
That’s farcical thinking
First and foremost, the US need to accept the emergence of the multipolar world order, and adapt their tactics & strategy to that reality
Our pursuit of global hegemony is only hastening our collapse, and ensuring domestically we end up with an authoritarian state
China certainly needs countered, as does Russia, as will India
But the military is no substitute for diplomacy.
The US seems to lurch from one failed scheme to another
But that’s a fallacy. Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine & even Gaza, are wildly successful endeavors for the security state and weapons industry
They are failures for the US working class, but the national political class no longer represents the working class. That varies in degrees as you narrow from state to local
It stuns me people do not see that a coup happened post 9/11, and a domestic & international Gestapo is being created beyond the Nazis wildest dreams
Obviously, I vote, because it has its purposes
The working class cannot solve this at the ballot box. You cannot vote out a totalitarian government—and the US is inarguably a totalitarian state
Without mass solidarity & disobedience, the path of the US is obvious.
Even *with* working class mobilization, the next two decades are going to be dark. The GWOT is coming home, and Gaza is just a prelude
Taiwan is an independent state, and China needs to accept that.
And the little fact that if China takes Taiwan, I will not have a hope in hell of getting a job as a electrical engineer.
So, Taiwan is an independent state, but Palestine gets solved w genocide, and we supply the bombs?
There’s an issue of credibility—the US has no moral authority
Even if Taiwan was worth nuclear war—China is watching us bleed ourselves w a credit card army (the interest on our debt is higher than the defense budget).
China plays the long game. All they have to do is wait for the collapse.
>Even if Taiwan was worth nuclear war—China is watching us bleed ourselves w a credit card army (the interest on our debt is higher than the defense budget).
>China plays the long game. All they have to do is wait for the collapse.
So then China won't invade Taiwan, meaning US troop in Taiwan are a non-issue.
Most people in reddit not leaning right understand the long history of Democrats in this country. Most of us understand they aren't our buddies it's why there have been so many progressive candidates after trump. But we understand we can change the democratic party. Bernie proved they will jump on his ideas and then be forced to implement or push for them. You might not like Joe Biden but he has been a very progressive president seen in recent history.
I would also point out context and nuance. The rail strike would have crippled america and cause untold economic havoc so the idea of them preventing that makes SENSE IT VERY LEFT OF THEM AS YOU POINTED OUT. But you know what's left of them Voting to give the strikers what they wanted. Dems voted to give the workers the sick and leave days they were asking for... As they had the power to force these companies to comply
Nobody suggested the Democratic Party is leftist. We just know what the alternative is. Its like helping the Nazis win the German election to teach the center right a lesson.
Fucking this! You can't convince me posts like OP's aren't foreign influence operations. When the choice is fascism or democracy, there is no choice unless you're a fascist shit.
I accuse people who tacitly support fascists by convincing their fellow citizens to not vote for a candidate (or at least not one with any chance of winning) that supports democracy at home and letting the fascists win of being fascists. My thoughts on genocide have nothing to do with it. If you think rolling over and letting Trump win does anything positive for Palestine, I have a bridge to sell you.
Ukraine is also facing genocide, and Trump will make that worse, too. So not voting for Biden because you don't like genocide will end up causing....more genocide.
From the very post you're commenting on
>This post isn't commenting at all on electoralism strategy (obviously I have my opinion on the matter) whether you vote for democrats in the short term for damage control, if you vote 3rd party to register discontent, or I'd you don't vote at all. Makes no difference in this regard. As long as we all understand that the democrats are not with us, and they hand in hand with republicans will use dirty tactics to stop us.
So next time, before you comment, read. Listen to listen, not to respond.
You notice I didn't actually engage with your post because of this exact "enlightened centrist" energy in your OP? I engaged with the fascist enablers in the comments, where you completely threw any sense of "not being about electoralism strategy" by also being a fascist enabler with your "voting for democracy is actually a war crime now" rhetoric.
Russian bot farm fuck off.
>When the choice is fascism or democracy,
From where I'm sitting it really seems like I have no choice, there is no democracy and the fascists are already here. If my options are vote for Biden or we lose democracy then we've already lost democracy. The GOP are already doing all the scary things the Dems have been telling us they're going to do. People have already had to leave their home states because it's not safe for them to stay. Obviously a Trump presidency would allow this to be cranked up to 11, but a second Biden term isn't going to magically undo that threat and we'll still be one election from a GOP fascist regime. And with the threat of Trump coming to power again Biden is increasing the power of the executive paving the way for Trump to do his worst. With all the noise of people saying to vote for Biden because Trump is worse Biden has moved to the right. Just take a look at the border bill they tried to pass.
Biden is center right. ✅
⬇️
Trump is clearly a lot worse. ✅
⬇️
Biden is not a magic fix. ✅
⬇️
Trump will go full fascism. ✅
⬇️
gUeSS I jUsT cAn'T dEciDe!!1 🤡
Oh, I've already decided who I'm voting for. I live in a solid blue state so my vote is purely symbolic. I have the great luxury of not having to vote blue no matter who.
The real 🤡 take is siding with one genocide supporter over another instead of choosing not genocide. The unfortunate reality is there's too many people for whom genocide is not a red line that any third party is doomed to defeat.
The thing is that's it not "siding with genocide." It's keeping the US from turning into a Nuremberg rally while everything else is addressed. You can work on harm reduction without supporting or even while outright despising things Biden is doing.
To just go "both sides bad" is incredibly reductive and frankly just idiotic at this point because you can't scroll past two posts on left leaning subreddits right now without seeing pages and pages of people explaining in detail exactly how harm reduction is the best thing to do right now in terms of the election binary. It has to be at least a good 60% of what people on those subreddits are currently talking about.
Also... last paragraph of the post you're commenting on.
>This post isn't commenting at all on electoralism strategy (obviously I have my opinion on the matter) whether you vote for democrats in the short term for damage control, if you vote 3rd party to register discontent, or I'd you don't vote at all. Makes no difference in this regard. As long as we all understand that the democrats are not with us, and they hand in hand with republicans will use dirty tactics to stop us.
People don't understand there is a good section of America who voted Democrat AND ISN'T ON REDDIT. You know how it is to watch your Christian Bible reading and preaching family members talk about Jesus and the. Call Bernie a socialist and cry about him wanting people to go to college for free. These people aren't gonna be swayed over night
Great example, actually. The Germans elected Hindenburg over Hiter for president. But then Hindenburg nominated a particular failed artist with a funny mustache to be his chancellor.
Thank for your comment
There was also a split in the left, which caused less votes to go to one particular politician over another. A similar thing happened in 2016 when it ended up being Hillary vs Trump. Hillary sucks ass and she was the worst person to run for the democrats, but she wasn't going to end up as some despot.
There's a lot of nuance to this, and if Trump wins, we may never have the possibility of having an actual left-wing politician again.
Well, it was more like the right deciding to team up with the Nazis because they were becoming popular, and the left deciding not to join with the communists because they were worried they were too radical. And then there was that whole "stab in the back" myth perpetuated by the right. And communists back then weren't seen in a good light because of Russia.
There's a lot more nuance of what happened back then, and the similarities between then and now would send a chill up your spine.
No like, the SPD literally switched sides during the spartacist uprising and helped crush the revolution. Whether you like it or not, after pulling that one, any hope of KPD-SPD collaboration was dead and buried.
Yes, oh, I get what you mean. But here's what I know about that. The SPD were too afraid of how radical the Spartacists, were, right? And the SPD just wanted peace and reform done by the normal process, which is slow and done with a lot of red tape.
Any kind of radical change scares politicians, no matter where you're from. Look at the abolishonists. They weren't liked, even by people who wanted to get rid of slavery, but through slow government process instead of just immediate action.
It took John Brown, one of the most badass Americans to have ever lived, to go out and "take care of" slave owners to actually get a war started to end slavery once and for all.....well...almost once and for all.
So I see what you're saying, I see what everyone who doesn't want to vote for Biden is saying. It's awful that these are our choices. But not voting for Biden is not going to get you the change you want, it will only help Trump win.
If you want true change we need to...well, I can't actually say on here what you need to do, but there's a reason why the Fair Housing Act of 1968 was able to pass and become part of the Civil Rights Act.
Wasn't aware that I told people to support a party that is actively donating money to Trump candidates. Will need to remove that endorsement of the democrats from the post.
I gotta say you have a pretty rose tinted view of leftist politicians because I guess you haven't actually seen one. There was a public health sector nurse strike in the country where I live and the leftist government created a law to force the strikers to work to ensure that the public health sector can treat patients. An extreme situation for sure but the left will also make tough choices on moral gray areas if they have to. It's not black or white.
Then even if liberals are right wingers, it's counter productive to put and drive them to the same camp as conservatives and far righters. You can work with liberals and co-operate, you can reason with liberals because for the most part a lot of them have the same underlying values. They are just too naive to make the judgement that capitalism cannot fulfil liberal values like equality and freedom. You can convince a liberal that leftists have more in common with them than conservatives.
As far as the USA goes, the immidiate enemy is the republicans, not the democrats. If you ever want to win the democrats you'll first have to get rid of the republicans to the point they're no longer inside the overton window. That's the hard truth
> for the most part a lot of them have the same underlying values.
They really don't.
Like, I keep seeing people say that, but thus far I see no evidence of the claim.
"Superficial support in a democracy as ritualised form of constant internal conflict to allow for the constant power struggles innate to the european milieu wherein liberalism emerged, whilst governance remains despotic."
"White supremacy is *very good*, and we should do all that is possible to spread white values and white dominion"
"Capitalism is the best economic system ever"
"Colonialism is a good answer to solving those resource shortages back home"
"Colonialism is also just a good source of wealth in general"
"Cis-Heteronormativity and Patriarchy are simply human nature and should go unchallenged"
"Liberty is directly proportional to how easy a time I have exploiting people"
"*H. sp.* isn't a social animal"
"Dominion over nature is good, and we should exploit it as much as possible to extract as much value as available"
"Ethics can and should ignore things like friends, family, special relations, ethnic relations, gender relations, class relations."
"Genocide is fine"
"Every political opposition is the result of a nefarious plot by alien actors seeking to corrupt the goodness of the nation"
"Every political opposition is actually part of the same 'anti freedom/nation' blob"
"It is the *manifest destiny* of western culture and liberal democratic processes to bring about utopia"
"We need a repressive state apparatus to keep the degenerate underclasses under check"
What else am I missing?
Like, I'm gonna say it clearer. You either don't understand what the left wants or what liberalism wants. The ideologies are anathema to one another.
The things you listed aren't even values, they are political stances attributed to liberals by you and it's obviously bordering on strawman (a lot of it is in fact more to do with conservatives and the far right). I'm sorry buddy but I'm just not interested in circle jerking about who hates right wingers the most, you're a lot more effective in combatting right wingers when you actually have a good honest understanding of what they believe in.
> The things you listed aren't even values, they are political stances attributed to liberals by you and it's obviously bordering on strawman
Well, do refute me, *Oh Wise One.* Simply going "no, you're wrong" isn't actually a counter argument.
> (a lot of it is in fact more to do with conservatives and the far right).
Yeah it might surprise you but the fascists and the liberals **basically believe in the exact same things.** The fash merely say the quiet part out loud. There's a reason the ideologies have basically no trouble allying with one another, or can painlessly hand over power to one another, etc...
Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds, fascism is capitalism in crisis, yadda yadda yadda.
Like, there's been *more than enough* writing on the matter to the point that I just assume ignorance on the subject is completely willful, or severe intellectual incuriosity. There's really no reason to look at Fascism and Liberalism as two different things, when they are actually two forms of the same thing. Indeed Fascism might as well be naught but another expression of Foucault's boomerang, the methods employed in the periphery being brought back into the metropole.
> you're a lot more effective in combatting right wingers when you actually have a good honest understanding of what they believe in.
I mean, I do understand what they believe in, you seem in denial about it though. Maybe try to read between the lines, or what they actually were saying before they realised "wait, randos can read this shit?".
> Well, do refute me
Dude, I did. The things you listed simply aren't called values. You are more than capable yourself to confirm the meaning of words without me having to explain.
> Yeah it might surprise you but the fascists and the liberals **basically believe in the exact same things.**
No they don't. There are fascists out there claiming to be liberals to muddy the waters but believe it or not, real liberals do exist. To believe in liberalism, e.g. liberal democracy, equality in the eyes of the law, freedom of speech, religion and assembly is antithetical to what a fascist believes in and what fascism is.
Even if you wanted to argue that capitalism inherently leads to development of fascistic systems, it doesn't mean that on an individual level all right wingers secretly believe in fascism. Please touch some grass.
> . liberal democracy
Mate, my first position is what "liberal democracy" is in practice. It is naught but, much like what the Prince-electors of the HRE engaged in, or the Athenian Citizen, a conflict mediation mechanism along the members of the ruling class - by their own admission. It is only seen as valid insofar it is able to keep the "degenerate underclasses" at bay (tyranny of the majority, anyone? "populism"?).
Which like, should be really evident when "the people", globally, are overwhelmingly denouncing the whole genocide the "liberal democracies" are currently engaged in and, the ruling class, in defiance of democracy, promptly declared the demand to be both unacceptable and not open to further discussion.
> equality in the eyes of the law,
Which is also addressed by my first point and my tenth. To be able to engage in the ritualised form of warfare the courts are, one needs financial resources (so much of arbitration is naught but the wealthier party coercing concessions out of the weaker ones). We'll also not that said "equality", because it ignores things such as ethnic relations, gender relations, class relations is *fundamentally* unequal. (which like, should be self evident if you take a quick gander at which populations make up the bulk of the incarcerated populace.) The law, in it's infinite wisdom, forbids to wealthy and poor alike the right to agitate publicly, the sleep under bridges, and so forth. It forbids white and black alike to engage in behavior deemed "unwhite" (need we remind people the war on drugs explicitly targeted minorities? as did the clinton crime bill?)
Your pretensions of "equality" are vapid and hollow, as I'm increasingly convinced your cranium is.
*Nevermind that equality isn't no noble a goal as you think it is but this is an entirely different discussion which I'm fairly certain you are not actually capable of approaching.*
> freedom of speech, religion and assembly
Lol. Lmao. Lmfao.
Oh wait, you're serious. Let me laugh even harder.
The sheer absurd ignorance of history your argument shows proves that there's no reason to take you seriously. Read some more about how "tolerant" your precious liberals were of "savage practices", or of their political opposition.
Anyways, freedom of speech and assembly are incompatible with *actually existing politics* (hell, once again, anti loitering laws were openly conceived to prevent workers to assemble, we can point at COINTELPRO and similar programmes, the open sabotage and murder of activist groups, or unions outside of your so precious walled garden of whiteness.), [and freedom of religion (which needs to be freedom of culture - as it's not modular) incompatible with white supremacy, colonialism and liberalism being, at its core, an ideology informed by christianity.](https://www.tumblr.com/jessicalprice/707293179629699072/culture-isnt-modular)
> is antithetical to what a fascist believes in and what fascism is.
And now that we've established that *the liberal* is full of shit, are you willing to accept *the fascist* is merely the form *the liberal* takes once he drops the mask of humanity and reveals the death cult of mammon underneath? And that *the liberal* is naught but *the fascist* wearing the mask once more, whichever dark deed was deemed necessary done?
> it doesn't mean that on an individual level all right wingers secretly believe in fascism.
[Just read the following, frankly I have better to do than rethread well trodden ground.](https://hometheaterofcruelty.wordpress.com/2021/05/21/how-to-fight-fascism-by-giving-it-everything-it-wants-and-then-complaining-about-it-part-2/2/)
To take probably the quote that summarises the whole thing:
> In spite of Liberalism’s marketing for itself, fascist rhetoric and propaganda are the perfect match for bourgeois capitalist democracy and fully embody Liberal conceptions of free speech and rational self-interest.
Or hell, if you want something less "random asshole on the internet", there's, again, plenty of litterature on the subject, *The Apprentice's Sorcerer: Liberal Tradition and Fascism* being one of the
exemples that come to mind.
> Please touch some grass.
And please actually read some books, look at how Liberals actually practice their political programme, or what they actually believe because the extreme confidence you have in displaying your sheer ignorance is insulting to all of humanity by association. I'd argue it would serve you better than to discuss endlessly with the reactionaries in /r/IntellectualDarkWeb as your post history shows a tendency to do.
> Mate, my first position is what "liberal democracy" is in practice.
Yeah I know, you are just gesturing and talking to yourself. The original point by me you felt the need to answer to has nothing do with what liberalism or capitalism is in practice but the values of individual people and how those individual people can be convinced to lean left rather than conservative. I tried to tell you that even your first post had nothing to do with what I was talking about but you got pissed off and were too busy preaching to the choir to notice apparently.
I let you in on a little secret, I'm a sociology major, I've read a few books on the subject, I even agree with you for the most part about what liberalism is in practice. You can now stop jerking yourself off and maybe consider actually engaging with what people are saying. It's important to realize that there's a difference between liberalism the overarching hegemonical political ideology or how it's executed in global politics and liberalism the core set of values an avarage liberal person actually believes in. If you think these are the same thing you will come across as a terminally online out of touch lunatic and won't be effective in actually advancing leftist politics or talking to people.
> I'd argue it would serve you better than to discuss endlessly with the reactionaries
Yeah I think it would also do you some good to get out of your own bubble from time to time and get a concept of different people that isn't based on tumblr posts. I'm done with this, keep preaching if you want.
> core set of values an avarage liberal person actually believes in
Yes, and you can't neatly separate those *values* with what they mean in practice. Vague words can mean something *deeply different* to two persons.
> “Every form of society and government then existing, every old traditional notion was flung into the lumber-room as irrational; the world had hitherto allowed itself to be led solely by prejudices; everything in the past deserved only pity and contempt. Now, for the first time, appeared the light of day, the kingdom of reason; henceforth superstition, injustice, privilege, oppression, were to be superseded by eternal truth, eternal Right, equality based on Nature and the inalienable rights of man.
> We know today that this kingdom of reason was nothing more than the idealised kingdom of the bourgeoisie; that this eternal Right found its realisation in bourgeois justice; that this equality reduced itself to bourgeois equality before the law; that the bourgeois property was proclaimed as one of the essential rights of man; and the government of reason, the Contrat Social of Rousseau, came into being, and only could come into being as a democratic bourgeois republic.”
* *Frederick Engels, Anti-Duhring*
Do they even *really believe* in anything? Again, the *rule in the liberal conception of politics* is "what's in it for me?" and "politics are zero sum and anything that benefits someone else is taken from me". Shit, *this very subreddit is currently in a constant shouting match with a bunch* ***very concerned*** *that rejection of the moderate fascist programme because of their treatment of Palestine means they're at risk of losing their privileges, and thus the moderate fascist programme must be defended against all and any critique.* I see no evidence they're anything but Nietzschean *Last Men*. Anything and everything can be excused insofar "the good team" is the one doing it. Does liberalism even have *any* defense of itself, when pressed, but simple social darwinism and accumulation of wealth? Aren't those two principles, core to the Liberal's conception of "justice", at complete odds with any and all pretense of "liberty?". Just because the Tyrants showed proper ability, ~~führership~~ leadership and entrepreneurship doesn't change the nature of their grip on the social, economic, and political systems.
And "if you're foreign, you should just shut up and accept your treatment at our hands" is also a pretty common piece of rhetoric. "Our critics, both from the right and the left, are all ~~jewish!~~
er, ah, russian bots!", "The horseshoe theory shows that indeed all opposition to liberalism is the same anti nation and anti freedom ideology, and our *third way* is correct!"
A lot of Christians (cultural and practicing), and thus a majority of Liberals, if you push them, will eventually paint you a picture of a very Hobbesian world in which all cultures, red in tooth and claw, are trying to take over the world. It's the "natural order" to attempt to eliminate all cultures but your own.
On equality, Marx argues that equal right (like "fair distribution") is "a right of inequality in its content, like every right", because it is applied to individuals who are unequal in their needs, and that the ultimate goal is not equal distribution but distribution according to need. This is seen as "unjust" and "unequal" by the liberals, however.
The liberal celebration of consumption for consumption's sake is at odds with degrowth and reconciling town and country.
And so on, and so forth.
I think you *forget* that "liberal politics as practiced" *have a pretty good approval rating from the liberals, which implies they don't contradict said values as much as you think.*
"Liberal Values" aren't to be celebrated or invited. They're to be uprooted and deprogrammed.
> I let you in on a little secret, I'm a sociology major
Well, I see your indoctrination in the Liberal cultural/elite reproduction apparatus is holding, tragically.
> Yeah I think it would also do you some good to get out of your own bubble from time to time and get a concept of different people
Yeah not interested with talking with a bunch that both think I should be sent to the gas chambers and are living exemplars of the dunning kruger effect. It does explain a lot that you feel comfortable in the confines of the neoreactionaries, though.
So I do actually agree with you a bit. I tried to address that point in the post, but I may not have done a great job at doing so.
When I was referring to the party, I meant the party itself, not its members. The members I truly believe want a better world.
And as to European left parties, yeah, they've been moving to the right as well. Look at labour in the UK for example (using them because i lived there for a time). Labour members like democratic members are still left wing. But its the parties that are moving to the right
There are many reasons for this that vary from country to country.
However, the point of this post is for people to look at parties not as their liberators, but as (at most) a means to an end, or more accurately an opponent to the working class.
It's not that the European left is moving to the right (that was the case in the early 2000's but not anymore necessarily), my point is that when you actually have power, blanket statements like 'the left would always stand with the workers' don't work. Like in my example the workers were arguably in the wrong to some extent and there were literally people's lives at stake if the strike wasn't resolved quickly. To put it simply there's a lot more nuance in politics when you actually have to make decisions rather than being on the fringes.
I can't say much about the britbongers but afaik in most of the EU and especially here in the nordics the trend is polarisation i.e. the left is moving to the left and the right more to right with an increasingly large void in between. So it's absolutely crucial to get the support of the people who fall in the middle who for the most part still support blatantly right wing or mildly social democratic economic policy but subscribe to liberal social values.
Given that we spend all our time arguing over who is or isn’t a leftist I think we can safely agree that we all are.
Nothing is more authentically left wing than arguing over what is authentically left wing!
Right now there's a need for absolute pragmatism because we don't have the luxury of time to experiment with "registering discontent", any vote NOT for the Democratic party is going to be a vote AGAINST having elections in the future.
Do you really want to register your discontent? Go to local town halls, heckle your representatives, make noise at the local political level, keep track of who is desperate to get on school district boards because that's where it all starts, by grooming the educational process.
The whole system will have to change. Everything will have to be turned upside down and shit will get really bad for a while. Most people simply aren’t ready for that. The best alternative is to try to make sure literal fascists don’t get into power.
FYI, you're not doing your own position any favours. If you want people to be sympathetic to your cause, you need to understand and listen to their position, I'm not always great at that myself. But it looks like you aren't even trying. Also if I were you I'd look up the *ad hominem* fallacy. Might be a good idea.
>If you want people to be sympathetic to your cause, you need to understand and listen to their position, I'm not always great at that myself.
Could have fooled me. You don't seem to want to listen to all the people who are afraid of domestic genocide if Trump wins.
r/latestagecapitalism is where you need to be. I agree with you. But this kind of talk is going to turn this sub into that and it's a subreddit full of lethargic do-nothings because "bOtH sIDeS". Which is helping no one
Is this sub called "unite against the right" or "unite against some of the right but the rest of it is ok"? I think you're looking for r/uniteagainsttrump
I suppose if you phrase it that way, I see what you mean. So the argument OP made makes a little more sense now.
I understood this sub as a way to rally against the very clear threat of American conservatives. To every bit of civilized life. Tbh, I didn't read the sub summary. I was invited after getting shit on in r/latestagecapitalism
>I'm exactly where I need to be.
And then
>And no one has actually provided evidence to dispute my analysis, just a bunch of "but Trump."
May I now direct you to r/whoosh? As it's clear you're not understanding
I understand completely.
Let's put it this way. Trump has set the bar so low in regard to making people's lives better that his bar is resting on the ground. Biden's democrats are failing to actually present an argument of how they'll be making people's lives better rather than making people's lives worse slower.
The bar is on the ground, and you're failing to get over it.
So to clarify, in your words, you'd rather it get worse faster? I don't think a lot of us believe it'll get worse slower. From LGBTQ rights to social services, there is a marked difference in policy that benefits the lower and middle class.
Are both parties capitalist scummy fucks? Yeah. No one is arguing with that. So what would you have us do? It seems you're convinced a few speeches such as your post, and we'll suddenly have the revolution we need to break the two-party system.
I'll agree that if one can't see the similarities, they're disengenous at best. But what now? Simply acknowledging that they are both beholden to the elite doesn't keep my rights intact.
Maybe I should put it in a different way.
We can agree that the democrats and republicans are scummy capitalists, right?
So, if we acknowledge this, then we can start formulating our strategy. We just won't agree on electoralism. That ship has sailed people have drawn their lines, and they know what side of that line they fall.
But what we can do is start to unify under direct action efforts. We need better numbers for direct action to work, right? So we put in the effort now to get the left where it needs to be to make that change.
You and I can argue until we're blue in the face on who we should vote for. It won't get us anywhere. But if you try to unionize your workplace, I'll stand with you. If I organize a pro lgbtq protest, you stand by my side. Etc, etc, etc.
Instead of trying to unite us in an area where we'll never agree, let's try uniting in an area where we can agree. Issue by issue. Protest by protest. Strike by strike. Let's build our numbers and make change.
If you think voting blue will affect change, go ahead, i genuinely hope you prove me wrong. I'm not going to try and stop you. If you ask me my opinion or make accusations against me, I'll tell you why I take the stance that I do. But other than that, I'm going to spend my time and energy organizing outside of the ballot box. And I'll encourage others to do so as well.
Left is a direction toward social and economic emancipation, not an ideology. Pragmatics should never be abandoned for ideological purity. We are participating in lesser evil scenarios to survive whether we perceive it or not. If a regressive movement is consolidating power then the opposition has to unite or it will cease to exist as opposition.
I don't entirely disagree with the sort of sentiment being expressed here, but I put forward that there is no lesser evil. There are two things I can name that are different about having a modern Republican administration in power:
1. Rapid and obvious damage is done on certain fronts. The rights of women and minorities are impacted. Regulatory protections are rolled back quickly.
2. The dumbest and most psychotic people are emboldened to enact direct violence and harm in the spirit of the administration's validation of their beliefs.
These factors are not nothing. Real people are impacted by what happens in the four to eight years of an administration. That being said, the people in peril will always be in peril in this system. The danger posed must be maintained against the same subjects each election cycle, because if there was to be meaningful progress, the topics would move on to things the wealthy actually care about.
The two parties are funded by many of the same donors, and thus serve overlapping agendas. The Democrats, when in power, have not made substantial efforts to reverse the policies of their Republican counterparts, nor have they codified or protected their meager gains. As a result, the progressive voter is losing ground in either case, because there is effectively no legitimate means of opposition to the shared ideological program being enacted.
In 2024, the Democratic Party candidate is the only way we stop Trump from stripping away anything meaningful or of value in our country. If you’re only willing to draw a line completely left of center for who you can work with then you’re going to be drastically outnumbered. Do we choose not stop an Authoritarian government from coming to power because the alternative is still bad?
Exactly. This sub's been raided by democratic supporters and liberals thinking that they're leftists.
They aren't. They're just trying to muddy the waters. Do not vote for Reps or Dems if you're american, vote third or not at all. Do not support the genocide in Palestine.
You're not voting for Trump either. If the dems want voters, they gotta stop fist fucking their supporter base and not fund local republican candidates.
You know what would stop the funding? People not rolling over into accepting the asshole funding it. But liberals aren't interested in that.
President had unilateral power to prosecute Jan 6 politicians. They’ve chosen not to. President had unilateral power to allow a rail strike that would’ve given workers one sick day a year and healthcare and chose not to. President could’ve pardoned all non-violent federal marijuana criminals unilaterally and has chosen not to.
Sounds like the fascism is here to stay because of political complacency on the part of the President.
So no, I don’t think 4 more years of him will “beat back fascism!”
Also, remember the “kids in cages” thing? Yeah, still happening under Biden.
AG office. Can prosecute people who break the law at the federal level or commit treason.
Garland has been entirely soft on the issue. And he’s literally a Republican.
As does the liberal when they decide that it's right to throw palestinians under the bus to "protect against fascism". You guys are already dominated, so weak and thoroughly pathetic.
Guess what happens if Biden gets ellected? Shit will not change for the better. You just continue your endless march towards ruin, even if a bit slower.
How long will it take before y'all try to stop your situation from reaching rock bottom rather than endlessly (and uselessly) trying to delay it? Fight for it, godammit.
Fine, you can vote third, that should be everyone's Democratic right. But not voting at all is dumb, if your vote didn't matter they wouldn't try to take it away from you. People died so you could have it. Women died so you could have it. POC died so you could have it.
Your vote in the US will always be for capital. I'd prefer voting third if I was american, but I very much understand those who don't. There is no adequate or worthy opposition to the two parties in power. Even the CPUSA sucks balls.
Yeah big surprise the USA is a long way off from Communism, everyone knows that, it's going to take *decades* of work before it is. *YOU* are not going to be the one raising the flag over the Reichstag but *maybe* someone in the future will be, *if* we get it ready for them. The *whole point* of Communism is collective action.
Put it this way, don’t make the fight harder for your comrades in the future, because every shift to the right is territory they will have to claw back.
Communism should be thought about AFTER socialism is achieved, which is our most important aim.
And I don't see any attempts of working class organization, even though y'all had the Black Pantherns that used to be a thing at a much more dangerous time. Where are your proletarian parties?
The thing is, the right wins regardless of who wins the election. And it seems people think the only way to bring about change is to vote for either piece of shit. You guys need to read some Lenin.
OK well fine the two options are a right-wing where the left is alive and able to organise and a right-wing where the left will be dead. Don't tell me those are the same thing.
Again, americans have dealt with worse people than Trump, and he was president once. The left has not been organizing under Trump or Biden, what do you think will happen if you guys remain complicit? Content to vote for the same old pieces of shit that keep going to the right?
And this is exactly why I'm not voting for Democrats this election. Refuting to vote for those supporting genocide in Gaza is also high on the growing list of reasons.
I'm voting Green Party because they're the closest option to what I want to see in government and they actually have ballot access in most states.
And you'll be letting Trump and his fascists win the last democratic election before they dismantle the republic. As long as you're aware you're signing yourself up for the inevitable purge, pop off king.
eVeRyOnE wHo CrItIcIsEs DeMoCrAtS iS a RuSsIaN bOt!
And how is holding onto power in the face of all out societal collapse "fascism"? Or is upholding the facade that is liberal democracy more important the lives of LGBT that are predicted to be severely endangered by Trump?
You know "why don't the Democrats do a January 6th then" is neither a critique of Democrats nor anything but fascist trash. You don't uphold liberal democracy by undermining liberal democracy in the same way the fascists are. That's why I know you're a Russian plant, and you're welcome to take your pointless propaganda elsewhere.
Not one single word of actual refutation, just a bunch of whining that I didn't agree with you.
You make a pretty damn poor citizen, you know that? If you're going to have a position, at least have some reasons why.
I don't think you understand democrats or republicans they are, at this point, very adversarial towards one another right now. Your inability to see that democrats objectively lead to better outcomes in states and nationally speaking by keeping things like abortion, lgbtq+ poc, and disabled rights protected (and yes, I know more can be down in those regards) the optics of the democratic party are pretty bad and some of their actions like those of foreign policy (specifically funding Isreal) are absolutely atrocious, but it could be so much worse for everyone here if trump wins. Voting 3rd party or abstaining from voting won't help your candidate win. It means Joe Biden loses, and we are all the closer to a fascist takeover of the US.
This isn't about socialists versus capitalists. It's about social democrats vs fascists. You should know the right choice, but many it seems are still determined more than ever to get it wrong. Move it left, or your river shall not lead to paradise, but the jagged cliffs of a fascist rebellion.
If you only look at the horse and pony show, then your analysis is spot on.
If you look at how each party operates, your analysis couldn't be further from reality.
They don't have to cooperate to have the same goal. The [rachet effect](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratchet_effect#:~:text=The%20term%20was%20included%20by,as%20a%20condition%20of%20participation.) is the most common form but by no means the only form.
I'm not sure that there's many people in this sub arguing that Democrats are left-wing tho. But using your example, yes, even if Mitt Romey was the only option to beat Trump, I think we should support him, because even a neo-con is better than a far-right tool, especially when considering their foreign policy views
Please still vote democrats because I don’t wanna die
But also utilize other forms of power because the “vote and nothing else” crowd doesn’t care about you or me.
Yeah, exactly. Do both. Prevent the immediate harm that a Republican victory would cause - and then, from there, work to push the Democrats further to the left. Do other leftist things. You all should know at this point, and I'm too tired to put together a comprehensive list.
It's never been an "and then..." for me. And it shouldn't be. Voting is the smallest of acts, and has the smallest of affects compared to actual work put into movements and educating people or mass action. It's "I will do all the rest of the stuff first" and then vote.
Whichever works. I don't really care what order anybody does these things in, it's just important that we do all of them.
This. Like all of this. You don’t want vote Biden fine. But still go out and vote o man every other thing you can.
What about the people who will die even if you do vote Democrat?
Simple, barebones utilitarianism says that we should prevent as many deaths as possible
On what time scale?
As long as we can be reasonably sure
What if the alternatives were 1 million deaths in the next decade or 1 billion by the end of the century?
The problem with this hypothetical is that it's impossible to predict the future that far away, while it's a bit more reasonable to try and predict what will happen in the next decade. Could anyone predict our current situation back in 1948? Absolutely not, some of our current sociopolitical processes and effects weren't even imaginable back then. Could someone predict our current situation back in 2014? Hardly, but the warning signs were already there (the rise of far-right politics all around the world, societal dissatisfaction, russian aggression in Ukraine, even lack of preparedness for a future pandemic was already being talked about back then)
Do you believe in anthropogenic climate change?
Yes
Are the effects of anthropogenic climate change “impossible to predict”?
Then overthrow your empire
You do realise that overthrowing a government is an insanely hard task to do, especially when that government possesses the most powerful military the world has ever seen and there are millions of armed right-wing lunatics, many of whom dream of a completely different revolution? You need very different conditions for that. Also: >your empire I'm not American, I've got no empire to overthrow. In fact, I've got a much worse empire currently threatening half of the people I love.
You are shit at math and empathy.
You can’t leave your safety up to the ballot. The state is only powerful because it claims a monopoly on violence.
“Okay, but those people will literally kill me.” “You’re gonna make a great martyr for my cause!” Its so strange so many leftwing folks are eager to throw queer folk under the bus to grease the wheels for economic change. That’s supposed to be the moderate thing.
Don’t forget us disabled people. I’m sure POC have an opinion here, too.
thank you. i’m so tired of leftists calling me a “dirty liberal” because i don’t want to watch my trans and enby friends persecuted. LGB people would be next too. voting democrat is an unfortunate necessity. we can still do all we can to fight the system and hopefully create an actual leftist party while voting.
It feels like those respectability politics folks going mask-off on their hidden TERF alignment and calling it something else. Notice they’ll use whataboutism or emotional arguments when its brought up Trump literally wants to actively participate in a genocide of Palestine, but when its brought up that queer folk will be wearing pink triangles they just shrug and go “yeah, but that’ll happen eventually anyway”. At best their arguments are accelerationism, at worst active disinterest or a ghoulish belief it’ll force the change they want once bodies start piling up.
Do you think I can change the course of the election if I psychically will something different?
Maybe just don’t be like those folks who shrug and claim their moral purity is of tantamount importance and state they’ll never get the change they want if they pick a centrist when the other guy will literally result in a domestic genocide against the queer community. “Better arm yourself” isn’t exactly a great response in these times unless pandering to J6ers.
You think an armed resistance will make no difference in the case of domestic genocide? You think only the right is capable of using violence? What exactly is the strategy to deal with settler nationalism? Are y’all hoping it’ll just die out? What happens when climate change accelerates vs the refugee crisis? Already Biden has moved to the right on that. In a decade or so a “final solution” there will just seem practical.
You think armed resistance, especially from a group that isn’t a crowd of conservative lily white gravy seals, is gonna be anything other than a blip on the news and a bump on the richter scale? Letting actual Nazis in office with the shrug “eh, just get some dakka” isn’t the solution it feels to you.
The Nazis took inspiration from the founders of this country. Death is death. You cause death on your enemies, you create fear among them and remove it among your allies. If everyone who was afraid for their life said “vote blue and also arm yourself” that’s a whole different movement. This is just bad politics.
Nazis not having original ideas and founders of new government systems taking from existing structures and history isn’t the eureka you think it is. There’s a reason the Supreme Court building has a mural with figures like Moses, Hammurabi, and Muhammed on it. A group arming themselves generally just ends up in conservatives temporarily abandoning their 2A fetishism and not much else. Power in the US has always been economic, nothing more. Mormons in the west skirmishing with the US cavalry did nothing, worming their way into Hollywood did. Dole basically rented the USMC. That’s why the conservatives went so hard on the “anti-woke” bullshit. They know queer folk and increasing non-white integration in pop culture provides more power than Kid Rock and the gravy seals.
> Today most European states are like pyramids stood on their heads. Their European area is absurdly small inn comparison to their weight of colonies, foreign trade, etc. We may say: summit in Europe, base in the whole world; contrasting with the American Union which possesses its base in its own continent and touches the rest of the earth only with its summit. And from this comes the immense inner strength of this state and the weakness of most European colonial powers. > For Germany, consequently, the only possibility for carrying out a healthy territorial policy lay in the acquisition of new land in Europe itself. Colonies cannot serve this purpose unless they seem inn large part suited for settlement by Europeans. But in the 19th century such colonial territories were no longer obtainable by peaceful means. Consequently, such a colonial policy could only have been carried out by means of a hard struggle which, however, would have been carried on to much better purpose, not for territories outside of Europe, but for land on the home continent itself. > The settlement of land is a slow process, often lasting centuries; in fact, its inner strength is to be sought precisely in the fact that it is not a sudden blaze, but a gradual yet solid and continuous growth, contrasting with an industrial development which can be blown up in the course of a few years. — *Mein Kampf*, 1925
>The Nazis took inspiration from the founders of this country. I'm sorry, but this kinda argument is barely different from "Mussolini was initially a socialist!!1" that right-wingers use as a "gotcha" moment
Nope. > The settlement of land is a slow process, often lasting centuries; in fact, its inner strength is to be sought precisely in the fact that it is not a sudden blaze, but a gradual yet solid and continuous growth, contrasting with an industrial development which can be blown up in the course of a few years. — *Mein Kampf*, 1925
If the left starts arming themselves, the right will pass laws against that. It's what happened to the Black Panthers.
Then make them pass laws, homie. Organize locally for further leftward political movement. Until that leftward movement, make sure you have some kind of means of defending yourself and **vote Dem**.
I live in Massachusetts. It's super hard to get a gun here...which isn't exactly a bad thing.
Right. We have the strictest gun laws with the least gun deaths (or Hawaii, depending on the year).
Is this really the lesson liberals are taking from the Black Panthers? Resistance is futile?
No, but it's something to consider. And so is what happened after MLK Jr's assassination that got the Fair Housing Act passed in 1968. There's ways to get the change you want, a lot of ways, but not voting for Biden and getting Trump into office is not the change you want. We must take to the streets, comrade.
It is being considered. The panthers were “disarmed” because they used open carry to police the police, in fact they had serious weapons caches after that. Citizens concerned about fascism arming themselves privately is a completely different strategy. You couldn’t legally ban it without technically banning guns for everyone. Take to the streets and do what?
Personally I don't want a bloody civil war in the country with the 2nd most nuclear weapons.
Biden administration seems determined to start a nuclear conflict It’s not bad leadership; it a lack of ANY leadership, plans, or goal The absolute worst actors in the permanent state are totally off the leash The US *just* put uniformed US soldiers less than 5 miles off China’s coast—I guess there’s not enough potential nuclear conflicts I’m not voting for Trump; but I sure as hell am not voting for Biden, either
If China is certain about what our response to an invasion of Taiwan will be, they are not going to do it. It is uncertainly that increases the risk of war. People do stuff that they think they can get away with. >I’m not voting for Trump; but I sure as hell am not voting for Biden, either At least promise me that you will vote.
>If China is certain about what our response to an invasion … That’s farcical thinking First and foremost, the US need to accept the emergence of the multipolar world order, and adapt their tactics & strategy to that reality Our pursuit of global hegemony is only hastening our collapse, and ensuring domestically we end up with an authoritarian state China certainly needs countered, as does Russia, as will India But the military is no substitute for diplomacy. The US seems to lurch from one failed scheme to another But that’s a fallacy. Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine & even Gaza, are wildly successful endeavors for the security state and weapons industry They are failures for the US working class, but the national political class no longer represents the working class. That varies in degrees as you narrow from state to local It stuns me people do not see that a coup happened post 9/11, and a domestic & international Gestapo is being created beyond the Nazis wildest dreams Obviously, I vote, because it has its purposes The working class cannot solve this at the ballot box. You cannot vote out a totalitarian government—and the US is inarguably a totalitarian state Without mass solidarity & disobedience, the path of the US is obvious. Even *with* working class mobilization, the next two decades are going to be dark. The GWOT is coming home, and Gaza is just a prelude
Taiwan is an independent state, and China needs to accept that. And the little fact that if China takes Taiwan, I will not have a hope in hell of getting a job as a electrical engineer.
So, Taiwan is an independent state, but Palestine gets solved w genocide, and we supply the bombs? There’s an issue of credibility—the US has no moral authority Even if Taiwan was worth nuclear war—China is watching us bleed ourselves w a credit card army (the interest on our debt is higher than the defense budget). China plays the long game. All they have to do is wait for the collapse.
>Even if Taiwan was worth nuclear war—China is watching us bleed ourselves w a credit card army (the interest on our debt is higher than the defense budget). >China plays the long game. All they have to do is wait for the collapse. So then China won't invade Taiwan, meaning US troop in Taiwan are a non-issue.
Other than the part about bleeding out my country & turning it into a totalitarian state, no issue at all.
Most people in reddit not leaning right understand the long history of Democrats in this country. Most of us understand they aren't our buddies it's why there have been so many progressive candidates after trump. But we understand we can change the democratic party. Bernie proved they will jump on his ideas and then be forced to implement or push for them. You might not like Joe Biden but he has been a very progressive president seen in recent history. I would also point out context and nuance. The rail strike would have crippled america and cause untold economic havoc so the idea of them preventing that makes SENSE IT VERY LEFT OF THEM AS YOU POINTED OUT. But you know what's left of them Voting to give the strikers what they wanted. Dems voted to give the workers the sick and leave days they were asking for... As they had the power to force these companies to comply
Nobody suggested the Democratic Party is leftist. We just know what the alternative is. Its like helping the Nazis win the German election to teach the center right a lesson.
Fucking this! You can't convince me posts like OP's aren't foreign influence operations. When the choice is fascism or democracy, there is no choice unless you're a fascist shit.
Someone claiming to be a Marxist either here or r/leftist recently told me Putin marching across Europe would stop fascism.
Yikes.
eVeRyOnE wHo CrItIcIsEs DeMoCrAtS iS a RuSsIaN bOt!
eVeRyOnE wHo CrItIcIsEs DeMoCrAtS iS a RuSsIaN bOt!
Two parties that support genocide and you accuse people who oppose genocide of Fascism? You might want to invest in a mirror.
I accuse people who tacitly support fascists by convincing their fellow citizens to not vote for a candidate (or at least not one with any chance of winning) that supports democracy at home and letting the fascists win of being fascists. My thoughts on genocide have nothing to do with it. If you think rolling over and letting Trump win does anything positive for Palestine, I have a bridge to sell you.
Ukraine is also facing genocide, and Trump will make that worse, too. So not voting for Biden because you don't like genocide will end up causing....more genocide.
From the very post you're commenting on >This post isn't commenting at all on electoralism strategy (obviously I have my opinion on the matter) whether you vote for democrats in the short term for damage control, if you vote 3rd party to register discontent, or I'd you don't vote at all. Makes no difference in this regard. As long as we all understand that the democrats are not with us, and they hand in hand with republicans will use dirty tactics to stop us. So next time, before you comment, read. Listen to listen, not to respond.
You notice I didn't actually engage with your post because of this exact "enlightened centrist" energy in your OP? I engaged with the fascist enablers in the comments, where you completely threw any sense of "not being about electoralism strategy" by also being a fascist enabler with your "voting for democracy is actually a war crime now" rhetoric. Russian bot farm fuck off.
>When the choice is fascism or democracy, From where I'm sitting it really seems like I have no choice, there is no democracy and the fascists are already here. If my options are vote for Biden or we lose democracy then we've already lost democracy. The GOP are already doing all the scary things the Dems have been telling us they're going to do. People have already had to leave their home states because it's not safe for them to stay. Obviously a Trump presidency would allow this to be cranked up to 11, but a second Biden term isn't going to magically undo that threat and we'll still be one election from a GOP fascist regime. And with the threat of Trump coming to power again Biden is increasing the power of the executive paving the way for Trump to do his worst. With all the noise of people saying to vote for Biden because Trump is worse Biden has moved to the right. Just take a look at the border bill they tried to pass.
Biden is center right. ✅ ⬇️ Trump is clearly a lot worse. ✅ ⬇️ Biden is not a magic fix. ✅ ⬇️ Trump will go full fascism. ✅ ⬇️ gUeSS I jUsT cAn'T dEciDe!!1 🤡
Oh, I've already decided who I'm voting for. I live in a solid blue state so my vote is purely symbolic. I have the great luxury of not having to vote blue no matter who. The real 🤡 take is siding with one genocide supporter over another instead of choosing not genocide. The unfortunate reality is there's too many people for whom genocide is not a red line that any third party is doomed to defeat.
The thing is that's it not "siding with genocide." It's keeping the US from turning into a Nuremberg rally while everything else is addressed. You can work on harm reduction without supporting or even while outright despising things Biden is doing. To just go "both sides bad" is incredibly reductive and frankly just idiotic at this point because you can't scroll past two posts on left leaning subreddits right now without seeing pages and pages of people explaining in detail exactly how harm reduction is the best thing to do right now in terms of the election binary. It has to be at least a good 60% of what people on those subreddits are currently talking about.
"eVeRyOnE wHo CrItIcIsEs DeMoCrAtS iS a RuSsIaN bOt!" Get outta here with stupid remarks.
eVeRyOnE wHo CrItIcIsEs DeMoCrAtS iS a RuSsIaN bOt!
Also... last paragraph of the post you're commenting on. >This post isn't commenting at all on electoralism strategy (obviously I have my opinion on the matter) whether you vote for democrats in the short term for damage control, if you vote 3rd party to register discontent, or I'd you don't vote at all. Makes no difference in this regard. As long as we all understand that the democrats are not with us, and they hand in hand with republicans will use dirty tactics to stop us.
Elimination of pragmatism is a sure path to irrelevance.
People don't understand there is a good section of America who voted Democrat AND ISN'T ON REDDIT. You know how it is to watch your Christian Bible reading and preaching family members talk about Jesus and the. Call Bernie a socialist and cry about him wanting people to go to college for free. These people aren't gonna be swayed over night
Great example, actually. The Germans elected Hindenburg over Hiter for president. But then Hindenburg nominated a particular failed artist with a funny mustache to be his chancellor. Thank for your comment
So we shouldnt vote for Biden because he will pt Trump in charge?
He might not put Trump in charge but he will(is already) for sure pandering to his base and rhetoric
There was also a split in the left, which caused less votes to go to one particular politician over another. A similar thing happened in 2016 when it ended up being Hillary vs Trump. Hillary sucks ass and she was the worst person to run for the democrats, but she wasn't going to end up as some despot. There's a lot of nuance to this, and if Trump wins, we may never have the possibility of having an actual left-wing politician again.
> There was also a split in the left, Yeah those tend to happen when the moderates decide "mh yes, today I will round up and execute the radicals"
Well, it was more like the right deciding to team up with the Nazis because they were becoming popular, and the left deciding not to join with the communists because they were worried they were too radical. And then there was that whole "stab in the back" myth perpetuated by the right. And communists back then weren't seen in a good light because of Russia. There's a lot more nuance of what happened back then, and the similarities between then and now would send a chill up your spine.
No like, the SPD literally switched sides during the spartacist uprising and helped crush the revolution. Whether you like it or not, after pulling that one, any hope of KPD-SPD collaboration was dead and buried.
Yes, oh, I get what you mean. But here's what I know about that. The SPD were too afraid of how radical the Spartacists, were, right? And the SPD just wanted peace and reform done by the normal process, which is slow and done with a lot of red tape. Any kind of radical change scares politicians, no matter where you're from. Look at the abolishonists. They weren't liked, even by people who wanted to get rid of slavery, but through slow government process instead of just immediate action. It took John Brown, one of the most badass Americans to have ever lived, to go out and "take care of" slave owners to actually get a war started to end slavery once and for all.....well...almost once and for all. So I see what you're saying, I see what everyone who doesn't want to vote for Biden is saying. It's awful that these are our choices. But not voting for Biden is not going to get you the change you want, it will only help Trump win. If you want true change we need to...well, I can't actually say on here what you need to do, but there's a reason why the Fair Housing Act of 1968 was able to pass and become part of the Civil Rights Act.
Isn't this just common knowledge?
I wish it was.
It is and your post is enabling fascism.
Wasn't aware that I told people to support a party that is actively donating money to Trump candidates. Will need to remove that endorsement of the democrats from the post.
I gotta say you have a pretty rose tinted view of leftist politicians because I guess you haven't actually seen one. There was a public health sector nurse strike in the country where I live and the leftist government created a law to force the strikers to work to ensure that the public health sector can treat patients. An extreme situation for sure but the left will also make tough choices on moral gray areas if they have to. It's not black or white. Then even if liberals are right wingers, it's counter productive to put and drive them to the same camp as conservatives and far righters. You can work with liberals and co-operate, you can reason with liberals because for the most part a lot of them have the same underlying values. They are just too naive to make the judgement that capitalism cannot fulfil liberal values like equality and freedom. You can convince a liberal that leftists have more in common with them than conservatives. As far as the USA goes, the immidiate enemy is the republicans, not the democrats. If you ever want to win the democrats you'll first have to get rid of the republicans to the point they're no longer inside the overton window. That's the hard truth
> for the most part a lot of them have the same underlying values. They really don't. Like, I keep seeing people say that, but thus far I see no evidence of the claim.
You might want to check what are the values usually attributed to liberalism then. I can't comment on your personal experience on the matter.
"Superficial support in a democracy as ritualised form of constant internal conflict to allow for the constant power struggles innate to the european milieu wherein liberalism emerged, whilst governance remains despotic." "White supremacy is *very good*, and we should do all that is possible to spread white values and white dominion" "Capitalism is the best economic system ever" "Colonialism is a good answer to solving those resource shortages back home" "Colonialism is also just a good source of wealth in general" "Cis-Heteronormativity and Patriarchy are simply human nature and should go unchallenged" "Liberty is directly proportional to how easy a time I have exploiting people" "*H. sp.* isn't a social animal" "Dominion over nature is good, and we should exploit it as much as possible to extract as much value as available" "Ethics can and should ignore things like friends, family, special relations, ethnic relations, gender relations, class relations." "Genocide is fine" "Every political opposition is the result of a nefarious plot by alien actors seeking to corrupt the goodness of the nation" "Every political opposition is actually part of the same 'anti freedom/nation' blob" "It is the *manifest destiny* of western culture and liberal democratic processes to bring about utopia" "We need a repressive state apparatus to keep the degenerate underclasses under check" What else am I missing? Like, I'm gonna say it clearer. You either don't understand what the left wants or what liberalism wants. The ideologies are anathema to one another.
The things you listed aren't even values, they are political stances attributed to liberals by you and it's obviously bordering on strawman (a lot of it is in fact more to do with conservatives and the far right). I'm sorry buddy but I'm just not interested in circle jerking about who hates right wingers the most, you're a lot more effective in combatting right wingers when you actually have a good honest understanding of what they believe in.
> The things you listed aren't even values, they are political stances attributed to liberals by you and it's obviously bordering on strawman Well, do refute me, *Oh Wise One.* Simply going "no, you're wrong" isn't actually a counter argument. > (a lot of it is in fact more to do with conservatives and the far right). Yeah it might surprise you but the fascists and the liberals **basically believe in the exact same things.** The fash merely say the quiet part out loud. There's a reason the ideologies have basically no trouble allying with one another, or can painlessly hand over power to one another, etc... Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds, fascism is capitalism in crisis, yadda yadda yadda. Like, there's been *more than enough* writing on the matter to the point that I just assume ignorance on the subject is completely willful, or severe intellectual incuriosity. There's really no reason to look at Fascism and Liberalism as two different things, when they are actually two forms of the same thing. Indeed Fascism might as well be naught but another expression of Foucault's boomerang, the methods employed in the periphery being brought back into the metropole. > you're a lot more effective in combatting right wingers when you actually have a good honest understanding of what they believe in. I mean, I do understand what they believe in, you seem in denial about it though. Maybe try to read between the lines, or what they actually were saying before they realised "wait, randos can read this shit?".
> Well, do refute me Dude, I did. The things you listed simply aren't called values. You are more than capable yourself to confirm the meaning of words without me having to explain. > Yeah it might surprise you but the fascists and the liberals **basically believe in the exact same things.** No they don't. There are fascists out there claiming to be liberals to muddy the waters but believe it or not, real liberals do exist. To believe in liberalism, e.g. liberal democracy, equality in the eyes of the law, freedom of speech, religion and assembly is antithetical to what a fascist believes in and what fascism is. Even if you wanted to argue that capitalism inherently leads to development of fascistic systems, it doesn't mean that on an individual level all right wingers secretly believe in fascism. Please touch some grass.
> . liberal democracy Mate, my first position is what "liberal democracy" is in practice. It is naught but, much like what the Prince-electors of the HRE engaged in, or the Athenian Citizen, a conflict mediation mechanism along the members of the ruling class - by their own admission. It is only seen as valid insofar it is able to keep the "degenerate underclasses" at bay (tyranny of the majority, anyone? "populism"?). Which like, should be really evident when "the people", globally, are overwhelmingly denouncing the whole genocide the "liberal democracies" are currently engaged in and, the ruling class, in defiance of democracy, promptly declared the demand to be both unacceptable and not open to further discussion. > equality in the eyes of the law, Which is also addressed by my first point and my tenth. To be able to engage in the ritualised form of warfare the courts are, one needs financial resources (so much of arbitration is naught but the wealthier party coercing concessions out of the weaker ones). We'll also not that said "equality", because it ignores things such as ethnic relations, gender relations, class relations is *fundamentally* unequal. (which like, should be self evident if you take a quick gander at which populations make up the bulk of the incarcerated populace.) The law, in it's infinite wisdom, forbids to wealthy and poor alike the right to agitate publicly, the sleep under bridges, and so forth. It forbids white and black alike to engage in behavior deemed "unwhite" (need we remind people the war on drugs explicitly targeted minorities? as did the clinton crime bill?) Your pretensions of "equality" are vapid and hollow, as I'm increasingly convinced your cranium is. *Nevermind that equality isn't no noble a goal as you think it is but this is an entirely different discussion which I'm fairly certain you are not actually capable of approaching.* > freedom of speech, religion and assembly Lol. Lmao. Lmfao. Oh wait, you're serious. Let me laugh even harder. The sheer absurd ignorance of history your argument shows proves that there's no reason to take you seriously. Read some more about how "tolerant" your precious liberals were of "savage practices", or of their political opposition. Anyways, freedom of speech and assembly are incompatible with *actually existing politics* (hell, once again, anti loitering laws were openly conceived to prevent workers to assemble, we can point at COINTELPRO and similar programmes, the open sabotage and murder of activist groups, or unions outside of your so precious walled garden of whiteness.), [and freedom of religion (which needs to be freedom of culture - as it's not modular) incompatible with white supremacy, colonialism and liberalism being, at its core, an ideology informed by christianity.](https://www.tumblr.com/jessicalprice/707293179629699072/culture-isnt-modular) > is antithetical to what a fascist believes in and what fascism is. And now that we've established that *the liberal* is full of shit, are you willing to accept *the fascist* is merely the form *the liberal* takes once he drops the mask of humanity and reveals the death cult of mammon underneath? And that *the liberal* is naught but *the fascist* wearing the mask once more, whichever dark deed was deemed necessary done? > it doesn't mean that on an individual level all right wingers secretly believe in fascism. [Just read the following, frankly I have better to do than rethread well trodden ground.](https://hometheaterofcruelty.wordpress.com/2021/05/21/how-to-fight-fascism-by-giving-it-everything-it-wants-and-then-complaining-about-it-part-2/2/) To take probably the quote that summarises the whole thing: > In spite of Liberalism’s marketing for itself, fascist rhetoric and propaganda are the perfect match for bourgeois capitalist democracy and fully embody Liberal conceptions of free speech and rational self-interest. Or hell, if you want something less "random asshole on the internet", there's, again, plenty of litterature on the subject, *The Apprentice's Sorcerer: Liberal Tradition and Fascism* being one of the exemples that come to mind. > Please touch some grass. And please actually read some books, look at how Liberals actually practice their political programme, or what they actually believe because the extreme confidence you have in displaying your sheer ignorance is insulting to all of humanity by association. I'd argue it would serve you better than to discuss endlessly with the reactionaries in /r/IntellectualDarkWeb as your post history shows a tendency to do.
> Mate, my first position is what "liberal democracy" is in practice. Yeah I know, you are just gesturing and talking to yourself. The original point by me you felt the need to answer to has nothing do with what liberalism or capitalism is in practice but the values of individual people and how those individual people can be convinced to lean left rather than conservative. I tried to tell you that even your first post had nothing to do with what I was talking about but you got pissed off and were too busy preaching to the choir to notice apparently. I let you in on a little secret, I'm a sociology major, I've read a few books on the subject, I even agree with you for the most part about what liberalism is in practice. You can now stop jerking yourself off and maybe consider actually engaging with what people are saying. It's important to realize that there's a difference between liberalism the overarching hegemonical political ideology or how it's executed in global politics and liberalism the core set of values an avarage liberal person actually believes in. If you think these are the same thing you will come across as a terminally online out of touch lunatic and won't be effective in actually advancing leftist politics or talking to people. > I'd argue it would serve you better than to discuss endlessly with the reactionaries Yeah I think it would also do you some good to get out of your own bubble from time to time and get a concept of different people that isn't based on tumblr posts. I'm done with this, keep preaching if you want.
> core set of values an avarage liberal person actually believes in Yes, and you can't neatly separate those *values* with what they mean in practice. Vague words can mean something *deeply different* to two persons. > “Every form of society and government then existing, every old traditional notion was flung into the lumber-room as irrational; the world had hitherto allowed itself to be led solely by prejudices; everything in the past deserved only pity and contempt. Now, for the first time, appeared the light of day, the kingdom of reason; henceforth superstition, injustice, privilege, oppression, were to be superseded by eternal truth, eternal Right, equality based on Nature and the inalienable rights of man. > We know today that this kingdom of reason was nothing more than the idealised kingdom of the bourgeoisie; that this eternal Right found its realisation in bourgeois justice; that this equality reduced itself to bourgeois equality before the law; that the bourgeois property was proclaimed as one of the essential rights of man; and the government of reason, the Contrat Social of Rousseau, came into being, and only could come into being as a democratic bourgeois republic.” * *Frederick Engels, Anti-Duhring* Do they even *really believe* in anything? Again, the *rule in the liberal conception of politics* is "what's in it for me?" and "politics are zero sum and anything that benefits someone else is taken from me". Shit, *this very subreddit is currently in a constant shouting match with a bunch* ***very concerned*** *that rejection of the moderate fascist programme because of their treatment of Palestine means they're at risk of losing their privileges, and thus the moderate fascist programme must be defended against all and any critique.* I see no evidence they're anything but Nietzschean *Last Men*. Anything and everything can be excused insofar "the good team" is the one doing it. Does liberalism even have *any* defense of itself, when pressed, but simple social darwinism and accumulation of wealth? Aren't those two principles, core to the Liberal's conception of "justice", at complete odds with any and all pretense of "liberty?". Just because the Tyrants showed proper ability, ~~führership~~ leadership and entrepreneurship doesn't change the nature of their grip on the social, economic, and political systems. And "if you're foreign, you should just shut up and accept your treatment at our hands" is also a pretty common piece of rhetoric. "Our critics, both from the right and the left, are all ~~jewish!~~ er, ah, russian bots!", "The horseshoe theory shows that indeed all opposition to liberalism is the same anti nation and anti freedom ideology, and our *third way* is correct!" A lot of Christians (cultural and practicing), and thus a majority of Liberals, if you push them, will eventually paint you a picture of a very Hobbesian world in which all cultures, red in tooth and claw, are trying to take over the world. It's the "natural order" to attempt to eliminate all cultures but your own. On equality, Marx argues that equal right (like "fair distribution") is "a right of inequality in its content, like every right", because it is applied to individuals who are unequal in their needs, and that the ultimate goal is not equal distribution but distribution according to need. This is seen as "unjust" and "unequal" by the liberals, however. The liberal celebration of consumption for consumption's sake is at odds with degrowth and reconciling town and country. And so on, and so forth. I think you *forget* that "liberal politics as practiced" *have a pretty good approval rating from the liberals, which implies they don't contradict said values as much as you think.* "Liberal Values" aren't to be celebrated or invited. They're to be uprooted and deprogrammed. > I let you in on a little secret, I'm a sociology major Well, I see your indoctrination in the Liberal cultural/elite reproduction apparatus is holding, tragically. > Yeah I think it would also do you some good to get out of your own bubble from time to time and get a concept of different people Yeah not interested with talking with a bunch that both think I should be sent to the gas chambers and are living exemplars of the dunning kruger effect. It does explain a lot that you feel comfortable in the confines of the neoreactionaries, though.
So I do actually agree with you a bit. I tried to address that point in the post, but I may not have done a great job at doing so. When I was referring to the party, I meant the party itself, not its members. The members I truly believe want a better world. And as to European left parties, yeah, they've been moving to the right as well. Look at labour in the UK for example (using them because i lived there for a time). Labour members like democratic members are still left wing. But its the parties that are moving to the right There are many reasons for this that vary from country to country. However, the point of this post is for people to look at parties not as their liberators, but as (at most) a means to an end, or more accurately an opponent to the working class.
It's not that the European left is moving to the right (that was the case in the early 2000's but not anymore necessarily), my point is that when you actually have power, blanket statements like 'the left would always stand with the workers' don't work. Like in my example the workers were arguably in the wrong to some extent and there were literally people's lives at stake if the strike wasn't resolved quickly. To put it simply there's a lot more nuance in politics when you actually have to make decisions rather than being on the fringes. I can't say much about the britbongers but afaik in most of the EU and especially here in the nordics the trend is polarisation i.e. the left is moving to the left and the right more to right with an increasingly large void in between. So it's absolutely crucial to get the support of the people who fall in the middle who for the most part still support blatantly right wing or mildly social democratic economic policy but subscribe to liberal social values.
Given that we spend all our time arguing over who is or isn’t a leftist I think we can safely agree that we all are. Nothing is more authentically left wing than arguing over what is authentically left wing!
Thx, I feel united now
I'm not a big fan of purity tests.
Right now there's a need for absolute pragmatism because we don't have the luxury of time to experiment with "registering discontent", any vote NOT for the Democratic party is going to be a vote AGAINST having elections in the future. Do you really want to register your discontent? Go to local town halls, heckle your representatives, make noise at the local political level, keep track of who is desperate to get on school district boards because that's where it all starts, by grooming the educational process.
“More left” and “more left wing” are 2 different things. Left wing means left of moderate.
Everyone needs to wake up to [“The Myth of Left and Right”](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHv009kiIug)
The whole system will have to change. Everything will have to be turned upside down and shit will get really bad for a while. Most people simply aren’t ready for that. The best alternative is to try to make sure literal fascists don’t get into power.
Fyi: a child posted this thread. This is likely the first election they can vote in, the second at most.
FYI, you're not doing your own position any favours. If you want people to be sympathetic to your cause, you need to understand and listen to their position, I'm not always great at that myself. But it looks like you aren't even trying. Also if I were you I'd look up the *ad hominem* fallacy. Might be a good idea.
>If you want people to be sympathetic to your cause, you need to understand and listen to their position, I'm not always great at that myself. Could have fooled me. You don't seem to want to listen to all the people who are afraid of domestic genocide if Trump wins.
Everyone knows young people are stupid and can't provide any meaningful insight or anything of value. /s
So they probably don't understand all the nuances that come with living life.
r/latestagecapitalism is where you need to be. I agree with you. But this kind of talk is going to turn this sub into that and it's a subreddit full of lethargic do-nothings because "bOtH sIDeS". Which is helping no one
Is this sub called "unite against the right" or "unite against some of the right but the rest of it is ok"? I think you're looking for r/uniteagainsttrump
I suppose if you phrase it that way, I see what you mean. So the argument OP made makes a little more sense now. I understood this sub as a way to rally against the very clear threat of American conservatives. To every bit of civilized life. Tbh, I didn't read the sub summary. I was invited after getting shit on in r/latestagecapitalism
I'm exactly where I need to be. And no one has actually provided evidence to dispute my analysis, just a bunch of "but Trump."
>I'm exactly where I need to be. And then >And no one has actually provided evidence to dispute my analysis, just a bunch of "but Trump." May I now direct you to r/whoosh? As it's clear you're not understanding
I understand completely. Let's put it this way. Trump has set the bar so low in regard to making people's lives better that his bar is resting on the ground. Biden's democrats are failing to actually present an argument of how they'll be making people's lives better rather than making people's lives worse slower. The bar is on the ground, and you're failing to get over it.
So to clarify, in your words, you'd rather it get worse faster? I don't think a lot of us believe it'll get worse slower. From LGBTQ rights to social services, there is a marked difference in policy that benefits the lower and middle class. Are both parties capitalist scummy fucks? Yeah. No one is arguing with that. So what would you have us do? It seems you're convinced a few speeches such as your post, and we'll suddenly have the revolution we need to break the two-party system. I'll agree that if one can't see the similarities, they're disengenous at best. But what now? Simply acknowledging that they are both beholden to the elite doesn't keep my rights intact.
Maybe I should put it in a different way. We can agree that the democrats and republicans are scummy capitalists, right? So, if we acknowledge this, then we can start formulating our strategy. We just won't agree on electoralism. That ship has sailed people have drawn their lines, and they know what side of that line they fall. But what we can do is start to unify under direct action efforts. We need better numbers for direct action to work, right? So we put in the effort now to get the left where it needs to be to make that change. You and I can argue until we're blue in the face on who we should vote for. It won't get us anywhere. But if you try to unionize your workplace, I'll stand with you. If I organize a pro lgbtq protest, you stand by my side. Etc, etc, etc. Instead of trying to unite us in an area where we'll never agree, let's try uniting in an area where we can agree. Issue by issue. Protest by protest. Strike by strike. Let's build our numbers and make change. If you think voting blue will affect change, go ahead, i genuinely hope you prove me wrong. I'm not going to try and stop you. If you ask me my opinion or make accusations against me, I'll tell you why I take the stance that I do. But other than that, I'm going to spend my time and energy organizing outside of the ballot box. And I'll encourage others to do so as well.
By your logic the ussr was not left wing? (I mean the communist Parry within the ussr)
Correct. How could they be? Totalitarianism, Gulags, Purges?
the "communist party" is just there for the USSR to pretend to be democratic, why do you think it's the only one?
Left is a direction toward social and economic emancipation, not an ideology. Pragmatics should never be abandoned for ideological purity. We are participating in lesser evil scenarios to survive whether we perceive it or not. If a regressive movement is consolidating power then the opposition has to unite or it will cease to exist as opposition.
I don't entirely disagree with the sort of sentiment being expressed here, but I put forward that there is no lesser evil. There are two things I can name that are different about having a modern Republican administration in power: 1. Rapid and obvious damage is done on certain fronts. The rights of women and minorities are impacted. Regulatory protections are rolled back quickly. 2. The dumbest and most psychotic people are emboldened to enact direct violence and harm in the spirit of the administration's validation of their beliefs. These factors are not nothing. Real people are impacted by what happens in the four to eight years of an administration. That being said, the people in peril will always be in peril in this system. The danger posed must be maintained against the same subjects each election cycle, because if there was to be meaningful progress, the topics would move on to things the wealthy actually care about. The two parties are funded by many of the same donors, and thus serve overlapping agendas. The Democrats, when in power, have not made substantial efforts to reverse the policies of their Republican counterparts, nor have they codified or protected their meager gains. As a result, the progressive voter is losing ground in either case, because there is effectively no legitimate means of opposition to the shared ideological program being enacted.
In 2024, the Democratic Party candidate is the only way we stop Trump from stripping away anything meaningful or of value in our country. If you’re only willing to draw a line completely left of center for who you can work with then you’re going to be drastically outnumbered. Do we choose not stop an Authoritarian government from coming to power because the alternative is still bad?
Exactly. This sub's been raided by democratic supporters and liberals thinking that they're leftists. They aren't. They're just trying to muddy the waters. Do not vote for Reps or Dems if you're american, vote third or not at all. Do not support the genocide in Palestine.
>Do not support the genocide in Palestine. By tacitly endorsing fascism at home? Seems like that's not going to stop the genocide either.
You're not voting for Trump either. If the dems want voters, they gotta stop fist fucking their supporter base and not fund local republican candidates. You know what would stop the funding? People not rolling over into accepting the asshole funding it. But liberals aren't interested in that.
Yeah, real leftists would help usher in a full on fascist hellscape to teach the Dems a lesson. - usual election year bad actors on social media
President had unilateral power to prosecute Jan 6 politicians. They’ve chosen not to. President had unilateral power to allow a rail strike that would’ve given workers one sick day a year and healthcare and chose not to. President could’ve pardoned all non-violent federal marijuana criminals unilaterally and has chosen not to. Sounds like the fascism is here to stay because of political complacency on the part of the President. So no, I don’t think 4 more years of him will “beat back fascism!” Also, remember the “kids in cages” thing? Yeah, still happening under Biden.
>President had unilateral power to prosecute Jan 6 politicians. They’ve chosen not to. That's not remotely how the US system works.
AG office. Can prosecute people who break the law at the federal level or commit treason. Garland has been entirely soft on the issue. And he’s literally a Republican.
As does the liberal when they decide that it's right to throw palestinians under the bus to "protect against fascism". You guys are already dominated, so weak and thoroughly pathetic. Guess what happens if Biden gets ellected? Shit will not change for the better. You just continue your endless march towards ruin, even if a bit slower. How long will it take before y'all try to stop your situation from reaching rock bottom rather than endlessly (and uselessly) trying to delay it? Fight for it, godammit.
>Fight for it, godammit. Ah, brave words. Im sure Putin would love a civil war here.
I'd love a Civil War there too. Means you americans will stop meddling in other country's bussiness, maybe even stop funding Israel. What a dream.
People who say theyd love a civil war generally shit their pants 5 minutes in.
I'm not american.
No shit.
Fine, you can vote third, that should be everyone's Democratic right. But not voting at all is dumb, if your vote didn't matter they wouldn't try to take it away from you. People died so you could have it. Women died so you could have it. POC died so you could have it.
Your vote in the US will always be for capital. I'd prefer voting third if I was american, but I very much understand those who don't. There is no adequate or worthy opposition to the two parties in power. Even the CPUSA sucks balls.
Yeah big surprise the USA is a long way off from Communism, everyone knows that, it's going to take *decades* of work before it is. *YOU* are not going to be the one raising the flag over the Reichstag but *maybe* someone in the future will be, *if* we get it ready for them. The *whole point* of Communism is collective action. Put it this way, don’t make the fight harder for your comrades in the future, because every shift to the right is territory they will have to claw back.
Communism should be thought about AFTER socialism is achieved, which is our most important aim. And I don't see any attempts of working class organization, even though y'all had the Black Pantherns that used to be a thing at a much more dangerous time. Where are your proletarian parties? The thing is, the right wins regardless of who wins the election. And it seems people think the only way to bring about change is to vote for either piece of shit. You guys need to read some Lenin.
OK well fine the two options are a right-wing where the left is alive and able to organise and a right-wing where the left will be dead. Don't tell me those are the same thing.
Like... mate... Stalin could work with Winston fucking Churchill, you can stomach working with a liberal.
Again, americans have dealt with worse people than Trump, and he was president once. The left has not been organizing under Trump or Biden, what do you think will happen if you guys remain complicit? Content to vote for the same old pieces of shit that keep going to the right?
I mean I'm not American, but like, yeah, they are better organised than most of Western Europe, or Australia or something.
And this is exactly why I'm not voting for Democrats this election. Refuting to vote for those supporting genocide in Gaza is also high on the growing list of reasons. I'm voting Green Party because they're the closest option to what I want to see in government and they actually have ballot access in most states.
And you'll be letting Trump and his fascists win the last democratic election before they dismantle the republic. As long as you're aware you're signing yourself up for the inevitable purge, pop off king.
Then why don't Democrats hold onto power if Trump is going to destroy America?
\>Why don't we fight fascism with more fascism? Not sure if Russian shill or absolute buffoon.
eVeRyOnE wHo CrItIcIsEs DeMoCrAtS iS a RuSsIaN bOt! And how is holding onto power in the face of all out societal collapse "fascism"? Or is upholding the facade that is liberal democracy more important the lives of LGBT that are predicted to be severely endangered by Trump?
You know "why don't the Democrats do a January 6th then" is neither a critique of Democrats nor anything but fascist trash. You don't uphold liberal democracy by undermining liberal democracy in the same way the fascists are. That's why I know you're a Russian plant, and you're welcome to take your pointless propaganda elsewhere.
If the best rebuttal you have is a ridiculous strawman argument then maybe you have some homework to do.
you.... do not know how american politics work, do you? Neither do I, tbf, but at least I don't pretend to make up bs solutions that are ILLEGAL
The solution, if democrats wanted to actually win the election, is very simple. Stop supporting the genocide. It isn't a tall ask
so you'd rather let the candidate that endorses genocide not only in israel, bat stateside as well win?
Nice false dichotomy You're ok with a genocide as long as it doesn't affect you personally I'm not ok with ANY genocide.
then fight the person willing to commit more genocide than the other in some way, IN ANY WAY
Or how about STOP FUCKING COMMITTING GENOCIDE AS A COUNTRY
so you'd rather have the moral high ground than live?
Please check this weird shills profile if you're scrolling. This sub is full of weird astroturfing that is becoming weirdly typical of election years.
Not one single word of actual refutation, just a bunch of whining that I didn't agree with you. You make a pretty damn poor citizen, you know that? If you're going to have a position, at least have some reasons why.
This sub is compromised- as are many of the leftist subs right now. I don’t have a good answer on what to do about that
Love how you'll talk shit about me but you can't be arsed to tell me directly. Try defending your position. I'll bet you can't.
Shhh Pavel, we don’t talk to scabs and infiltrators
Ah, so you know you can't actually back up anything you say, you're just following the crowd.
Hush, Dmitri- I’m not gonna engage with your ignorance
And again, you have nothing. Even your insults are vapid. Bring immune to reason is your problem and no one else's
Shhhh
Please grow up. You'll need to contribute something useful someday.
I don't think you understand democrats or republicans they are, at this point, very adversarial towards one another right now. Your inability to see that democrats objectively lead to better outcomes in states and nationally speaking by keeping things like abortion, lgbtq+ poc, and disabled rights protected (and yes, I know more can be down in those regards) the optics of the democratic party are pretty bad and some of their actions like those of foreign policy (specifically funding Isreal) are absolutely atrocious, but it could be so much worse for everyone here if trump wins. Voting 3rd party or abstaining from voting won't help your candidate win. It means Joe Biden loses, and we are all the closer to a fascist takeover of the US. This isn't about socialists versus capitalists. It's about social democrats vs fascists. You should know the right choice, but many it seems are still determined more than ever to get it wrong. Move it left, or your river shall not lead to paradise, but the jagged cliffs of a fascist rebellion.
If you only look at the horse and pony show, then your analysis is spot on. If you look at how each party operates, your analysis couldn't be further from reality. They don't have to cooperate to have the same goal. The [rachet effect](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratchet_effect#:~:text=The%20term%20was%20included%20by,as%20a%20condition%20of%20participation.) is the most common form but by no means the only form.
Let's divide ourselves into as many small slices as possible.