If it was that easy to undo what biden did, then practically he did nothing.

They absolutely, 1000% need Democrats to win. Maybe not their respective districts, but if they want to get anything done on a national level, they need about half the country on their side, and that includes Democrats.

Now, they can certainly eat the party whole, the way the tea party and MAGA ate the GOP. That involves being more specific than "Democrats bad". In fact, how did they do it? Did you ever see them telling people to abandon the Republican party?

Not on .world. I've noticed .world is more of a neoliberal, mostly pro-capitalism instance in general.

Note, I'm talking more about the moderation rather than members.

Well, .world has a lot of users who understand this, but the loudest voices (who are often times moderators) are definitely Democrat apologists. Then again, some of the other instances, like .ml, have the opposite problem, and are full-blown tankie/authoritarian apologists, so it's kind of a, "pick your poison, damned if you do, damned if you don't," situation.

That is absolutely not what I'm saying. I'm correcting objectively false claims you're making; environmental laws were not all Democrats, the Democrats did not do anything at the federal level to pass, "full gay rights with marriage," and the meme and OP did not say, "both sides bad." Those points are a statement of fact, not an argument.

What a stupid comment

Why can't stating facts just be that: stating facts.

Instead, people have to insert imaginations of their interlocutor's position so they can try to dish an "own" before asking them for clarification first.

And we wonder why discourse is broken in today's age

"But he said something vaguely positive, that's exactly like legal enforcement of their rights!"

I love how liberals bleat this because it implies genocide is good.

It’s not my party. I’ve been left of the Democrats since the 90s. It’s the party that more closely aligns with my values between the only two that can win a US Presidential Election.

I believe you, and I’m sure you’re not the only one with that problem. I didn’t say it was the reason Bernie lost, because I’m fully aware of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Hillary’s collusion, but it was a contributing factor.

I volunteered to direct foot traffic for the general election, and chatted up several other volunteers about the disappointing results of the primary. They told me that they couldn’t believe how many registered independents and no party affiliation voters they had to turn away. Apparently partisan primary requirements aren’t common knowledge, so I’m sharing this information to prevent other people from having the same experience.

As someone that voted Bernie in 2016, we didn’t have the votes in 2016 for Bernie to make it through the primary. The country itself was not as progressive in 2016 as it is now imo, especially so for the Democratic base.

For Bernie to have even had a chance to win the primary, the election format would have needed to not be First Past the Post. He was a victim of vote splitting found in First Past the Post and then establishment Dems allocated their voters votes to go towards Hillary. I don’t think it was fair what happened to Bernie especially with the DNC, but I realize now it was a flaw of the system itself that makes it extremely difficult for a progressive to win a Democratic presidential primary. I think it makes zero sense why people can’t pick their favorite candidate(s) first and then pick backup ‘safe’ candidates for elections. Also there is the issue of some states excluding people not registered with a party from voting in the primary. I feel it is a bad move to prevent these voters at the primary level since non-affiliated voters are usually the ones that ultimately decide the elections and they can give input ahead of time if they would vote for that candidate in the general election.

Having ranked robin voting, STAR voting, or score voting would help prevent a popular candidate like Bernie from losing by default to a ‘safe’ establishment pick.

Edit: Trust me, I would like to be wrong about 2016 and just how progressive country as a whole was at the time. But we’re really backwards in a lot of ways, especially so back then. The bulk of older voters were at most were economically voting for Democrats, not on social or economic policy by and large.

Yup. Carville wants to preserve the “schism” between progressives and liberals. That’s how you know it’s the right move. We need to shift back the Overton window.

Hubris is thinking a few liberal voters in america could abate a global trend toward fascism without fundamentally changing anything about our broken capitalist system.

we wouldn’t be in this (I think at this point global) mess…

We were in this mess before the election

What gov database do you have access to that tells you the financial status of lemmy users in this thread

Sure, but you don't get to revolution without many smaller escalations

Libs harp on that word because it sounds rightly ridiculous to an american, but say 'armed protest' and suddenly it sounds a lot more realistic.

I'm not american, and I don't 'need to feel better', I'm glad that country is destroying itself since they are all horrible, as I explained.

American involvement in the middle east has worsened the situation for Palestinians since Trump was elected.

You must be joking, there was nothing left for him to bomb in Palestine and he ruthlessly bombed Yemen, more than Trump did.
I give facts, they are not catchphrases as you demeaningly call it.
All you got is "Trump is worse".
You should move there, you fit right in with the smug and sanctimonius libs shifting blame and vile insults at leftists for what they themselves caused.

American involvement in the middle east has worsened the situation for Palestinians since Trump was elected.

No it hasn't, you were just a genocide denier when it was your team doing it. In that sense, the situation is better under Trump because at least BlueMaga shitlibs like you are not denying their genocide anymore.

If Trump is walking the "way way worse" path on Palestine it's only because Biden laid the path down for him in the first place.

And what pry tell did your protests accomplish, Protests are easy for the ruling class to ignore if they so chose. Did your protest make it uncomfortable for them to exist, did you disrupt trafic, cram the government building past building code forcing some of them to be unable to get to their office, block cars from leaving the parking lot?

shut the fuck up you fucking weenie

you have an opinion until you can be criticized for it then "oh I don't live there"

pick a lane

punk ass loser

Lol. The absolute state of BlueMAGA; reduced to "no, u!"

So do we, but apparently the USA has made genocide a bipartisan consensus.

I didn't, but I realise "no, U!" Is all you have, so you're going to cram it in regardless.

Well that's a completely incoherent non-sequitor, but that's also all BlueMAGA has left.

Which Ukrainians?

• The oligarchs?
• The Banderites?
• The eastern & southern Ukrainians, who, after the Maidan coup, declared independence from an unelected government, and were subsequently terrorized by the Banderites for nearly a decade, with tacit and overt support from the Ukrainian and US governments?
• The men being pulled off the streets and pushed to the front lines against their will?

.
Previously. Previously.

It seems simple enough to me

Hate the syatem

But also recognize that syatem exists

Work both in and out of the system to change things.

Or we just let the people who ratchet to the right keep power so they can keep ratcheting to the right and then wonder why it keeps happening

Yeah if you think Bush was an acceptable choice and not a fascist then you don't really have a leg to stand on with this "commies love gulags" nonsense. You think this El Salvador shit is new? Those of us who were paying attention know that Bush did the same shit, while they did their fair share of torturing alleged "terrorists" with no due process in our own black sites, the worst abuses were conducted in foreign countries like Egypt, when we sent prisoners there knowing full well how they'd be treated. Some of us have been fighting this battle for over 20 years, nice of you to finally wake up and notice now that someone you hate is doing it, but it would be nice if you'd notice when the people you like are doing it too.

It's so stupid when liberals, defending a system with the largest prison population per capita in the world, with indefinite detention without trial, mass surveillance, etc, still try to take the moral high ground on that issue just because the word "gulag" sounds scary and foreign.

Fascism isn't a choice, or a policy, it's Capitalism using brutal methods to defend itself, like when the Democrats sent Israel mountains of bombs to obliterate Palestinians. Fascism is not a distinct economic system, but the same underlying system as Capitalism, only when it's in crisis and needs to defend itself while pretending it's qualitatively different.

The Liberal answer to the political problems we see is to perpetuate it indefinately and purely act within the system that selects for whatever brutal methods it needs to sustain itself. This isn't an answer, it's approval.

As for gulags, I recommend reading Russian Justice. It's a good thing to jail fascists, Tsarists, and others who would violently try to overthrow a popular government. Or, are you saying you wouldn't jail Trump if given the opportunity?

Every single one of those elections, the Dems chanting "us or fascism!!"

It's kinda like the gun safety debate: we can not discuss it within 72 hrs of a mass shooting.

After 72 hrs, nobody wants to talk about it, or we have another one.

When will the Dems actually oppose fascism, instead of saying they want to?

Additionally, who is that "boring liberal republic" better for? Certainly not Palestinians. Certainly not for union workers on our rail lines. Not for people becoming houseless. Not for queer people. Not for indigenous peeps, either....

So, just for white, straight people, so we need to keep supporting it?

And just who are you to presume to correct anybody's point of view? Because telling me that commies and fascists like to send people to gulags is doing nothing to change anybody's mind. Let's face reality here: that doesn't hit anywhere close to home, especially when you have so much right-wing media spinning it around and justifying it.

The issues that actually hurt most people, your working class and poor people, are toxic to democrats because they need policies that will hurt their traditional pocket fillers.

They all chose, a long time ago, to serve their masters, and it's now coming to the breaking point: people can no longer afford to pay rent and basic necessities with their job.

This is when all hell breaks loose, the social contract breaks down, and you have incompetent psychopaths elected into power - because people are desperate and they want shit to change.

You can keep yelling at the top of your lungs that the alternative is awful and horrible and Hitler and gas chambers, but what you're ever more likely to hear is that "well, at least it ends the despair".

But sure, ignore everything and keep being as perplexed as most other democrats as to why people keep voting for that buffoon.

The problem with voting for a party simply because "we aren't fascism" is that it produces the most perverse incentives imaginable. If the only way Democrats can win the White House is by simply not being fascist, what motivation do they have to reform the system so that fascists won't be able to come back into power?

If there is a free election in 2028, and if Democrats somehow manage to win, they need to act decisively. They need to pass a storm of legislation that drastically curtails the powers of the presidency. If they don't, then we could be right back with another wannabe dictator Republican in power in 2032. We need to end the emergency powers, curtail the powers of ICE, end the mass surveillance, essentially dismantle the entire post-911 security architecture that put us at such a danger of dictatorship. It's an evil machine that never should have been built.

This is the fatal error of wanting to support a centrist Dem in 2028. The only way such a candidate is going to get elected is if they can run against the specter of fascism and dictatorship. They have zero motivation to dismantle the tools a future dictator would use; they need there to be a threat of a future dictator in order to win reelection. If that centrist Dem wins in 2028, and makes it so dictatorship is impossible, what are they going to run on in 2032? They need there to be a credible threat of dictatorship in order to win election. A centrist Dem can never dismantle fascism, as the looming potential of fascism is their only hope of getting elected. Centrist Dems want to dangle the threat of fascist dictatorship, like a Sword of Damocles, over your head forever. Corporate Dems will never dismantle what is their only hope of getting and retaining power.

a boring and flawed neoliberal Democrat is preferable to a fascist dictatorship.

Another reminder that blueMAGA don't see Palestinians as human.

threatening to send US citizens to an El Salvadorian gulag for disagreeing with the President.

Yeah, just non-citizens, as is right and proper.

As a colorblind person, this seems perfectly reasonable.

I will direct you to my comment here.

we root for the worst possible outcome

The meme is about voting third party, not Republican.

But yes, there have to be consequences to us not getting what we want. It's a very simple concept.

we are still pro democracy, we do, there is only one correct choice.

Western "democracy" in a nutshell. Catch-22 could only dream of such absurdity.

pro democracy

one correct choice

Pick one.

Now if we can convince that side to then use the victory to change the rules, then so be it.

The democrats are only in power for at most two years, and that's assuming there's no quislings like Lieberman or Fetterman or Manchin or Sinema in them. So they've barely got enough votes to move the needle on anything, and voting is low on the priority list.

And after two years the Republicans win one or both houses of Congress and maybe the presidency, and then undo everything.

This has been repeating my entire life, and now it's getting to the fascist endgame.

The system itself is broken and failing. It's not going to help us.

Genocide apologist

Intersting, I do not remember any means of production being turned over to the workers? I dont remember a law passed to remove the scehdual F capabilities, I do not remember stuffing the supreme court in retaliation for Roe being overturned. Heck I do not even remember stufing the Postal board of governors so full that it would fire DeJoy and ensure a reasonable PMG for over a decade... Please enlighten me, what left wing actions must I look at

All those left wing policies being implemented like:

- - - -

There were 3 million fewer voters than in 2020. This was the most advertised election in US history, and more people sat out.

But I don’t have it in me to just give up and willingly let people suffer without a fight.

Unless those people are Palestinian, then fuck 'em.

A bunch of shortsighted cosplayers with no sense of praxis or political literacy protested the do-nothing Dems and we got the freewheeling fascism MAGAs. How's that working out for you? How's the glorious revolution coming?

I know I’d be a lot cooler, especially around here, if I just put on the Che Guevara shirt and say revolution is the only answer.

Not what I said. Revolution is not the only mechanism for change that exists outside of voting, there are other forms of mass action such as strikes and protests.

Because every example of that sort of thing just leads to more fascism under a different name

That's completely ahistorical. Even if you write off all the biggest and most famous examples, like the Russian, American, Chinese, and French revolutions (which you shouldn't), the world is a big place and you wouldn't be making that kind of sweeping generalization if you'd actually looked into it.

The reason people say this shit (aside from propaganda to discourage doing revolutions) is to signal that they themselves aren't interested in participating in a revolution. But the actual history is a lot more complicated than is allowed by this sort of sweeping proclamation about every country in every time that has ever existed.

It's funny because this position of "revolution is always bad" is literally to the right of neocons. Neoconservatives are always fantasizing about the people of rival countries (Iran, Cuba, China, etc) rising up to overthrow their governments. They're allowed to be pro-revolution because they're sufficiently wedded to the establishment that they don't feel the need to disavow every revolutionary action ever to avoid suspicion, which allows these conservatives to be to take a position to the left of the average self-proclaimed anti-communist leftist who is desperate to make sure everyone knows they're not one of those kinds of leftists.

But as for making it a red line for supporting democrats, sure. I mean honestly, credit to you for proposing something that might actually work. I think if there’s a big enough movement to do that, every Democrat would get behind it.

Yes, and the same is true for setting red lines on other issues, such as Palestine. If enough people actually stood by it, the Democrats would be forced to change their position, or they would end up being replaced by another party.

That's your excuse? Seriously?

"Shame people didn't vote Dem 20 years ago, the gop wouldn't be around!"

"They did"

"Yeah, but 9/11 had happened only a decade earlier"

Lol. Yeah, it's a good thing we live in a Just World.

If you’d developed class consciousness, you’d understand why neither party enacts progressive policies despite their popularity. Previously:

The US government was never not captured by the bourgeoisie, because the US was born of a bourgeois revolution[1]. The wealthy, white, male, land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers constructed a bourgeois state with “checks and balances” against the “tyranny of the majority”. It was never meant to represent the majority—the working class—and it never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (at least those not disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote. BBC: [Princeton & Northwestern] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

If you want to save the planet, that takes abolishing the capitalist system. Neither major party is going to implement real measures to fix that. Harris was running on stronger borders too so I really don't think its a reach to say we'd be getting ICE raids and destroyed lives under her.

In the words of Malcolm X: "If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound..."

Give me someone that wants to heal the wound. I'll vote for them.

I will gladly be a communist liberal.

It is impossible to be a communist/anarchist/socialist/leftist liberal, because communism/anarchism/socialism/leftism are diametrically opposed to liberalism.

"leftism is when identify politics"

Ok liberal

Yes, and leftists don't put the same value in identity that liberals do. We obviously care to some extent, we believe in national liberation, and historically the communist movements have supported black people in the US for example.

You know what those communists didn't do though? Vote for liberals.

Also if you're trying to say that minority groups are the most politically active...I'd agree. That's why leftist groups are represented by large amounts of those people.

The consequences seem to have been the democrats have swung further to the right than Ronald Regan and every leftist doesn't even get a chance to run in that party and the same democratic party sues and uses legal maneuvering to remove all other parties like from the ballots.

They did not all re-win their primaries. See Bernie Sanders, Cory Bush, and Jamal Bowman. And you can’t win a primary when the DNC undemocratically cancels it, as it did last year.

📺 Why the Democratic Party CANNOT and WILL NOT be Reformed

Democrats would rather lose to a Republican, to a conservative, to a fascist, to Trump, than address the material conditions of the American people.

Being expendable by the democrats, and directly targeted by the right, is the issue. You need to fight for to stop it. The dems will never give it willingly, if ever.

Yeah, only foreigners are supposed to be expendable!

If you think not wanting to be exterminated is the same as wanting a unicorn, then yes, you do deserve fascism.

If the US has a successful Communist revolution, it certainly wouldn't be ruled by the PRC or DPRK.

All governments are authoritarian, all exert authority. What matters is which class is exerting its authority, ie which class has control of the state.

It will probably get through as me and my friends are in camps thinking that at least this would have happened with Harris anyways.

It would have, just not to you and your friends, which is all you care about.

Decades of mindless "harm reduction" got you where you are.

Complains about things being simplistic, proceeds to judge things based on what instance they're from

Rupert Murdoch and Elon Musk are both American citizens. I see that blueMAGA has reached the same point as their red counterparts in thinking that even naturalised citizens are foreigners.

But yes, anything to avoid accepting Americas problems could have domestic origins.