this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
1056 points (98.8% liked)

News

23293 readers
3694 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9point6 97 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

Maybe some of that freedom your nutjobs keep banging on about.

Make no mistake that small progress is still progress and given the amount of money spent on regression, don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

If given the choice of something better, never go for the other option because the first is not better enough

[–] [email protected] 54 points 3 months ago (6 children)

don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.

This sentiment is way too rare. Personally I'm a fan of using "don't let perfect be the enemy of good enough"

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 months ago (3 children)

It needs to be selectively applied though. We should fight for perfection, but we shouldn't avoid small gains in favor of large aspirations.

[–] pwnicholson 21 points 3 months ago

That's what the saying means. It doesn't mean perfect isn't good. It means perfect is great, but don't let it stop good.

[–] EleventhHour 16 points 3 months ago

just remember: "perfect" is a journey, not a destination. it something to strive for knowing full well that you'll never get there because it's impossible.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Oh yes, absolutely

[–] Viking_Hippie 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.

This sentiment is way too rare

Except literally every time someone on the left points out the Dem leadership habit of inching in the right direction while not doing much to stop their fascist counterparts from yarding if not miling in the opposite.

What little progress conservative Democrats DO graciously deign to bestow on the unwashed masses is the equivalent of getting a 2% raise in a year where your unavoidable expenses such as food, shelter, and medicine rose by double digits.

That's not good. That's insufficient.

[–] Cryophilia -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So give us more Democrats and you'll get more results. It's a simple question of mathematics. We can't pass laws unless you give us the numbers in Congress.

[–] Viking_Hippie 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

So give us more Democrats and you'll get more results. It's a simple question of mathematics

If they do their jobs well, they get rewarded with votes. It's a simple question of not inverting the relationship between the public servants and the public.

We can't pass laws unless you give us the numbers in Congress.

And people won't vote for you if you pass bad laws and/or do nothing with the mandate you're given. Which is what 90%+ of them do.

If they start actually helping people more, people will reward them. Giving them all they want in return for bad job performance isn't the motivator to do better you seem to think it is.

[–] Triasha 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If they do their jobs well, they get rewarded with votes. It’s a simple question of not inverting the relationship between the public servants and the public.

Hard disagree. The public is not a monolith. It does not know what it wants, because most people want mutually exclusive things.

[–] Viking_Hippie 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

[the public] does not know what it wants

Holy paternalistic condescension, Batman! 😬🤦

[–] Cryophilia -1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

That's not how it works. I'm not just saying that, I mean functionally, what you're saying is impossible. We can't make progress until we get the numbers in Congress, and you won't give us the numbers in Congress until we make progress. So nothing ever gets done. Gridlock at best.

And people wonder why the Dems seem so ineffectual. Its because our voters are piss poor at understanding how our fucking government works. Vote first, and then get results. It's literally impossible for it to happen the other way around. People who are not in Congress can't pass laws. You have to get them into Congress first.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You can get results by going for things republicans also want. As in, negotiate with your counterparts on the hill.

Sometimes the way forward isn’t one of overpowering all opposition. Not everything is a blitzkrieg.

[–] Cryophilia 1 points 3 months ago

We try to avoid negotiating with fascists.

[–] Viking_Hippie -1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

the Dems seem so ineffectual. Its because our voters

Classic victim blaming. "We're doing a lousy job because of the people not trusting us in spite of doing a lousy job!" 🙄

Vote first, and then get results.

That hasn't worked since 1978 at the very latest and it won't suddenly start working now.

The problem isn't that the average voter doesn't help Democrats enough. The problem is that Democrats don't help the average voter enough.

The reason for that problem isn't a lack of mandate, it's that the vast majority represent their big sum owner donors much more than the public at large. As shown by how the party fights anti-corporate Democrats much harder than they ever fight Republicans, even the fascists of today.

People who are not in Congress can't pass law

And people who don't prioritize the interests of the public don't pass law that furthers the interest of the public over those that supply big legal bribes, no matter how many of them there are in Congress.

[–] Triasha 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What, precisely, do you think Democrats should be doing right now to help the American people?

[–] Viking_Hippie 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Passing the long overdue minimum wage increase no matter what some unelected clerk with only symbolic authority thinks about it.

And before you say it: yes I know it wouldn't pass the House right now. The point is that they didn't do It when they could, just like with almost everything that helps regular people without directly benefitting the ultra-rich and their corporations.

As for what they CAN do in spite of the House being under fascist occupation, there's also a couple things.

Like halting all weapon shipments to the fascist apartheid regime of Netanyahu, Smotrich, Ben-Gvir et al and change the diplomatic stance towards them to something more akin the latter years of Apartheid South Africa and Serbia under Milošević.

Like commuting the sentences of everyone who's imprisoned for victimless crimes such as drug possession and voluntary sex work.

Like closing the concentration camps Trump built on the southern border and revising ICE and USCIS guidelines and protocols to make legal immigration much easier and cheaper to do and provide an achievable pathway for all undocumented immigrants.

That's just off the top of my head. There's probably hundreds if not thousands of other things that they can also do with just the Senate and the White house that would fundamentally change the lives of millions of people for the better.

Then when they've earned goodwill by doing some of that, more people will vote for them, they'll retake the House and be able to do even more good and get even more votes.

It's a virtuous circle in stead of the current downward spiral.

[–] Allonzee 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

These are hyperbolic times.

The internet age has all but murdered nuance.

[–] Bytemeister 1 points 3 months ago

No, republican fear mongering, and their refusal to recognize facts has all but murdered nuance. You can't have nuanced discussion because a significant portion of the populace have been delightfully gobbling up a buffet of lies. There is no nuance about reproductive healthcare when abortion is murder. There is no nuance about the electoral system when every election is rigged. There is no nuance about equality in law when the president is immune from all crimes. The Internet didn't destroy nuance, certain people have been throwing nuance out the window as fast as possible because an educated and empowered populace weakens their grip on the wheel of power.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The problem can be that some progress can be used to placate the masses by halting the momentum.

Obamacare was a step in the right direction, but also enough to kill the momentum towards the actual solutions that would have provided universal healthcare. Even those wouldn't have been perfect, but now the drive has plataeued and good enough for most people means we won't get good enough for everyone any time soon.

Decriminalizing weed instead of legalizing and regulating is another. It doesn't actually solve the inherent problems with the war on drugs because the drug trade that does involve criminal activity is still present. This kind of situation can backfire by reinforcing people's belief in the lies about drugs inherently causing violent crime.

So the sentiment is correct, but not all progress is good enough and partial progress can be a long term negative.

[–] Cryophilia 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Obamacare was a step in the right direction, but also enough to kill the momentum towards the actual solutions

Bullshit. If we'd kept the supermajority, democrats would have EXPANDED Obamacare.

Republicans are stopping progress. Democrats didn't go "eh fuck it I don't feel like helping people anymore". They were blocked by Republicans.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If we’d kept the supermajority, democrats would have EXPANDED Obamacare.

Democrats could have dropped the filibuster to be able to pass that better version with a simple majority. Then they could ride that success in future elections by pointing out that they were willing to overcome Republican obstruction.

But instead they half assed it when they had the chance and achieved partial progress that killed the momentum. Then the Republicans dropped the filibuster partially to stack the courts.

[–] Cryophilia -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Dropping the filibuster is a nuclear option that will open us up to massive Republican attacks when they're in power. It's not a move to be taken lightly.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It has zero power when the other party holds all three branches other than tradition.

Republicans have already shown they don't care about tradition, and they only keep the neutered version of it around to obstruct Democratic legislation. Republicans already snipped it out from the judicial nominations when they had the senate and the oval office. If they hold all three branches they will drop it the moment they want to pass an abortion ban or anything else. The Democrats keeping it around is just shooting themselves in the foot.

Remember that the filibuster exists with a simple majority in the senate and can be dropped at a moments notice. It was never needed in the first place because needing the House, Senate, and a Presidential signature is already enough room for obstruction and the idea that it keeps debate from being stifled has long proven to be false based on it being used without needing to even be spoken.

The filibuster only benefits Repubilcan obstruction. Why the Democrats won't let it go is beyond me.

[–] samus12345 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"Don't let perfect be the enemy of better."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

“Don’t butcher things your parents taught you”

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

the nutjobs will never get the freedom they want. they want freedom to step on others and freedom from accountability.

they do not have the same desires as you and i.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Yeah but this bill won't become law

[–] UnderpantsWeevil -3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Make no mistake that small progress is still progress

That's an argument I remember from under Obama. But the theory was that these small progressions would compound over time. In practice, the Dems don't make progress, they inhibit it. Liberals draw in an enormous amount of labor and financial power to campaign, then immediately sell out to corporate interests. They pass stop-gap bills to splinter progressive movements into factions of haves and have-nots. Then they collapse in the face of a reactionary resurgence.

The reactionaries impose huge reversals of existing New Deal and Great Society programs. They engage in flagrant criminality without any form of censure. They prosecute wars to loot natural resources abroad. Then they ship domestic capital overseas to dilute labor power at home and swell the ranks of the underemployed. They lard us up with debts to the same plutocrats who put them in office and leave Democrats with the bill when they finally slink out of office. And they balloon the national security state to surveil, suppress, and murder protesters and dissidents in nascent left-wing movements.

The "small progress" is a ratchet. It isn't progress at all. We're regressing rapidly. The liberal party seems content to prevent any kind of contrary political pressure, while the conservative movement goes all-in on paramilitary fascism.

[–] Cryophilia 0 points 3 months ago