this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
367 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19094 readers
5136 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

Going further right didn't help, now we need to go as left as possible

Radical ideas like Universal healthcare, paid maternity leave, free child care, taxing the rich.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 hour ago

Radical ideas the rest of the 1st world had had for 50 years and successfully implemented.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

What?

They are the establishment.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 hour ago

Thus the call to become something else; become being the operative word, meaning to change from what they currently are.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 hours ago

Just like GOP refugees created the Tea Party, we need to rally around the greatest symbol of the French Revolution, and build a Guillotine Party.

[–] LunarVoyager 25 points 3 hours ago

Wow, if only there had been an anti establishment candidate running for president as a democrat in 2016... too bad...

[–] DiagnosedADHD 11 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I fear it's too late. Unless the party can be taken by force it won't be enough and we only have 4 years. If dems didn't snub Bernie this all probably wouldn't have happened. Our choices used to be two flavors of corporate fascism, now it's far right vs corporate. Dems are better on social issues, but it's not enough.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 hours ago

Dems are clearly better on economic issues as well. Not nearly good enough, but better. The problem is that they will only go so far, and they won't talk about it, out of fear of angering their wealthy patrons.

[–] IzzyScissor 22 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Or maybe they should just leave the Democratic party and start a new progressive party? We have less than 4 years, but that's also the most time we'll ever have.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 hours ago (3 children)

The problem with that strategy is that our democracy uses a first-past-the-post voting system which trends towards a two-party system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo&t=31s

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

Then become one of the two parties.

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

There already are two. We must co-opt one with a populist candidate. The Republican Party was already hijacked by Trump. That leaves the Democratic Party.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 52 minutes ago (1 children)

Bernie tried twice, Democrats demonstrated their ability to stop that shit in its tracks. It will not work.

The only solution is for progressives to abandon the Party and start their own to replace it. The US has replaced parties before, it can be done again.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 37 minutes ago

Trump tried once and it worked. Neoliberal ideas are entrenched in the minds of Americans. Neoliberalism only allows change to the people in charge of systems as it asserts, incorrectly, that our institutions are flawless. Since neoliberals only consider changing people, it is much easier for a fascist to convince a neoliberal to change the people in society. Where as it is much harder for a progressive or a socialist to convince a neoliberal to enact systemic change or redistribute wealth respectively.

In short, people with neoliberal ideas in their head need to fully internalize neoliberalism as a scam.

Abandoning the Democrats will not result in them being replaced. They will continue to exist by moving further to the right, as Democrats like Chris Murphy have already proposed.

Starting a successful third party is mathematically impossible under a FPTP system. Third party candidates can only be spoiler candidates.

[–] davidagain 1 points 37 minutes ago* (last edited 36 minutes ago) (1 children)

I think you mean popular, not populist, but yes.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 22 minutes ago

No, I mean populist. Populism is what is popular right now.

https://www.wordnik.com/words/populism

A political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against the privileged elite.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

We have already seen a third party take over a major party. The current problem with the GOP is because it absorbed the Tea Party.

With the right symbol to rally behind, we can do the same thing to the Democratic party. We need to build the Guillotine Party.

[–] IzzyScissor 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Oh, I'm all for ranked choice voting, but in order for it to have any meaning we also need a plurality of parties. They also need time to build and I'm sure these two would start a good one if allowed.

Although the likelihood of political parties having any weight at all past January is anyone's guess..

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

Without rank choice voting any progressive party would act as a spoiler for the Democratic Party. Debilitating ourselves in this way isn't particularly useful for leveraging power to create better outcomes for the environment and minorities.

[–] Ensign_Crab 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Then the Democratic Party had best make sure that progressives have no reason to split off and form their own party, huh?

Why does it always fall to progressives to get behind Democrats and never the other way around?

Debilitating ourselves in this way isn’t particularly useful for leveraging power to create better outcomes for the environment and minorities.

Oh thank god Democrats don't throw vulnerable populations under the bus every chance they get.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 54 minutes ago (1 children)

Then the Democratic Party had best make sure that progressives have no reason to split off and form their own party, huh?

The FPTP voting system ensures that they do not have a reason.

Why does it always fall to progressives to get behind Democrats and never the other way around?

The FPTP voting system and entrenchment of neoliberalism in the minds of the American public for over 40 years from both mainstream political parties starting with Regan. This is may be the case for western countries and democracies more broadly as well. Currently, neoliberal ideas cause a contradiction when a person encounters progressive or socialist ideas. Along the lines of:

Why would we fix our institutions if they are flawless? What's the hurry to solve our problems if we are at the end of history?

Some useful and correct resolutions of these contradictions are:

Our institutions are flawed because they were made by us, flawed humans. The time to advert climate change, fix systemic inequalities, the reduce the wealth gap is now. Incremental changes will run out the clock, as they don't address the root causes. There will be hundreds of millions if not billions of causalities unless these issues are addressed sooner rather than later.

Neoliberal ideas must be pulled from the minds of Americans like a weed. Or like one of those radishes in Super Mario Bros 2. Then people will be able to embrace ideas like systemic change to institutions and wealth redistribution from the rich to everyone else.

When asked about socialism, if a person responds with 'socialism doesn't work' or 'the Soviet Union collapsed' those are the tells that a person needs to full internalize neoliberalism as a scam.

And maybe a history lesson about how the Soviet Union was actually an authoritarian communist dictatorship and not a socialist country. The government owned the means of the production, not the people, and the government wasn't representative of the people.

Oh thank god Democrats don’t throw vulnerable populations under the bus every chance they get.

It's better than the Democrats intentionally murdering people in camps. Neoliberals in office aren't going to solve our problems, but it gives us time to do the work to solve them. Like educating people and co-opting the Democratic Party in one of their primaries. Like Trump did to the Republicans and Bernie tried to do to the Democrats.

[–] Ensign_Crab 1 points 19 minutes ago (1 children)

It’s better than the Democrats intentionally murdering people in camps.

The would in a heartbeat if they thought they could get one Republican vote for doing so.

Neoliberals in office aren’t going to solve our problems, but it gives us time to do the work to solve them.

Neoliberals ARE our problem. We've had half a century of incrementalists demanding that we just wait a little more for them to get around to moving the needle to the left, and instead they move so far to the right that they're buddy-buddy with Netanyahu and the Cheneys. Incrementalism says "too soon" until it's too late.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 minutes ago (1 children)

The would in a heartbeat if they thought they could get one Republican vote for doing so.

Again, don't lie. The Democratic Party can of course move that far, but they have yet to do so.

Neoliberals ARE our problem.

Neoliberalism is the problem. Neoliberals can be tomorrow's socialists. But we have to put in the work and educate people. My argument already refuted this point, I recommend reading it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IzzyScissor 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

A few weeks ago, I'd have agreed with you, but now? The Democratic party that just lost 10 million votes.. We'll spoil that party? The one that just lost a fair election to a convicted felon? You want to protect them from being spoiled?

We have 4 years, which is, again, the most time we'll ever get to try something like this because that's how 4 year election cycles work. What is it exactly that they're doing successfully you don't want to spoil?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

We’ll spoil that party?

Yes, running third party candidates in a FPTP voting system is how the spoiler effect works.

You want to protect them from being spoiled?

Because of the FPTP voting system our democracy will always trend towards a two-party system. Until we enact systemic change, we will be stuck with the Democrats and the Republicans. As long as the Democrats are further to the left of fascism we should vote for them and avoid limiting our power with third party candidates.

We the people and our interests are what avoiding the spoiler effect protects.

What is it exactly that they’re doing successfully you don’t want to spoil?

The Democrats are neoliberals. They are easier to push on social issues and the environment. The Democratic Party is the party progressives and socialists are going to want to co-opt with a populist candidate. Like Bernie tried to do and Trump did to the Republicans. But more to the point, they do not want to kill minorities and destroy the environment.

Rather than seeking a moral victory over Democrats we should look for ways to leverage power for the people Republicans want to hurt. Doing otherwise makes the harm done to minorities the cost of doing business.

[–] Ensign_Crab 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

It's adorable that you expect anyone to buy that the Democratic Party is movable after they just spent a whole ass year refusing to budge on fucking genocide.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 49 minutes ago (1 children)

The Democratic Party is the party progressives and socialists are going to want to co-opt with a populist candidate. Like Bernie tried to do and Trump did to the Republicans.

This is the key part I recommend you read.

Also, this is off topic, but Harris did pledge to end the war. It was in the news. She called for a ceasefire at least three times. If you care about the Palestinians, then voting for the party that wants to end the war is more useful than allowing the party that wants Israel to finish the job to take power.

[–] Ensign_Crab 1 points 23 minutes ago (1 children)

The Democratic Party is the party progressives and socialists are going to want to co-opt with a populist candidate. Like Bernie tried to do and Trump did to the Republicans.

This is the key part I recommend you read.

I read it. Democrats will keep playing the left for fools and moving to the right, no matter what happens.

Also, this is off topic, but Harris did pledge to end the war. It was in the news. She called for a ceasefire at least three times.

BIDEN called for a ceasefire. With the same complete lack of conviction. There was no daylight between her and Biden on Netanyahu's genocide.

If you care about the Palestinians, then voting for the party that wants to end the war is more useful than allowing the party that wants Israel to finish the job to take power.

I voted for Harris and the election is over. That doesn't mean I'm going to pretend that she wasn't as committed to Netanyahu's genocide as Biden was.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 minutes ago (1 children)

I read it. Democrats will keep playing the left for fools and moving to the right, no matter what happens.

No Bernie's campaign and Warren's campaign drove Biden to the left on a whole host of issues, including labor unions.

There was no daylight between her and Biden on Netanyahu’s genocide.

Don't lie.

This comment said it best and lists calls for a ceasefire from Harris.

https://lemmy.world/comment/13069715

She’s taken a stance, multiple times. The left doesn’t want to hear it.

March - https://www.npr.org/2024/03/04/1234822836/kamala-harris-benny-gantz-gaza-cease-fire-israel-hamas

July - https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/25/harris-netanyahu-israel-cease-fire-00171315

September - https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/harris-trump-presidential-debate-election-2024/card/harris-calls-for-ceasefire-in-gaza-while-trump-claims-she-hates-israel--isokhfqmy6EgRGrUOSuK

Harris promised to do everything in her power to end the war in Gaza.

“This year has been difficult, given the scale of death and destruction in Gaza and given the civilian casualties and displacement in Lebanon, it is devastating. And as president, I will do everything in my power to end the war in Gaza, to bring home the hostages, end the suffering in Gaza, ensure Israel is secure, and ensure the Palestinian people can realise their right to dignity, freedom, security and self-determination,” Harris said to applause during a rally in East Lansing city of Michigan, home to 200,000 Arab Americans.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/4/harris-says-will-end-gaza-war-in-final-election-appeal-to-arab-americans

Unlike Biden, Harris was not a life long Zionist.

When Joe Biden met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his war cabinet during his visit to Israel, the U.S. president assured them: “I don’t believe you have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, and I am a Zionist.”

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/i-am-zionist-how-joe-bidens-lifelong-bond-with-israel-shapes-war-policy-2023-10-21/

Harris wasn't perfect. And that was simply not good enough for some people who didn't want to risk their hands getting dirty. Even if it meant the Palestinians becoming the cost of doing business.

I voted for Harris and the election is over. That doesn’t mean I’m going to pretend that she wasn’t as committed to Netanyahu’s genocide as Biden was.

Good for you. I appreciate it. No need to spread propaganda though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I mean yes, that's been the playbook for 8 years. More like 16 if you count what people actually thought Obama was going to be (and had record turn out). Try, try again?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

The lives of millions of minorities and the Earth's climate are at stake now. Minorities will notice the difference in the short term, but we will all notice the difference in the long term. Assuming we still have elections and a Democratic Party going forward, yes. We delay fascism and co-opt the Democratic Party. edit: typos

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Look, I don't know if you guys haven't been paying attention but places have been getting ravaged for decades because of what we've been doing. Everyone around me was flabbergasted with what happened in the NC western mountains. They videos were exactly like those I've been seeing in the Philippines and other countries that we just completely ignore when there's a natural disaster (maybe a 30 second blip in the media headline for 80% of it if they're in a really poor region).

The Western mountains were devastated because of the infrastructure in natural valleys and huge amounts of sediment deposited by centuries of mining those mountains out (you can see the natural rock formations that returned, lots of people know the land they built on wasn't there before it was developed). The hurricane wasn't man made, but everything fucking else about that catastrophe was because of our activity.

I don't know what the answer is, but I've been waiting for the democrat heroes to save the day since I started voting during Bush's administration that I was thoroughly against and thought our invasion of Iraq was a war crime. Now we continue to this day with a never ending war machine and a corporation first politics that hasn't ever changed. I'm all for us talking about some alternatives and pushing for everything and anything right now, not waiting to form something later to help "sway" the democrats policies (which it really didn't in the long run did it?)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

The Tea Party did not spoil a GOP election. The GOP caved and adopted their platform.

The Democratic Party will do the same thing with the Guillotine Party.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

They cannot and they will not. Please do not fall for them yanking the football away from you again. AOC and Bernie exist to give you hope and thereby capture your vote for a party that has no intention of ever fighting for the working class in a meaningful way. We need a real alternative but we've given away so much of our collective power (unions) that it's hard to see a hopeful path forward. Organize with your neighbors and start building trusted communities that will fight together when needed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Do you mean to say that AOC and Bernie are unknowingly treated as pawns by the Democrat party or that they are knowingly misleading voters into thinking the party leans further left than reality?

I would assume if anything it's the former, and Democrat idealism has lost against the reality that a third labor party cannot take root while first-past-the-post is the rule of the game.

[–] BMTea 12 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

So long as the Democratic Party leadership are reliant on corporate funding, obsessed with American power projection, smitten with Israel, pensive about worker rights and in lock-step with security and intelligence establishment, there is no hope. You will have on one hand a conservative party that shows antipathy and disdain for real liberal norms (Democratic establishment) and a rabid, evil party intent on reshaping America and the world to reflect white Christian nationalist fanaticism (Republicans.)

10 years ago I would have told you that the Dems are playing a dangerous game with their interventionism. Today they consigned 1 million children to starve, be blown to smithereens and die in order to enable the revenge of a leader who is as corrupt as Trump and far more bloodthirsty. Kamala calls Trump a "fascist" and gives Netanyahu a UN veto and 2000lb bounds to drop near hospitals. This is indiciative of a party that is morally rotten and cannot be relied upon to safeguard anyone's rights.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Unfortunately our democracy uses a first-past-the-post voting system which trends toward a two-party system. This makes the Republicans and Democrats the only game in town.

Minority Rule: First Past the Post Voting

We need to leverage power to reduce the harm done to the minority groups fascists in the Republican party want to hurt. So rather than attempting to achieve a moral victory over Democrats, people on the left should do the most useful thing they can during elections for minorities and vote for Democrats.

The Alt-Right Playbook: The Cost of Doing Business

[–] Ensign_Crab 1 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

Unfortunately our democracy uses a first-past-the-post voting system which trends toward a two-party system

Why must one of those parties be the Democrats? I don't see no fucking Whigs around, do you?

We need to leverage power to reduce the harm done to the minority groups fascists in the Republican party want to hurt

Democrats won't reduce any harm. They'll just send out fundraising emails, like they did when Roe was overturned. During this last cycle, they threw the undocumented under the bus and Democratic candidates were parroting Republican "boys in girls' sports" hatred.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 minutes ago

any chance you are one of the bright consultants who get paid millions by dnc to come up with the brilliant strategies to be so dogsit that they loose to orange buffoon ?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 25 minutes ago (1 children)

Why must one of those parties be the Democrats? I don’t see no fucking Whigs around, do you?

Because unlike the Wigs, the Democrats are not divide over slavery. They can just move to the right on contemporary issues as Chris Murphy details here.

Democrats won’t reduce any harm.

Hi, I'm a trans person. I'm not the most at risk trans person since I'm pre-transition, but it's definitely a case of they would if they could. I would not like to be murdered in a death camp please. Like if Democrats can't get trans messaging right, because they suck at winning, fine. At least they aren't trying to completely ostracize me from society and make me dig my own grave. I hope that gives a different perspective on this.

[–] Ensign_Crab 1 points 11 minutes ago

Hi, I’m a trans person. I’m not the most at risk trans person since I’m pre-transition, but it’s definitely a case of they would if they could. I would not like to be murdered in a death camp please. Like if Democrats can’t get trans messaging right, because they suck at winning, fine. At least they aren’t trying to completely ostracize me from society and make me dig my own grave.

Democrats have no concept of solidarity. None. They just haven't thrown you under the bus yet, but they've let you know that they will. Their candidates have been using the Republican "boys in girls' sports" hatred in their campaign ads.

The undocumented? Under the bus. Muslims? Under the bus. Rail workers? Under the bus. If you expect solidarity from Democrats, prepare to tuck and roll.

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

A big issue with this approach: The United States is not a law of nature; it doesn't have to exist. The system may only allow two options, but it does not guarantee that either one of those options will keep the system viable. Reduced harm is still harm, and at some point we needed to stop doing it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

This rhetoric is what is known as accelerationism. It's the idea that things have to get worse in order for them to get better. The United States not existing would mean the collapse of a society that supports about 340 million people. Letting the US burn to the ground is not useful, because it doesn't help any of the people living here.

The truth is that things get better when people learn from their mistakes and the bad things that happen to them. They then use that knowledge to make things better. There's no bottom to how bad things can get. Things can always get worse. And they will get worse unless we work to make them better.

Anyone can be tempted by the idea that they can make things better by letting them burn. But letting everything burn is how to harm the most people possible. In order to help anyone, we need to start leveraging power for each other. That means giving up on moral victories and analyzing strategies using utility instead of moral reasoning. edit: typo

[–] Brodysseus 9 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

They have 4 years to tighten up. I'm not optimistic. The only victory they have had since Obama was a fear victory.. nobody wanted Biden they were scared of trump. That is played out.

The right did a good job of parading him around as an anti-establishment, for the common people candidate. I don't think that's true, but a lot of people do.

I hope the D party reorganizes as a populist anti-establishment party and holds a ranked choice primary with some young actually left leaning candidates who can't be bought.

To be honest, if the D party don't reform and earn my vote, I'm not giving it to them out of fear anymore. Before trump I had a "no lesser of two evils" policy for voting. And I'm going back to it. They had 4 years to plan, hold a primary, do some prosecuting of rich criminals, understand why Trump's popular and strategize to beat it, literally fucking anything. Did they?

I'm over it, they can run a fair primary with some progressive candidates and let the people decide, and then I'll vote. Tired of whatever they're doing and it looks like a lot of others are as well. Hope they figure out the obvious issue they have and fix it. Since its a two party system they're hogging the only route that the left has to success and fucking it up remarkably bad. Like I could do a better job and I'm an idiot.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›