Abstract policies are a notoriously poor way of polling for voting patterns.
But it seems most people don't have a strong opinion on our New York boy, which is honestly the best we could ask for at this junction. May Zohran the DESTROYER'S enemies be DESTROYED Mamdani succeed and, for our sakes if not necessarily his, go on to national politics after. Gods know we need him.
It'll pass in ten minutes. These cultists do not have the same values as people we would consider 'normal'. This will not sway them any more than the past five dozen fucking times some fundamentally undeniable issue of hypocrisy in ultra-vile evil shite has come up.
Whatās going to happen when maga finds out that everything they were groomed to believe in is all about the very people they listened to, trusted in and destroyed for
Nothing, just like the last 500 times this happened.
More seriously, empires of the past are often fascinating because of the combination of traits they display in tandem with the diverse ways they can be examined, both positively and negatively.
Empires of the past are, typically, relatively well-recorded and demonstrate a wide array of the capabilities of humankind when well-organized. Obviously, for people who like the funny little fellows with weapons and armor, empires are always fun, because you kind of fucking die if you're an empire which can't marshal decent military forces; but empires have a vast array of appeal beyond that. The organizational and government complexity of the Inca providing both benefits and obligations; the insistent lawgiving of the Romans; the architectural marvels of the Egyptians; the intense artistic patronage of the Hellenic empires; the rise of theory of government in Han China; the trading instruments of the British Empire; and so on.
And these aren't limited to the stated, nor does one need to restrain oneself to thinking about one. Think about the architecture of the Romans and the lawgiving of the Inca, or the art of Han China and government theory in the Hellenic Empires - in both cases, you'll find plenty of fascinating material. There's always something to learn, with beauty, horror, and most consistently, fascinating insight into the myriad ways human beings see ourselves and execute great undertakings.
Yeah, but first you were talking about how the general populace was going right
They subsequently elected Starmer, of all people, didn't they?
This idea that success (which maybe doesnāt require to form the next government) translates to a higher share in votes might be a statistical thing, but itās not constructive, it just leads to opportunism.
I'm sorry, if Corbyn didn't form a government, as majority or coalition partner, didn't move politics in the UK left, nor politics in his own party left, nor moved demographics in the UK left... what kind of success are we looking at, here?
For the record, I'm not blaming Corbyn for this loss. Far from it. I'm only saying that going left is not enough
Yeah you can say that to suit your narrative, but itās complete BS. In fact Corbyn had significantly more votes in 2017 and 2019 than Starmer in 2024.
Which governments did Labour form at the time, again?
The left has to convince voters, not follow them, wtf
Electoral success and convincing people are not mutually exclusive options; the former is an immensely powerful tool for the latter. Unless your plan is "Hand the gun over to the fascists, put it to your head, and hope that when they pull the trigger it will inspire the masses to spontaneously learn the words to the Internationale in their hearts and rise up against fascism", it involves some amount of concessions to the majority of voters.
But sure, run on gay marriage in 1940 until you win, I'm sure the Black folk who are being lynched won't mind waiting another few decades, nor will the unions seeking better conditions, nor the folks trying to stop social security from being repealed etc etc etc etc.
And when you ask them what performative outrage that is, their answer is generally less "They made minor economic concessions to the working class!" and more "They acknowledged that BROWN people and TRANS people have RIGHTS"
You made no real argument whatsoever originally other than saying Obama wasnt a neoliberal president, which is just baseless and stupid.
Would you like to re-read my original response and point out where I said anything about the neoliberal characterization of Obama, or is that too arduous and trying a task to attempt?
You refuse to asses information from an article that well predates the Palestinian Genocide by a longshot and has nothing to do with the conflict whatsoever.
That's not one of the several genocides that Jacobin denies, and thus not one of the ones I was talking about. Though, for that matter, the article certainly does not predate 1948.
For... objecting to something that you said, and that you have been entirely incapable of mounting even a nominal defense of, probably because you're aware that it was said as bad-faith bullshit with no grounding in reality?
If I wanted campist apologia from genocide deniers, I could read Jacobin rag on my own time. I'll pass on someone trying to use it as a replacement for having thoughts of their own. I note that you didn't actually respond to what I actually objected to,
He massively carried water for the whole āif I made it, anyone canā and āblack people suffer from a culture of povertyā type of nonsense,
But I guess that would require you to defend the points you make, and wouldn't that just be an awful fate?
when in reality theyāre walking hand in hand with people that are pushing us to absolute limit of barely acceptable and then dangling what theyāve known they shouldāve done forever ago in front of us when weāre finally at our breaking point.
Please, talk to some ordinary Americans sometime. Some of the real, salt-of-the-earth types who regularly and reliably vote, and who make up the majority of the country.
You know, morons.
"The Dems aren't going left enough fast enough!" is not generally the refrain, even from those who do vote Dem.
PugJesus @ PugJesus @lemmy.world Posts 1,481Comments 4,096Joined 2 yr. ago
I think it speaks more to how shallow policy questions tend to be.