Permanently Deleted
ToastedPlanet @ ToastedPlanet @lemmy.blahaj.zone Posts 46Comments 1,180Joined 2 yr. ago
ToastedPlanet @ ToastedPlanet @lemmy.blahaj.zone
Posts
46
Comments
1,180
Joined
2 yr. ago
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
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.
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
While this strategy may feel good, it makes the minorities Republicans want to hurt the cost of doing business. Even if Democrats can't deliver on anything substantial in the short term voting for them in elections is useful.
First, it reduces the harm done to minorities. Second, it demonstrates there is a progressive voter block the democrats could shift closer to. Third, assuming we get more elections and the Democrats aren't all in jail, it creates time for a progressive, like the Democrats your argument listed, to co-opt the Democratic Party. Like what Trump did to the Republicans and Bernie tried to do to the Democrats.
Rather than trying to achieve moral victory over Democrats, let's leverage power for the people Republicans want to hurt.
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
There simply won’t be another election.
That is a possibility. The US elected fascists who now control all three branches of the federal government. However they do not have a two-thirds majority in congress or control two-thirds of the states. So it will be difficult for the fascists if they choose a purely legal route. However, since they are fascists, they might use violence to get what they want. We won't know until they try.
In the event that we still have elections and Democrats can still participate we should leverage power and vote for Democrats in those elections. This will reduce the harm done to minorities by fascists who want to kill them.
I wanted to add to your point, because people in this comment section are attempting to write off future elections unless Democrats completely meet the demands of progressives. This isn't something Democrats are likely to do. But the people who will be harmed by hypothetical future Republican administrations would prefer if Democrats were clogging up the works and knocking fascists out of power at the very least.
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
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.
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
The problem with that strategy is that our democracy uses a first-past-the-post voting system which trends towards a two-party system.
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
While the plan you've outlined in your argument my feel good, it isn't particularly useful for shifting the Democrats to the left. Under this plan, the causalities of this and future Republican administrations will be the cost of doing business.
Consider leveraging power by voting for Democrats in elections to benefit the people who will otherwise be harmed by future Republican administrations. edit: typo
This is what the incoming Trump administration wants to do to the US.
Uh huh. Are you only able to cooperate with people who agree with you in every way?
We should not cooperate with fascists especially when they don't believe in climate change. It would be a waste of time since they want to kill us and want to pollute as much as possible.
And yours is going out of its way to manufacture enemies.
My argument didn't tell the MAGA movement to be fascists. A progressive and socialist populist movement could rally most people without needing for anyone to hate minority groups or disregard scientific consensus.
Again, sure. Not worth fighting over the phrasing.
Good, so you agree then? We should move the Democratic Party to the left. Democrats should champion systemic change and wealth redistribution. edit: typo
He doesn’t say anything else on climate, and this is not “abandoning action on climate change.” The people already in the tent don’t agree on everything, and they have not “abandoned action” because of it.
The people who don't agree with climate change don't believe it exists.
https://www.axios.com/2024/11/06/trump-victory-sweeping-climate-consequences
This is not “uncritically supporting men’s rights.”
Your argument is focusing on the bait and ignoring the switch.
Listen to poor and rural people, men in crisis. Don’t decide for them.
We are listening to them. This is what they are saying.
This time around, one of the attack lines is “your body, my choice.”
https://www.vox.com/politics/384792/your-body-my-choice-maga-gender-election
Sure, if that’s how you need to frame it to fit your worldview go ahead. Just please try to find agreement when feminist framing is not used, because it usually won’t be.
That's how we're framing it. If that's not appealing to some people, there's a mainstream fascist political party they can join. We don't need two mainstream fascist parties.
By the way, the worldview is that all people are equal. And that inequality harms us all, but some people are harmed more than others. People on the left have no interest in a worldview where women are second class citizens.
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."
She even chose Tim Walz over Josh Shapiro, another Zionist.
For years, he has been a steadfast supporter of the Jewish state.
Murphy starts off saying we should abandon neoliberalism which is good.
The left has never fully grappled with the wreckage of fifty years of neoliberalism, which has left legions of Americans adrift as local places are hollowed out, rapacious profit seeking cannibalizes the common good, and unchecked new technology separates and isolates us.
But then finished by uncritically supporting men’s rights, abandoning social issues, and abandoning action on climate change.
But here's the thing - then you need to let people into the tent who aren't 100% on board with us on every social and cultural issue, or issues like guns or climate.
Listen to poor and rural people, men in crisis. Don't decide for them.
It fits the description to a T. We don't have time for 50% or 0% action on climate change. The window to avert key tipping points that will have catastrophic consequences for the Earth's climate is now.
As a trans person, I am not interested in 50% or 0% of my rights. I would like my right to exist, 100% of the time.
We should push back on some of the more fringe men's rights groups. No one is entitled to a state mandated girlfriend. But it is probably worth understanding how patriarchy harms men because inequality harms us all.
Biden wasn't running for president. Harris was and as VP she doesn't have the power to change the US' relationship with anyone.
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
The fascists are saying that since their political party won the election, men can threaten to rape women. Not fascist men, any man. Not progressive women, any woman. Avoid agreeing with them by imitating them.
It wasn't useful for Harris to call it a genocide, because it would have hurt her chances of getting elected. Even Bernie refers to it as a war, probably so he doesn't get censored by the Senate.
Harris called for a ceasefire multiple times. Here's a comment that said it best.
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
Despite your argument's attempt to conflate the two, it was evident from examining the evidence that Harris wanted a ceasefire and would be better than Trump on this issue. To end the genocide we need a president who wants it to end before all the Palestinians are dead.
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
That sounds clever, but it's still a rape threat, so don't.
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.
Trump wants Israel to finish the job.
Yet Trump has repeatedly urged to Israel “finish the job” and destroy Hamas — but hasn’t said how.
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.
Harris was running for president, not Biden. All the information we had suggested that Harris' presidency would be vastly different than Trump's second term.
Yet Trump has repeatedly urged to Israel “finish the job” and destroy Hamas — but hasn’t said how.
I read your comments and watched the video. This isn't my first time watching this video.
I’m trying to call attention to these useless attacks that disregard Palestinians.
The attacks, your argument refers to, are against accelerationism. Not everyone is going to use that term, but it's clear based on the statement that is what they are referring to. Gaza was the single issue accelerationists focused on. The accelerationists and this meme are disregarding the Palestinians.
The commenter's message and the video's message are the same. We need to leverage power to help minorities. Arguing against that message is more accelerationism.
Accelerationism is a self-defeating strategy that harms us all. Part of the bare minimum of doing the work between elections is calling out accelerationism's false promises. It takes little effort, but it's important to highlight the uselessness of this ideology. If we do not learn from all the failures of this election we will be doomed to repeat them in the future.
People are arguing against participating in elections to help minorities in this comment section. The video is in no small part about people refusing to leverage power to help minorities. This is not an issue of nuance. The arguments the video is referring to and the arguments in this comment section are a one to one match.
The meme misrepresents the video, which in facts calls out people for their inaction the same way the commenter in the meme is doing. It is in fact this meme that is attempting, unsuccessfully for another moral victory at the expense of the Palestinians. This meme does nothing to help the Palestinians, it is just seeking moral victory over those who would leverage power for the Palestinians.
The commenter's argument and the video's argument are the same argument. So the meme is arguing against the video's argument. edit: typos
Votes in high population states count less than votes in low population states, because of the electoral college, but they still count.
This isn't about placating the Democrats. It's about not using minorities as currency for a moral victory over the Democrats. The moral victory may feel good, but it isn't useful. A moral victory will not prevent key tipping points in the Earth's ecosystem that will cause catastrophic damage to the environment. Nor will it protect minorities from the fascists who want to kill them.
Hopefully the 10 million people will learn to leverage power by voting for the Democrats in elections even if they don't get anything out of it. Because we all have something to lose by Republicans taking power in the short term. Even if we won't all feel it until the long term.
The Democratic Party does need a populist narrative to appeal to a broader base, but the Democrats are unlikely to listen. The party needs to be hijacked the way Trump hijacked the Republican Party and the way Bernie tried to hijack the Democratic Party. Part of doing that is delaying fascism so that there are still elections and people to run against fascists. edit: typo