• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    16
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Only the Democrats have a chance of doing that and engineering a better system that might eventuallyundermine their own political hegemony.

    No they don’t

    But the right will never even be pressured to do anything like that intentionally by it’s base,

    The Democrats couldn’t be pressured to stop doing genocide even at the cost of losing the election

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -127 days ago

      I don’t think you’re listening. That’s one of the issues both sides share in common that sucks. Doesn’t change the fact they’re our only hope.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -37 days ago

        The thing is that your asking tankies to be pragmatic about policy. They would rather let the Palestinian Genocide continue and works lose more rights than to do anything helpful in the near or medium term. They just aren’t serious about the issues.

        Its easy for the .ml types to cry and wait for a perfect policy or candidate. They aren’t going hungry, nor under seige of any kind.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          36 days ago

          The thing is that your asking tankies to be pragmatic about policy.

          This “pragmatism” is how we got here in the first place.

          Its easy for the .ml types to cry and wait for a perfect policy or candidate.

          We’re not looking for a perfect candidate under bourgeois democracy, because we know it will never happen. 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

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -16 days ago

            We’re not looking for a perfect candidate under bourgeois democracy, because we know it will never happen. Previously:

            In either case you’re not doing shit and you’re not a serious movement. Tankies don’t vote to minimize harm, nor do they vote to expand the progressive wing.

            You all are effectively the ratchet democratsyou laughs at because you ultimately won’t show or organize for anything. Tankies aren’t serious people.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              46 days ago

              Schrodinger’s leftists; simultaneously the reason the Democrats lost the election and the biggest obstacle to progress, but also not a serious movement.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -26 days ago

                Non.voting is the largest block going back multiple cycles. Trolls like you are concerned but not enough to show up. I’m aware of your trolling, so I won’t entertain you much more

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  06 days ago

                  I’m aware of your trolling, so I won’t entertain you much more

                  In other words, you’re wrong and you know it, but you’re too huffy to admit it, so you’re going to try to pretend like it’s too below your dignity to actually respond to someone who disagrees with you. You’re just so self evidently right, after all.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        167 days ago

        I’m listening, I just think you’re wrong.

        And I brought up that issue specific to show that the Democrats also “will never even be pressured to do anything like that intentionally by it’s base”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -47 days ago

          Progressive social change has always occurred under the auspices of the left-most of the two major parties. That’s just how it overwhelmingly is. What’s not to agree with? How do you think progress will happen next time it happens?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            7
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            The hallmark progressive achievements made in this country, many that still exist today (to varying degrees ofc) were a result of third party sweat, blood and tears. Literally.

            I recommend reading about the social/workers rights movements of the early 1900s. The Progressive Party led by Roosevelt, The Bull Moose Party with social reformers like Jane Addams and Florence Kelly, the Socialist Party of Eugene Debs… all of these were most prominent in fighting for and ultimately producing a cluster of social welfare, social insurance reforms, women’s suffrage, workers rights/5 day work week, etc.

            It was the dedication, pressure and will to not fall in line trying to change the two-party duopoly from within but to build their own coalitions, their own movements on the outside, and thus the mainstream parties were eventually forced to inscribe the populus demands into legislation.

            All that to say, healthy third parties are a good thing. It builds actual pressure on your legislators. Politicians wont work on your behalf when they know you’re voting for them anyway – just line their pockets with money from the bourgeois they actually legislate for. Seeking the change you wish to see via third party can and has produced tremendous gains for the working class.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -77 days ago

              You can and should support them as they align with your values, but you’ll never get enough votes for them to have any chance of overthrowing the big two. It has to be changed from within, unless you’re prepared to try violence.

              • Cowbee [he/they]
                link
                fedilink
                127 days ago

                Since changing from within is impossible, and voting in a new party is highly unlikely, it seems the revolutionaries were right all along.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  02 days ago

                  Why do you think change from within impossible?

                  That’s exactly what Trump and MAGA did to the Republican party.

                  Violent revolution brings change but rarely the kind of change most of those who engaged in it actually wanted.

                  • Cowbee [he/they]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    22 days ago

                    Well, first, MAGA isn’t really a qualitative change to the GOP, and is fully compatible with bourgeois rule, unlike trying to get socialism to overtake the DNC. Secondly, revolution is by far the most successful way at bringing about what those engaged with it wanted, not sure what you’re talking about here.

              • mathemachristian[he]
                link
                fedilink
                26 days ago

                Fuck voting, organizing is where its at. I swear if just half the free time as some people on here… (not you specifically)