Dieser Bereich kann Inhalte enthalten, die nicht für alle Nutzer geeignet sind. Dazu können unter anderem Texte, Medien oder Diskussionen gehören, die als beleidigend, extremistisch, gewaltbezogen oder anderweitig belastend empfunden werden. Wenn du solche Inhalte nicht sehen möchtest, nutze bitte die jeweiligen Filter- und Meldeoptionen der Plattform oder meide entsprechende Threads/Communities.
Remember, poor people rely on you to gatekeep the movement. Think about how people struggling with medical bills will feel if they find out you let a non-vegan help. Not on my watch.
purity progressives: “I mean yea, he wants universal healthcare, ending wars, abolishing ICE and the police, investing in schools and the arts, social safety nets and taxing the rich… but… he called RFK jr an r-word one time… so, he’s basically a nazi and I hope he dies”
The ability to form political coalitions with people on an issue by issue basis
… is the ability to govern
Yeah, but that sounds quite liberal, and things “liberal” are a big no-no on this website 🗿(even if we’re talking socdems or demsocs).
I have been told by .ml users right out that socdems are basically Nazis and therefore I am the enemy.
Source?
Dude… it was the comment that caused me to block the entire .ml instance months ago. I’m not even sure I can see it anymore, because I blocked the instance. You’re welcome to look through my history and look at replies to a comment from me that said something along the lines of: “I’m open about who I am and what I believe, it’s all right there in my profile.” And them posting that my profile says SocDem and from there on it escalates until I suddenly stop responding, because I have registered that they are arguing in bad faith and that I have simply had spend enough time talking to a wall that had no interest in listening to anything I had to say and just wanted to demonize me.
So go look if you want, but I haven’t got the time and I don’t think I can see that string of comments without unblocking .ml.
Just don’t ask them why Stalin, who first got the idea of calling socdems “social fascists” and declaring them to be the enemy, was so cozy with actual nazis up until 1941. 🌝
Absolutely not, I will only work with people I 100% agree with, and I will happily throw the people I 75% agree with to the people I 0% agree with if I don’t get my way!
/s
Let’s work with the fascists that we don’t 100% agree with /s
Great piece of political wisdom:
“Never say no to a small piece of pie right now. There is time for more pie later.”
Very well said. Take a piece quick, instead of bitching you don’t have your fair share, pieless!
The only group acting like that is you “both sides aren’t the same” types, who call people tankies and commies and “purity testers”, and who post denigrating strawman memes like you did, all because others aren’t voting for the candidate you want them to, despite your so-called tankie enemies ostensibly agreeing on every social issue. What’s the difference between these two groups other than their voting strategy? That sounds like 75% agreement to me. And what is it when you demean these people and shoot down every candidate they’d actually support as “too radical”? Sounds like throwing them to the people you 0% agree with to me.
Maybe double check that sarcasm tag.
What candidate do I want people to vote for this election? What candidate am I shooting down as too radical?
Any third party candidate
Let’s say we had Harris and Mamdani in the running for Democratic nominee. Who would you want nominated? Who would you suggest people vote for?
And if Harris ended up the nominee, you’d want me to vote for her, wouldn’t you? And if I didn’t I’d be, in your mind, exactly the kind of “leftist infighter” and purity tester that you’re posting about, wouldn’t I?
cut to the chase, people making a political stunt to refuse to vote or a symbolic vote for a candidate they knew had no shot (Jill Stein)… all basically voted for Trump.
You can be mad at the DNC for their bullshit, and you’re justified. But when the cards were on the table, the time for debate was over… instead of fighting against the worst president in history… you said “they deserve it”. If that was your attitude, you lose the right to say that you’re against fascism. Because you still had some manner of power to choose, and you chose to not give a fuck.
My thought process was not what you say it is.
My mental model of the election dynamic is more complicated than the one you presented, so bear with me.
My thought process was:
How did we even come to the point that Trump had a shot at winning? And I remember back when we said the same thing about Bush, and about Reagan before that. And then I had a horrible thought:
What if, just like how Reagan presided over the country becoming unbelievably worse, and then Bush presided over that continuing to happen… What if Trump is only the worst thing so far? What if we all vote for an establishment dem out of fear, just as last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, and the time before that… And even if they win (as they do every so often) they don’t really do what anyone wants, and America keeps becoming more and more horrible to live in, and people keep getting more desperate, education keeps getting worse, and suddenly - someone even worse than Trump is now a viable candidate?
After all, America has generally gotten nothing but worse since the 1980s. There have been some serious social wins, but they’re incredibly overshadowed by economic losses. Sure gay people can get married now, but they (ans everyone else) are also far closer to being effectively enslaved than they were 40 years ago…
So with all that in mind I thought, “if only those people in the past, before the consequences were too dire, had stuck to their guns through those hard times and forced the party to really represent them next time” and I realized that, to them, at their time, it must have felt as dire as it felt now to me.
So I made a sacrifice to my own current well-being, because I was trying to lay the groundwork for a greater well-being for everyone in the future. My decision had nothing to do with punishing others, nothing to do with not giving a fuck, and its sad to me that that’s the only explanation you can think of.
I want to say something like: “You lose the right to say you’re against fascism, because you refused to make a short term sacrifice for future generations, you refused to look at even contemporary history, you refused… Etc”
But I won’t say that, because you were trying to do the right thing too, and you just didn’t see the situation the same way as me. But you wanted the same thing. And even though from my perspective, you enabled fascism, I would never dare say you’re not against it just because I disagree with your methods. Try to do me the same courtesy.
bullllllllshit. This is a massive cope you tell yourself.
You sacrificed everyone else for you own pride, end of story. All the other context is a bunch of fluff trying to self-rationalize why it was okay to sell everyone else down the river. Because you can say you did it in some effort to “the greater good”. Well, the kids in ICE cages don’t give af how noble your cause was… and I don’t either.
You know that and I know that. But dozens of millions of voting Americans are propaganda victims and do NOT know that.
The leaders we need, are ones who can reach out to at least some of those people and show them a path back to civil society.
I’m not talking about the brainwashed/propagandized MAGAts. Those people were always going to vote for facsism.
I’m talking about the people who knew what trump represented, knew what he was going to do because of what he had done… and even when they still had some power to alter things, they went “mmmm the other candidate isn’t perfect, so I don’t care if the proven evil fascist wins, they’re basically the same”
the only people who voted for trump are the people who voted for Trump. any other vote was a vote against Trump
If in the face of oppression you choose to do nothing, then you have sided with the oppressor.
edit: actual npc account. You pulled this 3 year old alt out of months long hibernation to just to defend voting for Stein (see: Trump enablers).
Man I wish I lived in your parallel reality where those where the deal breakers preventing anti-fascist coalitions from forming. Rather than, you know, imperialism and genocide.
Yeah it sucks. But, y’know, if the imperialism and genocide is invariant between the options, I’m still gonna vote for the one doing fewer other terrible things 🤷🏼
Obviously I’m also going to do everything I can to get to a point where I don’t have an imperialist, genocidal government. Mutual aid, canvassing for leftists in the primaries, political organization, developing community, taking over small municipalities, labor organization, etc.
All of which is gonna be a lot harder now that this side has declared antifascists to be a terrorist organization, and arrests people for pamphlets.
That’s a point we can debate (not that I feel like doing so right now, but it’s at least connected to reality enough to be worth debating). My problem is with the parent commenter, who’s acting like all the “purity tests” are about trivial minutae and not how many children each candidate wants to bomb to death.
To be fair, the original post is about leftist infighting, not liberals. A lot of the leftist infighting is about trivial minutae.
But that just doesn’t happen on a scale relevant to American politics. The informal progressive coalition is basically solid. If there’s a place where this is supposed to be relevant, I don’t know about it.
You’re on it. Lemmy is rife with leftist infighting.
Until Lemmy declares independence and starts holding elections, it’s not politically relevant. The stuff that matters happens, you know, in real life.
What’s the worst that could happen if I let the democrats know that not even genocide will cost them the election? What’s the worst that could happen by further entrenching the oligarchic uniparty? Surely the democrats won’t ever put me in the camps!
No critique here, glad to see at least one blue dog understands there’s other tools.
As opposed to the other side who also arrested peaceful protesters on bogus charges. Who also beat up protesters. Who also broke up strikes. Who also hounded leftist organisers.
The difference is that the media is more critical of it now. People are much more agitated under Trump. Organizing is easier in many ways.
I keep seeing variations on this, and no one has been able to explain to me how that communication vector works. When has that ever worked? They just double down or shift right to try impotently to scoop “moderate Republicans”. If they really are a uniparty, do you think they really care that much about winning or losing anyway? They’re gonna keep supporting genocide no matter how many times they lose.
The point isn’t to try to persuade the DNC (by doing literally nothing), the point is to slow the bleeding while we build what comes next.
Those are the main tools. Voting is the “other” tool. But it’s an easy tool, and it scales well with community organization. Seriously, take over a small municipality.
Exactly. "Also"s don’t matter when you make the choice. The things that are the same are gonna be the same either way. What matters are the differences, and there are obvious differences. Like labelling “aintifa” a terrorist organization.
Of course, on the backs of already marginalized people. I don’t have the stomach to knowingly increase the suffering of others for political gain.
Pretty simple. If I am doing a genocide, and you vote for me, it makes it clear you are at least apathetic about genocide.
Voting for the DNC does not slow the bleeding. Voting for the DNC makes it harder to build anything else.
Depends on your analysis on electorialism in modern day America. I think it has some value locally, and in bigger elections its only positive use is to build momentum for leftist parties.
So not exactly, because I am arguing there is not practical difference between the two. I suppose the republicans are more overt, which is a positive, since it makes even liberals reel.
Sure you do. That’s what you do by voting for democrats.
That doesn’t imply the converse, it doesn’t mean that not voting communicates any information about your stance on genocide, it just makes it clear that you’re apathetic in general.
How? The GOP is actively arresting people trying to build anything else. Attempts to co-opt a movement isn’t harder to overcome than prison.
Again, they are causing additional suffering. You think it’s a positive because you’re not one of the additional people suffering. My empathy won’t allow me to ignore the additional suffering caused by my action, or lack thereof. I can’t just take an ideological stand when I know it will increase the suffering of others.
Constant suffering I’ve learned to cope with, since I’d be catatonic otherwise. But the people only on one list? I can’t just stand by, I have to at least save them. I don’t know how you can do it, my body physically revulses at just the thought of standing by even if the difference is only one person. I don’t think I’d feel human.
The only big complaints I remember were about the Nazi from Maine
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Liberals and ableism, such a classic combination. Next do some homophobia or body-shaming.