this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2023
274 points (91.0% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2305 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bleph@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

So until we get single payer healthcare, you won't be happy with any other policy wins and you'd rather burn all your political capital fighting us instead of uniting against the literal fascists?

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The left, the real socialist left doesn’t have political capital. So there’s nothing to burn. Incremental policy is great to alleviate suffering, but ultimately is masturbatory. Fascism will eventually overcome America. This explains why. Waiting for real, substantial policy changes with climate change happening is denialism. We’re waiting for enough people to realize this so we can organize and fight for the future.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I found that argument very unconvincing.

I think the author's definition of fascism is nonsensical and ahistorical.

I agree that capitalism has the tendency to concentrate power (like every other social or political system ever in the history of humans), but the idea that we should just abandon the levers of power to the kind of people who want Donald Trump to be president is so insane to me.

The author even concedes that Donald Trump is uniquely bad but then bends over backwards trying to get back to his comfortable "both sides" narrative

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree that it is insane to concede power to fascism. I have kids and will be voting for Biden for this reason. I’m aware that when full fascism comes, it will not be pretty. But I also understand that capitalism will eventually decay into fascism. So, I am sympathetic to those that want to do something outside the system of just voting. I’m not trying to change your mind. I’m just trying to make people understand the situation we’re in.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well I'm glad I don't have to have the Cornel West argument here.

I think we agree that the whole Earth is in a dangerous and precarious situation and far too many people are still not acknowledging this?

Do you disagree that Biden has delivered more policy for the Left as a whole than any president since LBJ?

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Civil rights and the voter rights act were pretty big, so I don’t know. Biden has done more for the environment( he needs to do more) and that affects us all. I like Biden. I think he wants to do more. But he is beholden to the DNC and it’s corporate donors. When he gets his next term, expect him to do more.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well if we're talking "abolish the 2-party system" (with electoral reform) then I'm 100% agreed

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The DNC won’t let that happen. If they didn’t course correct after Bernie / Hillary, they never will. She should’ve picked him as VP. They would have freaked out.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I 100% agree both parties will resist as much as possible.

I personally think campaigning for electoral reform is better than trying to fully overthrow the existing system but I agree it is a very uphill battle.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks for the conversation. It helps to question my belief system. I hope I’m wrong about the future.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Agreed, here's to hope, cheers!

[–] bleph@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So ... all capitalism is fascism; therefore "both sides are the same"; therefore reject incremental progress as illegitimate?

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Incremental progress is not illegitimate. It’s just never going to be enough to solve the problem that is capitalism. If it were, the New Deal would have fixed this system and we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok....so because the New Deal didn't... overthrow capitalism forever.... therefore working within the system is pointless?

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yes 🙌 . Read Reform or Revolution by Rosa Luxemburg to understand why.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And the Nordic countries just don't exist?

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Social democracies aren’t socialism. They have unions, co-ops, but they don’t own the means of production. They are capitalism with heavy regulation and strong social policies. And they are already regressing. If we were a more socially democratic, my opinion might be different, But, historically, the reality that capitalism decays into fascism would still be true.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why do you assume that socialist systems won't also experience a gravitational pull towards fascism? In my opinion that's universal across all political systems. Also aren't all extant "state owns the means of production" counties quite fascist?

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wow, you’re really going there. I agree with your thinking. I think of it this way. Would I rather deal with climate change under a capitalist/fascist dictatorship with overconsumption and excess growth. Or would I rather deal with climate change under a tankie dictatorship with a planned economy that limits consumption and growth. I’ll pick the Marxist Leninist one. I’d rather it be an anarcho communist one. But with multiple factions vying for power and trying to control huge populations, that may not be possible.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So, do we agree that climate policy has been mixed-bag both in "The West" and China? (Everybody is touting their green tech while still building new fossil fuel extraction and plants)

Even if you were sure a tankie government would deliver better on climate change, what are the odds that "the revolution" leads to a full fascist government instead?

Surely the Right outguns us 10 to 1?

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

India has said they won’t stop developing until they have the same standard of living as the west. I’m willing to live under fascism if my kids can survive on this planet. That’s not even a difficult choice.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, the international politics of climate are absolute shit. I think we have to survive and resist this worldwide lurch rightwards before that will change.

[–] MaungaHikoi 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At least read what he posted before replying. We don't need to build another reddit where people just rage at each other on behalf of their team.

[–] bleph@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For the record, when I posted that reply the parent only read "yes 🙌"

I was saltier than I would like to be in retrospect though, I cut it out of a comment.