The only way to defeat us is if the Trump administration and the movement that undergirds it manages to divide us. We can’t let that happen. To win as a majority coalition, we must always invite everybody who believes in civil liberties and human rights.
Agreed. The purity testing and splintering into to niche issues is what always screws the left.
If people could just focus and align on some core root cause issues, like getting corrupt money out of politics, the message would be stronger.
All well and good, but what happens when someone comes to the meeting and says “we should end corruption and remove Trump, but I don’t like DEI policies.”
I’m guessing that will suddenly be added to the “root” cause and we’re right back into splintering and purity spirals again.
I’m guessing that will suddenly be added to the “root” cause
Hopefully yes, because that’s exactly what it is. You can’t fight fascism with fascism lite.
If everything is “root” then nothing is.
You… you think racism and xenophobia aren’t a root cause of this? If so, you should read a history book. Start from Nixon.
And here we go, a disagreement over policy balloons instantly into “racism and xenophobia” and an ally gets kicked out of the meeting because everything is black or white and no compromise is possible.
I find DEI policies to be a complicated topic, personally. I don’t oppose the basic idea and motive behind them, but I think they’ve been implemented poorly and often turn into discrimination in their own right. Am I now classed as “Trump supporter” in your eyes? I’ve been called a Trump supporter because I don’t like the recent Star Wars movies, so I’m sure a lot of people would indeed lump me in with him on that basis. And thus is proven the basic point about how Trump’s opponents are destroying themselves without Trump’s supporters having to lift a finger.
And here we go, a disagreement over policy balloons instantly into “racism and xenophobia”
Oh, so you’re saying you personally don’t like DEI policies. In that case I’m not necessarily calling you racist and xenophobic, but your seeming willingness to accept the results of past racism and xenophobia is definitely concerning. If I was running the meeting you wouldn’t get kicked out, but your “can we not include DEI in our platform” would be met with an uncompromising “no.” Before I explain why, do you understand the concepts of systemic racism and generational wealth?
but I think they’ve been implemented poorly and often turn into discrimination in their own right.
You need such “discrimination” to undo the results of past discrimination. For example, did you know that despite being only ~0.7% of the population, Native Americans make up about 24% of the poverty population of the US? Is this not injustice? How do you rectify it without affirmative action (aka DEI)?
You’re really, really intent on driving my point home here, aren’t you?
I oppose Trump. I think he’s the worst president the US has ever had and he needs to be stopped. But I expressed an unrelated view that is mildly in opposition to yours, and now that’s the only thing you can think about. You’re focusing entirely on attacking me on this issue.
Have you forgotten that this is about Trump, and about how the only way to defeat him is to get over these sorts of divisions and diversions?
This comment chain is just chef’s kiss
At best I was expecting a few “huh, yeah, that’s a common pattern” responses.
This heap of “you’re racist! Get out!” Rage I got instead illustrated my point better than I could have hoped for. Unfortunately. What a complete lack of self-awareness.
I wonder if anyone would change their mind if I “recanted” and started gushing about how I loved everything about how things were being handled on the left with no reservations or caveats? Or if, once branded an enemy, always an enemy?
In any event not a promising sign for future efforts to take Trump down. Probably for the best I’m not American, I’ll just focus on staying out of the splash zone.
Racism and Xenophobia are tools the Nixo used quite effectively. Do you think Nixon was racist and that was his goal? Was he in Vietnam because of how racist he was? Perhaps you should take your own advice Re: Nixon and make sure you understand “Why” and don’t confuse it with “how.”
You don’t vote for the candidate you want to fight for you, you vote for the candidate that’s easier for you to fight.
It’s not about fighting fascism with fascism lite, it’s about fighting fascism lite instead of full strength. Whatever you’re going to fight with is going to be much more effective against a weaker enemy.
You don’t vote for the candidate you want to fight for you, you vote for the candidate that’s easier for you to fight.
If that is the case, then I assume you voted for the geriatric cult of personality who will be dead within the year?
The fascist with a cabinet full of fascists, congressional control, SCOTUS control, and a detailed fascist playbook?
No, that would be stupid. Even if he is on death’s door, his replacement will be just as bad.
Ah ok. Then I assume you voted for the PSL candidate who isn’t quite on-board with full communism now (She still believes in markets) , but could probably be swayed that way right?
I did not give any consideration to candidates with no chance of winning, for obvious reasons.
I voted for the one who wasn’t a rabid fascist, and also stood a snowball’s chance of beating the rabid fascist. So the Dem candidate.
If it was useful to vote for allies instead of enemies (say, if our elections were some variety of ranked choice) I would have voted for whoever was most socially liberal and closest to market socialism (since that’s about the farthest we can hope to push the needle in a term or two; after that I’d start considering positions moderately to the left of that, rinse and repeat).
But it isn’t, so I didn’t. Dirty break is the only strategy that makes sense in our political environment. Obstruct the worst major party while you build a better platform grassroots style, and then once that platform is popular and normalized, and the worst major party is neutralized, then start running outside the Dem tent.
Voting for a candidate with no chance of success, with a population effectively propagandized against the platform, does not improve the material conditions of the working class in any way.
But but… wHaT aBoUt SuPpOrTiNg GeNoCiDe?
With a baseball bat?
You know what really has to happen. Just nobody has the guts to do it.
It will take more than that. There is a lot of rot.
oh 10 or 15 ought to do it. The rest are cowards and will have always been agaisnt maga.
But they’ll then join up with the new MAGA when that springs up in about a decade. Unless something is done about the core issues propping up MAGA, they’ll just keep coming. [Redacted]ing MAGAt leaders is, while not something I’d object to, not enough to really fix anything.
I mean… It’s a testable hypothesis. 🤷♂️
I’m down for some science!
Bring your shovel, mate. 👌
Infrastructure sabotage?
I can’t believe we’re not even one year into this yet.
To be fair, quite a few have been. Theyr targeting each other
The only way to defeat us is if the Trump administration and the movement that undergirds it manages to divide us. We can’t let that happen. To win as a majority coalition, we must always invite everybody who believes in civil liberties and human rights.
Sooooo we’re defeated? 1/3 of the population voted for this and is actively cheering it on, 1/3 don’t give enough of a shit to take action for whatever reason, and the last 1/3 are the target of the first 1/3.
How the fuck are we supposed to band together and “invite everybody that believes in civil liberties and human rights” when half of the country is either championing or passively allowing the stripping away of those rights? This would require the right wing to fundamentally shift their views on immigrants and gay people, which they obviously have no interest in doing.
All that was needed to defeat Hitler was to make the Nazis see Jews as people.
That’s pretty much what’s being said here. Can we please be realistic and not pretend that both sides are equal and valid in their rationale and behavior? If someone starts punching every gay person around them, you don’t tell the gay people to be more cooperative and understanding, you arrest the fucker and punish them.
With clubs, in a large group, Caesar-style, so nobody knows which of us did it?
🔫
Hopefully the military decide to end the clown show after that insanity earlier today
Memes and jokes will break this administration.
If there were only some laws that would protect us or maybe a document outlining who we are as a people. Dammit! /s
Not sure what kind of “together” we can have. Working with anti-MAGA conservatives is supposedly wrong, working with (even anti Netanyahu) Israel supporters is supposedly wrong - won’t get a majority that way.
“Anti-Netanyahu Israel supporters”? What, people who hate the leader but are fine with the slaughter and subsequent extermination of an entire ethnic group? And the only reason why people “can’t work with them” is because they get mad if you say that Israel is committing a genocide?
Anti-MAGA conservatives are also still very wrong and we have piles of evidence to show it. Compromising and making them feel good abojt how they’re only just now realizing how bad the far-right is while still clearly not learning the bigger lesson isn’t going to help anyone and instead just muddy the water.
There are a lot of progressive people who would get energized by a better campaign. Just gotta actually do that.
Define ‘work with’ in a way that doesnt involve compromising on genocide.
deleted by creator
Baseball bats?
