Whoops. I was signed out and just now realized I had this notification. I do think a lot of our differences is just perspective that have led on to very different outcomes. I do appreciate the discussion, sincerely, because as someone who was in the liberal camp for the longest time, it’s weird to feel such ire all the time from those same kinds of people online.
Here’s some of the perspective differences we have:
You have a kid, where me and my partner have decided that the world is probably too fucked to ever want to bring a kid into this world. I can see how that would make you more protective of a status quo that keeps you and your family relatively safe where I see how so many people are struggling and me and my partner are willing to fight to make it right. I don’t think either of us are wrong for these perspectives and I’d likely be where you are if I had children (and thought well enough about the future to want children).
2001-2003 was a wild time where everyone collectively decided that becoming more of an authoritarian surveillance state was a good thing under the guise of national security. I’m not sure if I’d consider the democrats sliding to agree with republicans on almost everything something that we should have rose tinted glasses on.
Both of us seem to be playing out our own version of “make the right decision, not the easy decision”
AOC and Sanders aren’t, in my opinion, more measurably left than others in government nearly a decade ago. Harry Truman was pushing hard for Universal healthcare. Also In the Revenue act of 1935, there was a progressive tax rate of 75% for the top bracket. (that’s only 37% today, and oftentimes many loopholes and tax havens make this percentage much lower). Bernie, I think, was mainly pushing for wealth, corporate, and estate tax changes, and they seem on par or less strong than the tax plans from ~90 years ago. I love both Sanders and AOC’s views on their civic duty, but it will always feel like it falls short when AOC celebrates “taxing the rich” by instituting a 1% tax on stock buybacks when those shouldn’t even be legal in the first place. And yes, I get that they’re trying their hardest, but the issue is that both of them are fought hard by the rest of the democratic party and seen as antichrists from the republican party. Would republican voters who are struggling hate bernie sanders and AOC if they weren’t being propagandized by every media outlet out there that their proposals were idealistic, unrealistic, and wasteful instead of doing things that would directly help them? It’s a complicated series of cogs that make this machine work, so I can only judge democrats by what they as a group do rather than what a few of them want. I refuse to be swayed by the carrot and the string politics anymore by believing that democrats will all join hands around any policy bernie and AOC has without watering it down to make republicans more happy, only for republicans to water it down further, only for republicans to kill that bill.
These democrats won’t wipe out the republicans without also wiping themselves out since both of them are parties that primarily support the growth of capital, not health/safety of residents, not equitability, not ethics, not the health of the planet. If those other things come, it won’t come at the cost of capital (and to a lesser degree political power). Democrats know they don’t have to sacrifice the capital of corporations to make the lives of citizens better because the only ones fighting for labor/human rights are a tiny minority of representatives and there’ll always be someone there to block it, whether they are republican or democrat. There can always be a sacrificial lamb that can be propped up on the ballot if it helps maintain capital. Even people who ran as progressive democrats can suddenly change their affiliation to republican after winning the election if it benefits capital. Even if Democrats encompass sinema and manchin. This is why the status quo needs to change and the parties need to die. The parties don’t die by continuing to tell them to keep going on like they have been.
“I respectfully object to the notion that the GOP blocking everything will be a constant.”
There will always be people who will be resistant to seeing change in the tangible world whether it’s the GOP or not. And they will continue to be voted on by people who agree with them. I suspect democrats will be this group in the future if they manage to outlive the republicans. Change can be extremely scary, especially when it seems like the entire world is becoming more and more fascist, so I can see why someone with a child would want to protect the status quo at all cost. This fucked up world might give your child a full life at least. If too much changed too quickly, it might be too difficult to think about what impacts it might have on your child’s life. I concede that there’ll likely be nothing I can say that can change the protective nature of a parent, and while I wish I was as optimistic as you, I’ve seen too many bloody limbs that were caused by my comfort to continue in my comfort since the only things I really have to protect are my partner and our dog. Both of us have a lot to lose with a trump presidency and we know a lot of people like us do as well. I’ve voted democrat down ballot my whole life and me and so many of my friends feel entirely betrayed by the democratic party as a whole- so much that our relationship has shifted from odd-bedfellows to a malignant force that keeps a husk of a party (republicans) legitimate by only being a little more popular than them. I don’t believe that the vast majority of voting americans are just to the left of literal fascism. There’s a reason why civic apathy is so high- they don’t see anything they want being proposed or protected. If republicans win this upcoming election, that doesn’t upset the democrats’ main goal of securing capital. I’m sure some of them can even write a few books on their experience during another trump presidency. But if a theoretical party existed that helped out the vast majority of americans by making things easier, cheaper, and more transparent, that would upset both the democrat and republican’s goal of securing capital. This is why leftists say things akin to “both sides”. They aren’t the same. They’ve very different. But they’re both pro-capital and it’s very obvious that’s what they fight for over anything else.
Speaking of biden’s views on Israel, he seems to be more vocally zionist than any other president in my lifetime. Trump might be racist against arabs, but biden’s zionism is colonialism + being racist against arabs (even if not vocally racist like trump). I’m not saying trump would be better for palestine. He likely would ramp up things just to look strong in comparison to biden- not because he has any idea what’s going on. But that also assumes palestine will still be there when trump is sworn in.
The trump vs hitler question wasn’t meant to be trying to compare biden with either of them- I mainly wanted to see how far along you’d believe in and participate in this system even if you know that both choices are actively bad. Would it have to be hitler vs pol pot before you consider rising up instead of believing that voting will help in a meaningful way? I’d like to believe everyone has a line whether they know it or not. A system that allows a trump to run and win is a system not designed for us to succeed. And I’m not even against voting- I think local elections are extremely important. I just really don’t think a single person with unilateral control over our military actions is a good idea. Actions related to war should require unanimous consent so it rarely happens. But it isn’t because securing resources for energy production or land to create capital is easily possible for someone who can be the sacrificial lamb if the populace isn’t sufficiently convinced that the people we’re bombing aren’t evil enough. The capitalistic machine marches forward regardless of the happiness of the populace.
The rematch and choice of these two candidates is inevitable.
This is elder abuse at this point to run them. One or both of them might die during the campaign. And at this point, it might be the best case scenario since I can’t see either of them stepping down.
Whoops. I was signed out and just now realized I had this notification. I do think a lot of our differences is just perspective that have led on to very different outcomes. I do appreciate the discussion, sincerely, because as someone who was in the liberal camp for the longest time, it’s weird to feel such ire all the time from those same kinds of people online.
Here’s some of the perspective differences we have:
You have a kid, where me and my partner have decided that the world is probably too fucked to ever want to bring a kid into this world. I can see how that would make you more protective of a status quo that keeps you and your family relatively safe where I see how so many people are struggling and me and my partner are willing to fight to make it right. I don’t think either of us are wrong for these perspectives and I’d likely be where you are if I had children (and thought well enough about the future to want children).
2001-2003 was a wild time where everyone collectively decided that becoming more of an authoritarian surveillance state was a good thing under the guise of national security. I’m not sure if I’d consider the democrats sliding to agree with republicans on almost everything something that we should have rose tinted glasses on.
Both of us seem to be playing out our own version of “make the right decision, not the easy decision”
AOC and Sanders aren’t, in my opinion, more measurably left than others in government nearly a decade ago. Harry Truman was pushing hard for Universal healthcare. Also In the Revenue act of 1935, there was a progressive tax rate of 75% for the top bracket. (that’s only 37% today, and oftentimes many loopholes and tax havens make this percentage much lower). Bernie, I think, was mainly pushing for wealth, corporate, and estate tax changes, and they seem on par or less strong than the tax plans from ~90 years ago. I love both Sanders and AOC’s views on their civic duty, but it will always feel like it falls short when AOC celebrates “taxing the rich” by instituting a 1% tax on stock buybacks when those shouldn’t even be legal in the first place. And yes, I get that they’re trying their hardest, but the issue is that both of them are fought hard by the rest of the democratic party and seen as antichrists from the republican party. Would republican voters who are struggling hate bernie sanders and AOC if they weren’t being propagandized by every media outlet out there that their proposals were idealistic, unrealistic, and wasteful instead of doing things that would directly help them? It’s a complicated series of cogs that make this machine work, so I can only judge democrats by what they as a group do rather than what a few of them want. I refuse to be swayed by the carrot and the string politics anymore by believing that democrats will all join hands around any policy bernie and AOC has without watering it down to make republicans more happy, only for republicans to water it down further, only for republicans to kill that bill.
These democrats won’t wipe out the republicans without also wiping themselves out since both of them are parties that primarily support the growth of capital, not health/safety of residents, not equitability, not ethics, not the health of the planet. If those other things come, it won’t come at the cost of capital (and to a lesser degree political power). Democrats know they don’t have to sacrifice the capital of corporations to make the lives of citizens better because the only ones fighting for labor/human rights are a tiny minority of representatives and there’ll always be someone there to block it, whether they are republican or democrat. There can always be a sacrificial lamb that can be propped up on the ballot if it helps maintain capital. Even people who ran as progressive democrats can suddenly change their affiliation to republican after winning the election if it benefits capital. Even if Democrats encompass sinema and manchin. This is why the status quo needs to change and the parties need to die. The parties don’t die by continuing to tell them to keep going on like they have been.
There will always be people who will be resistant to seeing change in the tangible world whether it’s the GOP or not. And they will continue to be voted on by people who agree with them. I suspect democrats will be this group in the future if they manage to outlive the republicans. Change can be extremely scary, especially when it seems like the entire world is becoming more and more fascist, so I can see why someone with a child would want to protect the status quo at all cost. This fucked up world might give your child a full life at least. If too much changed too quickly, it might be too difficult to think about what impacts it might have on your child’s life. I concede that there’ll likely be nothing I can say that can change the protective nature of a parent, and while I wish I was as optimistic as you, I’ve seen too many bloody limbs that were caused by my comfort to continue in my comfort since the only things I really have to protect are my partner and our dog. Both of us have a lot to lose with a trump presidency and we know a lot of people like us do as well. I’ve voted democrat down ballot my whole life and me and so many of my friends feel entirely betrayed by the democratic party as a whole- so much that our relationship has shifted from odd-bedfellows to a malignant force that keeps a husk of a party (republicans) legitimate by only being a little more popular than them. I don’t believe that the vast majority of voting americans are just to the left of literal fascism. There’s a reason why civic apathy is so high- they don’t see anything they want being proposed or protected. If republicans win this upcoming election, that doesn’t upset the democrats’ main goal of securing capital. I’m sure some of them can even write a few books on their experience during another trump presidency. But if a theoretical party existed that helped out the vast majority of americans by making things easier, cheaper, and more transparent, that would upset both the democrat and republican’s goal of securing capital. This is why leftists say things akin to “both sides”. They aren’t the same. They’ve very different. But they’re both pro-capital and it’s very obvious that’s what they fight for over anything else.
Speaking of biden’s views on Israel, he seems to be more vocally zionist than any other president in my lifetime. Trump might be racist against arabs, but biden’s zionism is colonialism + being racist against arabs (even if not vocally racist like trump). I’m not saying trump would be better for palestine. He likely would ramp up things just to look strong in comparison to biden- not because he has any idea what’s going on. But that also assumes palestine will still be there when trump is sworn in.
The trump vs hitler question wasn’t meant to be trying to compare biden with either of them- I mainly wanted to see how far along you’d believe in and participate in this system even if you know that both choices are actively bad. Would it have to be hitler vs pol pot before you consider rising up instead of believing that voting will help in a meaningful way? I’d like to believe everyone has a line whether they know it or not. A system that allows a trump to run and win is a system not designed for us to succeed. And I’m not even against voting- I think local elections are extremely important. I just really don’t think a single person with unilateral control over our military actions is a good idea. Actions related to war should require unanimous consent so it rarely happens. But it isn’t because securing resources for energy production or land to create capital is easily possible for someone who can be the sacrificial lamb if the populace isn’t sufficiently convinced that the people we’re bombing aren’t evil enough. The capitalistic machine marches forward regardless of the happiness of the populace.
This is elder abuse at this point to run them. One or both of them might die during the campaign. And at this point, it might be the best case scenario since I can’t see either of them stepping down.