I’ve seen a depressing trend of Democratic politicians embracing anti trans talking points and compromising gender affirming care for young people. This is extremely concerning as states and the federal government are undermining access to care now more than ever. Democrats standing by trans people has far more dire consequences now than ever, yet we’re being treated as politically disposable by people who used to campaign on lgbtq issues like Gavin Newsom and Pete Buttigieg.
I can’t say I’m surprised. Liberal papers like the New York Times has been uncritically promoting unscientific transphobia for years that claims alternatives exist to gender affirming care. My guess is that people see a person transitioning as an unfortunate thing, desperately wishing there was another way. They ignore the fact that gender affirming care is both the best treatment for dysphoria, and one of the most successful treatments for any mental condition ever discovered.
To put it simply, making gender affirming care harder to obtain for kids will kill many of them. Kids being kept from care by their parents already drives people to suicide, and a slimy politician preventing supportive parents from helping their kids will do the same. Every time I see people claim these guys are our best shot at beating fascism, I die inside. I have no doubt that they’ll eventually axe care for all adults like everyone who was originally “worried about fairness in sports” is currently pushing for. The only way they won’t is if we make it a costly issue for them.
none of us are free until all of us are free.
I agree with that but it won’t be a single victory that gets everyone what we need.
I’ve seen a depressing trend of Democratic politicians embracing anti trans talking points and compromising gender affirming care for young people.
Burn the DNC to the ground, these impotent acts of betrayal of the voting base that fail to meaningfully activate anyone in return are the unmistakable indicators of a terminal disease in the party.
The sooner we do it, the sooner we can start building a real party on the left in the US.
This isn’t redeemable or reformable.
Make a third party that appeals regionally at first than expand nationwide to replace the democrats.
It’s a mathematical certainty that any work on a third party will only help the party that it is most unlike. Seriously, you aren’t the first to think “fuck it, let’s just have a NEW party.” You will spend your days actively harming your interests until you die. And here’s the part where you tell me it needs to get worse before it gets better. No, it doesn’t. It needs to get better incrementally over long time scales and that is the ONLY way anything has ever improved anywhere. Do the work. This nonsense about burning down the world over a single issue is performative crap we don’t have time for.
This is why first-past-the-post needs to be replaced with the single transferable vote. The rules were originally designed by the rich for the rich.
If you believe that’s where your energy is best spent, I wish you success. It’s probably a matter of planting trees whose shade you’ll never sit in, but there are healthy alternatives we can promote.
Starting a third party in a FPTP system? That’s just suicide.
There is another way: run for office as a Democrat and be the change you want to see in the party. What Bernie and AOC did. We need a few dozen more of them, and things will actually start moving.
What the tea party did. What MAGA did. What Mandami is doing.
Changing the existing party is what works. Demolishing it does not.
We can only hope Elon starts his third party he’s threatened a couple times.
The Republican party replaced the Whig party and the Bull Moose party came close.
mamdani is the first of these and the democratic party won’t even endorse him; what makes you think they’ll behave any different for others?
If you haven’t noticed, it doesn’t fucking matter. Mamdani is the candidate and assuming people turn out he will be the mayor.
They’ll never “endorse” their replacements, nor do they need to.
As others have pointed out here, this kind of takeover of an existing part is exactly what Trump did. You may remember that he did it over the strenuous objections and through stiff resistance of the party.
He did this through his mastery of media, and capturing 30% of the voters in this country with his performance through the process. They eventually realized that Trump was the best card they had to play.
As Bernie and AOC showed, you can muster enough popular support in your home constituency that pushback from the bureaucrats doesn’t matter.
I think the sad news for a lot of people in this thread is that 30% of Americans are not actually onboard with their agenda for a more socialistic America. So while isolated successes may be possible, and help things progress, there simply isn’t going to be a groundswell of support like Trump received. The Democrats are the limp plastic bags of cold soup that they are because the voters themselves are complacent with the status quo and not really willing to roll the dice on it. Sure, plenty are poor enough to almost certainly benefit, but they don’t think of themselves that way. No one’s lower class - everyone’s on their way to joining the “I got mine” club anytime now. And that’s America. This is it I’m afraid. This is who we are.
Because they will see that he wins anyway
Starting a third party in a FPTP system? That’s just suicide.
It worked in Canada, India and the UK.
they have Parliamentary systems :/
the US is fucked because the President is enormously powerful and elected directly by the people.
The president is not elected directly by the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election
“The election of the president and vice president of the United States is an indirect election…”
It took centuries for women to earn the right to vote, so I happily champion decent causes until their full fruition.
That’s the way to think: long arc.
Rosa Parks wasn’t the first person who refused to give up her seat on the bus. There were absolutely other cases that could have been pushed through the courts earlier. But Parks was an ideal figure: clean record, old, harmless little lady. For her story to go down in history, others had to be passed over. It’s what we call picking our battles.
the proper way is to do a hostile takeover of the Democratic party.
Trump wasn’t really a Republican, he was a nationalist (in 2016) and now a fascist (in 2024.) Republicans were neocons, libertarians and classical conservatives.
in 2017 he purged the actual Republicans from the Party, and filled its hollowed husk with MAGA. by 2024, the takeover was complete. actual Republicans (e.g. Liz Cheney, Romney) abandoned ship. the name is the only thing that stayed the same.
so, we need to do the same with the DNC. the formula is simple. hijack the primaries, shove the existing leadership out and show the Republicans what “socialism” really means.
Agreed.
the proper way is to do a hostile takeover of the Democratic party.
so, we need to do the same with the DNC. the formula is simple. hijack the primaries, shove the existing leadership out and show the Republicans what “socialism” really means.
Amen.
Most of them voluntarily left though
This nonsense about burning down the world over a single issue is performative crap we don’t have time for.
It isn’t a single issue. It simply isn’t. Regardless, telling trans people and their allies online that fighting for their rights is “nonsense” amounting to “performative crap”, seems like transphobia to me.
Look at this guy strategizing like he has multiple fair and free elections left!
Woman* and it’s always worth talking about improving democracy. It’s not like every US election is automatically “rigged” after Trump got a second term. Check Portland’s electoral system.
Trans rights are human rights. What would be the point of opposing fascism if it’s not to uphold human rights?
because it’s worse for business than neoliberalism was. The rich agreed to fascism because they needed to redirect populist sentiment, but the neoliberal model really was optimal for them.
They created a culture war to distract people from the class war they are winning.
Based on a recent video i viewed of tech CEOs practically fellating Trump on camera, I would say business sentiment regarding fascism is mixed, at least.
They wish they didn’t have to kiss the ring, but at least they aren’t seeing harsher regulation from radical communist liberals.
Giving up on trans rights is the definition of losing to fascism.
Fascism is an ideology that’s turtules all the way down. Once you exclude one group you have built the social infrastructure and mechanisms to exclude any other group. The only defense is to accept and include all groups.
This. This is how genocide operates. The number of bystanders gets lower and lower as they are carted off into the camps or turn full blown fascist. It’s always like this. Armenia. Germany. Rwanda. It’s a set script.
RFK has made no secret of wanting to take away meds from mentally ill people and putting them into farming camps.
Mamdani needs to become mayor of New York already to show these clown democrats how to do their jobs.
They are doing their jobs. They aren’t stupid, they just don’t work for us.
And we shouldn’t be voting for anyone who won’t work for us.
The problem is that it can be difficult to tell who that is until they’re already elected. Kind of like how a driving instructor has no idea how the next person in the test car is going to perform until they actually do it.
And then once they’re elected there’s a distinct advantage for incumbents to stay elected, unless they’ve really fucked up somehow.
Republicans managed to do it. They have an entire party perfectly willing to destroy the country for the billionaire oligarchs from the very top all the way down to the town dog catcher.
That’s because the Republican base is a literal cult
You guys don’t get it. We need to concede the civil rights of a marginalized group to defeat fascism!
👵🖕
if the Social Democrats would just concede the Jewish Question, they could have kept the Nazis out of power!
Sure, but it is kinda funny how every time people start to get close to attacking capitalism or supporting socialists rising in power, suddenly there’s a big wave of hate and outrage at trans people, gay people, migrants, etc.
It’s almost like they want us to butt-heads with a majority of the population about issues that population will never budge on because the average American has the attention span and compassion of a broken chunk of drywall and only know how to fight.
I have been saying this for a long time, do not abandon advocacy for the rights of marginalized people, but if we want to actually bend society to protecting and respecting those rights, we have to bend it against corporate influence, we have to elect anti-oligarchs, socialists and economic progressives to our local seats of power and influence, we have to kick the legs out from under the foundation of the system that will come for trans people, it will come for gay people, it will come for brown, black and interracial couples, it will come for the mentally handicapped and it will come for women and children, it will come for your video games and your weed and your furry art. One-by-one, every single right and freedom will be lost if we don’t start using our strongest weapon against their most vulnerable weak-point, which is by not spending money on luxuries, saving cash away from the banks and corporations who want to “borrow” it.
Our interpersonal narratives with each other need to keep focusing on how the wealthy are the ones making us hate each other, they’re the ones driving up the price of eggs, they’re the ones making us scared of trans people, they’re the ones running congress and senate, they’re the ones making gas cost so much, they’re the ones taking chunks out of our paychecks and giving us NOTHING in return.
Again, all anyone knows how to do is argue and fight so we have to channel that at the right targets instead of meeting it head-on or we will keep getting stuck in this spiral that has seen only losses in the last decade.
Your “reasoned” argument to “slow down”, “don’t rock the boat” or “be patient” for social justice would be familiar to Civil Rights activists. MLK suggested that the “white moderate” was a bigger obstacle to civil rights than the white citizens council.
What you’re really saying is that class struggle takes priority over social justice. The big problem with that is that social justice has never came to people who who politely sit at the back of the bus.
What you’re really saying is that class struggle takes priority over social justice.
Right now? Yes. Not broadly, social justice is one of our top goals, but we don’t take Berlin without storming Normandy. We are losing social justice because we are ignoring class. We are about to lose everything because we’re not attacking class.
I wish, wish, wish more leftists with activist mindsets spent more time in liberal and conservative spaces so everyone had a more realistic idea what we’re up against. If we keep attacking this wall with scolding, with social messaging, with appeals to empathy, we’re going to keep doing what we’ve been fucking doing for years… losing.
Again though, this isn’t a binary, let’s not fall down that weird schism that bad-actors have leveraged us apart with that says “if you’re not for X you MUST be against Y” or “If you’re supporting Gaza children you MUST be against Jewish people” etc.
I don’t think there’s any harm in carrying our flags and slogans in marches and so on, but if you’re talking to an average white liberal or conservative in actual conversation… which you should do a LOT more of, we keep the talk focused on what they’re losing out on because of oligarchy and what harm it’s doing to them personally, because literally, that’s all they care about BUT it’s a crack that can be weakened and allow other issues in. (As well as the harm being waged on trans people, people of color, etc, depending on the person and how receptive they are. You should broadly get better at making people like you too but that’s a separate essay.)
I am speaking from experience here in changing people’s hearts and minds on these issues. You all are a lot stronger as individuals than you think and are capable of doing so much more than you think, but it’s a power that needs to be wielded with tactics and strategy like anything. We are the smarter side, we are the thinking side, let’s think of ways to stop losing. If you have better ideas to stop losing I’m all ears, because whatever we’ve been doing isn’t working. Don’t let the “we got 'em” memes color our thinking because the fascists are literally celebrating in the streets and growing in power and they’re coming for all of us.
Right, the problem with the white moderates was their focus on class struggle…
I get it, but conservatism has taken over by ratcheting the country to the right. They’ve been patiently putting people in positions of power from dog catcher up to the presidency for the last forty years.
Progressives aren’t satisfied with ratcheting the country to the left. It’s all or nothing.
The country never moves towards the left or anything closely resembling egalitarianism in any meaningful way. Gay marriage has been one of the few major wins in recent history, but that’s not “ratcheting the country to the left”. You could be the most staunch supporter of capitalism and “free markets” in the world, literally the opposite of egalitarianism, and still support trans and gay rights/be socially liberal.
Progressives aren’t satisfied with ratcheting the country to the left. It’s all or nothing.
The Democrats aren’t satisfied until the country is completely to the right and they aren’t interested in winning elections or seriously fighting MAGA - their focus is firmly on suppressing the left.
Progressives do not hold significant power in elected office or in the DNC. Bernie Sanders had two primaries rigged against him, and David Hogg was recently ousted from his position as Vice Chair of the DNC
for gender diversity reasonsbecause he was pushing progressive primary challengers.Ken Martin also ensured DNC officer neutrality in future primaries this year, in order to neuter David Hogg not long after he committed to funding these challengers (which is likely why David Hogg refused to run for re-election). Democrats only have a problem with rigging primaries when progressives are the ones getting support.
Progressives are unpredictable and difficult to control, may be of the socialist variety, and disincentivize major donors - which the DNC and Democratic party rely on.
“Ending” slavery, suffrage, the New Deal, income tax, * gay rights… They were all steps to the left.
I’m not arguing that the democratic party as it stands is the vehicle to institute a just and fair society. But I did watch the Tea Party subvert and consume the republicans. It can be done to the democratic party as well. It has to be in tandem with regular wins, like how the conservatives did it.
*I can’t believe I left out Roe v Wade
“Ending” slavery
Slavery only increased under neoliberal policy. Where does our lithium come from? Slaves and child slaves. Our cocoa? In part, child slaves. Where do most of our goods come from? Sweat shops and exploited third-world countries. Our prison labor, which has absolutely exploded under neoliberal policy, is also by definition slave labor. Before Trump, over 40% of our agricultural labor force were undocumented immigrants - modern slaves.
I’m sure if you looked hard enough, you’d see how much suffering and exploitation went into every single item around you.
suffrage, the New Deal, income tax
Ancient history, and none of these things besides suffrage truly represent the left, which is commonly associated with socialism and egalitarianism - the left was historically coined to describe socialists.
Capitalism is fundamentally opposed to egalitarianism, liberal and leftist ideology, and democracy. And it’s worth mentioning Democrats are further right than most European center-right parties.
gay rights
You could even be a bigger fascist and authoritarian than Trump, including being a Christian, and be in support of gay rights. See Peter Thiel, self-proclaimed right-libertarian, who is the opposite of a libertarian in practice.
Democrats flying the rainbow flag is just as gross and meaningless as corporations doing it: it’s branding. Except now the branding requires that we sacrifice trans people to appeal to
centristsRepublicans/old-school conservatives and try to siphon voters from MAGA. Meanwhile, gay marriage is likely going to quickly be dismantled like everything else, while Democrats stand silent.But I did watch the Tea Party subvert and consume the republicans. It can be done to the democratic party as well.
Will this come in time to address the fresh water crisis? Will it come in time to address the climate crisis? How many trans people will die by suicide because it’s “too radical” to support them even a little bit? How many people will die because of preventable disease? How many people will forego higher education? How many people will be laid off and rendered homeless until we establish UBI? How many child slaves will be sacrificed in the mines so we can have new iPhones every year? I could go on and on and on.
It has to be in tandem with regular wins, like how the conservatives did it.
Progressives have been playing ball way more than you suggest. Enough. It’s become a game of dodgeball where progressives can’t throw, only take hits from the Democrats and everybody else. Shifting to the right is not an effective strategy for Democrats, not even a little bit. 1/3 of the country doesn’t vote, why the fuck is nobody looking at that group?
Saw your edit:
*I can’t believe I left out Roe v Wade
A Supreme Court decision. Which was never codified into law by Democrats…
You’re going to sit there and say you wouldn’t have voted for fucking Lincoln because he didn’t “really” end slavery?
I’d like to believe that I would be arguing for the abolition of all social, race, and class-based hierarchies, among other things, but this isn’t then and I wasn’t born in that time period.
Suppose I were born at that time, had access to a very good education, and possessed roughly the same spirit as I do now; I’d likely be politically active and influencing people like Lincoln as best I could.
Nobody is entitled to another’s vote though, and I’ll just leave it at that.
Edit - I thought on it and I feel it’s necessary to amend this for those curious why I would respond in such a way:
During the 1858 debates with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln stated that the “physical difference between the white and black races … will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality”. He added that "there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.
If it came down to it, I’d likely vote for Lincoln. Regardless of some of his statements, he showed deep principles:
“I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong,” he stated. “I can not remember when I did not so think, and feel.”
Very few involved with politics in the present day are even 1% as principled and vocal about what they believe to be right as Lincoln - he was so incredibly ahead of his time.
Well I would definitely 100% be supporting moderate pussy Lincoln because the Confederacy fucking sucks and I don’t want their supporter to win.
Sorry to hear you were on the fence about it.
There were historically people calling Lincoln’s abolitionist ideas not radical enough, so bite me.
You’d likely unquestionably vote for a self-proclaimed Zionist committing a genocide, and that was your point in reality - to shame me for having principles in general and in particular in regards to how I vote. You are free to push the Democratic party to the left or away from supporting genocide at any point instead of attacking me - I don’t vote for genocide and my vote must be earned through representation.
It’s basic democracy, the Democrats don’t automatically earn or own my vote because they play at being socially liberal when it suits them.
I could imagine you arguing to Lincoln that he actually should be less radical, that he should compromise on his principle of seeing slavery as being wrong. Just allow a little slavery Lincoln… c’mon man.
I get it, but
🖕
Constructive and useful. Go fuck yourself.
They make a great point, but nope. Gotta make them feel stupid for thinking about the obvious problem with idealism.
Fucking oneself is actually quite healthy. You should try it, you feel repressed
You think basic human rights are idealism?
No wonder the Democrat’s approval rating is so low. Your party is so spineless.
Nice twisting of the words as usual. Im not even american you imbecill.
I think believing that everyone can change their mind because you say so is idealism.
No “buts”.
Liberation cannot be done with giving it to everyone, provided that fascists get buried 6 ft under.
It’s not liberation until it’s for everyone. But we won’t get there in one legislative fight, or even one legislative session, once and for all. It will always need to be fought for.
Conservatives won’t turn down a smaller victory for one that’s out of reach. That’s why they’re winning.
Ansolutely agree, people didn’t turn to being pro-abortion instantly. But with a long and gradual strifle.
But we should be aware to never give up that which we already have.
Welcome to your civilization. Where your rights are used to further agendas.
Edit:Not Progress
Not what they mean at all. It’s just that social issues are secondary to winning the war.
This means putting it off until Conservatives can no longer stop us.
(Not trans btw, just believe in trans right)
Their strategy is currently losing the war, as well as social issues
My FB feed is still littered with die-hard liberals espousing views we could afford to debate 15, 20 years ago. Pollution and gun rights. Every word they say is heard differently by the other side and they still don’t get it. Fascists are taking over the US and they want to figure out how to recycle better.
True, but we’re losing it much faster lately.
My problem isn’t how fast we’re losing, it’s that the supposed “opposition” is pretty openly not fighting.
BE
Because the wealthy ones are the ones who actually drive any actual change, regardless of politics or effort. If they want hell on Earth, there will be hell on Earth. And they want hell on Earth.
Thanks. Glad I’m here for you to sacrifice.
Except none of the assholes people have proposed actually have good strategy. None of them are populists, just pro business liberals who are simple downgrades to the Democrats of last year, worse at everything including making up for what lost them 2024.
Oh, I forgot you can’t vote anymore. Argument moot I guess.
What a weak mentality from a fitting username. The voters must change to match the party in your mind, not the other way around. To suggest otherwise means I’m an anti voter or green party Russian agent. That’s the only possible interpretation for someone unwilling tolerate criticism of their tribe; that I’m an absolute strawman who isn’t enlightened enough to polish shoes with my tongue.
You aren’t going to get everything you want right away. People could not even handle climate change ffs! We should ensure our survival and dominance first, before implementing literally anything else.
They kept latching onto climate change as if it were some made up bullshit.
Pure idealism simply gets you nowhere. Why do you have to have everything NOW? No one said we will abandon trans rights altogether.
But it does not matter now. It’s armed resistance or nothing else.
“Trans people want basic human rights?!? What kind of crazy, idealistic world do you think we live in? We have to abandon you now, but don’t worry, we’ll totally come back for you after we get ours.”
- The party of spineless cowards that stands for nothing
it’s giving Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.
Democrats should really just embrace pro-gun politics and win over both right-wingers and left-wing gun owners.
Why in the world would anyone in his right mind buy a tool they’ll never use?
I’m always amazed at the idea that we left leaning don’t have guns. I’ve got a range a few miles away. While yes, i don’t have a basement full of guns. The number is definitely not zero. I think there are more left gun owners than is given credit.
They deliberately made things like guns and flags our contention issues so that the left remains weak and neutered. I can’t imagine more than the slimmest margin of Lemmy lefties would dare fly an American flag or open-carry and that’s one of many reasons we never succeed at policy or lasting social change.
Force and patriotism are political capital which is the currency of politics and policy and elections, and this is why Trump’s base has so much more value and are courted more than say, Bernie’s base or whatever mythical, fantasy leftist leader everyone is hoping will show up next.
Everyone here thinks we’re just a one good candidate away from some kind of absurd post-scarcity civilization with holodecks and food replicators. We are barbarians with iPhones, we have to treat our world as a much less fair and far more hostile place.
It has nothing to do with leaning right or left. The odds of having to use a gun are smaller that having to repair a 15th century submarine. There are better places to spend that kind of time and money.
Would you like me to guess your sex and race? I’ve never repaired a 15th century submarine, twice the former though. I must just be an outlier.
I bought my crappy little gun for 80 bucks.
I guess I need to find out what tools I need to repair a 15th century… ohhhhh.
Haha
I’ve had to use guns many times, never needed it for self defense in a human confrontation, so far. Like most people, I’m not trying to create confrontation, I try to live at peace with people.
But I have several outbuildings that have been invaded by destructive animals multiple times. By local law, I am not allowed to relocate them. Sure I could pay $100 a critter or more for a professional to kill them, but a bullet is a lot cheaper. Also, the 2nd amendment wasn’t written for self defense. It was written for tyranny.
liberals won’t use them, leftists would
Now that’s a good answer. And i guess the distinction gets more relevant bybthe day.
I pray I’ll never have to pull a plunger on someone. But if that day comes, I’ll be real glad I already have a plunger.
“I’d rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.”
Right wingers will never, ever, under any circuimstance shift left. Pandering to them is exactly why the turnout for Harris was millions less than Biden.
Voter turnout was at a record high in 2020, because the Covid-19 pandemic and BLM protests, made the then administration unpopular. It was a relative anomaly, and the next presidential race would have had lower turnout regardless of the candidate.
Prior to 2024, Harris had always presented herself as more left than Biden, she only claimed to tow the line in 2024 due to how unpopular she was in the 2020 DNC primary.
Guns are still, nevertheless, a good thing for antifascists. Democrats literally are trying to empower the fucking cops to arbitraily deny people of color the constitution right to own guns (via denying gun permits under so-calles “may issue” laws, ironically, were struck down by the 6 fascist-alligned judges in the supreme court)
Armed minorities are harder to oppress.
I just don’t see full auto rifles being more useful to us than semi-autos.
Unless we use it to spray crowds of people it has more drawbacks than benefits.
Ratchet effect, in real time. This is what harm reduction and blue no matter who buys you. Democrats are not your friend. The system cannot be reformed. We cannot vote our way out of this. Trans people need to arm up. Allies need to arm up. Look out for one another. Stay safe and good luck.
If every time you give in to their demands and they take a step further to the right and ask for more with the intention of surviving to fight to protect what you value another day, you will eventually lose what you value and have nothing left to defend.
Which is why the whole narrative that we either compromise or continue to do the same all-or-nothing approach is a false dichotomy spread by our enemies.
You don’t capitulate, you don’t conceded, you redirect.
We need to leverage this into a class-war, we are SO close to it, every time we get close to large-scale movements against capital, the right throws some hissy fit about bathrooms or drag queens and we all get distracted trying to uselessly butt-heads instead of pushing our whole country towards the objectively key solution of attacking money.
The conservative chuds who give Trump and his ilk so much power and political capital are dumber than boards, they can be captured, they can be used, they can be pushed towards goals mindlessly if you give them the right WWE spectacle story to follow. The things that don’t work on them are the lectures, the speeches, the appeals to empathy and other ideas they just can’t connect with if they don’t have clear-cut villains and heroes and a storyline that they think impacts them personally.
The rich elites are just SITTING there, safe in the fact that every time the nation’s liberals start to feel uncomfortable, they can pull some levers and suddenly everyone is focused on Epstein and “lol president bad” narratives. This is why we’re not getting anywhere, we’re falling for the tactics. We’re getting pulled into the endless debates that don’t go anywhere. If we could even make them twitch, if we could get them to falter and pause and worry that they’ve stretched us too thin for a moment, we can capitalize on that, we can install our own local leaders, our own judges, our own county and city board members. It’s slow, painful and takes focus on a goal I just don’t see the left in this country rising to sadly.
Honestly and in all seriousness, I don’t think trans rights matter enough to drop them. Like these people aren’t in favor of e.g. trump because of trans rights. They are in favor of trump. Why? There is no actual reason. We are talking about people who want the death penalty and a small government??? Who want to cut spending and vote for the guy who spends more money??? they are worried about the quality of life of workers and vote ice cold capitalist into power??? Trans rights don’t matter for them, it is a story that they can tell themselves. It is a “reason” because “idk i am just really frustrated and I don’t know how to deal with the mental discomfort of acknowledging that my behavior especially my political behavior supported the creation of the situation that I strongly dislike” just isn’t comfortable for them.
Trans rights are more than extremely important but politically, they just don’t matter. Dropping them will change nothing, but make us worse people.
To say it another way, even if you were to drop support for trans rights, you wouldn’t gain much of anything.
Yeah, thanks for putting it that way.
Like I said elsewhere, they already held these views and see now as the perfect time to push them. They think that because the fascists won they don’t need to try as hard, even though them not sacrificing their pet beliefs on TikTok and Palestine contributed to that result. They think Harris being a brown woman is where they failed rather than her being Biden’s VP.
Not only Democratic politicians, I see it here in the Fediverse all the time. People seem to think that the Democrats winning is more important than human rights.
I just don’t understood that kind of dogmatic thinking.
Because when the other side is explicitly promising a theocratic fascist dictatorship, you have to pick the lesser evil to even have a chance of things getting better without large scale violence.
A lot of things need to change to get to the point where we’re not picking between two evils, but those changes have to start at local and state levels, and it takes time to propagate to the federal level.
Trans rights being side-tabled for a bit is better than them and every other “undesirable” getting sent to concentration camps.
It’s not that we’re simping for the Democrat leadership, it’s that we’re smart enough to realize it’s currently a binary system and the other option is exponentially worse.
Because when the other side is explicitly promising a theocratic fascist dictatorship, you have to pick the lesser evil to even have a chance of things getting better without large scale violence.
What happens then, when the “lesser evil” gets in power, and rolls back 5% of what the facists did, bomb a bunch of innocient people, give mountains of money to their rich friends, and continue to attack “undesirables”?
It’s not that we’re simping for the Democrat leadership…
Yes you are
…it’s that we’re smart enough to realize it’s currently a binary system and the other option is exponentially worse.
But that’s not true. The other option is only slightly worse, and Democrats keep spending their time trying to get as close to that line as possible.
If they want our votes, they should try doing what we want, like supporting basic human rights, instead of supporting the fascists.
If you think the Democrats are only slightly better than Trump and the rest of MAGA, I have a bridge to sell you.
Both:
- bomb kids
- fight against the working class
- fight against healthcare for all
- give tax money to their rich friends
- fight against human rights
- support genocide
- support large corporations
- support destroying the planet
- support suveillance systems
- support war
- fight aganst making the rich pay their fair share of taxes
- support rapists for president
- support authoritarianism
- openly fight against what their voters want
- support mass deportations without due process
- support the killing of american citizens
- support torture programs
But yeah, go ahead and tell me how much better the Democrats are.
What happens then, when the “lesser evil” gets in power, and rolls back 5% of what the facists did, bomb a bunch of innocient people, give mountains of money to their rich friends, and continue to attack “undesirables”?
Vote for the next lesser evil until its all rolled back and we have a non imperial foreign policy.
If you don’t work to build a leftist movement you’ll never have one. Voting for harm minimization is still helpful as we build.
Vote for the next lesser evil until its all rolled back and we have a non imperial foreign policy.
And hows that been working out? The lesser evil keep marching towards the right. They even fight against anyone who says we can do more than just roll-back 5%.
If you don’t work to build a leftist movement you’ll never have one. Voting for harm minimization is still helpful as we build.
Or we could just vote for leftists, instead of right-wingers who lightly cosplay as leftists in the hopes that one of these days, they’ll change course and become actual leftists.
And hows that been working out?
We’ve not been doingi it. Non voting is the biggest block for decades now.
Or we could just vote for leftists
Like I said
If you don’t work to build a leftist movement you’ll never have one. Voting for harm minimization is still helpful as we build.
We’ve not been doingi it. Non voting is the biggest block for decades now.
Yes we have. We did it under Obama, and Biden. Guess what happened? They rolled back %5 of the facist policy, beefed up the rest, gave handouts to their rich friends, took away more civil rights, and bombed the fuck outta people.
If you don’t work to build a leftist movement you’ll never have one. Voting for harm minimization is still helpful as we build.
And I’m saying: I am building one. By voting for actual leftists, instead of cosplayers.
Yes we have. We did it under Obama, and Biden. Guess what happened?
Non-voting is still the winner in those; further we don’t have a consecutive lesser evil in those, so that does not help as much as it could.
Still,
Voting for harm minimization is still helpful as we build.
Not everyone is going to have a leftist in their local and state ballot. Its rather privileged of you to say this is not helpful to the rest of us.
What happens is that there’s 5% less fascism. And also it doesn’t increase by whatever amount the fascism party would’ve increased it by.
The other things would’ve also happened (and more even!) under the fascism party.
I don’t want 5% less facism, I want a party that fights against facism, instead of supporting it. The Democrats spent their time building out the tools for fascism, then put on their shocked-picachu face when the facists use those tools.
Nobody wants just 5% less fascism. But your options are full fascism or 5% less.
What are you gonna do? Not vote for either party? You just removed a vote from 5% less fascism.
The reality is, there is a fuckton of fascists in america. If you want no fascism you gotta for for less fascism first, to signal to the political parties what you want. When they see that less fascism gives them votes, they will shift towards less fascism until there is none.
Just like Americans signaled so much that they want more fascism, that both the republicans and democrats got more fascists.
Nobody wants just 5% less fascism.
Aparently the Democratic leadership does, since that’s what they keep doing.
But your options are full fascism or 5% less.
That is not true, but the Democrats have convinced a lot of people that it is true. We have a ton of options.
If you want no fascism you gotta for for less fascism first, to signal to the political parties what you want. When they see that less fascism gives them votes, they will shift towards less fascism until there is none.
You mean the same party that have spent the past few decades ignoring their voters? The same party that helped build out the tools that the facists are using, even when their voters didn’t want those systems?
A vote for Democrats tells them that, even when they support things like facism, genocide, and taking away human rights, you are gonna stick with them. I’m not going to, because I am against those things.
Don’t worry, I’m not American, I don’t have to stick with no American political party.
You claim that you have other options. Which ones are those? The third parties that will never win because the system strongly favours a 2-party system?
You realize the left needs to win for us to have human rights? Your critique makes literally zero sense.
Are you talking about the party that isn’t able to win, and also doesn’t support universal human rights?
Maybe they would have more luck with the former, if they tried the latter.
deleted by creator
If the left needs to win, then we can’t vote for most democrats.
I think it’s more that people think winning is more important than performative losing. It’s not pragmatic to promote talking points that hurt your own cause.
For example, I’d wager that cutting hundreds of billions from Medicaid will hurt the general population AND the trans population far more than gender affirming care for kids or trans rights in sports would benefit trans people.
And consider this, every time we lose, it’s going to get worse and worse and keep shifting the Overton Window to the right.
Are we supposed to pretend that strategy and tactics aren’t applicable to politics? Winning the broader war wins many smaller battles by default.
And consider this, every time we lose, it’s going to get worse and worse and keep shifting the Overton Window to the right.
Are we supposed to pretend that strategy and tactics aren’t applicable to politics? Winning the broader war wins many smaller battles by default.
I’m looking at the current Democratic strategy of moving to the right, and continuing to lose.
You are correct that strategy and tactics are applicable. Maybe if the Democrats want to win, they should avoid their losing strategy.
The US democrat party has a huge problem. That it is in the US. Therefore, there can only be 2 parties. Yet, the spectrum of politicians is huge. It’s big enough for it to be hated by everyone.
The right will hate the democrats because they are woke and young and pro-trans, pro-brown, pro-immigrant.
And the left will hate the democrats because they are fascists, old, anti-trans, racists and anti-immigrants.
The media can pick and choose what democrat they want to demonize, and that ends up hurting the entire party. The left will hate the rightmost democrats, and the right will do the same with the leftmost ones.
Which ends up with conservatives voting for the republicans, and progressives not even bothering to vote because they are too much to the right.
They only win sometimes because the republicans are so ridiculously horrible that any good big policy will land the democrats the white house. But good luck getting that whole spectrum + their donors to all agree on one good big policy.
almost as if the Democrats should run an actual Leftist candidate so the Left would turn out for them.
worked for the Republicans. the Right turned out for Trump after the party withered under decades of neocons.
That’s where the next problem comes in. America has a fuckton of fascists.
Turning to the right in a right environment will always be more successful than turning to the left.
The only way out is to advocate for leftwing policies without stating they are left-wing. Whatever is labeled “woke” in America is probably not going to gain them many votes.
is Mamdani woke? is Luigi woke?
they’re both extremely polarizing, hated by the establishment and extraordinarily popular. kinda like Trump was, actually.
I haven’t looked into it, but mamdani is probably extremely popular in NY, but hated by the MAGA crowd. Since they probably heard him from fox news than from his policies.
I haven’t heard Luigi be called woke. But what he did is not (just) culturally left, it is economically left. Which is what I think the left should focus on. Culturally left is “woke” because that is what the commies do in their cities, “real hardworking manly Americans” don’t have trans people in their rural towns, but they do have bloodsucking healthcare companies.
Listening to the children’s feelings is “woke”. Increasing the taxes on the billionaires to deliver drinkable water to Americans is not.
I think you are glossing over a big part of the picture: Where the Democratic leadership gaslights their voters, and pushes against popular, leftist candidates, and popular, leftist policies.
Yes, the Democratic party has a huge problem: They actively fight against the politicians and policies that their voters want.
To be fair. They have tried with what they believe Americans want.
It’s been on the decline lately, but the last ~10 years there has been a big trend of “Americans wants black women”. If a movie had a group of at least 4 people, a black woman was one of them. If an ad had 4 people in quick succession, a black woman was one of them.
So they saw this opportunity and decided that the most important thing would be having the first black woman president. They might just be incredibly bad at seeing what the voters actually want. And of course, going for cultural-left made them lose against the most incompetent opponent.
Or they might just be physically unable to be an economically left party, so they go with cultural left in order to differentiate themselves with the fascism party.
To be fair. They have tried with what they believe Americans want.
No they didn’t. Americans have very clearly been saying that they want someone who is not a status-quo, neoliberal politician, who is only in it to help out their donors. The Democrats keep saying “Nah, we’re just gonna pick the candidate for you.”
They didn’t do this because they are bad at reading what people want, they did this because their core philosophy is directly oppositional to what Americans want.
It’s been on the decline lately, but the last ~10 years there has been a big trend of “Americans wants black women”. If a movie had a group of at least 4 people, a black woman was one of them. If an ad had 4 people in quick succession, a black woman was one of them.
What are you talking about? I’ve never heard anyone say that. It might shock you to hear this, but movies aren’t where you find out what voters want.
So they saw this opportunity and decided that the most important thing would be having the first black woman president.
No, they saw the opportunity to have another corporate shill who won’t rock the boat and took it. She just happened to be the VP at the time, so they could justify not having an actual primary.
And of course, going for cultural-left made them lose against the most incompetent opponent.
No, them picking terrible, center-right candidates, running on terrible, center-right policies, and openly telling their voter-base to sit down and shut up is what made them lose.
Or they might just be physically unable to be an economically left party, so they go with cultural left in order to differentiate themselves with the fascism party.
They aren’t physically unable, they chose to be bound by what their donors tell them.
Winning an election is step one. Policies that benefit everyone (except maybe the very top) is next. Then win the next election and pull the country left. Then rinse and repeat. We didn’t get here overnight.
But Democrats aren’t winning. They are moving to the right and losing. In the rare circumstances where they do win, they generally end up supporting right-wing policies anyway. It’s almost like there’s a correlation between those…
We have two different problems. The democratic party as everyone knows, is a feckless bunch. So it must be turned into a viable party once again. But we can’t rehabilitate it and kneecap it at the same time. They also have to win (and then cycle/replace candidates that aren’t with the program.)
The Tea Party did it to Republicans. We have to do it for Democrats… It would also be great to erode resistance to ranked choice voting.
It’s a tall order. We should have been doing it twenty or thirty years ago.
The Democrats learned from what happened to the Republican party, and set up systems to prevent that from happening. You can keep fighting to rehabilitate them, but I’m not gonna waste my time. Just like you can fight to rehabilitate the Republicans if you want, but I’m not gonna hold my breath for that either.
Probably traditional tribal resistance to criticism that calls into question dominant cultural scripts. It’s the same instinct that demands resistance only be peaceful and legal.
