600
submitted 3 weeks ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 75 points 3 weeks ago

The democrats know all these things and don’t care. they’re just as much in service to the billionaires as the republicans.

[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

They'd rather lose to Republicans than cross their "donors."

The gravy train runs to both parties as long as they protect this sociopathic grift of an economy from the people it enslaves. The DNC would consider winning on a platform of ending oligarchy (which could only ever happen with a left wing populist that steals the party out from under them like Trump did to the GOP, solely to steal their grift machine in his case) a catastrophic defeat and national crisis on the level we wish they'd treat Trump like.

It's why leaders like Nancy Pelosi make it their mission to sabotage spoiler members (because both parties promote on the basis of being a good bribe getter and taker) like AOC. She spent weeks before Trump was inaugurated making calls to prevent AOC's committee leadership bid. There's the DNC's priorities.

Our whole captured government is a game of neoliberal/fascist-good cop/bad cop. Do you want to waste your life enriching sociopath would be pharoahs with affirmation ribbons or scapegoats? A con game we can't stop playing as we're exploited dry.

[-] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 3 weeks ago

Liberals don't care. Socialists / progressives do care. Bernie and AOC have consistently fought to expand class consciousness and to fight against the growing wealth disparity

[-] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

The "liberals" you speak of are just conservatives larping as liberals

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 3 weeks ago

The word for a liberal that cares about class consciousness is "Error: undefined. Did you mean socialist?"

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 weeks ago

I’ll give Bernie a pass although he’s a milquetoast ineffectual social democrat. AOC is a fraud.

[-] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

You know, I see people like you saying this stuff and I guess I don’t understand it. WHO are you advocating for to do the thing(s) you want? I would like specific names you would put forward.

I’m not politically educated enough to know who these others are that someone like you would recommend, but I do see a lot of complaining and not enough solutions being presented so that someone like me could learn about them.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 weeks ago

Anarchism. I have zero faith in government and my beliefs have only gotten stronger and stronger as I’ve gotten older.

There’s no one in government I trust. AOC is neolib larping as a progressive/ social democrat. They’re all still liberals and don’t actually threaten capital.

[-] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Thank you.

I don’t personally think anarchism is the right thing based on the definition of anarchy but I get your line of thinking. A legit real, physical resistance is probably needed.

I have zero faith in our American government as well. They want to status quo and don’t want to give up their power.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago

There are many different kinds of anarchy, I can assure you the common definition of “chaos” is inaccurate.

[-] lurklurk@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

And anarchy is achieved by complaining about all government options online?

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 weeks ago

And what is achieved by voting for democrats? Fascism?

[-] lurklurk@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

It's a small action to help less get fascism. It's arguably more effective than manifesting anarchism

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

Well you failed, you got just as much fascism because liberals create the conditions that enable fascism and do nothing to stop it because that would offend their capitalist donors. Read a history book instead of smugly scolding the left for your failures.

[-] lurklurk@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Good luck with your strategy of ... checks notes... doing nothing

It's honestly amusing

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

Good luck with your strategy of voting harder seems to be working out great for ya shit lib.

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 1 points 3 weeks ago

Isn't AOC a Democrat?

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 19 points 3 weeks ago

I generally avoid painting them all with a single brush like that.

Some absolutely are bought off like you describe. But an awful lot are not — the big problem we've had is that the contingent of the bought off Democrats plus the Republicans has been enough to block meaningful action, even when the Democrats have had a nominal majority.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 weeks ago

I’m tired of the excuse making for them. It’s like sitting at a table of 10 Nazis. Guess what? It’s 11 Nazis.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 5 points 3 weeks ago

Problem with that view is that minority of the Democrats were bought off, like about 4%. And they had a hard time winning reelection as a result

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 weeks ago
[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 6 points 3 weeks ago

If so, it doesn't show up in voting records or rhetoric.

[-] Bacano@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Definitely the party leaders who consistently outperform the S and P

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I dislike this comparison because it invokes a circular reasoning / begging the question fallacy:

What we are debating is whether all billionaires are bad. Then you raise a comparison trying to prove they're all bad by associating them with nazis.

But we haven't yet established if the 10 billionaires around a table are all inherently evil or to the same degree to begin with.

Bill Gates or Warren Buffett are not as bad as Musk or the Waltons. At least the former believe they shouldn't exist in the first place. So when fighting fascism we kind of need all the resources we can get.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 weeks ago

Gee who’s funding the Nazis right now (and back then)? The billionaires.

I was using the saying because it’s appropriate, but the Nazi comparison is double appropriate.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

All?

And do you think no comparative billionaires funded the allied war machine against Hitler, himself?

Moreover can you identify a specific policy compromise where in the absence of support from Tyler Perry, Bill Gates, or Mark Cuban for example, Harris would've performed better in the absence of their support and funding?

Can you please explain how Tyler Perry is as deplorable as Charles or David Koch?

The fallacy remains.

[-] sudo42@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

The last 3 elections have shown there are only two groups: Republicans and Republicans that get paid less.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 3 weeks ago

I feel like they get paid just as much only put on a fucking costume and pretend to be something they aren’t.

But thank you for your sane comment in a world of complete fucking insanity and denial about what’s really going on.

[-] sudo42@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

True. Maybe "Republicans and JV Republicans" is more accurate?

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago

Oooo good one.

Taking bets if there is a 2028 election (there won’t be) the democrats will run Liz Cheney.

[-] KnowledgeableNip@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Controlled opposition.

But still better than whatever is happening now. I can't imagine a Nazi salute at Kamala's inauguration.

[-] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 3 weeks ago

True, liberals are the lesser evil compared to neocons and fascists.

But the top 100 richest billionaires grew their wealth by 63% under Biden so liberalism still inevitably leads to extreme wealth disparities that erode democracy until neo-feudalistic oligarchy is all that will remain

[-] KnowledgeableNip@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago

They'd never go after their donors but at least I don't have to worry about a second Wannsee Conference.

[-] h4x0r@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago

Republican reich vs republican lite.

[-] rayyy@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

The democrats know all these things and don’t care.

Kevin Phillips, the Republican architect of the "Southern Strategy, has a vastly different view. He essentially said, in his book, "American Dynasty", that Republicans think of the working class as dirt to be used however they royally please, while Democrats at least acknowledged that the working class enabled them to be where they are and supported them.
BYTW, Kevin Phillips, who is very politically knowledgeable, is now extremely disillusioned with Republicans and generally hates both parties.

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 weeks ago

Maybe that was true in 2004 when it was published but it is no longer true. Both see the working class as dirt.

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 2 points 3 weeks ago

Fortunately there's other parties

[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

As it stands, third-party will never win in the US.

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 1 points 3 weeks ago

Fortunately we can change the election system to be democratic. Maine did it years ago, for example

[-] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

Good luck with that on a federal level. Neither the Democrats nor Republicans will risk losing an inch of power.

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 2 points 3 weeks ago

Luigi has entered the chat

[-] inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago

That I voted for despite the fact they’ll never get an ounce of power

this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2025
600 points (100.0% liked)

politics

20229 readers
3121 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS