#if you want politicians who build things and make progress

[tyrannosaurus-trainwreck]

I feel like Kerry was doing pretty well until he got swiftboated and then everybody pretty much fell for it?

But I mean, politics isn't a reality tv show. It's not supposed to be "exciting" or "dramatic" outside of acute crises. A big part of the current problem has been caused by the media's addiction to the political horse race--no matter how wildly unequal two candidates are, they're going to give the impression that they're neck and neck the whole way in order to drive viewer engagement.

You, as one of the poor bastards who's not a multimedia conglomerate and actually has to live with the outcome, do not want a presidential candidate who's a hot mess, or who thinks they're hosting a roast every time they get on camera. The two presidents in living memory who were very good at being entertaining--Trump and Reagan--were unmitigated human rights disasters with shit policies across the board.

You remember Trump's Muslim ban? The federal goon squads deployed to cities he didn't think were handling the police-brutality protests harshly enough? The medical gear and supplies that got distributed as a reward for state governors' loyalty during the worst of the pandemic? I mean, yeah, it made for some real crackerjack headlines, but it was fucking terrifying to live through. And that's if you did, in fact, live through it. Not everybody did.

Ideally you want a candidate who's a good, engaging public speaker and fairly charismatic, but podium-thumping demagogues and rabble-rousing activists tend not to be great at the long-term, consistent, broad-spectrum political work that most elected officials need to do. Even municipal-level politicians tend to have terms of at least 2 years, and even the ones who run on single issues still have to deal competently with a whole bunch of shit they don't personally care about all the time. They have to be able to stay focused and not burn out.

I don't even know if "take over the DNC, kids" is what will do it, since it seems like it takes about three years for leftists to turn on even the younger, more progressive and nominally "exciting" politicians like Ocasio-Cortez over the compromises made to keep the government functioning.

The kids most likely to wind up taking over the DNC are still going to be unsexy nerds more interested in diverting bloated police budgets to a slew of community initiatives, or reinstating building codes that kept unethical developers from building low-income housing on flood plains, or introducing data-driven benefits programs pegged to cost of living indices than in shaking their asses on social media, passing ideological purity tests, or giving barn-burner speeches.

They're occasionally going to have to vote for bills with shitty riders, have a shitty opinion, or endorse a shitty colleague. They're going to have to be at least palatable to a voting majority of their constituency, which means they're probably not going to be able to run on "defund the police" or "expand welfare access" or "fuck your real estate prices" at any level higher than the House, and even then only if it's a small and very liberal seat. The ones who wind up with a reasonable shot at the presidency are unlikely to be radicals or ideologues simply by virtue of needing to appeal to a majority of voters.

Like, I don't know what to tell you. The right can put up whatever clown they want so long as he solemnly swears to keep undermining the government's ability to rein in corporate malfeasance, and the superPAC money will come pouring in. They are actively trying to break anything they can't burn to the ground. There's no drawback for that guy to run around yelling "Cry harder, libs!" and being a bozo. The people he's aiming for actively want a dysfunctional government that harms its citizens through inaction, and the spectacle also serves to disengage people who don't want that but are also too terrified of socialized medicine, immigrants, and the poors to reliably vote blue.

Unless what you want is that, only the bozo is running around yelling "Nationalize your mom!", then there's a certain level of bland, workhorse dependability that you have to make peace with in a presidential candidate. So long as more than 35% of the electorate is afraid that you are, in fact, going to nationalize their mom, the Dems aren't putting up anyone without a known anti-mom-nationalizing platform.

Are their policies good? Will they work with your down-ticket radicals and reformers to move the country in the right direction, or at least stay out of the way? Do they have experts and cabinet members picked out who are going to run their agencies well? Will they get you closer to your goals than the guy whose last cabinet was primarily white supremacists? Will all that let you pressure your representatives and senators to work with progressive elements to get more progressive laws passed? Yeah? Okay, then.

We have lived through this before.

People said Gore wasn't good enough, that he was Bland and uninteresting and middle of the road and something had to change. So they voted third party or they didn't vote at all. And the Democratic party didn't wake up, and we got George W Bush and all the absolute hot garbage that came with him.

And they said Hillary Clinton was the wrong candidate, that she was middle of the road at best and conservative for the Democrats at worst, that she was entitled and they were going to vote for a third party or they didn't vote at all or worse yet, they voted for the other candidate as a joke because it's not like those votes change things, you know? And the Democratic party didn't magically wake up, they didn't majorly change, and we are still dealing with the fallout from that.

And that's not only twice in my lifetime, but twice in my voting lifetime. One of the important things you learn in therapy is that you cannot change other people, and you cannot set your expectations based on how you think they ought to react to certain things.

If you are refusing to vote, or voting third-party because of what you think it's going to make someone else do, please reconsider.

If you want to make the liberals or the centrists or whatever you want to call them wake up, you're going to need to do something that hasn't already been done twice in the last 20 years.

[thecolorblockcurator]

If I see one more now it’s time for the hard work or now it’s time to start community building post I’m going to lose it

I don’t want to be in a community with people who couldn’t even vote to begin with. The easiest thing. Competent politician with a track record of making substantial progressive and non-partisan changes throughout her career who is wildly more progressive than any other sitting president vs fascist white supremacist wannabe dictator who is a literal convicted felon and rapist who is close friends with dictators.

With early voting, drop off boxes, vote guides. It was so easy

But you didn’t vote. You couldn’t in your conscious vote.

I can’t in my conscious share a community with someone who is so self involved that they are willing to sacrifice the safety and rights of millions of individuals to make a point.

You had your chance. Community building is hard it requires compromise and you couldn’t even vote.

[portablechargertmblr]

Why does it matter?

A question asked to me by so many, predominantly, cis white males. "Why does the election matter?", followed by "they're both bad people" and "We don't even live there" Here is why it matters.

Donald Trump is one of the most prevalent factors in bringing hate speech to the public. He made it something you can be outspoken about. Name one person who didn't know about Trump's "build a wall to keep out the immigrants" belief in 2016. And it DOES make a difference. A difference in how people are treated in America, across the globe. A difference in what politicians are going to make their platform about; because being open and progressive is no longer what the voters want to hear!

Small things started to happen, piece by piece. Corporations no longer backing pride, the rise in disgusting, misogynistic podcasts/celebrities. There's no longer any SEMBLANCE of supporting queer communities and women's rights. The predominant voice in all the media we absorb around us is no longer pretending to care.

It matters for the world because as much as we hate it, America is powerful. America has started and ended wars. America has instilled leaders and changed the course of history countless of times. America has proven to us all the damage it can do. Trump has proven to us all the damage he can do.

To the point where that nation being a democracy is near laughable. If he loses, half the country won't even accept it. This is unbelievable and NOT how things were prior to his harmful rhetoric.

I recall 2016, I was sitting with my mom on the couch in shock. What broke my heart above all else, was Trump's promise to bomb Allepo during the debate. This was a city under siege in Syria, one with thousands of non-evacuated civilians and children. What on earth makes you think he won't do this again?

So yes, to everyone out there wondering. It does matter. People all around the world will die because of this. The rights of marginalized communities will be questioned all around the world because of this. When the rest of politics becomes just as fucked up as America's, and you are the one standing in front of a voter's ballot deciding the future of your nation, it will matter.

I am absolutely devastated by Trump being re-elected. All this being said, we must still live on. We MUST offer support to those who need it now more than ever. We MUST stay strong for all of our friends and family that may be directly impacted by this. We MUST stay together, because then Trump winning the country does not mean he has won our lives.

[tobiasdrake]

To everyone who's absolutely livid about this election and even more livid about the various pundits and even Democratic politicians claiming that Kamala "palling around with Liz Cheney and wanting Republicans in her cabinet" Harris was "too far left":

Be mad. Stay mad. I need all-a-y'all to show up ready to rock when 2026 Congressional primary seasons begin. Maybe even run yourself.

If establishment Democrats take away from this that they lost because they weren't far enough to the Right, they are only going to alienate Democratic voters further. As Republicans turn into Trumpists, we cannot allow our side to shift so far right that the Dems outright become Republicans.

Democratic voters will not vote for Honorary Republicans.

Democrats who learn the wrong lessons from this and move right? They need to be destroyed. The primary election is where you have the power to do that. If they keep coming out and saying things like "I'm against trans people too!" and "We need to fix our border crisis!" and "Kamala lost because she was woke!" then their ability to court the votes of the Left will necessarily wane.

But they can be replaced.

If you weren't there for the rise of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, you need to understand that she was running for the district of Joseph Crowley. Crowley was the guy. He was so important to the party that he was being groomed to replace Nancy Pelosi as leader of the House. This man was so untouchable, he didn't even bother to show up to the debates.

AOC destroyed him in the primary and then swept the general. He was so powerful that he was supposed to lead a key faction of the party and instead he was dragged kicking and screaming out of office by a progressive liberal, because voters liked her better. He's gone. He sells weed now.

And if they learn the right lessons and move left? Great. Still show up to the primaries ready to rock with even more leftist ideas anyway. If you win, great, and if you lose, you still make them scared and force them to come even more to the left.

The primary is where we get to fight for the identity of our own party. So stay mad. Scream at the top of your lungs. Don't be afraid to criticize Dems. And in the meantime, build coalitions, build support for leftist causes, and show up ready to rock when primary season comes.

[ellevandersneed]

People really hate the idea of unemployment benefits, and constantly obsess over who "deserves" to have access to food, housing, and medical services. There are people who know, deep down in their hearts, that their job is horrible and that life would be better if they could do whatever they wanted, and since its too hard to imagine a future where everyone is free, they spend their time conjuring with their minds all sorts of scam artists and lazy "degenerates" who don't work, and steal unemployment benefit from "deserving" unemployed. Maybe all of those bad, underserving people who don't work will one day die out. Maybe the government should implement a program so that we can finally exterminate this undesirable element of society so that everyone who wants to work can stay working. I've met people who think this. They vote in US elections. They are your boss and your "progressive" friend and your parent. There are thousands of people who wake up every day and think like this. The idea of who does and does not "deserve" unemployment does not end at one type of person. The perpetually unemployed: the autistic individual, the physically disabled friend, etc, are all dead weights on society in the eyes of your petite bourgeoisie cousin or uncle or neighbor. "Why should I have to share my earnings with these dead-weights?" they think. But they ignore the fact that, in order for their bosses to make a profit with their business, they are being paid only a fraction of what their labor-power is worth. Business owners have been doing this for centuries and human beings have been coerced in one way or another to accept it as normal and healthy. It's, unfortunately, communist to think about that sort of thing. Better to flip the blame downwards. It's those dead-weight leftists and disableds that are really keeping me from having all the wealth I deserve. We just need to build a society around killing off anyone who doesn't fit into this model. Anyone who isn't physically fit goes into the furnace! I have had a close family member tell me how good COVID was because it "killed off" a lot of the physically disabled. That mentality flourishes in places like the US, where freedom and democracy are just words you say in order to show that you love the United States and all it represents. US Uber Alles! Pitchforks not for my boss, but for my disabled neighbor, nephew, and childhood friend! There's a reason why US politicians and businessmen don't work that hard to keep quasi-fascists like Trump out of the White House.

[nappingpaperclip]

“People who tell you not to vote Biden are psyops trying to steal left votes” type posts are pro-government propoganda.

Last time y’all spread that bullshit around the blogs getting deleted for being “Russian spies” were black leftists.

NOT EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH YOU IS A PSYOP. Get real!!

Not everyone who criticizes Biden or says they won’t be voting for a genocider and that you shouldn’t either wants you to vote for Trump or not vote!! Third party candidates exist!!! Write ins exist!!! If we actually organized instead of y’all pulling the “lesser evil” bs about a GENOCIDAL RACIST RAPIST OLD MAN we might actually see some fuckin progress!!

Did y’all forget Biden is a rapist?????

Btw is the “left” in the room with us? Where is the left? Where is the progress y’all keep claiming Biden is making?

Last time I checked Biden has not let those kids out of cages, has personally approved more huge pipelines that run through Indigenous lands and speed up climate change, has ex-BlackRock leaders (yknow, the top 10 climate change villains company who also funds most American private prisons as well as funding arms manufacturing companies, who spend millions lobbying politicians on environmental regulations, immigration and drug policy) in his cabinet, increased police and military budget, didn’t codify Roe v Wade, in fact he held it hostage for votes, hasn’t codified gay marriage or trans rights, hasn’t legalized marijuana, hasn’t raised the federal minimum wage, oh and also is DOING GENOCIDE in case y’all forgot or wanna tiptoe around the “some bad policies” y’all always talk about

Did y’all forget about his “nothing will fundamentally change” policy?

Y’all heard that and thought “left”?? Babes he’s a right leaning centrist AT BEST.

There are actually left candidates btw! Ones who care about things like Landback and reparations and free healthcare and education and sustainability! The ones y’all are telling people are throwaway votes/votes for Trump!! (Which isn’t even how the electoral college works btw)

So us telling y’all not to vote for a genocider makes us Russian psyop spies but y’all telling us not to vote for leftist third party candidates doesn’t? K.

Vote for who you want, I don’t give a fuck anymore, BUT DONT TELL HIM HE STILL HAS YOUR UNCONDITIONAL SUPPORT WHILE HES COMMITTING GENOCIDE IF YOU ACTUALLY WANT HIM TO STOP

The only way to get a politician to stop doing WAR CRIMES is to tell them you won’t vote for them or give them money or otherwise support them until they stop!

You can fucking lie if you want!!! All we’re asking is for y’all not to publicly announce Genocide Joe still has your unconditional support WHILE HES DOING GENOCIDE

His approval ratings are literally less than Trumps!

He has no one to blame but himself.

If he loses in November, I don’t want to hear y’all bitch and moan and blame black people or disillusioned voters or third party voters or “Russian spies” again like y’all did in 2016, I don’t want to see y’all blame anyone but him, BLAME BIDEN FOR HIS OWN ACTIONS. HE IS A GROWN MAN AND HAS THE MONEY AND POWER TO STOP IT IF HE ACTUALLY WANTED TO.

Y’all keep saying he’s doing his best to stop it, that he’s working behind the scenes, that he’s trying, IF HES TRYING WHY ARE WE STILL SENDING ISRAEL MONEY?

IF HE IS TRYING, WHY DID HE SEND ISRAEL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN SMALL PAYMENTS TO AVOID NOTIFYING CONGRESS?

IF HES TRYING WHY HAVE WE NOT SANCTIONED ISRAEL?

IF HES TRYING, WHY HAVE US SOLDIERS BEEN SEEN FIGHTING ALONGSIDE THE IDF?

IF HES TRYING WHY ARE WE SENDING EXPIRED MREs AS AID? EXPIRED FOOD DROPS THAT ARE NOT ENOUGH TO FEED MILLIONS OF STARVING PEOPLE, WITH FAULTY PARACHUTES THAT KILL CHILDREN?

IF HES TRYING, WHY DID WE BUILD A PORT CUTTING THE GAZA STRIP IN HALF, A PORT THAT NETANYAHU SAID WOULD BE USED TO DEPORT PALESTINIANS?

IF HES TRYING WHY DID HE SIGN OFF $14 BILLION FUCKING DOLLARS ON TOP OF THE ANNUAL CONTRACT AND SMALL SECRET PAYMENTS TO GO TOWARDS ISRAELS BOMBS AND GUNS AND FREE HEALTHCARE WHILE IGNORING THE PEOPLE HERE WHO NEED FOOD, HOUSES, AND HEALTHCARE???

DONT MAKE UP RUSSIAN SPIES TO POINT FINGERS AT! IF HE DOESNT WANT TO LOSE HE SHOULDNT DO GENOCIDE

IF GENOCIDE JOE LOSES THE ELECTION FUCKING BLAME HIM FOR DOING A GENOCIDE!!

[spock-smokes-weed]

Sorry I’m not done chirping. I have bad insomnia right now.

I’m honestly so sick of the pearl clutching from liberals right now about people not voting. It comes across as so fucking tone deaf.

Listen, I am pro voting and of the mind it’s much smarter in the long run to vote instead of sitting out. Low voter turn out is how the Republicans can stay in power.

However, I feel like turning up your nose at those who don’t vote doesn’t do anything to actually understand WHY people don’t vote. And it’s usually because the Dems never fucking bring anything to the table and try to coast on being the lesser of two evils. That is honestly such an insulting way to run a campaign.

Especially when it comes to minority voters. A lot of them have spoken to how they feel like their material conditions never improve under either party. Yes they get worse under republicans, but “not making things worse” should never be the standard we set. But that’s the message Dems have been running on since Ronald Regan.

And in regards to the moment we’re in now, I think it’s heartless to be looking down on Muslim and Palestinian Americans for not wanting to vote for Kamala Harris. Sure, Palestine might not be a deal breaker for YOU, but spare a fucking thought to the people who’ve lost whole branches of their family in this genocide. This comes back to what I said before: things would be worse in Gaza under Trump, but you’re delusional to think the Biden administration has handled this well. On the issue of Israel/Palestine, Biden and Trump are the same.

As Genocide Joe’s VP, Kamala Harris absolutely has to answer to the abysmal way the administration has handled this genocide. It’s cowardly for her to stay silent and hope she can toe the line up until Election Day. And the time to call her out isn’t when she gets in the White House, it’s right now while she’s still courting the American people.

There are plenty of people who want to vote for the Harris/Walz ticket and their progressive policies, but the silence on Palestine is an absolute deal breaker. My GOAT Hasan Piker said he would literally door knock for Kamala if she changes her position on Americans unwavering support to Israel. Continuing to stick by Israel is LOSER behavior. It’s another example of Dems scurrying to the right on unpopular issues because they’re spineless cowards who are afraid of making brave political decision. The Dems have nothing to gain from their current position. Literally nothing. 

For the people are going to vote no matter what (like myself) now isn’t the moment to spit and hiss at people for not wanting to vote, now is the moment to stand with the people who feel left behind by democratic policy and DEMAND the democrats do better. And we do that by disrupting the good press Harris is getting right now. Go out and protest and call your representatives!!! Make it clear “I’d love to vote for Harris but I can’t in good conscience until her position on Israel changes” THAT’S IT!!!! Even if that’s a lie!!! It’s okay to lie to politicians!!!! Tell them you won’t vote even if you are!!!! Enough noise will make it impossible for them to ignore it!!! 

The biggest problem with the Democratic Party is that they’ve tried time and time again to chase the success the republicans had, instead of engaging with their own base. We are seeing right now the progressive policies are popular and it’s smart politics to build a base on that. And it’s actually incredibly dumb to adopt right wing positions on issues like immigration and Palestine. Drawing the line in the sand now while the Dems are on a winning streak could do a lot to drag American politics away from the nightmare we’ve been living under since Regan. 

[yannaryartside]

THE VALUE OF PARTNERS

ANOTHER REVISION OF THE PUSHING ELEMENT

I have been thinking about my favorite partnerships on TV and what made those relationships valuable in the professional world of the characters, but also incredibly transformational on a personal level, all in the context of the "pushing" thing the show and cast keep bringing up.

In good shows centered around partnerships, the two characters should not only complement each other, but also be crafted so their personalities and motives serve as an element that force each other to go through major character development. Most of the time, these changes are gonna build the "theme" of the show.

This essay discusses how SydCarmy follows the principles of the other 3 dynamics. Spoiler alert for all the shows. Long post underneath.

A PARTNER COMPENSATES THE THINGS YOU ARE NOT GOOD AT

Leo McGarry is the chief of staff of president Jed Bartlet in the show The West Wing. These two are long time friends, and is Leo who convinces Jed to run for president. Since the beginning, Leo makes a lot of decisions for Jed, and he continues to do so when he assumes power.

"Because you are a crappy politician," said Leo when Jed asked him why he should let in decide in certain matters. That is true; Jed was an idealist and a professor of economics who could see the world of conflicts in his mind like a movie, but Leo was the only one who knew how to deal with the malice of the political world. These were not defects; it was only the way they were built. But Leo showed Jed the person he could be. Jed shows Leo how to believe that actual change can be made.

In a recent article I read about S3, they said this season will show why Syd is such a "nonnegotiable" part of the staff (like that was not obvious before, but ok) because it will show her as a balance to Carmy's tempest. They complement each other in other aspects:

Carmy definitely is not good at the logistics part of things, and Syd probably will force him to consider certain things in his future vision the way she did in s1.

Syd is definitely not good at trusting herself, but Carmy helps her in this aspect.

Syd dreamed about actual "progress" and "excellence," not just doing "better," because for Carmy, doing "better' with what his family had given him was already more than he dared to imagine. I wonder how he will carry getting a star as his own intention.

Syd brings the water to every conflict Carmy puts fire into.

Carmy can bring "wisdom" to Syd's fears rooted in lack of experience. Consider the actual mature perspective about Syd's problems with his father and the "then nobody comes" answer to her fears about the restaurant in the table scene.

A PARTNER FORCES YOU TO TRANSFORM/ SHOWS YOU WHAT YOU COULD BE

In Elementary, Joan Watson is the sober companion of the drug-addicted detective Sherlock Holmes. As their personal relationship, respect, and care for each other grow, they form a professional partnership.

None of them could have become the ultimate version of themselves without each other.

Joan, with her friendship, encourages Sherlock to heal from the wounds that were the biggest threats to recovering from the addiction that ruined his life and professional career, not to mention their friendship, and the others she brought into his life gave Sherlock his first real chance at happiness.

Sherlock points to Joan how much she wants to obey society's rules for a woman to the point of not recognizing what she actually wants to do with her life. She mentors her into becoming a detective and helps her to recognize how boring she is of a mundane existence.

In the past and future of the show, Carmy and Syd are the characters who force change in each other the most, which is a constant catalyst for character development. Regardless of how much they wanted to change, the fact that they have given change a go is probably the biggest indicator of how much they want to make this work. They are each other's door to the ultimate version of themselves.

Carmy very much forced Syd to be a leader. She didn't feel prepared to form the brigade. Regardless of how much he created a scenario for the staff to resent her, the show wants to teach us that this was a deep fear of hers, and she needed to go through with it to not fear it any longer, all while Carmy was absent. Ironically, even when he actually wants to be present for her at the opening, we all know how that went. It will be interesting to see how much they will support each other next season. But in Carmy's eyes, Syd can see the person she was afraid she would not be able to become, the leader she needs to be if she wants to pursue this dream.

Carmy doesn't know how to operate outside the elements that made his home and past jobs so toxic. He is shaped by knives, but he has a deep gentleness inside and cares for people, which responds to Sydney's efforts for fairness and growth. In her eyes, he can clearly see the person he would like to become: a fair leader, the one he didn't have at home or at work.

There is also a final dark tone at this point: Carmy is pretty much the staple of the psycho chef that she has been afraid of her whole professional life. Working with Carmy (especially in S3) will definitely put her in a position of what she will do with that. It will "force" her to change, whatever that does to their professional and personal relationship.

A PARTNER MAKES YOU SEE THE WORLD IN OTHER EYES

Finally, this one is more rooted in the romantic/friendship aspect.

In the show Castle, a partnership forms between the closed-book detective Beckett and the eccentric mystery writer Castle. Their dynamic is rooted in their deep respect for each other and a ton of romantic/sexual tension. However, their conflicts tend to revolve around their perspectives of the world, and they must change it because of each other.

Castle teaches Beckett to see the world with enjoyment and wonder, which is deeply healing for her after a long time of her life being dictated by past trauma. Beckett and her work allow the Castle to channel some dark instincts he had hidden from himself and show him the hero he also always had inside him.

I think Syd allows Carmy a freedom of form he had never known before; she shows him understanding (actual one, not superficial like Claire tried to do based on shared trauma), compassion, and clear limits that force him to grow. She is actually reliable to the point his family never was. She never guilt trips him and has formed a good communication system and (most of the time) expectations.

Carmy admires Syd's honesty and freedom of spirit, and I think Syd admires Carmy's resilience. They have always wanted to be the best friends they can be for each other, which can be world-changing for both.

CONCLUSION: what does this mean for the pushing allegory

I guess it depends on how you use it. None of these characters came into each other's lives in a gentle way; the changes they were forced to make because they were in proximity to each other came with a lot of internal conflict. That is the point.

But "pushing": would have never gone far without the other half of te partnership accepting the new truth the partner was bringing in.

Because real change is only possible from within.

So the "push" is actually just an invitation, and it can only be that to be meaningful, healthy, and long-lasting. Let's see how the push goes in season 3.

Thank you for reading.

[yourgamemasterthewhiterabbit]

I have said this so many times before, but revolution is coming, it can either happen peacefully and gently, by the government conceding to meet the people's needs, or it can happen violently, but it will happen, people will not just quietly die en-mass to feed your ego.

Everyone making the choices, the 1%ers, right wing politicians, they think they can deny people reasonable access to food, to shelter, to healthcare and education, to a minimal quality of life, to security, they think they can stand in the way of progress, for profit, they think they can take away their rights over their own bodies, then convince them, the masses, the solution is individualism, to take things into their own hands, to arm themselves and wait 'for their revolution'... They literally encourage that "revolution or nothing" way of thinking as a way of keeping the population angry, and in their minds malleable and under control...

And they really think, they really think they can just ride that forever without hitting the point that it will erupt into a bloodbath... Not in some eventuality, but now, while people are dying and desperate. They think they can brazenly parade around in front of those same people protected by their class and wealth from the consequences of the system they are building, and somehow not inspire violence.

I keep trying to warn you where this will lead.

It isn't about what I want or what I think should happen, I'm not endorsing anything, let's be clear, it's about what will happen, really, it's about human nature.

This isn't about what's moral, or what's reasonable, or what you think you can stoke a divisive culture war against, it isn't about my opinion, I did not invent the nature of need, it's about what people have always done when faced with no good options, guns in their hands and staring up at the people sentencing them to suffering and death.

You give people their rights, you give them food and shelter, you give them dignity, education and a choice, or what you will get out of them is the violence of a people who's needs are being systematically denied them. Thinking you can convince people out of that is like thinking you can argue with gravity. [is that why your rockets crash?]

If you deny someone all their needs, arm them, and then tell them to either do something about it or go die in silence, what do you think will happen next? What do you genuinely expect?

There is a threshold of suffering past which no distraction will be enough.

You deny someone autonomy, you deny them safety, food, shelter, financial security, you deny them a future, you make the world hostile to them, you prove their electoral system doesn't work -or isn't working- and that partaking in the system doesn't get fair results, then you peacock around in front of them asking them "what are you going to do about it?"

They are starting to answer you.

[deadindeathvalley]

Hey gen z

I really thought this generation was going to pull through and help us make change this time around. I'm a young millennial. I'm not even that much older than y'all. But it's evident that there's a huge problem. Obviously this is a generalization and not all gen z is like this, but we need to talk. Now read this whole thing before you react.

Last year it made my heart swell seeing all these young people rally around Palestine. I thought it meant our country was moving forward. But this election really showed that y'all don't care about anyone who doesn't align with your specific political beliefs.

You have a majority of young Gen z men voting for trump, this whole "your body my choice" trend, and the absolutely horrifically racist behavior I've seen on the internet. You also have a lot of trades wife pick me girls bringing back ED culture and throwing tantrums when they see a fat person existing.

Then you come over to the left and it's full of tankies and people insisting that Dems and GOP are exactly the same and there's no point in voting. They hate liberal women seemingly more than they hate conservatives and take anything they do as a personal offence. They poopoo on any efforts to organize and call anything that isn't violent "performative." They see that 53% of white women voted for trump (which is less than in 2020) and accuse every white woman of being a fake progressive who secretly voted for trump or of having a trump supporting boyfriend.

Gen z refuses to have nuanced conversations and insists on infighting and hating liberals whom they have more in common with than the actual enemy. They are evangelical in their beliefs on both sides. They won't listen to older activists who have experience because they're "out of touch." They lack social skills and empathy, and push away anyone who tries to find common ground.

Y'all are making me feel old with this behavior. I will always be a leftist in my beliefs but I want nothing to do with our community. It's toxic and cannibalistic. Y'all act like mean girls and force people to submit to you. It's wild. Meanwhile liberals are trying to find solidarity with their blue bracelets and their pink hats and trying to support each other. Maybe you think it's corny but at least they're doing SOMETHING besides rotting in their bed and bullying people on the internet.

A lot of you live in these leftist little echo chambers, whether that's physically or online. You put statistics theory and articles over real people's experiences and don't understand that the majority of the country isn't as far left as you. If you want leftist politicians and policies then you have to give people a reason to vote for your cause. Some people just aren't aware, and you bullying them for not aligning with you will not make them want to vote for your guy. You have to have GENUINE conversations with people which a lot of you seem incapable of.

I'm not saying other generations aren't problematic in their own way, but I've spent a lot of time in leftist gen z spaces and my mental health hit an all time low during that time. It was full of a bunch of miserable people hazing anyone that wasn't as miserable as them. It was full of people preaching theory like it was the bible and blocking anyone who tried to have a nuanced conversation. They call anyone with spiritual beliefs a grifter and a liar and use the world liberal like it's a slur.

I need y'all to get your shit together and learn to be empathetic EVEN towards people you perceive as more privileged than you. Gen Z has a real problem with dehumanization, and I know because I almost fell into that trap. Learn to be kind to strangers, care about people different than you, and dismantle your individualism and maybe we'll get somewhere as a country.

Until then I'll see anyone wearing a blue bracelet as someone who's trying. I see you. Let's build a community.

Love,

Your older sibling.

[science-fiction-is-real]

To be brutally honest, I don't give a fuck if you vote for Joe Biden or not. I recognize he has done a small number of sort of good things and that trump is objectively worse on multiple fronts. It is a completely understandable choice.

But if you vote for Biden I need you to recognize three things.

1) the lesser of two evils is still insanely evil. Joe Biden is a horrible monster and has been for half a century. A ghoul among ghouls. If you care about progressive policy, Joe Biden should make your skin crawl. He deserves the fires of hell and worse.

2) the real route to political progress is not the ballot box. t's through building up mass movements of working class people who engage in collective action that directly challenge the ruling class's authority. Strikes, protests, direct action. History has shown that when working people are mobilized in large numbers, even right wing politicians are forced to implement progressive policy. Richard Nixon being my favorite example. If you are free on a Tuesday afternoon and have to choose between standing on a picket line and going to vote, choose the picket line.

3) we desperately need to build an alternative politics to the 2 corporate parties. We need to actually start creating a scenario in which a third party vote is viable. This means campaigning for third party candidates, joining and donating to third parties, and making your distaste for the Democrats known. This is not a project we can just procrastinate till after the next election. Because then you will want to put it off till after the next election too, and the one after that and the one after that. We have to start building this left wing alternative now.

[beardedmrbean]

The man who killed five people at a Louisville, Kentucky, bank in April was motivated by his outrage over the nation’s gun laws, which he considered lax and hoped a bloody rampage of white victims would spur politicians into action, according to a police report released Tuesday that contained excerpts from the killer’s journal.

Connor Sturgeon, 25, gunned down co-workers inside a conference room at Old National Bank on East Main Street on April 10 after he admitted in his journal that he was suffering from mental health issues, was dissatisfied with his job and the direction his life was taking.

Eight others were injured during the shooting, including a responding officer who was struck in the head and critically wounded. Sturgeon fired more than 40 rounds in about eight minutes, according to the report.

"I have decided to make an impact. These people did not deserve to die, but because I was depressed and able to buy [guns], they are gone," Sturgeon wrote in his journal on April 4, according to the report released by the Louisville Police Department.

"Perhaps this is the impact for change – upper class white people dying. I certainly would not have been able to do this were it more difficult to get a gun."

The April 4 journal entry was the same day he purchased an AR-15 rifle for $500 used in the deadly shooting six days later, according to a receipt in the police report. He also bought 120 rounds and four rifle magazines in a process that took about 45 minutes, he said.

Sturgeon noted his surprise at how straightforward it was for him to purchase the weapon, given his mental health struggles.

"OH MY GO THIS IS SO EASY," he wrote in bold. "I knew it would be doable but this is ridiculous."

He went on to ridicule lawmakers, writing how he wanted his actions to galvanize them.

"I know our politicians are solely focused on lining their own pockets, but maybe this will knock some sense into them. If not, good luck."

Sturgeon wrote that "Democrats get rich [by] doing nothing in the name of civility" while they allow Republicans to "do whatever they want to whoever they want."

"A level of corruption that stands directly between us and progress," he wrote.

The report also reveals that investigators found a plan stored in a Notes app in which he wrote, "They won’t listen to words or protests, so let’s see if they hear this."

Sturgeon appeared to reserve his harshest criticism for the National Rifle Association.

"But let us not forget the most important player here," he wrote on April 9. "The one who made all this possible. [Let's] give it up for the NRA!!"

"I couldn’t have done this without all of your lobbying dollars! You really brought this whole thing together. This is the world you are building. One without any regard for the value of human life."

In Kentucky, Sturgeon faced no barriers to entry as a gun owner since he had no prior criminal record, which means he would have passed the federally required background check, according to the Washington Post.

The state does not have a "red flag" law, a measure to prevent people who are reported to be potentially dangerous from buying and possessing guns.

Nevertheless, such a law may not have prevented Sturgeon from buying the weapon because his mental health struggles had not been reported to authorities.

Sturgeon’s family has said they intend to sue the maker of the rifle used in the attack.

The report also contained a picture of Sturgeon taking a selfie on April 5 that showed him making a "joker face," which authorities say is a trend popular on social media.

Authorities say they have closed the investigation into Sturgeon’s actions.

He was shot dead by police later that day, and investigators determined that the actions of the officer who shot Sturgeon were not criminal.

The five employees killed were Joshua Barrick, 40, a senior vice president; Deana Eckert, 57, an executive administrative officer; Thomas Elliott, 63, also a senior vice president; Juliana Farmer, 45, a loan analyst; and Jim Tutt Jr., 64, a commercial real estate market executive. Elliott was a close personal friend of Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear. Of the five victims, only Farmer was black.

[ludinusdaleth]

hi I’m from Australia and I’m just wondering if you can explain the phenomenon of people from “blue states” seemingly wishing death on people from “red states/southern states” cause alot of people I follow are queer/bipoc communist folk from the south and I keep seeing “do not dehumanise us just because we are a red state” and “do not celebrate the hurricane just because it’s happening in the south” and like… do people do this??? I’m almost scared to ask. Cause here in australia even when it takes place in the most conservative part of idk, deep north queensland, something like a bushfire is nationally mourned as a tragedy and people rally to fund rebuilding and rescue efforts. I don’t think ive ever seen someone say “those damn liberal-national voters had it comin” so im so lost at the concept that this is something that apparently happens in USAmerica. Can you possibly explain this? What makes supposedly “progressive” folks so cruel? All the love to you by the way I hope your friends and any family in hurricane affected areas are safe, totally understand if you don’t want to answer the question at this time ❤️

yeah, ill try to explain. thank you for the well wishes, though i am currently fine. im in texas (and not on the coast), so i barely get any hurricane brunt at any time, but i have close friends in the current affected states who i am sending all the love & support i can to. ill put this under a read more because there's a lot to cover.

all americans im sure are the exact same to non americans, but basically due to the civil war about a century and a half ago, there is a big cultural rift between the north and south states - mostly in the east, but western blue (liberal) states definitely fit the northern mindset, and some more northern states along the appalachian mountains are considered southern. because of the grip of slavery on the south before that war, we in the south have never really escaped that history (many songs cite the south as being full of ghosts of history, and god, it is). we are also stereotyped presently as racist dumb redneck hicks. combine those two and you do not garner sympathy.

the thing is that the south is the most diverse area in the entire usa, and there there are a multitude of factors that lead us to being "less advanced" than the north, many of which hinge on that fact. the south has always had a more conservative grip due to the slaveowning elite just evolving to be right wingers nowadays. because we had worse building blocks to start with than the north with its better weather and an economy not built on slaves, we had work to do anyway, but conservatives in office refuse to fix or change any infrastructure. because they want to stay in power, our politicians purposely cut any and all educational funds and preach evangelical teachings so many of us grow up deeply propoganized - though some of us dont or work to break free of that thought process. we are not a monolith. you will find some of the most stalwart leftists here as well as the most violent ring wingers, almost like, we're a massive & diverse group of people. what we believe barely matters though when our politicians gerrymander and ensure county/town lines are drawn in such a way that priveleged votes always matter statistically more than oppressed ones do.

that's where the whole cruel progressives thing comes in. folks in blue areas, the north & canada especially, are blue, yes, but generally neoliberal when it comes to others beyond their purview. there is a smugness that they were born somewhere not haunted by a history of enslavement (ignoring the norths own racism - everyone i know who's moved north says their bigotry is highly noticeable, and slavery is legal everywhere in the country due to an exploited loophole in the 13th ammendment), and born in an area not as "punished by god" (a phrase used by southern pastors often) by natural disaster. every time there is even a modicum of news about a tragic event in a red state - a tornado, a hurricane, a shooting, things that can all happen in their lives too if less often - you will not be able to go near any comment section online or some northerners in reality who will not mock it. we deserve it for choosing to live here (as if we are not the poorest area of the country or as if the south is not also beautiful) and for choosing to vote red. there are occasional times this reverses - southerners love to jump on california's hypocrisy about this when they have earthquakes and fires - but it's not an equal balance. especially not when northern blue folk, who claim to be leftist & therefore compassionate, actively cheer on the deaths of those who could not evacuate because they were poor or desperate, and who make up our largest bipoc & queer populations in the country.

that is where bitterness, anger, and begging others to see southerners as human stems from. there is a lot more history & nuance to it than i can comprehensively express early in the morning, but that is the beginner gist of it. feel free to ask more if something wasnt clear or similar. my home is a mess, and i love it all the same, and my heart aches for my neighbors, and burns at others dehumanization of them and us as a whole. i know it will only get worse as climate change does and i wish we could all stick together instead rather than still drawing these boundary lines like our leaders want us to.

[ninjakittenarmy]

Some of you people need to understand that being anti-military is a fringe position, even on the left.

“Why do so many stories keep portraying the US Military in a positive light?”

Because more people watch that stuff. Because most people don’t like stories that constantly shit on soldiers. It is true that the Pentagon offers backing to make media that is favorable to the military but plenty of media is just as positive about the military without that, and often the makers of stuff that IS backed by the Pentagon are NOT in fact sellouts abandoning principles for money. They believe in what they’re selling and have no reason to refuse the aid because they do not see the military as unsavory benefactors.

“I thought we all decided that the military was an imperialist force and foreign intervention was inherently bad!”

No, YOU decided that, and other people put up with it and barely argued with you on political forums because you supported their other policy positions and/or they wanted more support for their adjacent but less extreme positions that actually ARE popular like reining in military spending and opposing the War on Terror.

Which brings me to:

“Why are progressives supporting the democrats’ pro military stance? Why aren’t we canceling Kamala and Waltz for catering to the pro military crowd?”

Because you people have had eight years to make yourselves useful and support progressive policies and politicians and you keep NOT VOTING and LOUDLY ANNOUNCING you won’t vote for the sake of moral purity and refusing to back candidates who would improve people’s rights and allowing conservatives to get elected for the sake of “not being complicit in your own oppression”, proving this is a lot more about adhering rigidly to abstract principles and feeling good about yourself for it than actually HELPING anyone. The rest of the left has determined you’re not useful idiots but are in fact quite useless. As such, they’re done humoring you. I say “they” because I never made any of this a secret. You can die on the anti-military hill if you want but we were NEVER going to die with you. You will go down alone and we will move on without you hanging like a millstone around our necks. Don’t let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya.

“How can you call yourself a leftists if you don’t hate the military or militaries as a concept?”

Tell me you don’t know anything about leftism without telling me you don’t know anything about leftism. There are LOADS of left wing ideologies that aren’t pacifist. Most communist groups are rather favorable towards militaries as a way to fight for communism. The left’s opposition to militaries as a concept comes from the counterculture movement of the 60s and is only popular in countries where left-wing politics are associated with counterculture movements. Any time Communist or Socialist parties became a ruling party, the idea that the military could be used to fight FOR the cause as well as against it has set in. In fact, most Communist revolutions had substantial factions of the nation’s military supporting it.

Now, I am not a tankie. I have nothing but disdain for Stalin and his imitators or the CCP and its puppets. I believe these are examples of abject failures to build socialism and most revolutionaries followed their lead, leaving leftwing parties that formed coalitions with liberals the most successful so far. However I see no basis whatsoever for saying that Lenin and his ilk failed BECAUSE he didn’t decide to oppose the concept of a standing military. That is one of the things they did right.

The left being strictly anti-war even in the West, while ultimately based on the idea of unity and peace once communism is built, only became as common as it is during the Cold War where the majority of wars were fought AGAINST the left. In WWII, the left was large PRO entering the war while the RIGHT was advocating for peace (or to enter on the opposite side which was never going to happen) because we were planning on entering an alliance with the USSR and the Allies instead of the Axis Powers the far right nationalists supported. The writer of Jonny Got His Gun, Dalton Trumbo, for example, specifically refused to have his book republished until after the war because he was a Socialist and heard right wing groups using it to oppose WWII. Trumbo was STAUNCHLY against this as he was criticizing the concept of conscript and the actual structure of the military rather than the concept of war, and did not believe his criticisms of WWI should be translated to WWII.

Leon Trotsky, leader of the biggest left opposition faction against Stalin, was also very much in favor of the Red Army, believing that the revolution had to be SPREAD, not that they should just build Socialism at home and leave everyone to their own devices. Socialism in One Country was Stalin’s platform to appease the west and also added many elements of right wing nationalism opposed by the original revolutionaries (whom he killed). While particularly gullible leftists saw Stalin as someone to rally behind due to his emphasis on self-determination and non-intervention, this rhetoric, like that of most dictators and militants, both left and right the isolationist tankie left loves to suck up to, was using this as the other side of his staunchly nationalist, authoritarian ideology that he used to justify countless atrocities against minorities in the USSR while also intervening just as much as the West did in foreign affairs.

TLDR: You are too much of a useful idiot to bad actors to be worth cooperating with, stop endorsing the PRC and Hamas while calling America evil for opposing them.

[wordsword-swords]

An Old Scuffed Letter to Kamala Harris (right after the DNC:

The current policy direction the Vice President has chosen is counterproductive and shows her contempt for the voters of the democratic party. Leftists, or other more progressive voters are not more likely to vote for the democratic party--they're more likely to go the way of 2016 and vote for a third party. By chasing the nebulous 'moderate' via adopting republican policies, VP Harris drops the democrat voters she managed to excite.

Never in my life have i voted for anything other than the Democratic party. At this point in time I will not be voting for Kamala Harris. I will be voting for Jill Stein. To make things clear: I voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. I did not at all understand why people were voting third party. It was stupid. But now I get it. Because Kamala assumes that democrats will vote for her no matter what, she campaigns on policies that do not benefit the American people nor improve the current problems we have as citizens. Instead she is trying to court… the MAGA crowd? by adopting 'the wall,' a racist, wasteful policy. I was hoping. I was really, really hoping that Kamala becoming the nominee would mean getting closer to a permanent ceasefire in Gaza. That Kamala becoming the nominee would mean less regressive politics as Democrats chase the MAGA republicans by moving the Overton window with them. I was hopeful. It's a shame that I was wrong.

If Kamala Harris wants to run as a pseudo republican the likes of Kirsten Sinema, she should say so. Until she adopts policies that make sense, and have some kind of comprehensive Democratic party through-lines, she has no worth as a Democratic party candidate. This is not racist. This is coming from me, a black woman who would love to have the first woman, black woman, and first overall south Asian as president. To put it in ways you may understand: building 'the wall' is not Brat. Increasing the bombing of Gaza, is not Brat. Failing to pressure Netanyahu for a ceasefire is not Brat. Forbidding a palestinian-american Democratic party politician from speaking at the DNC is not Brat.

If Kamala persists in chasing 'middle' ground policies that are honestly just the right wing policies of four years ago, I will persist in campaigning and organizing against her as a candidate. I will be encouraging other progressives from the democratic party to leave, and join the green party. Because at this point in time, Kamala does not care. She does not take progressive policy seriously.

Just having Tim Walz as a VP candidate does not placate the masses. She should take a leaf from his book and learn how to, as he said, compromise without compromising his values. If border walls and more bombs killing butchering Gazan children are her values, then so be it. I will organize and campaign accordingly.

Thank you for your time. No thank you to the border wall and butchering of children and civilians. I hope Kamala finds a solid electorate to campaign to. I hope that she wises up and runs on popular policy, inviting independents and third party voters, and even republicans by solving problems that affect every citizen. Tim Walz did this in his state. He won a red area. I live in Indiana. I am currently talking to the senators that work from here, and working with young conservatives teaching an argument for ceasefire. Fun fact: many young conservatives aren't a fan of trump already! They also are not a fan of what they call 'Israel first' policies. You can be blue and invite everybody. You don't need to make bad faith promises to do random nonsense things nobody even wants.

Good Luck Madam Vice President. I hope you stick to your principles, or to good principles, and compromise without compromising your values. Or Democratic values at least.

Best, Victoria Longe

[griseldagimpel]

General U.S. Politics Post

I wanted to do a kinda general post about U.S. politics for people (and especially younger people) who are new to getting involved in politics.

Political parties aren't government themselves. They're basically social clubs with the goal of getting members of that club elected to politics. I know the two big ones have been around long enough to feel like government institutions, but they're really just a bunch of people banding together to hopefully achieve common goals.

There are third parties, but when it comes to the legislative branch, it's all about block voting. If you succeed in getting members of a third party elected, they'll still have to work with members of one of the big parties to get anything done.

For that reason, some people prefer to do the coalition building beforehand and have their candidates with what would be third-party views run as members of one of the two big parties, since if an issue becomes part of the official party platform, it can lead to everyone in the party getting on board with it.

Ultimately, it's just a matter of what strategy one feels is best to pursue; I just want to stress that political parties aren't static but an amorphous blob made up of all its individual parts.

If you want an example of one of the two big parties shifting, look at the Republican Party since Obama got elected.

When someone with money wants elected officials who'll serve their interests, it's easier to find a politician who's already amicable to their interests and back them than to, like, Corrupt a Good Politician or whatever.

Also, especially for issues that aren't super polarized and thus both main candidates are amicable, sometimes the strategy is to donate to both parties. That happens, too.

As a general rule, while politicians lie, they mostly don't lie about what they what they want to do. Rather, they lie about the justification for what they want to do, the consequences, and how much it'll cost. And the more outspoken a politician is about wanting to do something, the more you can trust that, yeah, they do want to do it.

But sometimes a politician can't achieve the thing they want to do because they don't have the support necessary to get it done. Again, the legislative branch is all about block voting.

Sometimes a politician knows that they won't have support to actually be able to do anything about the thing they want to do, but they run on the issue anyway. It can be useful to check if the politician has a detailed plan on HOW they will accomplish the thing they want to do. If they don't have a detailed plan, there's a good chance they don't have a path to make progress on the issue and know it.

And sometimes their goal is to make noise about an issue in hopes of drumming up support. That's part of what's needed sometimes, but it's good to be aware of what an elected officials feasibly can achieve.

When running for election, words like "moderate" are basically just marketing/branding and probably don't give you a good idea about a politician's stances on issues. Also, again, the legislative branch works via block voting, so with some exceptions, the party platform matters more than an individual politician's platform in terms of what will actually get accomplished. An individual politician might be able to stick their pet issue into a bigger bill, but a lot of the time, votes are largely going to fall along party lines.

Online petitions, especially if they aren't through a .gov website, don't accomplish anything in and of themselves. Calling elected officials has more impact than signing a petition online. What online petitions do is allow for contact information of sympathetic individuals to be collected so they can be hit up for donations later.

There are petitions that actually do do something, especially if that something is putting a candidate or constitutional ammendment on the ballot. These petitions generally require you to print it out and mail it in somewhere.