#the red party is the liberal one. the blue party is the conservative one. the orange party is APPARENTLY the socialist one. APPARENTLY.

[insignificantstrawberry]

hey other canadians…instead of sending thoughts and prayers and positive vibes why don’t you instead start learning about the ridings in your local districts.

who is running for the member of parliament? who is running for the member of the provincial parliament? who represents your house of assembly? what is the majority party in your area?

don’t give into the smugness. don’t be a bleeding heart. do something productive and get informed. you have many choices in federal parties, i suggest you familiarize yourself now instead of waiting until the day of an election.

[senseiwu]

Yes..... yeeeessss.....

Please stay like this. Please

[nivalingreenhow]

Okay, now that it's been a few days, and I've had time to process what's happened, it's time to dig into what to do next

Simply put, vote in your midterms. In 2026 33 senate seats will be up for grabs.

*All* house of representative seats will be up for grabs. All 435 of them. Do you know what Trump can do with a congress that's against him? Not much. In 2026 there will be an opportunity to shut this down and give him as much trouble as the republican congress gave Obama. A blue congress means no confirmation for supreme court appointments. It means possibility of impeachment *and* conviction. It means he can be taken out of office, it means that in two years, if enough people vote, he will be effectively shackled

You know what else happens in 2026? Local and state elections. Are you in a state that's dangerously conservative? You can change that. The fact is people don't turn out for mid term elections. They just don't. So even in red states, if enough liberals, progressives, and independents show up, there is an opportunity to take back your state governments.

But the work starts now. Get involved locally. Vote in city counsel elections. Vote for local judges. Vote for sheriff!! Did you know in most places, that's an elected position? You can choose who runs your law enforcement.

Vote for mayor, vote for governor, vote for state legislators. With this administration, the states will be the ones deciding things. Make sure you're creating a place you want to live in. You do have that power. There are several 'red' states that have a higher number of registered democrats than the number of people who voted for Trump. If those people vote in the midterms, then we have hope

This isn't about Harris or the national democratic party and what they've done wrong. This is about your local chapters, the people in *your* communities. This is about your future and the future of this country. Hope is not lost because there are still so many things we can do, and the midterms are the best shot we have at turning this around

[johnbrand]

Silver Fox News

Out of breath, Richie shut the door behind him. The sun was already shining into his childhood home, the suburban frame one he had seen little of over the last four years. With his college a few states over, Richie was practically only home for the holidays, spending his summers at local internships that kept him away from where he grew up. He did not have anything against his town, or his dad for that matter; he had simply always been too busy. And now, freshly graduated and without a job quite yet, Richie had returned for the time being.

“Dad?” Richie called out, searching the kitchen. Typically, his father waited for him once he got back from his morning run, seated at the counter with a morning coffee and whatever protein-stuffed breakfast appeased him. But now, Richie could not find his dad anywhere.

“Scott?” Richie tried, but no response. Sweat dribbled down his lean, hairless frame. He liked to keep slim and clean-looking, knowing it was attractive for the men he usually slept with. While quite the flirt back in his college town, Richie had yet to hook up with anyone at home. He still had not had that talk with his father yet.

Richie scouted a bit longer, eventually finding his father in the master bedroom. Digging through his closet, Scott seemed to be tossing out all his blue clothing. Anything remotely near that shade even. After another “Dad?” Richie finally caught his father’s attention. Richie had only been home for a few days now, but he had never seen his father so invested in a task and yet, so out of it completely.

“Have you watched the news this morning, son?” Scott asked, to Richie's surprise.

“Uh, no…?”  The sweat had already dried against his exposed frame by that point, so without bothering to take a shower, Richie followed his father out into the living room. He just hoped whatever it was his father wanted him to see would be short, as he was practically naked besides his running shorts. Grabbing the remote, Richie did not expect the first channel to be a Fox News affiliate.

“Really, dad?” Richie questioned. He had never placed his father as the conservative type. He had typically been more independent, while Richie’s perspective was wholly liberal. It was a bit strange to see the network, but maybe Scott had changed while he had been away in college. Speaking of which, had his father always been so salt-and-peppered on top? Richie also took a moment to appreciate his father’s musculature, which he had somehow not noticed until now.

Richie returned his eyes to the screen. On top of the typical Fox News logo was the word “Silver” in an old fashioned font. And instead of the typical newscasters, stories, and lineup, there was just a slide displaying some text. 

“Thank you for tuning into Silver Fox News. Your program will begin shortly.”

“Did you buy some kind of premium subscription?” Richie openly questioned his father, who seemed to be absorbed by the television. “Okay, you got me in front of the news; what did you want to show me?”

Richie’s answer came quickly. The text disappeared, revealing a simple red spiral with flashing commands. It was not anything special, but it was enough.

“Pretty colors…swirling…” Richie slurred after a minute, his tongue becoming heavy in his mouth. “Soothing, silky…the spiral is so…hot…I love…the spiral…I love this feeling…I listen…to the spiral…”

When major research institutions began to announce their predictions of voter turnout for the upcoming election, alarms began to ring off within the Republican party. An assumed 41 million Gen Z voters would be hauling into polling stations, with numbers as high as 43% confirmed to be liberal. It was a staunch difference, one that many leaders could not accept. So instead of following the traditional tactics to sway voters like they had in the past, they decided to take a new route. Why sway voters, when you could make them?

Thanks to the research and funding of a certain well-known tech billionaire, the necessary resources were simple. Leaders believed that the easiest way to eliminate the problem was by creating the solution in the most efficient way possible. Social aspects would include basic background, education, and upbringing. Physical aspects would manage age, size, and demographic. Mental aspects would focus on tradition, individuality, and compliance. But the beauty of it all was that the programmers did very little of the work. Instead, they simply utilized the victim’s preconceived notions.

“What does…being Republican…mean to me…?” Richie drawled, his voice having dropped an octave since the program began. Instead of installing a literal trigger into the victim, the channel exploited the stereotypical beliefs victims already held. “I must become…Republican…that means…middle-aged…suburban…uneducated…Christian…”

As Richie chanted his prejudices out like a spell, his body was subsequently altered. His age more than doubled, ripping away the hair from his head and leaving the beginnings of a horseshoe to splatter the rest across his body. Wrinkles and age lines began to form, but so did musculature as his body beefed up, becoming stronger in the way that most Conservative men naturally are. Daily maintenance of a large suburban home did that to a man after all. 

“Traditional…simple…heterosexual…” Richie continued as a beard formed around his lips. His past was rewritten to better fit the portrait he was painting. Sundays in church, dropping out of high school to later receive a GED, working hard to earn his privilege and not understanding why it was handed to others. Fear of God, fear of big government, fear of outsiders influencing how things were. Disgust for “progress,” disgust for pronouns, disgust for sexual interactions with other males. Pride in his country, pride in being a male, and pride in taking nothing from nobody.

“...handsome…masculine…arrogant…” Before this had all began, researchers already knew that many of their victims would end up the same, as the stereotype of the average Republican was firmly held. What they had not predicted however was the amount of people who held hidden desires for this “average Republican.” A hypothesis arose quickly: if the liberal holds stronger prejudices, then they will become a more attractive Republican. “...alpha…virile…superior…” The choice of naming their channel "Silver Fox News" had been an appropriate one.

Richie, or Dick as he would now be referred to, would certainly provide further evidence to support their theory. As the program finished, the new, Republican silver fox readjusted back into reality, finding his best bud Scott standing before him. Dick could not remember what had just happened, but he liked what Scott laid out as a plan for the rest of the day. Work in the garage for a few hours, run out and purchase the new Trump propaganda, and then end the night at a Hooters. Dick could not decide which part of the plan he would enjoy the most, but clutching his massive pouch, he knew which he was most excited for.

[rotzaprachim]

the answer is that I think that flipping back red counties blue and coming up with an election winning Democratic Party is going to both recognize that America and the American working class in particular are an incredibly heterogenous base with no one size fits all policy, AND it’s going to take complex moral negotiation of the likes that will be difficult and painful and definitely shoot vulnerable people in the foot because of the deep social conservatism of much of America that will require everyone from the center to the hard left to band together and suck it up in a way that fucking sucks because this is the country we live in and social progressivism is not popular.

There’s an awful lot of finger pointing from everyone to the center to the left going on right now and honestly much of it is justified even when it’s seemingly contradictory, but all of it displays a kind of refusal to face up to the key issues that much of the U.S. is socially, economically, and politically conservative in a way I think a lot of non-republicans of all stripes have made ourselves blind to because it fucking sucks. “This or this didn’t reach out to the median voter” “this or this wasn’t popular” you know somethings that really aren’t popular? Protecting trans children, recognizing the rights of trans individuals, not straight up shooting homeless people, not straight up deporting millions of undocumented workers. These are all seen as flakey liberal snowflake policies by mass portions of the American people and we need to fucking face it.

[kawaiimunism]

It's interesting to me how the "vote blue no matter who" crowd sometimes conceptualize election outcomes as aggregate social responses to a candidate's/party's public perception (a sensible and useful way of seeing things), and other times conceptualize election outcomes as conjunctions of individual voting decisions (a dumb and useless way of seeing things), and they select which one they believe in depending on what's convenient in the current conversation.

Complaining that the Democratic party platform is too conservative? Upset that Dems aren't delivering on progressive campaign promises? "You stupid baby, they have to do that to appeal to swing voters and moderates. If the Democrats tried to be more progressive, they'd never win!"

Refusing to vote? Voting third-party? "You stupid baby, your individual decision not to vote for the Dems is handing the election to the Republicans!"

You can really see this in action when someone points out that, if left-wing non-voters are really a significant enough bloc to sway election outcomes as much as U.S. liberals act like they are, then it's the Democratic party's fault if they lose elections by failing to appeal to that bloc. The libs have to simultaneously take the former view ("they can't do that b/c they'd lose swing votes!") and the latter ("it's your individual responsibility to make sure Dems win by voting for them!"). It's the only way to maintain the "everyone is to blame except my favorite party/candidate" mindset when elections don't go their way.

You can also see it when someone points out that, if you care about election strategy, the most sensible individual voting decision depends on whether you live in a swing state or not: If you live in a swing state, vote for candidates from whichever major party you hate least. If you live in a blue/red state, vote for candidates from parties you want to receive state ballot access and federal election funding (even if they'll never actually win the presidency, more money for campaigning gives them more opportunities to advance their policy perspectives in public). But in the "vote blue no matter who" crowd's equivocation between individual behavior and aggregate outcomes, voting third-party in a non-swing state is still verboten, because "it's the same as voting for Republicans!" and therefore technically increasing GOP chances of winning the presidency, even if your state is so solidly red or blue that it makes zero fucking sense to actually think about things that way. (EDIT: The way libs/Dems ritualize voting is also important. The "you have to vote even if you're not in a swing state" stuff is more about demonstrating fealty to liberal democracy and American civic religion than it is about outcomes, but I think what I'm saying here is relevant too.)

Like, I'm not particularly invested in voting one way or another. I've said a lot on here that I don't really care whether you vote or not, I care about whether you're doing other shit. I'm just commenting on some rhetorical patterns I've noticed that I think are interesting.

[angryschnauzer]

Its election day in the UK and its the big national one, so here's a summary of the parties;

Conservatives (Tories) - Blue - Love the rich, eat the peasants.

Labour (Red) - Pro union, pro working class, tax everything

Liberal (Yellow) - In the middle on everything

Green (duh) - Environmentalists, pro everything eco friendly.

UK Reform (pale blue) - openly racists, ban all brown immigrants and send them to Africa irrespective of where they are from or if they are refugees.

[fluidstatick]

Dear Left-of-Center American,

So you're not in a swing state, you hate the electoral system we've got, and you want to cast a protest vote, or abstain entirely.

Consider this:

If you vote blue, you suck the joy out of the other guy voting red.

Walk with me --

Biden's terrible, you said, repeatedly, last week. He's always been terrible. And I don't disagree with you. He's done a lot of bad things. There's blood on his hands. That's true of every president America has ever had. (Yes, Carter too. Don't get distracted. Stay with me, here.)

Now that Biden's dropped out, you still don't want to vote. Harris has done a lot of shady things. You point to Haiti, California's prisons, her voting record on various and sundry policies that you like or don't like. But I'm looking you in the eyes. I'm holding out my hands. I'm asking you, gently, to step away from the receipts and look at the basic arithmetic of the two party system.

Yknow that person? The one that looks at you funny, like you're either pitiable or disgusting -- Yeah, that one. Maybe you can think of a few. The terven evangelical lady who won't stop sending you anons about gender essentialism and hellfire. The old man you keep running into on the city bus, who loudly scoffs to the guy two seats over "these damn liberals have no shame anymore." The college jock with the massive lifted pickup truck covered in maga stickers. The grey suited board member on c-span who stares dead-eyed at nothing while one of your comrades tries to explain to him why he should care about other people. You know the ones.

Those people vote. They love voting. If they go to church, their clergy encourages them to make godly decisions at the polls. It's a sacred privilege, but it's also fun for them. They love their superhero candidate. They're voting for International Prom King. They're simping over their man so hard it's their entire personality from May to the following January and beyond.

Those people that don't like you started planning for the 2024 election the moment they understood they couldn't scream and curse Joe out of the white house. This is every competitive sport on earth combined for them. They vote because they love the idea of helping their guy score the ultimate super mega touchdown of all time. These people gameify their elections. They're giddy about watching results pour in.

When I was very small, I listened to my lifelong democrat parents criticize Bush Sr. They didn't think I understood what they were talking about, but I knew the man was powerful and was making decisions that made things more difficult for people. I watched Bill Clinton make life easier for my parents, and Americans like them, for eight solid years. (Yes, I learned about bombs and lobbyists and oil subsidies, too. Don't get distracted.) I watched Gore lose the 2000 election, slowly and painfully over the course of weeks. I learned about gerrymandering and voter suppression and swing states and delegates.

And then. When I was in my late teens, too naive to know better, I dated a staunch conservative. The first presidential election I was old enough to participate in was 2004. I was living with the aforementioned conservative. When our voter's pamphlets arrived in the mail in mid October he handed mine to me and said, grimly, "You're gonna vote for Kerry, aren't you?"

I said "of course I am."

He tossed his voter's pamphlet in the trash and said "See, you liberals annoy me. What's the point of me doing my civic duty as an American id you're just going to cancel it out by voting for a socialist?"

(Kerry was not a socialist.)

Bush won a second term in 2004. It wasn't nearly as close as Bush/Gore, because Americans were still deeply paranoid about terrorism, preoccupied with Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria. Kerry ran on economics. Bush ran on Islamophobia. But I pissed off my conservative boyfriend, his parents, and half of his friends. We broke up not long after that.

And my point is: If you can't convince yourself to show up at the polls in support of the Democratic nominee, and you can't imagine your deeply red state flupping blue, or your historically blue state drifting purple: Imagine looking your most obnoxious bigoted neighbor in the eye and telling them "I voted for the one you don't like. If you think about it, it's like you didn't vote at all."

Is that how voting works? Of course not. Will it piss em off? Yeah, probably.

Vote to spite an asshole with a punchable face, if you want. Just fuckin' vote.

[alias-milamber]

UK Elections For People Who Have No Real Reason To Care

(The following post has many personal opinions and is not meant as an unbiased view on UK politics)

The UK Prime Minister, Rish! Sunak (although if you've lost track, that's not on you) has announced a general election, meaning a massive reelection of all 650 MPs that sit in the House of Commons.

General Elections may be called at any time, but must be announced before the 5th anniversary of the last one, but no less than 25 days before it happens. Sunak had until mid December to call one. He's opted for July 4th, probably so Biden doesn't notice he's not in charge anymore.

Why now? Inflation has fallen for the first time in fucking ages, and nothing's gone disasterously wrong for nearly three weeks, so he thinks it's the best time.

Who will win? The Labour party would have to absolutely fuck themselves directly and repeatedly to lose the upcoming election.

So the Tories again, probably.

Who are these people?

The UK currently has various party blocks. All these parties are a series of smaller parties in a raincoat, to a greater or lesser official extent, but they haven't scuttled between raincoats for a bit.

*deep breath*

Conservatives, blue, Have held the biggest majority (and therefore the premiership) since 2010. Traditionally the party of the right, currently under the banner of "One Conservatism", which is basically "Plebs stay in your lane, we'll stay in ours, and if we all do our bit it'll be the 1800s again before you know it". Over the last score years have slowly drifted further and further right as the disaster-capitalists at the core depowered and destroyed the last vestiges of sanity. They've never been the good guys, but right now they're clinging on by a thread. Been through four leaders in five years, and scraped the bottom of the barrel to find Rishi Sunak, a man without any personality traits at all married to a woman with a very large number of government contracts in her company. Informally known as the Tory party, for reasons historical. Traditionally suprisingly good on LGB issues, increasingly shit on T issues. Current policies include saying anything to make people on the right vote for them.

Labour, Red. The party the Tories have been trading off with for the last hundred years or so. In theory a party "Of The People" standing for worker's rights and the unions, in practice they've been drifting centre-right for the last forty years to capture tory voters as they're flung overboard by that party's fleeing right. A lot of their support still comes from the trade unions, but there's a vast and increasing gulf between the party leadership and Labour's traditional positions. The current leader, Sir Keir Starmer, is a soapstone edifice to police power, dedication to which got him a knighthood. Generally considered The Less Worse Option. Traditionally good on LGBT issues, increasingly shit on LGBT issues. Especially T issues. Current policies include saying anything to make anybody vote for them.

Liberal Democrats, Yellowy Orange. The traditional third party, who were the ones trading power with the aristocracy party up to 100 years ago when Labour took over. After slowly building up a reputation for solid and dependable politics with sensible aims, they hit it big in 2010 when their leader at the time - Nick Clegg - was charismatic enough to get them actual media attention during a general election. They finished third as ever, but took enough of a bite out of the blues that the only way to form a majority government was to form a coalition with either of the leading parties. Labour refused, so the Con/Dem Coalition was formed. Over the next few years, the Dems traded all of their power for magic beans, and took the fall for all of their policies being vetoed by their partners, especially the abolition of student loans - a cornerstone of their campaign and the source of a great deal of their millennial popularity. Nick Clegg is now the head of communication for Meta, and the LibDems have rotated through a series of blank pieces of paper where their leadership used to be, having probably blown their chance of leadership for another century. Most famous currently for putting out leaflets saying "Only LibDems can win against the tories!" with the kind of mislabelled graphs that would get you kicked out of maths class. Most people couldn't pick the current leader out of a lineup, or name a current policy.

Green Party, Green. Probably the most progressive party of the lot, and have really capitalised on the collapse of the LibDem support. Very good on green initiatives, but the aging hippy at the core of their leadership occasionally veers into Edison Was A Witch anti-technologist, especially around anything to do with nuclear power. Extremely good as an argument candidate locally, but have a rough time getting their arguments onto the national stage. Their democratic internals are also somewhat prone to slate-manipulation which has recently put non-socially-progressive candidates in high positions. Which is a more polite than they deserve way of saying that they are occasionally terfy as fuck.

SNP, Yellow & Black: Current Governors of Scotland. To be absolutely honest, I don't know much about them apart from their extremely hard - and justified - boner for getting independence of Scotland from the rest of this shitshow. They've had a bit of a rocky road internally for the last couple of years, but unless they completely fuck everything in the next 40 days, they're unlikely to be dethroned. They're also unlikely to get their way any time soon, more's the pity.

Alba, Blue & White: The former leader of the SNP - Alec Salmond - went to set up his own party with blackjack and hookers after he was turfed out on sexual abuse allegations. Has, to date, only managed to gain seats by converting sitting SNP members. Terfy as fuck.

Sinn Fein, dark green: The party of Irish republicanism, both north and south, though the north is the only bit that is part of this general election. Commenting on Sinn Fein is so far out of my swim lane that I'm liable to be eaten by a shark.

Various Nationalist Parties, Misc. Reform UK (nee Brexit Party), UKIP, Britain First, etc. It's been half a century since Britain had any kind of national identity, really, but that's not any excuse to go back to that one. A selection of gammon-faced shouty-men (and, it's 2024, women) will happily take your vote in return for a promise that Britain can once again crush the world under its heel and get rid of all the darkies once and for all. There's really no reason for them to to be in the section below, but the BBC and other media keep booking them and giving them the oxygen of attention for "balance", and that means they keep coming up like the spaghetti which gave you food poisoning. Which they hate. Because it's foreign.

Misc. There are various single-issue and low population parties, and independent MPs, who don't make this list. I hope one day some of them do.

As a reward for reading all of that, here's a dog photo:

[fairuzfan]

It’s “vote blue no matter who” but then you get Dems like Kyrsten Sinema, Joe Manchin, and John Fetterman or people like Tricia Cotham and Jeff Van Drew who switched parties and then it’s every excuse in the book as to why Dems can’t get shit done and just “vote harder.”

Dems did know that embracing disenchanted conservatives would push the party further right, and that’s precisely why centrists and the upper middle class liberals were all so excited to join ranks with “never Trump” republicans.

The issue is that voting is great and all in theory. Some of my family is residing in a country where you can't vote so like, having a say in your government?! That's great!

But I don't *really* have a say in my government when all the standard forms of calling and emailing are being flat out ignored. Sure I voted. But now what. Fetterman is a racist asshole that pretended to be "on the side of the oppressed" to get his position. Sinema is.... like that. Manchin is annoying as hell. And what, you're telling me "just wait til next election and they'll be gone"? Like at what point will this endless spiral of "it could be worse" honestly start benefiting anyone.

And people are saying "join unions or organize" as some sort of gotcha... Palestinians have been organizing for 75 years. The whole reason people know so much about Palestine is because we've been organizing for YEARS, have been participating in the system for YEARS. Sure I can unionize. Sure I can organize. But when absolutely no one takes you seriously in your government?? Then what are you supposed to do??

I still am an advocate for voting locally, but I honestly don't see the point in voting higher than that. I remember a comment in the "can't vote out fascism" post was saying "actual physical fascism is worse than passive fascism" and I'm like.... yeah for you maybe? I'm disabled and I've been mostly in my house for the past 3 years because I want to avoid COVID at all costs. Disabled people around the states have as well. People have been dying well before the past couple of months. Are you saying you'd rather have silent deaths than loud ones?

And another comment that really annoyed me and felt severely disconnected from reality was "Trump's Foreign Policy is the same if not worse than Biden..." Worse than funding a genocide...? Like I hate Trump so much and would never vote for him. But I also won't ever vote for Biden.

Also something that "Vote Blue" people don't realize.... Biden's already lost. I'm not saying this to be smug or anything. Many Muslims and SWANA immigrants vote PRIMARILY based on foreign policy. Like that's one of our main concerns. Every single election, we consider which person would be "better" for people overseas — this isn't me projecting, we talk amongst ourselves about it to make a decision. And these people live in major cities and swing states like Michigan in Dearborn and Detroit. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Illinois turns red next election. Many Palestinian refugees after the Nakba and Naksa settled in Chicago and the greater Chicago area. I've heard that people hate Fetterman so much that they're not voting for him next election or wanting anything to do with democrats anymore. Dems have completely neglected the Muslim and SWANA community and that will come back to bite them in the butt.

Like at this point, you should be thinking of what to do when Trump becomes president lol. Actually think about it. Because honestly, you can yell at me all you want and call me stupid or an idiot for not voting/doing a write in — but I'm 10000% sure that Trump is going to win next election. What more are you going to do other than vote?

[stephenjaymorrisblog]

Pigs off Campus!

(College Revolt is Back in Style.)

Stephen Jay Morris

4/23/2024

©Scientific Morality

                Here is a nifty little analogy:  suppose your dad gave money to your uncle to buy a gun so that he could shoot his ex-wife? Would your dad be guilty of murder?  Kind of.  He would be an accessory to murder. Suppose your country gave weapons to another country to commit genocide? Would it be guilty of genocide? Sort of, as they would be an accessory to a war crime. So, is it justifiable for Americans to protest Israel’s genocide against Palestinians? Hell, yeah! Not only is it justified, but it is also warranted.

            Now I am going to play a game of comparative history. The Chuds have been whining and bitching about how college professors are brainwashing their precious White children with leftist propaganda. Back in 1968, most universities were run by Right wing, WASP men in suits and ties. College professors were either moderates or conservative. Only the Arts departments were managed by liberals and Beatniks. Baby Boomers were never brainwashed by college professors. They were autodidactic and hungry for the truth. Some joined the “Ban the Bomb” movement and later, the Civil Rights movement.

            The urgency of the war at hand got ahold of Boomers. Many Vietnamese women and children along with American soldiers were dying by the hundreds, as was reported on the nightly news. A minority of Boomers felt helpless and wanted to stop the killing. So, they resorted to protests and strikes on university campuses. These acts were coordinated by two major student groups: the Black Student Union and Students for a Democratic Society, other wise known as SDS. I joined SDS in 1969. The only communication avenues we had at the time were printed fliers, underground newspapers, and FM rock stations. Oh, and let’s not forget the telephone. The FBI loved tapping them. If we’d had the technology Zoomers have today, we would have stopped the Vietnam War in 1967.

            In 1968, the anti-war movement went international, from Europe to Africa to South America. Most of the world was opposed to the Vietnam War.

So, is this latest movement against Likud Party’s genocide on the Palestinian people a new Anti-War movement? As sure as the Earth is round! Now all this of this carping about Anti-Semitism is no different than when the New Left was accused of being Anti-American. Neither is true! There is a Jewish sect called, “Keturei Karta,” who believe that there can be no Israel until the Messiah comes. Many Jews do not accept Jesus as the Jewish messiah. Now, let me ask you. Is this orthodox sect antisemitic or just comprised of your average self-hating Jews? Shit no dumbass!

            In 1968, we waved Vietcong flags and were accused of being communists. It was all done in the name of solidarity. Now the Palestinian flag is waved. Nothing has changed. We did have contingencies of Tankies, and other types of communist groups, who marched with us and chanted slogans that didn’t reflect the true sentiment of the movement’s coalition. Here are a couple I remember: “America must die! Let the red flag fly!”  and “Get a clue! Fuck the red, white, and blue!” There were other silly ones I’ve long since forgotten.

            Now you have Islamic nationalist groups doing the same thing. The Chants of “Death to America” come from small, Muslim, theocratic groups who are not affiliated with the Anti-authoritarian Left. Due to rumors and erroneous propaganda, the Left, as a rule, do not support Islam. Why? Well, because many of them does not support organized religion! Second, Islam, like Christianity and Judaism, are sexist religions.

            It was the Battle of Seatle, in 1999, that gave me hope. Then came the occupation movement of 2011, and now, this anti-war movement of 2024. If they can pull this off, the movement’s young people can stop this so-called war in the Middle East. As for the young people in Israel, will they rise up and stop Likud Party? That remains to be seen.

[mariacallous]

The soon-to-be ruling party in Britain has alighted on two motifs for its general election campaign: the red, white, and blue Union Jack and the word “change.”

If he is to win, Keir Starmer, the Labour Party leader, must pull off a voting shift greater even than that achieved by his mentor Tony Blair in 1997, the last time their party seized power. Yet such is the calamitous state of the Conservatives that after 14 years of misrule, a victory for Labour has been pretty much priced in for the election on July 4.

The only question is how great a majority it will achieve and whether that can produce a buffer large enough to keep it in power for a decade at least to tackle Britain’s many woes—from the economy to the health service, education, social care, and failed privatizations such as the postal service and water. Indeed, pretty much every area of public infrastructure needs repair.

There is another problem, one that is harder to enumerate but that also goes to the core of Britain’s unhappiness. Starmer often points to, if obliquely, the loss of the country’s status, its decline in esteem around the world and among the British themselves. There is little any government can, or should, do to address broad historical sweeps that produce such cultural malaise, such as postcolonial decline (which also affects France and similar countries).

What governments can do is chart a new course. Blair tried to modernize Britain’s image, with some success, at least until the Iraq War in 2003. Since then, it has retreated into the default position of desperately clinging to past glories, applying balm to cover more contemporary wounds. Starmer, for his part, will not talk about the central cause, Brexit; he refuses to countenance a formal return to European Union structures.

There are other causes of Britain’s malaise, however. The two most recognizable emblems of Britain’s soft power, the royal family and the BBC, are themselves beleaguered. There is little Starmer can do to address the former (though, within months of taking office, Blair persuaded Queen Elizabeth to show a little less stiff upper lip following the death of Princess Diana).

But there is much the prospective incumbent in Downing Street can do to help sort out the national broadcaster. The BBC’s future matters far beyond the island’s shores. It is central to the global battle for hearts and minds, an important tool for liberal democracy to counter the increasingly successful disinformation strategies of Russia and China.

In short, a reinvigorated BBC would also reinvigorate Britain’s reputation in the world. But to achieve that is easier said than done and will require considerable surgery.

Nearly 20 years ago, I wrote a piece reworking the famous acronym as “Broken, Beaten, Cowed.” Needless to say, the higher-ups at the network didn’t appreciate it. I stood by my argument then. I feel even more vindicated now.

Some of the problems are self-inflicted. The organization’s management has struggled to deal with a string of HR scandals, some extraordinarily sordid, over the years. These have damaged its reputation.

In the many decades I have known, and contributed to, the BBC, relations between staff and management have veered between suspicion and acrimony. Both sides seem to be equally responsible. The tens of thousands who work there have a deeply embedded civil service mentality. For many of these “lifers,” it has been their only employer.

Most of those now in charge of the organization have spent much of their careers outside it. That brings with it a difference in perspective but also a lack of loyalty to a venerable institution. They have pushed out a large proportion of the news and current affairs department and shut or pared back important foreign bureaus. Much expertise has gone with them. Many esteemed journalists have claimed they have been discriminated against and sometimes humiliated, while being encouraged to leave. Several employment tribunals are ongoing.

The bigger issues at stake are financial and political. The BBC has had to operate in an environment of deliberately stoked hostility. A series of Conservative culture ministers, almost one for each year in office, have either loathed or barely tolerated the publicly funded corporation. Its budget has been cut; its system of funding through a direct tax, the license fee, is now open to debate. Meanwhile, a Fox News-style culture warrior channel called GB News has been lavished with praise by the government.

The organization is facing a series of technological and demographic headwinds. Far fewer Gen Zers watch and listen to BBC output than older generations (a problem that other legacy media organizations grapple with). In a bid to keep up with the times, the BBC has changed the nature of much of its content. Serious detailed documentaries take second place to competing with TikTok.

The evening current affairs program Newsnight, on air since 1980, is now a low-cost, low-grade chat show. The morning radio program, called Today, which used to be an appointment to listen, has replaced much of its (more expensive) international coverage with round-Britain lifestyle segments.

The most visible area of withering is in the BBC’s global output. In a note to staff in April announcing her departure after only three years as director of the World Service, Liliane Landor expressed deep concern about the “operational capability” of the service, which broadcasts in 42 languages. “With media freedom under threat, the World Service is a force for good and the BBC needs to look after it,” Landor said in a statement.

The BBC announced in September 2022 that nearly 400 jobs in its global arm would be lost to save 28.5 million pounds (about $35.6 million). Several languages have been dropped, including Arabic, with Persian to follow. In 2021, the BBC spent 290 million pounds ($368 million) on the service, with the government, via the Foreign Office, committing to invest a further 94 million pounds ($120 million) a year until next March. After this, funding is up for grabs.

BBC Director General Tim Davie, while pushing through the cuts, has urged the government to provide more of the funding. “We cannot keep asking U.K. license fee payers to invest in it when we face cuts to U.K. services,” he said. “We will need to discuss a long-term funding solution … that comes from central government budgets.”

Back in 2021, during the height of the COVID-19 fake news battle, the government gave the BBC an extra pot of money to fight disinformation coming from Russia, China, and elsewhere. The idea was to help expand a new unit verifying information and tackling bots. The sum, 8 million pounds ($11 million), while not unwelcome, was a drop in the ocean and does not compensate for the contraction of its traditional journalism.

The organization’s most recent annual report revealed that the weekly reach of the World Service had declined 12 percent year-on-year to 318 million people. Shortly after celebrating its centenary, the BBC is losing global influence at a time when it is most needed, with democracy in so much peril in so many parts of the world.

Starmer and his ministers will not want to get involved in the BBC’s day-to-day problems. Indeed, they will be keen, after a decade of interference by the Conservatives, to give it more operational independence.

Yet if there is one area where the government should be active, it is in preserving and extending the BBC’s role in providing impartial and reliable news and analysis to as many people as possible around the world. That will cost money – and Labour has made clear it will not spend what it can’t afford. Much of it could be found by abolishing the comical ‘GREAT’ campaign of British flag-waving that costs the taxpayer 60 million pounds per year. The government will have to do a new cost-sharing deal with the BBC and even if a little more has to be found, it is surely a price worth paying to give the UK an influence in the world it has steadily lost.

Whatever the costs, the long-term cost of watching as the organization’s international output continues to wither will be greater still.

[greenhappyseed]

This is a great question. In order to win, Democrats need to convince the American people — especially in rural areas and “red” states — that their ideas and plans will benefit the wallets of more people than Republicans. If people don’t feel like an honest day’s work can feed, house, provide healthcare, and clothe themselves, with some left over for entertainment, emergency savings, and long term retirement savings, then they will keep demanding change even though there are only 2 viable political parties. To oversimplify, red and blue are not merely team colors; they stand for specific governing principles:

Republicans are pro-business, anti-union, anti-regulation, pro-free market, and often shrink the size of government spending on social services (eg, no welfare, eliminating pensions and social security) while increasing military investments and spending (sometimes called being a hawk). Republicans often think private companies can do things better and faster than the government with less “waste,” and view the government with suspicion. Ronald Reagan, the Republican president throughout the 1980s, famously said, “I think you all know that I've always felt the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help.” American Republicans are extremely conservative and theocratic (meaning a government by god(s)) compared to other conservative parties around the world.

Democrats are pro-worker, pro-union, pro-regulation, pro-government benefits, and generally against excessive military interventions (sometimes called being a dove….or a hippie). Democrats often think there’s a checks-and-balances system that needs to be in place between private companies and the government. Even though Americans refer to Democrats as “liberal,” they really aren’t — Democrats are a centrist party compared to other “liberal” parties around the world. But Democrats are all we have because it’s a 2-party system.

If I have to sum up the economic differences in one sentence, Republican vs Democrat comes down to who you trust more, companies or the government, to make life better for 340+ million people. Your answer will likely depend on your life experiences. For example, Republicans typically claim to be the party of financial responsibility because they prefer “small government,” but over my lifetime, Democrats have been the party that generally reins in Republican overspending (usually due to wars, vanity projects like a border wall, or paying a private company to provide what was previously a government service — this almost always increases government costs by >10-20% because someone has to profit). Democrats have also successfully gotten the United States out of (i) the 2008 global financial crisis (which was itself arguably caused by deregulation/lack of regulation) and (ii) what was nearly a massive COVID recession, with current inflation being the expected side effect of preventing a massive freaking recession (but IMO, Biden and the Democrats did a really poor job of marketing this tradeoff to the American people — I’ll get back to marketing in a moment…)

Personally, I think there are things that private companies can’t or won’t do because they won’t make enough money, and government needs to fill those gaps. I also think there are times when private industries make money but fail to actually help people (eg, healthcare), so it’s the role of government to step in. Moreover, I believe in sensible regulation to keep people safe, like food safety laws. Why should anyone get hurt or die just so some CEO can maximize shareholder value?? Finally, I am for freedom of religion and am very much against any kind of theocracy. Therefore, without even touching any social issues, it’s clear I’m a Democrat, and not much will ever sway me to vote for a Republican.

With that in mind, there are 2 main issues for Democrats to solve in the next election cycle:

1. Democrats need better marketing narratives because they struggle at the national level to connect with people’s feelings. This isn’t about facts or logic. It’s entirely about emotional connection. For all the actual policies and plans that the Democrats stand for, their brand is elite, coastal, urban, nerdy, wimpy, passive, excessively intellectual, un-fun, out of touch, etc. The fact is that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris come from middle class families and do not have Ivy League educations. Meanwhile, Trump was born to New York City elite, went to an Ivy League college, and has been a Manhattan socialite since before I was born. He literally lives in a gilded penthouse high above Manhattan when he’s not at his Florida mansion compound.

Yet somehow people think Trump represents them and understands their struggles better than Biden and Harris. They think Biden and Harris are out of touch while the man in the gold Manhattan penthouse “gets” them. WHY?? Because Trump makes people feel heard. All his petty anger, his negativity, and his victim complexes aren’t just him being a spoiled brat; he’s saying the things that people want to say. He mirrors their feelings back to them. He doesn’t actually care or intend to do anything to help them. But he makes them feel like he might, all facts and evidence to the contrary.

Look, I don’t think Trump is a particularly smart man or good businessman. But he IS a brilliant marketer. Probably one of the best in the last 50 years, if not century. Even the extremely well-documented trail of victims he’s left in the wake of his infomercial schemes isn’t enough to convince voters he’s a con man. Trump’s ability to create an emotional connection is so strong, especially among people who are desperately looking for it, that facts, policies, and plans don’t matter.

2. Democrats need infrastructure so their marketing narrative is voiced by trusted friends and neighbors. By aligning with church-going Christians, the Republicans didn’t just obtain a block of reliable voters. They obtained the hyper-local infrastructure where the Republican party story can be told. In other words, Trump creates the initial emotional connection and marketing narrative, but then it’s local churches that reinforce his message every. single. week. It’s a regular meeting place where people can talk about which candidate they support and why.

It’s influencing, plain and simple.

The Democrats don’t really have this infrastructure anymore. It used to come from unions, but as those crumble, it’s hard to find a replacement. Emails, text messages, TV ads, door-to-door canvassing by random campaign staffers, yard signs, etc. do not change minds. Telling people they have their facts wrong doesn’t change minds.

However, talking about how you feel, and why you believe what you believe, can absolutely sway opinions. For example, when Republicans talk about lowering taxes, I like to say that I’m happy to pay taxes if the money will feed hungry children, help veterans & first responders recover from injuries, revitalize a town after a natural disaster, etc. I do not think such things should be dependent on charities or churches that can pick and choose who is worthy. IMO it’s the role of government to provide for ALL who are less fortunate, because nobody else will do so reliably.

Of course, I’m just some random person on the internet. I’m literally out of touch for you. But you can see how having these discussions in real life, face to face, makes it real and tangible. Talk about what you believe so those around you know that Democrats are not “urban coastal elites.” Show that Democrats stand for actual economic policies, not just “social justice” and DEI. Democrats are real people — real Americans — in every community across the country who believe in the power of a government by the people to good things for the people.

[thedawningofthehour]

I finally got registered to vote yesterday in Pennsylvania. I am doing mail in ballot. I kind of don’t know how your state is, but my state is pretty much like 50% Republican and 50% Democrat. Man, I hope Harris wins.

Pennsylvania is huge, like it's not hyperbole at all to say that the election might literally come down to a state like Pennsylvania. You're doing your part and I'm proud of you.

Minnesota is very solidly blue-like, Ilhan Omar is literally my representative, the Twin Cities is extremely gay and liberal and outside of like, Duluth and Rochester, (which are also very gay and liberal) there's not much else to Minnesota. Like, I know this is how most states work, most of the people are concentrated in cities and the more spread out people are the more conservative they tend to be, but I lived up in Bemidji for a year and can't stress enough how fucking empty northern MN is. Which, fair, cold like that is unnatural and not fit for human habitation. (I knew a guy from Togo who, the first day they had a -30 or whatever day-which was pretty much every day in the winter when I lived there-went down to the front door, opened it, felt the cold, and immediately turned around and went back to bed)

Also Tim Walz is literally our governor. And we are hamming it up a little bit with our 'Minnesota's dad' thing, but honestly not even that much. He was very popular even before Harris picked him as his running mate, and now we're all like "look, that's our guy!" Safe to say Harris has this state pretty much locked down.

I will still be voting, of course, and you all should too even if you're in a state that's solidly red or blue. For one, that's how a lot of states go red, blue voters don't show up because they think there's no point. Texas has more registered Democrats than Republicans-it's very possible that it goes blue. (and for the sake of Texans it really needs to, because good god Republicans are doing everything in their power to torpedo that state) And trust me, those old people who do nothing but watch Fox News-they vote. In every. Election.

And a lot of you guys might have been too young to really understand what was going on, but back in 2016 there was real talk about not certifying the election-not because we didn't like the outcome, but because Clinton literally got more votes than Trump. If Trump wins the EC but loses the popular vote by millions of votes, there's a legit argument to be had for not certifying it. Hopefully we won't get to that point.

REGISTER TO VOTE GUYS!

CHECK AND MAKE SURE YOU'RE REGISTERED! REGULARLY!

AND VOTE!

Like, yes, this is all ridiculous. We shouldn't have to say "you need to vote blue or democracy will literally be destroyed." We shouldn't have red states weighed so heavily that they can win elections even when they lose. We shouldn't have to check our voting registration weekly to make sure our registration hasn't been dumped in an effort to keep us from voting. We should have ranked voting to make third-party candidates viable. We should have automatic voter registration and have Election Day as a federal holiday, but we don't. And we can push for that stuff, but we have to accept that we're not going to have it by November.

Like, you can argue that you shouldn't need to lock your door because people shouldn't be robbing houses. That's not going to be much consolation when you come home and your TV is gone.

[stackthedeck]

Hey, we've been mutuals for a while, and I think of you in a good light. I'm disappointed to see you post infographics that are clearly designed to persuade left leaning youth to not vote in the upcoming election. If you actually think Trump and Biden are equivalent, you've been badly mislead. Anything that convinces people their vote doesn't matter is dangerous and unethical to post.

Literally just google a list of things they did during their presidencies. Here's a list for each, from the same website: trump, biden. It's different. This doesn't even include the price cap on insulin Biden just mandated, since his list was made before that. He also reversed a policy, that trump put in place, permitting medical professionals to discriminate based on religious values (aka turn away gay and trans patients.)

If not that, look at who Trump appointed to the supreme court, and then look what happened to Roe v. Wade. The justices a conservative appoint are going to vote differently than the ones a liberal will appoint.

Like, I'm sorry if this is coming off as rude, but please think a little more critically and actually look at what they each have done and will continue to do. You are discouraging people from voting and you are responsible for the impact this has. You're spreading misinformation.

Frankly this does come off as rude. That post did not say don’t vote for Biden and it made incredibly valid criticism of Biden. Has the Biden administration put in place good policy? Yes of course. Are citizens right to also criticize that the administration hasn’t and isn’t doing enough? Also yes.

Listen I’m a political science student this doesn’t make me and expert by any means but I have done work in government so idk. I’m registered to vote in a red state I’ve voted third party for president in every election and I vote for candidates I agree with and know are effective in local and congressional elections. I’m not saying don’t vote. Even people saying don’t vote Biden aren’t saying don’t vote at all but encouraging voting at all the other levels

I don’t want trump to win but public pressure from key groups of voters such as Arab Americans of all ages (because framing this as a lazy ungrateful younger generational issue is incredibly ignorant) and yeah younger voters could encourage the Biden administration to actually change its policies especially about the ongoing genocide in Palestine. Biden does not get my vote or anyone’s vote because he’s not trump, that’s not democracy it is a hostage situation. Biden must be responsive to the people not just on election day and on the campaign trail but every day. I donated money to his campaign and grassroots organizations that empowered people to vote in 2020. I will not do so again until the Biden administration ceases all aid and weapons to Israel.

I don’t live in a swing state Biden doesn’t care about me. I’ve been harassed in the schools I’m employed at by teachers and parents alike because I’m visibly queer and because I live in a red state I have no legal recourse. Why doesn’t the Biden administration do anything to stop the hundreds of anti trans and anti queer bills in the states? Why don’t I have federal anti discrimination laws protecting me? My trans health care was denied under a blue president what difference does it make.

Vote blue no matter who is just as damaging to democratic values and thinking as make America great again. Either way the parties are complacent because they just have to be not the other guy instead of being responsive to the will of the people. We have to demand better.

Hopefully by 2024 I will be registered to vote in a swing state and Biden will have made the changes to earn my vote. But I know that I will be voting for state and local candidates and it will be coordinated with other truly civically engaged voters who want to see real change in their communities

[davekat-sucks]

Every once and a while I think about how fandom in general got over political. I'm not against people caring about politics in their country or getting educated in world politics. Honestly, though we need more of people learning world history before people start talking about world politics, but whatever that isn't my point.

I think overpollicization has made fandoms a dull place to be in. Before we had ship wars, now people honestly make ships into representing real life gay people instead of women just admiting they want to see the cute boys kiss. Jade Harley can't have guns because America has a gun violence problem and she's intelligent so she "grew out of it" but Jake can have handguns because he's an oaf. Jane actually had a real argument in the homestuck epilogues and no one corrected her that they have a plan to ward off overpopulation. Jane has to be trump because we always need to make fun of american politics in american stories. It was even annoying when childrens shows in the 90s put bill clinton into things for no reason, so that isn't exactly new.

I suppose my disappointment mostly stems from fandom being a really fun place when I was a teenager coming up and I think teens today get sucked into social media and then right into a political party without knowing anything about it. This goes for red vs blue, it isn't just blue. There are polls that suggest young men seem to steer more conservative, young women are more liberal. Which is what we need, more of a divide. I'm hoping more and more teenagers coming up reject adults and strangers telling them what to think about issues they themselves aren't even well informed in. "Hey, man. I just want to see Logan and Scott kiss and leave Jean, not that big of a deal."

People hating on Undyne in Deltarune just because she is a police officer that they go make headcanons that she shouldn't be one because of the BLM crap. Before, mixing real life stuff with fiction is looked down upon. Because the reason we watch movies, listen to music, read manga/books, etc is to ESCAPE from facing reality. Not bring reality back to our interests.