331
this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2025
331 points (89.3% liked)
politics
20332 readers
2966 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
People here still blaming this on minority voters are deafeningly silent on party leadership holding the coalition hostage over AIPAC funding
Stop directing your anger at people being robbed of basic representation instead of political actors who are gleefully accepting blood money to turn against their constituents and a blind eye to genocide
We know they're war-criminals. There's still a difference between that and leveling the place for a hotel. Trump gleefully accepted $100m from Adelson for the west bank.
Stop assuming we're pro-dems and not just anti-trump.
This is the shit that drives me nuts. No matter how many fucking times you explain it, they just cannot wrap their heads around this for some reason. Or they refuse to.
I'm not accusing anyone of being pro-dems, I'm pointing out that this line of reporting is intentionally misdirecting anger at voters - who can literally only react to the policies and governance of the democrats as they are - instead of the democrats sabotaging themselves for thinking they could have their cake and eat it too.
Thinking that the democrats could participate in a highly-publicized genocide and not lose any voters is folly, but then turning around blaming the voters for the loss of votes is beyond hubris and well into delusion. Anyone with eyes could see this loss coming from a mile away and was screaming at the democrats to change course.
But the voters are to blame. So is the DNC. Both suck...bad. Unfortunately, the majority of Americans, including their political representative, are more concerned with propping up failing capitalism than actually fixing solvable world issues. At this point, I find it impossible to envision creating enough public and political support for actual change unless the entire economic system burns down. My fear is that instead of galvanizing the working class, ian economic collapse is only going to create a vacuum to be filled by the next fascist to secure even greater control.
If you have a practical solution, i'd love to hear it.
Lenin actually described this pattern, theorizing that "fascism is capitalism in decay."
There are a lot of marxists of a variety of bents who have their own theories on how to achieve a socialist state, but most of them guess that an advanced capitalist state has very little likelihood of transitioning without a revolutionary vanguard or violent class conflict.
It's a reason why socialist projects almost exclusively appear in pre-industrial parts of the world - but a classless communist state is only really achievable in more advanced post-industrial societies because they'd actually have the infrastructure to get to post-scarcity. So what ends up happening usually is either a protracted socialist "dictatorship of the proletariat", or a social democratic state that is slowly undermined by austerity until it returns to a more conventional capitalist organization.
All that to say: no, I do not think the US even meets the bare minimum of class consciousness required to avoid a fascistic collapse. The only good news is that, historically, fascist movements tend to burn out fairly quickly unless they have a competent leader. So, there's that.
Unfortunately, this is usually what happens when governments/societies collapse. Lot of people on the internet talking about burning it all down and starting over, not realizing that usually just makes things worse.
It doesn't matter if Democrats aren't picture perfect. Anyone willing to rub brain cells together knows they're infinitely better at governing than Republicans, including in regards to Palestine, and should vote accordingly. I don't need the Democrats to cup my balls and talk dirty to me to know the smarter move is to vote for them. I don't need to be courted every fucking election or my vote goes to a proto-fascist or I don't vote at all.
The majority of the fault is squarely on voters, not Democrats. Because they didn't fucking inform themselves responsibly.
A little less than half of all eligible voters don't vote in any given federal election - multiple factors more than the margin of every race; can we blame those people for every atrocity conducted on our behalf, too?
The outcome of every election since our founding was determined by how many people the candidates can get to turn out for them -that didn't suddenly change this time. Democrats chose to spend their efforts trying to disabuse their constituents of their moral objections and deny any real domestic reform, and they lost because of it.
I'm not assuming you're pro-dems, I'm pointing out that their loss is entirely attributable to their own political mis-calculation on top of their efforts to gaslight Americans about their roll and knowledge of the crimes being committed on their behalf.
Blaming voters for reacting to the Democrats' policy decisions - including the moderates they alienated - is simply yet another attempt to obscure the facts that lead us to this moment.
Probably more to do with the mass delusion and post truth world we live in.
And yes, enabling the greater evil is a failing of the people who voted against their interests because less evil wasn’t good enough.
Gaza is fully leveled and Trump had nothing to do with it.
Not yet it isn't and yes, he did. He announced it the other day. The ethnic clensing of 2M people
Please elaborate what the party leadership could've done differently to not alienate the other voting blocks mentioned.
They could have defended the lives of Palestinians and acknowledged that the genocide was happening.
It was Biden's press secretary and SOS who got up on a podium everyday and assured the press and those "other voters" that Israel wasn't doing anything wrong. They drew that line themselves, not anyone who was protesting the genocide.
I find arguments that the non-voters shouldn't be blamed for Trump because party leadership didn't properly encourage them to vote for Harris idiotic. Everyone has a duty to educate themselves about their vote. Shifting blame to the DNC is both patronizing and destructive. The DNC sucks.... You know who else sucks? people who didn't stand up against Trump. Those people are grown ass adults who actively helped a fascist by doing nothing but bitch.
A-Fucking-Men
These two sentences are in contradiction
Here, see if you can spot the double standard:
"The [voters] suck… You know who else sucks? [the DNC] who didn’t stand up against [Israel]. Those people are grown ass adults who actively helped a fascist by doing nothing but bitch."
I don't understand. You are quoting two different posts, then concluding that two different people with different viewpoints represents a "double standard"... That is also an idiotic take.
With that said, OPs comment asking what the DNC could have done isn't contradictory or hypocritical if you put it alongside my viewpoint. It simply illustrates that you will never make every voter happy on every plank of your platform. We are all different people with different goals. Democracy is about compromise and understanding that the only way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time. Certain non-voters attitude became "because neither side aligns with my very specific interest, I'm just not voting! That'll show the Dems that they can't win unless they support [insert political viewpoint here].". To go back to my elephant analogy, it's like those people saying "I'm going to starve because i can't eat the elephant in one bite!"
So for some people, their line in the sand is a humanitarian Gaza policy, which will likely require a strong military presence to enforce ceasefires and aid deployment. For others it's a distaste for overseas military actions, and any intent to increase American involvement in the middle east. One side is pissed off and won't vote if it looks like you are abandoning Palestinians. The other side is pissed off if you suggest increasing military operations in the region, even if it's to deescalate Israeli aggression. You can't please both.
So voters from both of these camps chose to sit on their vote because they couldn't get what they wanted... In exchange they helped someone that is likely destructive to both camps' larger interests, as well as their specific interests discussed above, get elected. That is their right and choice. Just like it's my right and choice to call them out for supporting fascism through inaction.
Looking at it that way, I'm not sure how you could say our viewpoints are contradictory.
Ok, now apply that criticism to those who (hypothetically) wouldn't have voted if Biden had stopped supplying military aid to Israel.
The Democrats created that block of voters by repeatedly lying about their knowledge of Israel's war crimes. Not only could they have done the right thing by withholding their offensive aid from Israel, they could have also not lied about it.
Democrats tried obscuring the scale of devastation in gaza with their own involvement, and then lost because they got caught and then doubled down. You can't treat your constituents with that much contempt and expect not to lose those voters, and then post-rationalize the lie by claiming that they would have lost more voters had they been honest and intervened.
You seem to think the election was more about punishing Biden for Gaza than preventing trump from destroying America.
Those were the only two choices. Period.
The thing that you don't want to admit here is that you chose trump. You in part made this current reality happen while we tried to prevent it.
Gaza will be gone and you will have literally helped trump do it by not voting Harris.
That fact will never change.
Bingo.
There were two and only two options. There is no reality in which there was another option.
Harris or Trump were going to be president and one expressed disapproval of what Israel was doing and the other straight up said they should finish the job.
Anyone who didn't vote or voted 3rd party, helped usher Donald Trump into the Oval Office and sealed Gaza's fate. They could have chosen to limit the amount of suffering, but they chose to take their ball and go home instead.
No, I don't. Elections allow citizens to participate in deciding their representation, and those candidates campaign for votes by convincing normal people that you will represent their interests.
I shouldn't have to cite the history of how that started for you to understand that's just how it's always worked, and if there was ever an implicit intent for every single person to vote in every election they would have (at least) made election days a holiday (since most polling places were a half-day's trip from land-owning patriarchs at the beginning).
This a-historical fantasy of elections being objective measures of the totality of a voting population's will is an absurd caricature of our democracy, and it's only purpose seems to be to shift the responsibility of candidates to advocate for their qualifications and onto voters, who are not obligated to make that choice when the candidate themselves has abdicated their own responsibility to justify their candidacy.
Gaza will be gone because democrats decided their relationship with a fascist ethnostate was more important than stopping a fascist from taking the executive office, and even your and my vote for Genocide Lite was made into a meaningless sacrifice because of it.