• ynthrepic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    1 day ago

    I don’t think you’re listening. That’s one of the issues both sides share in common that sucks. Doesn’t change the fact they’re our only hope.

    • zbyte64@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Listen to yourself. You’re saying the Democrats are our only hope yet they also don’t listen.

      Democrats do listen, but only to those with power. Before anything can change for the better we need power for ourselves.

          • ynthrepic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            1 day ago

            You can and should support them as they align with your values, but you’ll never get enough votes for them to have any chance of overthrowing the big two. It has to be changed from within, unless you’re prepared to try violence.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Since changing from within is impossible, and voting in a new party is highly unlikely, it seems the revolutionaries were right all along.

    • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m listening, I just think you’re wrong.

      And I brought up that issue specific to show that the Democrats also “will never even be pressured to do anything like that intentionally by it’s base”

      • ynthrepic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        Progressive social change has always occurred under the auspices of the left-most of the two major parties. That’s just how it overwhelmingly is. What’s not to agree with? How do you think progress will happen next time it happens?

        • gucken@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          The hallmark progressive achievements made in this country, many that still exist today (to varying degrees ofc) were a result of third party sweat, blood and tears. Literally.

          I recommend reading about the social/workers rights movements of the early 1900s. The Progressive Party led by Roosevelt, The Bull Moose Party with social reformers like Jane Addams and Florence Kelly, the Socialist Party of Eugene Debs… all of these were most prominent in fighting for and ultimately producing a cluster of social welfare, social insurance reforms, women’s suffrage, workers rights/5 day work week, etc.

          It was the dedication, pressure and will to not fall in line trying to change the two-party duopoly from within but to build their own coalitions, their own movements on the outside, and thus the mainstream parties were eventually forced to inscribe the populus demands into legislation.

          All that to say, healthy third parties are a good thing. It builds actual pressure on your legislators. Politicians wont work on your behalf when they know you’re voting for them anyway – just line their pockets with money from the bourgeois they actually legislate for. Seeking the change you wish to see via third party can and has produced tremendous gains for the working class.

    • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      The thing is that your asking tankies to be pragmatic about policy. They would rather let the Palestinian Genocide continue and works lose more rights than to do anything helpful in the near or medium term. They just aren’t serious about the issues.

      Its easy for the .ml types to cry and wait for a perfect policy or candidate. They aren’t going hungry, nor under seige of any kind.

      • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        14 hours ago

        The thing is that your asking tankies to be pragmatic about policy.

        This “pragmatism” is how we got here in the first place.

        Its easy for the .ml types to cry and wait for a perfect policy or candidate.

        We’re not looking for a perfect candidate under bourgeois democracy, because we know it will never happen. Previously:

        The US government was never not captured by the bourgeoisie, because the US was born of a bourgeois revolution[1]. The wealthy, white, male, land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers constructed a bourgeois state with “checks and balances” against the “tyranny of the majority”. It was never meant to represent the majority—the working class—and it never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (at least those not disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote. BBC: [Princeton & Northwestern] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy

        • InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          13 hours ago

          We’re not looking for a perfect candidate under bourgeois democracy, because we know it will never happen. Previously:

          In either case you’re not doing shit and you’re not a serious movement. Tankies don’t vote to minimize harm, nor do they vote to expand the progressive wing.

          You all are effectively the ratchet democratsyou laughs at because you ultimately won’t show or organize for anything. Tankies aren’t serious people.

          • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Schrodinger’s leftists; simultaneously the reason the Democrats lost the election and the biggest obstacle to progress, but also not a serious movement.