|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
"This needed to happen" to the Democratic party, but fair enough, I worded that poorly.
|
On July 10 2018 22:49 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 16:56 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 16:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 10 2018 16:10 screamingpalm wrote:Did we vote for a Republican, or against Hillary? Citation needed here.  Well, I spent a year telling GH that all his revolutionary fantasies were great but would never even be possible in a forseeable future if Hillary was beaten simply because of how awful the Supreme Court would be. You can get all the Bernies you want now, no one will get money out of politics or make the US any less awful and corrupt in any way, any such initiative will be killed by the SC. Well here you go. Trump is a nefarious clown elected on and by a local brand of stupidity and ignorance. Eventually this charade will end. But the consequences of the SC picks are there to stay. Well, I get it and all, but let's not forget how life was under Obama and a Dem majority. This needed to happen, growing pains and all, but SCOTUS be damned if the people are united in the public purpose. Otherwise... there's no point. I'd rather the people are united in truth than neoliberal propaganda. It's up to us to make the change we want to see. We must make them do it, as so many have alluded to in the past. Even Bernie Sanders and his tax and spend mythology. "This needed to happen", regulatory capture, child detention centers, social safety net dismantlement and all. It takes some combination of extreme privilege, naivety or desperation to push for accelerationism.
Yeah, the argument sucks. My wife and I now have to live under the shadow of health care being denied because some conservative judge decides pre-existing conditions are now a good reason for her to be denied care. And now some of those folks are advocating that me being fucked over is the only way to get the political change they want. Some peek privilege right there.
|
On July 10 2018 22:57 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 22:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On July 10 2018 16:56 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 16:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 10 2018 16:10 screamingpalm wrote:Did we vote for a Republican, or against Hillary? Citation needed here. Well, I spent a year telling GH that all his revolutionary fantasies were great but would never even be possible in a forseeable future if Hillary was beaten simply because of how awful the Supreme Court would be. You can get all the Bernies you want now, no one will get money out of politics or make the US any less awful and corrupt in any way, any such initiative will be killed by the SC. Well here you go. Trump is a nefarious clown elected on and by a local brand of stupidity and ignorance. Eventually this charade will end. But the consequences of the SC picks are there to stay. Well, I get it and all, but let's not forget how life was under Obama and a Dem majority. This needed to happen, growing pains and all, but SCOTUS be damned if the people are united in the public purpose. Otherwise... there's no point. I'd rather the people are united in truth than neoliberal propaganda. It's up to us to make the change we want to see. We must make them do it, as so many have alluded to in the past. Even Bernie Sanders and his tax and spend mythology. "This needed to happen", regulatory capture, child detention centers, social safety net dismantlement and all. It takes some combination of extreme privilege, naivety or desperation to push for accelerationism. Yeah, the argument sucks. My wife and I now have to live under the shadow of health care being denied because some conservative judge decides pre-existing conditions are now a good reason for her to be denied care. And now some of those folks are advocating that me being fucked over is the only way to get the political change they want. Some peek privilege right there.
Call it privilege (it's usually the opposite) if you want, but it's true. Calling the radical change necessary for oppressed people"privileged" is definitely a position of privilege though.
|
On July 10 2018 23:04 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 22:57 Plansix wrote:On July 10 2018 22:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On July 10 2018 16:56 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 16:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 10 2018 16:10 screamingpalm wrote:Did we vote for a Republican, or against Hillary? Citation needed here. Well, I spent a year telling GH that all his revolutionary fantasies were great but would never even be possible in a forseeable future if Hillary was beaten simply because of how awful the Supreme Court would be. You can get all the Bernies you want now, no one will get money out of politics or make the US any less awful and corrupt in any way, any such initiative will be killed by the SC. Well here you go. Trump is a nefarious clown elected on and by a local brand of stupidity and ignorance. Eventually this charade will end. But the consequences of the SC picks are there to stay. Well, I get it and all, but let's not forget how life was under Obama and a Dem majority. This needed to happen, growing pains and all, but SCOTUS be damned if the people are united in the public purpose. Otherwise... there's no point. I'd rather the people are united in truth than neoliberal propaganda. It's up to us to make the change we want to see. We must make them do it, as so many have alluded to in the past. Even Bernie Sanders and his tax and spend mythology. "This needed to happen", regulatory capture, child detention centers, social safety net dismantlement and all. It takes some combination of extreme privilege, naivety or desperation to push for accelerationism. Yeah, the argument sucks. My wife and I now have to live under the shadow of health care being denied because some conservative judge decides pre-existing conditions are now a good reason for her to be denied care. And now some of those folks are advocating that me being fucked over is the only way to get the political change they want. Some peek privilege right there. Call it privilege (it's usually the opposite) if you want, but it's true.
And you wonder why progressives like yourself can’t get the support you want for more moderate, centrist voters. Why would I ever trust you when it is so clear you will throw me under the bus to get a win for your agenda?
|
On July 10 2018 23:07 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 23:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 10 2018 22:57 Plansix wrote:On July 10 2018 22:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On July 10 2018 16:56 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 16:49 Biff The Understudy wrote:On July 10 2018 16:10 screamingpalm wrote:Did we vote for a Republican, or against Hillary? Citation needed here. Well, I spent a year telling GH that all his revolutionary fantasies were great but would never even be possible in a forseeable future if Hillary was beaten simply because of how awful the Supreme Court would be. You can get all the Bernies you want now, no one will get money out of politics or make the US any less awful and corrupt in any way, any such initiative will be killed by the SC. Well here you go. Trump is a nefarious clown elected on and by a local brand of stupidity and ignorance. Eventually this charade will end. But the consequences of the SC picks are there to stay. Well, I get it and all, but let's not forget how life was under Obama and a Dem majority. This needed to happen, growing pains and all, but SCOTUS be damned if the people are united in the public purpose. Otherwise... there's no point. I'd rather the people are united in truth than neoliberal propaganda. It's up to us to make the change we want to see. We must make them do it, as so many have alluded to in the past. Even Bernie Sanders and his tax and spend mythology. "This needed to happen", regulatory capture, child detention centers, social safety net dismantlement and all. It takes some combination of extreme privilege, naivety or desperation to push for accelerationism. Yeah, the argument sucks. My wife and I now have to live under the shadow of health care being denied because some conservative judge decides pre-existing conditions are now a good reason for her to be denied care. And now some of those folks are advocating that me being fucked over is the only way to get the political change they want. Some peek privilege right there. Call it privilege (it's usually the opposite) if you want, but it's true. And you wonder why progressives like yourself can’t get the support you want for more moderate, centrist voters. Why would I ever trust you when it is so clear you will throw me under the bus to get a win for your agenda?
Because that would be an incredibly foolish interpretation?
It's not about "throwing you under the bus" like centrists have done to people like myself since forever, it's that until it gets a fraction as bad for centrists as it is the oppressed people those centrists walked all over, they won't wise up. Hell most of them still aren't and are bitching about missing brunch for protests.
|
|
|
On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better.
I can show you through explaining economics. Nothing will improve through neoliberalism. GH understands where I'm coming from and that's enough for me. I know all too well how futile it is to convince Yellow Dogs. I'm a black sheep progressive in a family of liberals lol.
|
On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better.
I'm not "trying to get the population mad enough by making it worse for them", and lets be clear, it's worse for us under Trump too, sooo....
The point is centrist are willing to accept a degeneration of conditions for oppressed people with no indication it's unacceptable so that makes supporting them unacceptable for people like myself.
What that means for centrists means jack shit to me. I can assure centrists that I and other revolutionary types won't be coddling them hoping that they'll see the light.
You'll have the Social Dems to do that for you.
|
On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better. I'm not "trying to get the population mad enough by making it worse for them", and lets be clear, it's worse for us under Trump too, sooo.... The point is centrist are willing to accept a degeneration of conditions for oppressed people with no indication it's unacceptable so that makes supporting them unacceptable for people like myself.
I can't see that this is true. Your perspective on this is clear, anything other than total, unconditional support for extremists is perceived as consent for oppression. There's a huge grey area in the middle there (occupied by the vast majority of opinion) that you conveniently ignore.
On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
What that means for you means jack shit to me. I can assure centrists that I and other revolutionary types won't be coddling them hoping that they'll see the light.
You'll have the Social Dems to do that for you.
You also won't be getting any of the things you want because of this.
The problem with refusal to compromise from a disadvantaged position is that you have nothing to negotiate with. Negotiation is at the heart of any democracy.
|
|
|
On July 10 2018 22:00 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 21:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 10 2018 21:22 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 21:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 10 2018 17:23 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 17:16 Slydie wrote:Even Bernie Sanders and his tax and spend mythology. He takes most of this "mythology" from how European IRL countries are run... The truth is that voters aren't ready for the actual truth. When Bernie's economic adviser explained how the system actually operates, he said he couldn't actually say that to people on the campaign trail... much like Al Gore said to Warren Mosler in the day during his campaign. The EU is far different from the US in that they have no equivalent of Uncle Sam to inject capital... monetary sovereignty. It is mainly fueled by neoliberal propaganda and quack mainstream economists such as Paul Krugman and Robert Reich... + Show Spoiler + Functionally tax and spend isn't substantially different than the borrow and spend you're advocating under MMT. Not sure why you're calling it mythology. Borrow? All spending is done through Congressional appropriations. They alone create net new assets. There is no borrowing in this sense. You're either taxing and spending (redirecting income flows) or borrowing and spending (redirecting savings flows). Not sure what you are trying to say in the above. Congressional appropriations 'create net new assets'? Edit: Yes taxes are a drain and spending is an addition. That's an income function though, not assets. Money flows in a circuit. New money can only be created by the Federal government, and they alone also drain money through taxation. Banks do not create net new assets, they can only net to zero and create loans. (This was a huge problem during the private debt expansion of the Clinton goldilocks economy and exactly why it was unsustainable). Contrary to popular belief, FICA is a drain- the money leaves the system (it is a regressive tax). SS payments are new assets created through Congressional appropriations... as is all federal spending (i.e. a law must pass, which then sends instructions to the Federal Reserve to create funds requested by the law). This is done by marking up an account at the Fed- using a computer and created out of thin air (and legislation/political will).
This is not how things work. You are mixing stocks with flows and monetary systems with fiscal systems.
The Federal Reserve (Fed), not Federal Government creates new money. Monetary and fiscal action is separate.
Taxes and spending flow through the Treasury, not the Federal Reserve.
Banks operate in a fractional reserve system. New lending does increase the money supply.
|
On July 10 2018 23:32 screamingpalm wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better. I can show you through explaining economics. Nothing will improve through neoliberalism. GH understands where I'm coming from and that's enough for me. I know all too well how futile it is to convince Yellow Dogs. I'm a black sheep progressive in a family of liberals lol.
The smug superiority and dismissal of voters concerns has really panned out for the left over the last 30 years. I’m sure returning to that will pan out this time.
|
|
|
On July 10 2018 23:37 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better. I'm not "trying to get the population mad enough by making it worse for them", and lets be clear, it's worse for us under Trump too, sooo.... The point is centrist are willing to accept a degeneration of conditions for oppressed people with no indication it's unacceptable so that makes supporting them unacceptable for people like myself. I can't see that this is true. Your perspective on this is clear, anything other than total, unconditional support for extremists is perceived as consent for oppression. There's a huge grey area in the middle there (occupied by the vast majority of opinion) that you conveniently ignore. Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
What that means for you means jack shit to me. I can assure centrists that I and other revolutionary types won't be coddling them hoping that they'll see the light.
You'll have the Social Dems to do that for you. You also won't be getting any of the things you want because of this. The problem with refusal to compromise from a disadvantaged position is that you have nothing to negotiate with. Negotiation is at the heart of any democracy.
I'm aware there's a grey area, that would be your social dems, dem socials, and socialists, Centrists are to the right of the grey area.
You act like we were getting what we wanted voting 95%+ Democrat for decades lol.
Democrat strongholds are some of THE WORST places, y'all can miss me with this "play nice and pray for help" nonsense
On July 10 2018 23:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 23:32 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better. I can show you through explaining economics. Nothing will improve through neoliberalism. GH understands where I'm coming from and that's enough for me. I know all too well how futile it is to convince Yellow Dogs. I'm a black sheep progressive in a family of liberals lol. The smug superiority and dismissal of voters concerns has really panned out for the left over the last 30 years. I’m sure returning to that will pan out this time.
lol Trump is a blatant criminal and conman, you guys are various degrees of convinced he's a treasonous Russian asset (or unwitting useful fool), there is ZERO chance he gets impeached, and Democrats are just praying to make it through midterms without drastically underperforming and you're worried about the people to your left not being sensitive to your problems...
Funny how centrist can ignore the hell out of our problems and demand our vote but we're supposed to center theirs and vote for whoever their corporate masters offer us, the time for tolerating that nonsense has passed and if Centrist try it again in 2018 and 2020 they will lose and it will be their own fault, not anyone to their left.
|
On July 10 2018 23:41 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 23:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better. I'm not "trying to get the population mad enough by making it worse for them", and lets be clear, it's worse for us under Trump too, sooo.... The point is centrist are willing to accept a degeneration of conditions for oppressed people with no indication it's unacceptable so that makes supporting them unacceptable for people like myself. I can't see that this is true. Your perspective on this is clear, anything other than total, unconditional support for extremists is perceived as consent for oppression. There's a huge grey area in the middle there (occupied by the vast majority of opinion) that you conveniently ignore. On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
What that means for you means jack shit to me. I can assure centrists that I and other revolutionary types won't be coddling them hoping that they'll see the light.
You'll have the Social Dems to do that for you. You also won't be getting any of the things you want because of this. The problem with refusal to compromise from a disadvantaged position is that you have nothing to negotiate with. Negotiation is at the heart of any democracy. I'm aware there's a grey area, that would be your social dems, dem socials, and socialists, Centrists are to the right of the grey area. You act like we were getting what we wanted voting 95%+ Democrat for decades lol. Democrat strongholds are some of THE WORST places, y'all can miss me with this "play nice and pray for help" nonsense
I don't think you (I'm struggling to define 'you' as a group - revolutionary left maybe?) are getting what you want. You obviously aren't. I just think that the temptation to go for extreme change is counter productive in a practical sense. You won't get anything by sitting and waiting for a revolution, and you won't get anything by yelling at people until they join your side. Really what you end up with is something like Trump, at which point you can happily show how he has exposed the political system for what it is, and you still have nothing to show for it.
I don't pretend to have personal experience of the US political landscape, I don't and its probably harder for minorities than my brain will allow me to see (its not really the same here), but it doesn't change the practical issues you have with support.
If meeting people in the middle doesn't get the results you want, and pushing for revolution makes things worse, which option do you go for?
|
On July 10 2018 23:50 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 23:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 10 2018 23:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better. I'm not "trying to get the population mad enough by making it worse for them", and lets be clear, it's worse for us under Trump too, sooo.... The point is centrist are willing to accept a degeneration of conditions for oppressed people with no indication it's unacceptable so that makes supporting them unacceptable for people like myself. I can't see that this is true. Your perspective on this is clear, anything other than total, unconditional support for extremists is perceived as consent for oppression. There's a huge grey area in the middle there (occupied by the vast majority of opinion) that you conveniently ignore. On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
What that means for you means jack shit to me. I can assure centrists that I and other revolutionary types won't be coddling them hoping that they'll see the light.
You'll have the Social Dems to do that for you. You also won't be getting any of the things you want because of this. The problem with refusal to compromise from a disadvantaged position is that you have nothing to negotiate with. Negotiation is at the heart of any democracy. I'm aware there's a grey area, that would be your social dems, dem socials, and socialists, Centrists are to the right of the grey area. You act like we were getting what we wanted voting 95%+ Democrat for decades lol. Democrat strongholds are some of THE WORST places, y'all can miss me with this "play nice and pray for help" nonsense I don't think you (I'm struggling to define 'you' as a group - revolutionary left maybe?) are getting what you want. You obviously aren't. I just think that the temptation to go for extreme change is counter productive in a practical sense. You won't get anything by sitting and waiting for a revolution, and you won't get anything by yelling at people until they join your side. Really what you end up with is something like Trump, at which point you can happily show how he has exposed the political system for what it is, and you still have nothing to show for it. I don't pretend to have personal experience of the US political landscape, I don't and its probably harder for minorities than my brain will allow me to see (its not really the same here), but it doesn't change the practical issues you have with support. If meeting people in the middle doesn't get the results you want, and pushing for revolution makes things worse, which option do you go for?
That's all just not true when it comes to revolutionary struggles. The whitewashing and revisionism of MLK Jr. has a lot to do with why people between 18-40 believe that though
“Nobody in the world, nobody in history, has ever gotten their freedom by appealing to the moral sense of people who oppressing them.” -Assata Shakur
If Centrists are looking for compromise I've said they have the Social Dems, Dem Socialists and so on. But it's them coming left, or losing. Those are their options.
|
|
|
On July 10 2018 23:38 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 22:00 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 21:54 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 10 2018 21:22 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 21:19 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 10 2018 17:23 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 17:16 Slydie wrote:Even Bernie Sanders and his tax and spend mythology. He takes most of this "mythology" from how European IRL countries are run... The truth is that voters aren't ready for the actual truth. When Bernie's economic adviser explained how the system actually operates, he said he couldn't actually say that to people on the campaign trail... much like Al Gore said to Warren Mosler in the day during his campaign. The EU is far different from the US in that they have no equivalent of Uncle Sam to inject capital... monetary sovereignty. It is mainly fueled by neoliberal propaganda and quack mainstream economists such as Paul Krugman and Robert Reich... + Show Spoiler + Functionally tax and spend isn't substantially different than the borrow and spend you're advocating under MMT. Not sure why you're calling it mythology. Borrow? All spending is done through Congressional appropriations. They alone create net new assets. There is no borrowing in this sense. You're either taxing and spending (redirecting income flows) or borrowing and spending (redirecting savings flows). Not sure what you are trying to say in the above. Congressional appropriations 'create net new assets'? Edit: Yes taxes are a drain and spending is an addition. That's an income function though, not assets. Money flows in a circuit. New money can only be created by the Federal government, and they alone also drain money through taxation. Banks do not create net new assets, they can only net to zero and create loans. (This was a huge problem during the private debt expansion of the Clinton goldilocks economy and exactly why it was unsustainable). Contrary to popular belief, FICA is a drain- the money leaves the system (it is a regressive tax). SS payments are new assets created through Congressional appropriations... as is all federal spending (i.e. a law must pass, which then sends instructions to the Federal Reserve to create funds requested by the law). This is done by marking up an account at the Fed- using a computer and created out of thin air (and legislation/political will). This is not how things work. You are mixing stocks with flows and monetary systems with fiscal systems. The Federal Reserve (Fed), not Federal Government creates new money. Monetary and fiscal action is separate. Taxes and spending flow through the Treasury, not the Federal Reserve. Banks operate in a fractional reserve system. New lending does increase the money supply.
The Federal Reserve is part of the Federal government. It is a creature of Congress.
Monetary and fiscal policy are indeed separate.
Monetary policy is the domain of the Federal Reserve, only they can create money.
Fiscal policy falls under the Treasury. This is where "borrowing" comes in, but it gets a bit more complex... this is where interest rate targets are set, etc.
Banks can only create loans and credit- each with a corresponding debit at the Fed. Once paid off, nets to zero.
|
On July 10 2018 23:56 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2018 23:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 10 2018 23:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better. I'm not "trying to get the population mad enough by making it worse for them", and lets be clear, it's worse for us under Trump too, sooo.... The point is centrist are willing to accept a degeneration of conditions for oppressed people with no indication it's unacceptable so that makes supporting them unacceptable for people like myself. I can't see that this is true. Your perspective on this is clear, anything other than total, unconditional support for extremists is perceived as consent for oppression. There's a huge grey area in the middle there (occupied by the vast majority of opinion) that you conveniently ignore. On July 10 2018 23:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
What that means for you means jack shit to me. I can assure centrists that I and other revolutionary types won't be coddling them hoping that they'll see the light.
You'll have the Social Dems to do that for you. You also won't be getting any of the things you want because of this. The problem with refusal to compromise from a disadvantaged position is that you have nothing to negotiate with. Negotiation is at the heart of any democracy. I'm aware there's a grey area, that would be your social dems, dem socials, and socialists, Centrists are to the right of the grey area. You act like we were getting what we wanted voting 95%+ Democrat for decades lol. Democrat strongholds are some of THE WORST places, y'all can miss me with this "play nice and pray for help" nonsense On July 10 2018 23:38 Plansix wrote:On July 10 2018 23:32 screamingpalm wrote:On July 10 2018 23:28 JimmiC wrote:
Plansix is right. No one can get behind extremists. You end up looking just as bad as the other side with a different package. Instead of trying to get the population "mad" enough by making it worse for them. Show them how it could be better, be better. I can show you through explaining economics. Nothing will improve through neoliberalism. GH understands where I'm coming from and that's enough for me. I know all too well how futile it is to convince Yellow Dogs. I'm a black sheep progressive in a family of liberals lol. The smug superiority and dismissal of voters concerns has really panned out for the left over the last 30 years. I’m sure returning to that will pan out this time. lol Trump is a blatant criminal and conman, you guys are various degrees of convinced he's a treasonous Russian asset (or unwitting useful fool), there is ZERO chance he gets impeached, and Democrats are just praying to make it through midterms without drastically underperforming and you're worried about the people to your left not being sensitive to your problems... Funny how centrist can ignore the hell out of our problems and demand our vote but we're supposed to center theirs and vote for whoever their corporate masters offer us, the time for tolerating that nonsense has passed and if Centrist try it again in 2018 and 2020 they will lose and it will be their own fault, not anyone to their left. It is amazing no matter the discussion and with who how fast you can bring it to "you vs them". I think you might enjoy the fight more then believe your points. If you don't it would be advantageous to look for things you can agree on to build bridges instead of always be smashing them and say purposely inflammatory things like "abolish the police".
It's always been them vs us, and the longer people don't see it the stronger they get/stay. What you guys are really asking for is for me/us to go back to quietly accepting the shit deal we get out of fear of a shittier one, I'm trying to tell you guys that's done (I mean for me it's unquestionable) and the sooner people accept that the sooner we can get a better future.
|
I'm sure you would like a Proletariat Revolution, because that's what it sounds like. Class struggle, us vs them, and I suppose this leads to mass incarceration of the capitalist scum and labour camps, collective production and then, as history has shown us, general starvation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
