Neither of those things are true.
7 Likes
Try instead:
Housing, food, healthcare, and education are guaranteed for everybody.
Get this to 100% of the population.
It’s not having below median which is the problem, it’s the incentives that poverty creates. When you are fighting for housing, food, healthcare, and education, it’s not bargaining – it’s a gun to your head.
17 Likes
9 Likes
Two years is far from a meaningless time period.
1 Like
Really doesn’t matter if your premiums are subsidized when you gotta pay hundreds of dollars to go to the doctor.
7 Likes
For decades the Dems have sold out the working class in favor of the owning class. That isn’t conspiracy nonsense.
When the Dems voted in favor of the Taft-Hartley Act that severely restricted the rights of unions to organize and strike and paved the way for things like so-called “right-to-work” laws. That was Dems doing the bidding of their corporate masters, and shitting all over the working class.
The war on drugs, the growth of the prison-industrial complex, and the militarization of police were bi-partisan.
When Clinton did welfare “reform”(aka gutted welfare), was that him caring about poverty or doing the bidding of his corporate masters? Or when he championed NAFTA, was that good for working people? Did that reduce poverty, or did it increase corporate profits at the expense of working people?
When Obama let the banksters off the hook for the largest financial fraud in history, and millions lost their homes, was that him caring about poverty or serving his Wall St. backers?
When Dem politicians use right-wing talking points to shit on UHC/M4A, they aren’t doing that in order to alleviate poverty, they are saying those things to protect the interests of capital.
The 2020 NDAA passed with overwhelming Dem support in Congress. $700B+ for bombs and occupations, when it’d be better spent on green/sustainable jobs, and education. Those Dem politicians voted for that; they have agency. “They got money for war, but can’t feed the poor.” -Tupac
I really wish the Dems were as pro-worker and anti-poverty as the image that they curate to gain support. I don’t normally quote the Bible, but it’s right when it says that “a man can not serve two masters”. We live in a class based system that is violently enforced. The struggle is real, and the Dems, for the most part, are on the pro-capitalist rather than pro-worker side of the struggle. It sucks that they are, but that’s the reality of a pro-business party in a capitalist society. It’s why Trump’s and the GOP’s attacks on the Dems resonate–because there is truth behind it.
It’s like our country is a fully provisioned restaurant owned by the wealthy and staffed by the Dems & GOP. The Dems serve scraps and claim that’s all there is, while the wealthy have food fights in a private dining room. The GOP serves straight up salmonella, and claims it’s both sides’ fault. I’d rather eat scraps than salmonella, but they are both lying to us.
Just because the GOP is worse, and just because the Dems do some good some times, that doesn’t mean that the Dem politicians by-and-large aren’t subservient to their capitalist masters–the very ones that are prosecuting and winning the class war against us.
24 Likes
I would say it resonates because they’re preaching to the choir.
Then again, it seems more discerning minds agree that Trump’s witless musings and the GOP’s baldly self-interested diatribes have “truth” to them. In my opinion, much of the historical corporate centrism described above is less descriptive of the Democratic Party today than the much more conservative party of the last couple decades. Institutional inertia and political concern about moving too far too fast are twin beasts that must be tamed before goals can be achieved. When no less corporatist shills than Klobuchar and Schumer are decrying the filibuster as preventing a very liberal agenda from advancing it tends to dilute the visceral anger of your post.
In order for your view to be correct, the policy advanced by Democrats would have to be tepid-regressive if the Democrats held 60+ seats. I believe Schumer, with a super majority, would actually advance the policies he continually and ardently and publicly advocates. Your view is that he’s lying.
When Trump fear mongers about immigrant caravans he’s full of shit. And when the GOP suddenly notices the deficit after blowing it up by giving tax cuts to corporations and the wealthy, they are also full of shit and disingenuous. When Trump rails on the negative impact of NAFTA, that’s the truth. That’s what effective propaganda relies on–that there be some truth to it. Then keep repeating the truth parts along with the lie parts, until the audience believes that it is all truth.
I was listening to a Michael Parenti speech from the 80’s and he describes how people were discounting Reagan as some mindless dolt, while he was simultaneously adroitly advancing the interests of the ruling class. It was eerily reminiscent of how Trump is portrayed as an idiot. Yet, just like Reagan he delivers on tax cuts for the rich, pulling back workers’ rights and protections, appointing RW judges, and installing “civil servants” who’s goals were destruction of government and institutions. Trump may not be able to multiply 6x17 in his head, or speak as eloquently as Obama, but he doesn’t need to be able to do those things in order win battles in the class war.
In your opinion when did this historical corporate centrism Dem party transform into something else? Obama ramped up the police/surveillance state, let the banksters off the hook, did drone wars, etc. Obama’s a smart guy, he knows what the impact of NAFTA was and he was like “hold my beer, catch a load of this TPP”. That was just a few years ago. Biden is president and he participated in all the stuff I listed in my previous post except for Taft-Hartley. Schumer was around for most of it too.
When Dems say that they want to pass “very liberal” agendas I put that in the same category of “most progressive” stimulus ever. Like what does it actually mean? Very liberal…progressive…shit I bet Kyrsten Cinema is capable of describing herself as either one, and she voted against increasing the minimum wage.
Here’s a little breakdown that may help us understand each other better. From my view:
-
very progressive/liberal stimulus=temporary tax credits=bandaids, the system is still in place but there is some relief for those in need
-
giving employees 1/3rd representation on the board of companies=reformist=better than bandaids because at least we’ve partly changed the power dynamic of the employer/employee relationship
-
turning Amazon in to worker owned co-operative=radical/socialist=getting rid of the parasitic class and getting closer to the cure
8 Likes
In the last year or so. Schumer has done a total face turn since the Obama era Schumer.
Maybe Trump broke him.
Schumer is probably motivated somewhat by an AOC primary challenge but honestly he’s a massive favorite to fade that no matter what. He seems to genuinely get it now, I think Mitch shitting in his face for a decade actually changed him.
2 Likes
I think you could pick out points after Nov 4th u til after 6th Jan to see how Schumer changed his stance on the GOP & see’s them for what they are nowadays.
Before the pandemic Chucky was regularly attending cocktail parties in the Hamptons with rich deplorables.
1 Like
Whelp, I totally agree the Dems are shit but they have been making some progress and this bill is a good one none the less. The most questionable thing is that they took so long but hope they get these checks out ASAP. Its distributions in the correct direction so don’t be confused by the idealistic noise.
Re: things changing, people need to understand that ballot initiatives or maybe even laying down in the streets en masse are the only likely paths to break the stranglehold. The people being paid by big business to be politicians are never going to hang themselves.
lol votefor”socialists” has to be the most misleading screen name on this site
1 Like
NAFTA getting its own thread.
1 Like
clinton didn’t negotiate it. passing it was fairly bipartisan. pinning job elimination on clinton without mentioning that is misleading, even as clinton did a ton to alleviate the jobs transition.
software was already booming before mosaic and IE (lol WWW). it actually required a concerted growth mindset from business to generate demand for programmers and the government to “luckbox” into plenty of people trying to learn cobol/etc. by the time i was a cs undergrad, their numbers grew for a decade.
Somebody tell Bernie about subpoenas
https://twitter.com/sensanders/status/1370506337948467201?s=21
1 Like
I suppose it doesn’t matter, but that is some weak shit.