There’s an obvious causation link and I think we generally agree. A big part of the Democratic Party failing to advocate for good policy is the right wing long game mentioned above. Funding all kinds of right wing bullshit and contributing to both parties has really paid off.
1 Like
The foundational myth of the “American dream” is incompatible with a good social democracy. It infects every aspect of American politics making it very difficult to establish and maintain large scale social safety programs.
2 Likes
Is it fair to say that the drive towards Canadian health care as we know it was led by the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, a political party whose ideology was inspired by the worst of the Great Depression?
The twin horrors of Trump and COVID create the right moment in history for forging a new movement whose shadow can fall upon history for decades to come. Aspiring to a return to normalcy is a waste of this moment. We can do better. We must do better. “Build back better” is a promise to repeat the sins of the past with a fresh coat of paint. It is a disappointment to those who dream of a new world.
The old ideology of the Democratic Party is flawed. FDR’s New Deal was really a compromise with capitalism and racism that has been watered down even further by neoliberalism and Third Way politics. It’s not even obvious that politicians such as Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have a clear ideology that explains their choices. Their actions are consistent with pragmatists seeking to maintain their personal power within the party. Is Joe Biden any different? Some say no.
Why be a Democrat? Why vote for a Democrat? For too long, we have tried to answer this with policies. It’s time that we did better at crafting a foundational philosophy, at telling the story of a partisan narrative, of illustrating the big picture that ties everything together.
I don’t think there’s a good historical precedent for successful regime change against a world power with the theoretical military capacity of a fascist US. The closest comparison is the fall of Nazi Germany, which resulted from coordinated outside intervention following the escalation of genocide beyond the offending country’s borders - and even that result is likely different in a hypothetical scenario where Hitler has nukes.
China is all the precedent we need for a modern-day view of nuclear-enabled governmental monstrosity. The world has happily turned a blind eye on decades of suppressed dissent, and more recently even on genocide. It’s pretty clear you can do all the human-rights violating you want, as long as you keep it within your own borders and back it up with atomic fission. A GOP-led fascist state that follows these basic guidelines is a likely favorite to last for decades. China, Russia, and North Korea are all going strong.
1 Like
You’ll know it when you see it.
1 Like
Yes, a lot of right wing bullshit has been accepted as true through repetition and browbeating, even if Republicans don’t even hold themselves to the standards they use as weapons: support our troops, respect the flag, debt is bad, socialism is bad, giving poor people money makes them lazy, you solve crime by tougher policing and sentencing, etc. The Dems cave and cower to all of these rather than beating back with left wing cudgels of their own.
24min to 29min.
We need massive change in American.
1 Like
Did I say there was no racism? Pretty sure I said “parts”.
Did you listen to the part i linked? He is arguing against incrementalism and calling for massive change.
Wow dude how big do you want this conflagration to get? You are putting billionaires’ private islands and backup yachts at significant risk.
2 Likes
No he isn’t. He is arguing for massive change but in no way means some kind of “burn it down” social shock like people mean itt. He means massive as in large-scale.
He is also not arguing against incrementalism he is arguing against relying on some magical power of time to heal. It’s not the same thing at all. If you listen to rest he literally mentions several bills he is supporting to address specific issues.
Never said he called to burn it all down.
He says we are going to slow and need massive change and those that argue for slow change are using time as a weapon.
One that will lead to where we are today. An America that still has racism and riots. Or he was right the change is to slow and his predictions came true.
2 Likes
I agree with you. I guess I am making a subtle distinction between something being incremental,
-literally changing through a series of small fixed actions-to something that takes a lot of time. The two are not always connected.
The civil rights movement is a good example in the span of less than a decade you had the civil rights act of 57, 64, and 67 all incrementally add new rights.
If you think he would be happy with where we are today and happy with how time has progressed. No way. He would say we have moved to slow.
1 Like
Totally agree. He would be leading BLM protests.
Again, the fact that a perfect society has not been reached yet isn’t an indictment of incrementalism.
The bottom line is I wish some version of massive instant changes worked. I just don’t see any evidence for it except in very rare cases. Incrementalism isn’t virtuous, it’s just all we have that actually works.
Dont think you need to burn it all down to have the possibility of better things in the long run from another trump term. Say trump wins and sinks us even further down the idiot hole and a more evil America. There is a possibility more and more people ride the pendulum to progressive side of things to the point the eDems could not stop them next time. Where if Biden wins we could see more like him or even worse a Tom Cotton after him…
No i dont want people to not vote in swing states or vote trump. Only its hard to predict these things.
1 Like
He is arguing against incrementalism/slow change there. If you dont think so. Ok.
52 years after MLK was murdered the police still kills Black people with impunity. How the fuck is that not an indictment of incrementalism?
1 Like
No worries in another fifty years or a century or two we will get there. Go slow…
Again as opposed to what? Tell me with specifics how you are solving racism in one massive shift?
Wishing something would happen isn’t actual policy.
As I already said, incrementalism isn’t virtuous it’s just all we have that actually works.