Again - what’s the alternative. Seriously. Take your time.
Is it amassing at the state house with armor and placards? Possibly a sit-in? Are you suggesting we take over a university administration building? Reading Anarchist’s Cookbook and making some black powder bombs and smoking banana peels? JFC. GI.
WHAT. What do you got.
Nothing. For the last year, anytime I ask this question, that’s the ultimate answer. You got a nose full of attitude. Great. That’s great, kids. You’ll go far with that. It’s a wonder you haven’t made any headway at all in any aspect of governmental power already.
Thanks for shitting in something you know nothing about. You’re a big boy!
Okay wait - I went to your comments before blocking you and you’re not a troll or an idiot - so what the fuck? Are you literally saying democracy is infeasible?
Do you really just hate the Democrats so much that you dont’ see any way out? Surely you would vote third party or something right?
I dunno. You’re just being a dick so maybe that’s the answer but I thought I’d try just in case.
Okay serious answer, no I don’t think democracy is not feasible, I think that democracy is crucial and the inherently oligarchic elements of American democracy, in particular, and to a lesser extent parliamentary democracy, are exploitable in a way that is especially problematic in the context of the post-1980s “shareholder value” type of corporate governance that has become so common. I think that democracy needs to be restructured in a way that is bottom-up on a sub-municipal level. I know that sounds soviet but that’s not what I mean, it should be an open system which is NOT premised on a vanguard party or anything like that. I think that would work in an American context is something more like a Rojavan or Zapatista type of structure, but with higher level protections on a federal level for certain rights, which should include positive rights instead of just negative ones. I also think, unlike democratic confederalist systems currently, there does need to be a separate, yet democratically accountable, judiciary that operates on the basis of stare decisis.
Ultimately, these are very long term and difficult changes, so for the time being I think that building some kind of dual power is a good goal, although to show the viability of this kind of democratic structure rather than, as is usually the goal, trying to somehow smother the state in its entirety. I think site difficult, but actually somewhat feasible, goal should be to enact a third founding, the first being the typical “founding” of America and the second being the reconstruction amendments, which fundamentally changed both the federal structure and almost all federal legal analysis immediately. A third founding, I think, is the only way to do things like enshrine positive rights, abolish the senate or make it proportional, repeal the amendment limiting the size of the House, etc, although making the states themselves bottom-up rather than unitary will require similar, parallel action on the state level.
For the more immediate future, the answer is not, I think, founding some kind of socialist party, but it does require making Democratic Party politics much more democratic and populist. This isn’t that hard, relatively speaking. Parties are pretty easy to structurally change. We can’t win if we keep attacking anybody going against the establishment consensus and accusing them of fictionalism for being leftist and criticizing the DNC’s actions. This thinking is what kills one party states and it will kill the Democratic Party too.
Sorry I’m being such a dick, I just hate seeing such a resurgence of Democratic groupthink at a make or break moment when we reeeeeeeally need to do some internal soul searching and serious self criticism. And most importantly stop trying to uphold norms of decency and reasonableness. It won’t work, we unfortunately have to get in the mud and play dirty back. There’s no valor in losing on the high ground when democracy itself is at stake.
For the more immediate future, the answer is not, I think, founding some kind of socialist party, but it does require making Democratic Party politics much more democratic and populist.
Excellent, I am on board with this.
I just hate seeing such a resurgence of Democratic groupthink at a make or break moment when we reeeeeeeally need to do some internal soul searching and serious self criticism.
Speaking personally, I’m just incredibly angry there was anyone on the left who decided to let trump win. That’s in stark contrast to being a cheerleader for Democratic groupthink. I’ve always been critical of Democrats for all the usual reasons and more AOC more Bernie is where I want it to go.
Just the slimy 4chan nature of calling Democrats “libs” and throwing “bougie” around like it means anything to the speaker (and quoting Lenin directly in russian which - was a new one for me) is ridiculous. We have a vehicle, let’s fucking go is my point, but there seems to be a bulwark of (?? i don’t know, bot? russian? idiot sophmore?) left that refuses to move in any direction for any reason because it’s “not pure”.
Anyway, I don’t disagree what what you’ve got here - most of it is pretty darn lofty but hey, dream big, right? - and moving the DNC to the left has always been my argument anyway so, agreed.
Every time Republicans have held the absolute minority in government, Dems were hamstrung and couldn’t pass any progressive legislation.
Somehow the reverse isn’t true.
Therefore Dems don’t dislike what trump is doing. What can be done when the uniparty reveals itself as it has, with Dems rubber-stamping anything Trump does?
Well we’re on .world. so that can’t be discussed per instance rules.
Again - what’s the alternative. Seriously. Take your time.
Is it amassing at the state house with armor and placards? Possibly a sit-in? Are you suggesting we take over a university administration building? Reading Anarchist’s Cookbook and making some black powder bombs and smoking banana peels? JFC. GI.
WHAT. What do you got.
Nothing. For the last year, anytime I ask this question, that’s the ultimate answer. You got a nose full of attitude. Great. That’s great, kids. You’ll go far with that. It’s a wonder you haven’t made any headway at all in any aspect of governmental power already.
Get elected lol. Look at me I can be a DNC strategist.
No, you’re a sad clown. With no ideas.Thanks for shitting in something you know nothing about. You’re a big boy!Okay wait - I went to your comments before blocking you and you’re not a troll or an idiot - so what the fuck? Are you literally saying democracy is infeasible?
Do you really just hate the Democrats so much that you dont’ see any way out? Surely you would vote third party or something right?
I dunno. You’re just being a dick so maybe that’s the answer but I thought I’d try just in case.
Okay serious answer, no I don’t think democracy is not feasible, I think that democracy is crucial and the inherently oligarchic elements of American democracy, in particular, and to a lesser extent parliamentary democracy, are exploitable in a way that is especially problematic in the context of the post-1980s “shareholder value” type of corporate governance that has become so common. I think that democracy needs to be restructured in a way that is bottom-up on a sub-municipal level. I know that sounds soviet but that’s not what I mean, it should be an open system which is NOT premised on a vanguard party or anything like that. I think that would work in an American context is something more like a Rojavan or Zapatista type of structure, but with higher level protections on a federal level for certain rights, which should include positive rights instead of just negative ones. I also think, unlike democratic confederalist systems currently, there does need to be a separate, yet democratically accountable, judiciary that operates on the basis of stare decisis.
Ultimately, these are very long term and difficult changes, so for the time being I think that building some kind of dual power is a good goal, although to show the viability of this kind of democratic structure rather than, as is usually the goal, trying to somehow smother the state in its entirety. I think site difficult, but actually somewhat feasible, goal should be to enact a third founding, the first being the typical “founding” of America and the second being the reconstruction amendments, which fundamentally changed both the federal structure and almost all federal legal analysis immediately. A third founding, I think, is the only way to do things like enshrine positive rights, abolish the senate or make it proportional, repeal the amendment limiting the size of the House, etc, although making the states themselves bottom-up rather than unitary will require similar, parallel action on the state level.
For the more immediate future, the answer is not, I think, founding some kind of socialist party, but it does require making Democratic Party politics much more democratic and populist. This isn’t that hard, relatively speaking. Parties are pretty easy to structurally change. We can’t win if we keep attacking anybody going against the establishment consensus and accusing them of fictionalism for being leftist and criticizing the DNC’s actions. This thinking is what kills one party states and it will kill the Democratic Party too.
Sorry I’m being such a dick, I just hate seeing such a resurgence of Democratic groupthink at a make or break moment when we reeeeeeeally need to do some internal soul searching and serious self criticism. And most importantly stop trying to uphold norms of decency and reasonableness. It won’t work, we unfortunately have to get in the mud and play dirty back. There’s no valor in losing on the high ground when democracy itself is at stake.
Excellent, I am on board with this.
Speaking personally, I’m just incredibly angry there was anyone on the left who decided to let trump win. That’s in stark contrast to being a cheerleader for Democratic groupthink. I’ve always been critical of Democrats for all the usual reasons and more AOC more Bernie is where I want it to go.
Just the slimy 4chan nature of calling Democrats “libs” and throwing “bougie” around like it means anything to the speaker (and quoting Lenin directly in russian which - was a new one for me) is ridiculous. We have a vehicle, let’s fucking go is my point, but there seems to be a bulwark of (?? i don’t know, bot? russian? idiot sophmore?) left that refuses to move in any direction for any reason because it’s “not pure”.
Anyway, I don’t disagree what what you’ve got here - most of it is pretty darn lofty but hey, dream big, right? - and moving the DNC to the left has always been my argument anyway so, agreed.
Every time Republicans have held the absolute minority in government, Dems were hamstrung and couldn’t pass any progressive legislation.
Somehow the reverse isn’t true.
Therefore Dems don’t dislike what trump is doing. What can be done when the uniparty reveals itself as it has, with Dems rubber-stamping anything Trump does?
Well we’re on .world. so that can’t be discussed per instance rules.