Young conservatives are a vocal minority, being Twitter natives and all. Statistics don't bear much fruit for this concern.
AOC on Biden's Presidency, Democratic Party, and Her Future in Politics
- Thread starter Deleted member 17184
- Start date
- News
OP
OP
Even if they are a vocal minority, the point I was making was that they have an easier path to achieve what they want. Progressives may be the majority in the younger generations, but how many of them face obstacles that make it very difficult or impossible to get into a position of power? On the other hand, conservatives with the means can get there and will get instant internal support.Young conservatives are a vocal minority, being Twitter natives and all. Statistics don't bear much fruit for this concern.
How do we as the voting public get nanci pelosi, chuck schumer and Diane fienstein out of positions of power. Do we need to have million man marches in DC demanding their resignation. We are going to be exactly where we were in 2016 in 2024 with the GOP taking over if we don't change things. How do we put pressure on the fucking dinosaurs at the top of the Democrats?
This is a great point.
But I also think liberals would abandon minorities just as quickly without someone picking their pockets.
She is totally right. If we want MFA, increased worker pay, and a functioning infrastructure - we have to support real socialists and stop settling. That will only happen when liberals stop shitting on other liberals for refusing to support bad Democrats. Trump began with the RINO movement. Republicans are willing to primary out anyone not willing to adopt the most hard right positions. Meanwhile Democrats run spineless Colin fucking Peterson in my state of Minnesota and blame socialism was the cause of him bombing. Just bonkers.
No. Please watch everything.Love AOC. If you've never seen the Netflix documentary that followed her winning office, it's great.
(If you just watch 30 seconds, watch the end starting at 1 hour and 21 mins in, where she talks about a road trip she took with her dad to DC when she was a little girl...)
Knock Down The House | FULL FEATURE | Netflix
Four female candidates -- each driven by personal experience and hardship -- enter the 2018 race for Congress, challenging powerful incumbents for a spot at ...youtu.be
Her opponent, the person she actually faced, is a good representation of the current Democratic party.
The same people that have already decided -- as a lot of people in this very much forum --, how the "Latinos" think about the progressive movement.
Because, of course.
Her mentions right now are full of liberals tut-tutting her because "It's Joe and Kamala's time now."
I fucking quit. Things will never be better.
The older establishment democrats are still shellshocked by the Reagan years, and that informs how they interact with the left and their base. It's frustrating to watch.
just as context, I think it's a really, really bad sign when a democrat loses and mother jones runs an article entitled, I shit you not, "Will the Defeat of Democrat Collin Peterson Be Good for the Climate?"
the man is trash. there's no way to move the party in a positive direction when people like this are the chair of the house committee on agriculture. if talking about socialism gets people like this gone, I hope the DSA puts up billboards of lenin all over the country.
Man the past 24hrs is why I personally have more disdain for the corporate wing of the Dem party than any political faction right now.
Exactly.
In addition to denying climate change - he voted against Trump impeachment, voted pro-life, and fought against DC statehood. Was a Democrat in good standing.
It's been a bit dizzying following all these internal arguments at this point for me. So, to be clear, who's dismissing the black youth from the democratic party?
Pelosi and Clyburn and others who want dems to try to appeal more to old white people and for BLM protestors to shut up and take it.
Young conservatives are a vocal minority, being Twitter natives and all. Statistics don't bear much fruit for this concern.
I feel like this math changes if you rank it along with enthusiasm or by race. We just had record turn out to support the most nearly the most center democratic candidate that ran in a field of 20+
What they want is power to shape society to fit their beliefs, first and foremost. And what good does it do to be included in a party whose political ideology is (quite observably) losing hold of the chance to get that power with every passing minute? If they can't gain or maintain power because of GOP radicalization being out of touch with the rest of the incoming major voter demographics and using every play in the playbook as a hail-mary to throw down roadblocks and squeeze the last few drops of juice out of that near-spent orange rind before there's nothing left, then that "easy in" is pretty useless to them in the long term.
The tougher slog sucks to watch in slow-motion, but it will net some power that isn't a fading mirage, at the very least.
You are confusing the primary with the general. The youth came out for Bernie in the primaries but were outnumbered by the older voters for Biden in the primary, delivering the primary to Biden. I could talk about "moderate voltron" here as well but this is not really the thread for that. Then in the general, they turned out for Biden over Trump because of party unity. This does not mean they like Biden. They turned out for not!Trump.
The Dem youth, after being talked down to for years, fell in line in the general and rallied behind Biden, the way all the centrists wanted them to. And now you want to erase the real history of their preference? I am constantly frustrated by the revisionist framing of this election.
This is how they actually behave in the field:
OP
OP
I understand what you're saying, but I think we're not talking about the same thing.
What I mean is that, regardless of the party or even a specific region in the world, the political system is designed by conservatives for conservatives. Any progress happens through a fight against that system. AOC faces internal resistance, protests about any important topic are protests because minorities are not heard by the law, and so on.
Once the dinosaurs in the Democratic Party go away, do you believe there will be an open path for progressives to be in higher positions or for conservatives inside it? I'm not a US citizen, so I don't know the dynamics that much, but we can see the reports. I don't think AOC would be considering leaving politics if she was optimistic about the long run.
I want to be proven wrong, trust me. The US took a big step towards defeating fascism, but both it and the rest of the world need to do a lot to enable progressive politics.
Yeah, the Dinosaurs didn't just die out because of old age there was an Earth changing event that more or less killed them. You might say that's happening here but much like the Dinosaurs it won't happen overnight. You can't just expect people who hold any belief to just die out for no reason you have to make their belief obsolete or untenable so more wont follow. Basically, like the Dinosaurs you gotta change the environment to kill them.
But I don't really see how the party can change without getting to the abyss first. Like I said, I have no problem saying people of color are what allows Democrats to win with their current platform, Democrats simply wouldn't have won without them but white people still made up 59% of Democrats in 2019 so merely abandoning the white vote is also a losing strategy as you're also not winning without some racist white people either. Now clearly the abyss you speak of is coming, the country is becoming more and more non-white each year and each year the make-up of the Democratic Party, and even the Republican Party to a much smaller extent, is becoming more and more diverse and with the current younger generations being more left-leaning than average we will reach a point where progressives are the dominant force of the party before too long the question isn't is that happening but when is it going to happen and when is it safe to switch. And in the mean-time everyone's getting rightfully pissed because it's obvious what's going to happen, obvious what should happen and are understandably angry it hasn't happened yet.
I just feel like it's a fucked up line that we have to walk right now and that people should understand this. And really, even once the party is predominantly progressive I still don't know what their actual platform is and should be because we'll probably have real strong shots at the Presidency and shitty shots at the Senate so you're left choosing between a platform that elects popular Presidents that can't get shit done or less palatable Presidents who can which is still a shit position. Even getting rid of the Electoral College won't fix our Senate problem even if it makes the party clear favorites to win the Presidency.
Seriously. I was having fun celebrating Biden's win, but now Twitter is full of these assholes acting like progressives actually lost with Biden winning. As if Trump being defeated is gonna make us mad or something. Add that in to all these republicans and democrats who might as well be republicans filling the airwaves with their attacks on the progressive wing too.
It's the disgusting sports fandom-like toxicity coming from them that makes me sick.
Please never link Dore ever again
I distrust establishment politicians in any country and I'm on at the least as left as the squad and bernie and likely even more so and I'm on her side on this
But Dore is a fucking idiot who doesn't know what he's talking about
What does socialist mean in America? The traditional definition does not permit private property (although socialism is different from communism).Young conservatives are a vocal minority, being Twitter natives and all. Statistics don't bear much fruit for this concern.
Are 70% of Millennials in the US ok not being allowed to own a car or a bike? (community level ownership only)
Or has the definition changed?
I think socialism is too extreme, I'm a social democrat.
I'm no expert on socialism, but I think many socialists make a distinction between personal property, and private property.
Things like cars and basic homes can be included under personal property in some flavors of socialism (I think).
Jimmy Dore is one of the very few independent voices in the media. And definitely not an idiot. Far from it. I would say 90% of the time he's spot on. Harsh with the establisment, sure. But fair.
Insulting him and asking for censorship is a disgrace.
We had record turnout against Trump, not for the Democrats. Not taking the Senate and losing seats in the house highlights that.
I think you're describing communism. Socialism doesn't disallow private property, but focuses on enterprise and production. So, like, factories and shit. You can own things, but all corporations are worker-owned.
I mean, in a very very basic sense. There's so many different varieties of "socialism" that the definition will change for likely any American you ask, which makes the argument over it in the US so funny - there isn't even a shared definition of what "socialism" is!
Yes, the revolution will not require that you share the clothes off your back with your neighbor lol
In America, your average waking baby progressive's idea of "socialism" is actually just social democracy.
Edit: This but unironically
Last edited:
Also, the conversation in America is very muddied from the Red Scare. Everything is Socialism here if it benefits the workers or the average citizen. So I think this is us saying fuck it, we Socialists now. When really a majority of them just want a social safety net the rest of the 1st world has.
To an American young liberal who votes for Bernie Sanders, socialism = that things they have in Nordic countries.
Socialism is usually described by socialists/Marxists as an early stage of communism, with the goal being the abolishment of private property and workers owning the means of production. If an American uses socialism positively, they almost certainly mean social democracy, which is heavily regulated capitalism with social safety nets.
I can't find it now, but I remember there was a survey that asked Democrat and Republican voters to list countries they considered socialist, and Democrats listed the Nordic countries, and Republicans listed China, Venezuela, and Russia (???).
Socialism is usually described by socialists/Marxists as an early stage of communism, with the goal being the abolishment of private property and workers owning the means of production. If an American uses socialism positively, they almost certainly mean social democracy, which is heavily regulated capitalism with social safety nets.
I can't find it now, but I remember there was a survey that asked Democrat and Republican voters to list countries they considered socialist, and Democrats listed the Nordic countries, and Republicans listed China, Venezuela, and Russia (???).
I think/hope it just means a move towards a mixed economy as seen in most European countries.
Of course. I mean, obviously you have people mixed in there that absolutely are still trying to get a Communist utopia going and are jumping at the chance to get in here and influence these newcomers to go further and others are on the ride just for Health Care and would likely bail immediately after that but the vast majority would get off still to the right of the DSA. But I also think the Republicans have just diluted the word Socialism, by Republican's own definition the United States is already a Socialist country so in that context if government run healthcare or retirement is Socialist and you're for those, well, in the United States that's pro-Socialism so people are going to answer accordingly.
The DSA is not "the youth" and it's frankly tiring to see these concepts conflated so often.
No I'm describing socialism as remember it when I read Das Kapital years ago (modernized Swedish translation). But as I said, I'm not entirely clear about the definition of the former.
Thanks, that makes sense.
Got it - that's as accurate as you can get.
Just underscores how I wish we had some clear definition of the concept in the US.
I'm a baby socialist, but I've been reading Bertell Ollman (Marxist prof at NYU) for a little bit now, and I think you'll like some of his stuff. He's easy to read and explains a lot of this pretty well I think (but again, I'm just a baby socialist so maybe I'm wrong lol)
Here's an intro to him, how he started, and some of the basics are given about Marxism and how it relates to an American society
Marx for a New Century: An Interview with Bertell Ollman
Bertell Ollman is a Marxist scholar and professor of politics at New York University. His work is a canny mix of serious scholarship and novel pop
historynewsnetwork.org
#####
And then his blog site has more nice reads. The below is a massive one lol, but it hits basically all of the important parts. Find a good open hour and give it a readover if you're still interested.
Fuck all these dinosaurs in office and faux-Democrats concerned with maintaining the status quo and who will more than likely spend the next four years bickering about progressives and trying to shut their voices down behind closed doors while taking jabs at them in public.
this is a point worth repeating. i'm so tired of hearing that congressional leadership are the real politics understanders and we just don't get their game. most representative democracies have more turnover so you don't get leadership trying awkwardly and unnecessarily to repackage stuff from 30 years ago to a wildly overblown "moderate suburbanite" demographic.
Good WaPo opinion article today on this all:
I'm tired of letting these moderates and centrist try to rewrite reality itself, while spreading around as much FUD as your typical Repub. The left and the youth busted their asses off to elect an old racist segregationist who has open contempt for them, and they still get blamed for winning. Shameful shit.
The gaslighting has to end.
But, one thing I'm happy about is that we're seeing a lot of pushback instead of the left doing what they did during the Obama years and taking it on the chin (well, the left barely existed in those days I guess...).
There is no boardroom of ideas here, just people in the streets speaking their truths. White is no longer default, and thank god for that.
I'm tired of letting these moderates and centrist try to rewrite reality itself, while spreading around as much FUD as your typical Repub. The left and the youth busted their asses off to elect an old racist segregationist who has open contempt for them, and they still get blamed for winning. Shameful shit.
The gaslighting has to end.
But, one thing I'm happy about is that we're seeing a lot of pushback instead of the left doing what they did during the Obama years and taking it on the chin (well, the left barely existed in those days I guess...).
There is no boardroom of ideas here, just people in the streets speaking their truths. White is no longer default, and thank god for that.
The Democratic Party just superkicked minorities, progressives and tossed them out the barbershop window. Who are they expecting will be organizing on the ground for the GA elections? This is embarrassing.
how this is playing out is making me recall how frustrated i was with the democratic party during the end of the obama years
If there's blame to be placed, it's on the entirety of the party. Trump is gone, but not Trumpism. Authoritarianism took root in this country and nearly took it over. But it's still there and needs to be rooted out. That requires unity. You don't get unity without compromise, and if you don't want compromise, expect to be defeated in these runoffs and in 2022. That's just the reality of it.
This is how you win. Not "I'm a veteran who grew up in the heart of (State) and I'm here to protect your healthcare"