AOC on Biden's Presidency, Democratic Party, and Her Future in Politics

Deleted member 75819 · Nov 9, 2020

Burbank said:
What does socialist mean in America? The traditional definition does not permit private property (although socialism is different from communism).

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.

As someone with anarchistic leanings, I generally separate private and personal property thusly: if you aren't maintaining it or living in it yourself, you do not own it. Ownership as defined and defended by the state is what allows capitalistic exploitation to exist in the first place. People have this false notion that socialism and communism make it impossible for personal individuals to make and sell (or trade a la communism) things, invoking this silly image of the shadowy communist police hunting you down and putting you in the gulag if you trade a bag of potatoes, but as long as your creations aren't the result of the exploited labor made possible by state-sponsored private ownership, you're good.

Codeblue · Nov 9, 2020

dabig2 said:
Good WaPo opinion article today on this all:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/08/democratic-leaders-play-ridiculous-blame-game-with-progressives/

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.

Love Cori Bush.

Glad the progressives are unified in pushing back on Spanberger lecturing activists on how they're making her wealthy white electorate uncomfortable.

Burbank · Nov 9, 2020

BigEvilTurtle said:
As someone with anarchistic leanings, I generally separate private and personal property thusly: if you aren't maintaining it or living in it yourself, you do not own it. Ownership as defined and defended by the state is what allows capitalistic exploitation to exist in the first place. People have this false notion that socialism and communism make it impossible for personal individuals to make and sell (or trade a la communism) things, invoking this silly image of the shadowy communist police hunting you down and putting you in the gulag if you trade a bag of potatoes, but as long as your creations aren't the result of the exploited labor made possible by state-sponsored private ownership, you're good.

To generalize:
I can run/manage a company and own it together (equally) with the other people who work there?

I can't run it and own it 100%, keeping the profits while just retaining salaried employees?
And I also can't simply own, keeping the profits while someone else runs it for me (salaried)?

If yes that, is less extreme than I thought and sounds quite reasonable. Are there any practical successful applications of socialism? I haven't heard of any successes on a state level, but it sounds like a business or community could be organized this way if you want to?

EDIT:
Yes?

The Employee Ownership 100: America's Largest Majority Employee-Owned Companies | NCEO

An annotated list of the 100 largest U.S. companies 50% or more employee-owned through an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) or other means, ranked by the number of employees.

www.nceo.org

But how equal is ownership? My consultant company is technically employee owned. But some "employees" own like 10% of the company, while the average Joe owns between maybe 0-0.00001% (1e-5%). C:a 90 of all employees own 0 shares.

supremeplatypus · Nov 9, 2020

I think Bolivia is a successful country run by a socialist party with consistent economic growth and increasing living standards which is great for a poor country but it's still a market based economy really so all it proves is that soc dem policies are good for a country rather than full on socialism

shnurgleton · Nov 9, 2020

I don't know how to shake the sense of dread I have that progressives are going to be thrown under the bus and nothing will be accomplished, that the progressive momentum built up under the trump admin is being squandered and we'll never see committed action for climate change and healthcare

Deleted member 75819 · Nov 9, 2020

Burbank said:
To generalize:
I can run/manage a company and own it together (equally) with the other people who work there?

I can't run it and own it 100%, keeping the profits while just retaining salaried employees?
And I also can't simply own, keeping the profits while someone else runs it for me (salaried)?

If yes that, is less extreme than I thought and sounds quite reasonable. Are there any practical successful applications of socialism? I haven't heard of any successes on a state level, but it sounds like a business or community could be organized this way if you want to?

EDIT:
Yes?

The Employee Ownership 100: America's Largest Majority Employee-Owned Companies | NCEO

An annotated list of the 100 largest U.S. companies 50% or more employee-owned through an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) or other means, ranked by the number of employees.

www.nceo.org

But how equal is ownership? My consultant company is technically employee owned. But some "employees" own like 10% of the company, while the average Joe owns between maybe 0-0.00001% (1e-5%). C:a 90 of all employees own 0 shares.

What you're describing would be close to what anarcho-syndicalism would look like, which is essentially a revolution of worker unionization, direct action, self-management and direct democracy in the workplace. I tend to vacillate between this and anarcho-communism. The industries would be totally equally owned and operated with a flat power structure.

As for existing or historical practical applications of socialism, you'd be better answered by someone with more knowledge than I have.

LProtagonist · Nov 9, 2020

shnurgleton said:
I don't know how to shake the sense of dread I have that progressives are going to be thrown under the bus and nothing will be accomplished, that the progressive momentum built up under the trump admin is being squandered and we'll never see committed action for climate change and healthcare

The majority of people are fine with thinking everything is better simply because the next president isn't going to be an asshole.

Pekola · Nov 9, 2020

AOC has begun playing hardline, and has specifically requested that Rahm Emmanuel is NOT considered for Biden's cabinet.

The fact that he's even been floated around is a disgrace.

Powdered Egg · Nov 9, 2020

Rahm Emanuel was just on TV last week regurgitating the lie that Bernie did nothing for Dems after he lost in '16. The racist POS just gets to yap it up on TV like he didn't cover up a Black person's killing.

Rangerx · Nov 9, 2020

Establishment Democrats have protected the concentration of wealth and power whenever they've been in office, which is what leads to people voting for Trump. Joe Biden has always been one of those politicians. I fear people will start returning to normal life and stop pushing for change just because someone who isn't Trump is in office.

Deleted member 7130 · Nov 9, 2020

supremeplatypus said:
I think Bolivia is a successful country run by a socialist party with consistent economic growth and increasing living standards which is great for a poor country but it's still a market based economy really so all it proves is that soc dem policies are good for a country rather than full on socialism

For a singular nation, SocDem definitely improves conditions compared to neoliberal policy, but it is still fundamentally dependent on global capitalism which itself is an imperialist net for the global north. Nor does it solve contradictions in eliminating hierarchies based on race, gender, sexual orientation, etc; as capitalism as a whole is both inherently racial and predisposed to fomenting other forms of oppression along those lines.

dabig2 · Nov 9, 2020

Powdered Egg said:
Rahm Emanuel was just on TV last week regurgitating the lie that Bernie did nothing for Dems after he lost in '16. The racist POS just gets to yap it up on TV like he didn't cover up a Black person's killing.

Hell, this dude ran and covered up for a god-to-honest illegal blacksite in Chicago that was scooping up poor black people off the streets and disappearing them for periods of time, to go along with the abuse.

Chicago police detained thousands of black Americans at interrogation facility

Special report: Guardian lawsuit reveals overwhelming racial disparity at Homan Square, where detainees are still held for minor crimes with little access to the outside world

www.theguardian.com

At least 3,500 Americans have been detained inside a Chicago police warehouse described by some of its arrestees as a secretive interrogation facility, newly uncovered records reveal.

Of the thousands held in the facility known as Homan Square over a decade, 82% were black. Only three received documented visits from an attorney, according to a cache of documents obtained when the Guardian sued the police.

After the Guardian's initial Homan Square expose in February, police faced protests and calls for investigations from local politicians.

Rahm Emanuel, running for re-election partly on a platform of police reform, was not among them. He defended his police, saying "we follow all the rules" at Homan Square while vaguely calling the reporting "not true". Emanuel's office did not immediately respond to a request for clarification.

The police, claiming nothing at Homan Square was untoward, said on 1 March that Homan Square merely housed undercover units, a property-reclamation area open to the public and "several standard interview rooms".

Man deserves to be excommunicated socially and politically, but he's spent the last 3 decades being an asshole and yet keeps failing up and basically has a legend about him. So I wouldn't be surprised to see liberals try to make him happy.

Goat Mimicry · Nov 9, 2020

Pekola said:
AOC has begun playing hardline, and has specifically requested that Rahm Emmanuel is NOT considered for Biden's cabinet.

The fact that he's even been floated around is a disgrace.

It's so dumb. He's not even uniquely qualified, there are plenty of other Democrats who would do just as well at the job without his awful history.

I hope she succeeds.

ibyea · Nov 9, 2020

Rahm Emmanuel, wtf?

Powdered Egg · Nov 9, 2020

dabig2 said:
Hell, this dude ran and covered up for a god-to-honest illegal blacksite in Chicago that was scooping up poor black people off the streets and disappearing them for periods of time, to go along with the abuse.

Chicago police detained thousands of black Americans at interrogation facility

Special report: Guardian lawsuit reveals overwhelming racial disparity at Homan Square, where detainees are still held for minor crimes with little access to the outside world

www.theguardian.com

Man deserves to be excommunicated socially and politically, but he's spent the last 3 decades being an asshole and yet keeps failing up and basically has a legend about him. So I wouldn't be surprised to see liberals try to make him happy.

I remember that Black site story, it's sickening. It's one thing for Dems to largely ignore some constituents but the repeated propping up of Anti-Black figures when this country is full of other human beings is something else.

steejee · Nov 9, 2020

Pekola said:
AOC has begun playing hardline, and has specifically requested that Rahm Emmanuel is NOT considered for Biden's cabinet.

The fact that he's even been floated around is a disgrace.

I'd be curious who specifically floated him as a possibility, as they should get dragged badly for it and just having the vague 'some in inner-circle' is of no help to anyone.

Rodderick · Nov 9, 2020

Rahm Emanuel is completely toxic and can't be competent enough to compensate for all the terrible bullshit he's done. Just stay away from him.

Deleted member 11413 · Nov 9, 2020

Powdered Egg said:
Rahm Emanuel was just on TV last week regurgitating the lie that Bernie did nothing for Dems after he lost in '16. The racist POS just gets to yap it up on TV like he didn't cover up a Black person's killing.

Rahm Emanuel is one of the most vile pieces of shit still involved in Democratic politics. That motherfucker needs to go. Every time I see his smug face on TV doing punditry my blood boils

Tbm24 · Nov 9, 2020

Why are we discussing Rahm Emanuel? I doubt Biden forgot how his White House Tenure went and more importantly ended.

Deleted member 11413 · Nov 9, 2020

Tbm24 said:
Why are we discussing Rahm Emanuel? I doubt Biden forgot how his White House Tenure went and more importantly ended.

Because people are floating him as a possibility for a role in the admin.

firehawk12 · Nov 9, 2020

Emanuel and Kasich getting seats in Cabinet would be hilariously on point for the Democrats at least.

Deleted member 2145 · Nov 9, 2020

Powdered Egg said:
Rahm Emanuel was just on TV last week regurgitating the lie that Bernie did nothing for Dems after he lost in '16. The racist POS just gets to yap it up on TV like he didn't cover up a Black person's killing.

never berners lol

lifetime L achievement award

dabig2 · Nov 9, 2020

Powdered Egg said:
I remember that Black site story, it's sickening. It's one thing for Dems to largely ignore some constituents but the repeated propping up of Anti-Black figures when this country is full of other human beings is something else.

It's a shame. It's the same status quo Malcolm X was already calling stale as hell back in "Ballot or the Bullet".

Tbm24 said:
Why are we discussing Rahm Emanuel? I doubt Biden forgot how his White House Tenure went and more importantly ended.

Rahm's name been floated as potential cabinet picks since the start of the year. His communications with the Biden team throughout the year have also not assuaged any fears. And they're still longtime friends and workers, going back to the Clinton years.

Plus, his bro just officially joined a Biden transition team:

Ezekiel Emanuel, Rahm's brother who argued in this 2019 essay that his life should end at 75 because life after that age is longer productive and may involve disability, is joining the Biden-Harris COVID-19 Advisory Board

The above is probably why you're hearing grumblings again about Rahm influence and potential cabinet positions for him. We'll see I guess, won't we.

Equippedwithtowel · Nov 9, 2020

the die at 75 guy is on the covid task force... well life is full of fun surprises. That and the cia/cfr lady are both big eye emoji material.

Scuffed · Nov 9, 2020

Any Dem or Republican "ally" going hard in on progressives is bad news and are on the shit list. The phony tweet replies of "I used to love you but now you are dividing" to AOC and other progressives are a kin to the "As a black man.." posts supporting Trump.

Powdered Egg · Nov 9, 2020

Equippedwithtowel said:
the die at 75 guy is on the covid task force... well life is full of fun surprises. That and the cia/cfr lady are both big eye emoji material.

Are you talking about Spamberger or a different cia psychopath?

Kill3r7 · Nov 9, 2020

firehawk12 said:
Emanuel and Kasich getting seats in Cabinet would be hilariously on point for the Democrats at least.

Rahm is close to Biden and Obama. There is nothing surprising about his name popping up. I mean that is politics at its core.

firehawk12 · Nov 9, 2020

Kill3r7 said:
Rahm is close to Biden and Obama. There is nothing surprising about his name popping up. I mean that is politics at its core.

Oh sure.

It's also why I wouldn't be surprised if AOC just becomes disgusted at the party and decides to leave politics for good and work from the outside instead.

danm999 · Nov 9, 2020

Rahm Emmanuel good lord

Kill3r7 · Nov 9, 2020

firehawk12 said:
Oh sure.

It's also why I wouldn't be surprised if AOC just becomes disgusted at the party and decides to leave politics for good and work from the outside instead.

AOC is the de facto leader of the progressive wing of the party. What needs to happen is for other progressive candidates to win elections in solidly blue districts/states to grow the coalition. Otherwise they will remain outsiders no matter how much lip service they get from establishment Democrats. Also, the current leaders of the party are relatively old. So there will be a power vacuum in the coming years. She needs to bide her time and be ready to take advantage of the changing landscape.

firehawk12 · Nov 9, 2020

Kill3r7 said:
AOC is the de facto leader of the progressive wing of the party. What needs to happen is for other progressive candidates to win elections in solidly blue districts/states to grow the coalition. Otherwise they will remain outsiders no matter how much lip service they get from establishment Democrats. Also, the current leaders of the party are relatively old. So there will be a power vacuum in the coming years. She needs to bide her time and be ready to take advantage of the changing landscape.

I don't know how many people can take another decade of being considered a cancer to the party before they can get a promise of power. Considering they didn't even wait for the end of election night to start stabbing her in the back, I imagine they're going to try to undermine the progressive wing as much as possible going into 2022.

Kill3r7 · Nov 9, 2020

firehawk12 said:
I don't know how many people can take another decade of being considered a cancer to the party before they can get a promise of power. Considering they didn't even wait for the end of election night to start stabbing her in the back, I imagine they're going to try to undermine the progressive wing as much as possible going into 2022.

Of course they will fight them. No one is just going to relinquish power. If AOC goes after Schumer you better believe he will fight for his seat.

Equippedwithtowel · Nov 9, 2020

Powdered Egg said:
Are you talking about Spamberger or a different cia psychopath?

In-Q-Tel - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In-Q-Tel (IQT), formerly Peleus and In-Q-It, is an American not-for-profit venture capital firm based in Arlington, Virginia. It invests in high-tech companies for the sole purpose of keeping the Central Intelligence Agency, and other intelligence agencies, equipped with the latest in information technology in support of United States intelligence capability.[4] The name "In-Q-Tel" is an intentional reference to Q, the fictional inventor who supplies technology to James Bond.[5]

put that together with the council on forgien relations and it's a little bit of a eyebrow raiser of a cv

Deleted member 2145 · Nov 9, 2020

Kill3r7 said:
AOC is the de facto leader of the progressive wing of the party. What needs to happen is for other progressive candidates to win elections in solidly blue districts/states to grow the coalition. Otherwise they will remain outsiders no matter how much lip service they get from establishment Democrats. Also, the current leaders of the party are relatively old. So there will be a power vacuum in the coming years. She needs to bide her time and be ready to take advantage of the changing landscape.

honestly I feel good about where progressives stand after the election. grew the numbers, grew the voices, and we've got some fighters heading to washington that aren't going to put up with typical dem bullshit. plus progressives actually support broadly popular policy platforms and stand for the many and marginalized. numbers should only grow. bernie shattered the notion that incrementalism is a necessary reality and his coaching tree, as it were, is already having a huge effect on politics in washington and the national discourse in general.

Terrell · Nov 9, 2020

medinaria said:
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.

I think a good party-uniting exercise would be for the progressives to unite with the party in refusing to allow Aaron Coleman to sit in the House for... well, being the worst kind of "progressive" possible, along with the party uniting with progressives to perhaps do the same to Rahm Emmanuel, to show some solidarity between them both by acknowledging at least what both should be able to comfortably consider unacceptable within the party.
Because really, there's other better options than either of those 2 being part of the party. And if the party as a whole can't agree on that, the problem is bigger than anyone has made it out to be.

mAcOdIn said:
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.

You're right, I think "a gigantic change in the behaviour and ideals of the majority of the electorate" is a massive event in American/world politics.
Canada is already seeing this change, with the 18-40 vote being literally the only voter cohort that's expanding since 2015 (and was rightfully attributed to the left-of-centre party's 2015 victory and their disillusionment being why they failed to gain a majority in 2019), and Canadian politicians aren't interested in waiting to the last bloody minute to try to appeal to them when they've quite literally become the key to victory (except conservatives, of course, but considering how pro-oil they are, it's not a shock that they're interested in latching onto a dwindling resource), but that's because there's a risk that in a multi-party parliamentary system, the youth vote can easily be swallowed up by another party that meets their ideals more perfectly if existing parties refuse to lay groundwork for them to be accepted within it.
American politics is an entirely different animal, for sure, but that does not make it immune to similar concerns with key differences. When progressives rise to be the dominant power in the party, how the moderate/centrist/"establishment" Democrats behave towards progressives now will make the difference between whether they will be considered allies to progressives that can be worked and reasoned with or will be squeezed out completely as intolerable obstructionist status quo shills.
Additionally, with the GOP being in a bit of disarray and a disillusioned GOP electorate who can't understand why state and Senate Republicans aren't stepping in to help Trump, there's a big risk of fragmentation of the GOP that could split both big tents open once an opportunity presents itself to do so. And then there'd be SERIOUS trouble and suddenly the moderates in the Democrats and GOP would work across the aisle in an unprecedented way to establish electoral reforms (like instant runoff ballots across the country) like their lives depend on them. But that's a big maybe that would have to see a lot of things play out, though some of the pre-requisites are already in play, such as the existing parties throwing these "undesirable" party factions (progressives and racial equality activists for the Dems and Tea Party/alt-right/QAnon folks for the GOP) under the bus, which is currently very much in progress.

H.Cornerstone · Nov 9, 2020

This is what Socialist means in America:

hachikoma · Nov 9, 2020

Terrell said:
I think a good party-uniting exercise would be for the progressives to unite with the party in refusing to allow Aaron Coleman to sit in the House for... well, being the worst kind of "progressive" possible, along with the party uniting with progressives to perhaps do the same to Rahm Emmanuel, to show some solidarity between them both by acknowledging at least what both should be able to comfortably consider unacceptable within the party.

you're not the first person I've seen talking about Coleman as if he's going to be in Congress. he was elected to the kansas state house, just so people know.

Chadtwo · Nov 9, 2020

Burbank said:
To generalize:
I can run/manage a company and own it together (equally) with the other people who work there?

I can't run it and own it 100%, keeping the profits while just retaining salaried employees?
And I also can't simply own, keeping the profits while someone else runs it for me (salaried)?

If yes that, is less extreme than I thought and sounds quite reasonable. Are there any practical successful applications of socialism? I haven't heard of any successes on a state level, but it sounds like a business or community could be organized this way if you want to?

EDIT:
Yes?

The Employee Ownership 100: America's Largest Majority Employee-Owned Companies | NCEO

An annotated list of the 100 largest U.S. companies 50% or more employee-owned through an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) or other means, ranked by the number of employees.

www.nceo.org

But how equal is ownership? My consultant company is technically employee owned. But some "employees" own like 10% of the company, while the average Joe owns between maybe 0-0.00001% (1e-5%). C:a 90 of all employees own 0 shares.

Re applications of socialism: check out the South American pink wave, rojava, Spanish Catalonia for a brief moment, Basque Spain today (which has the highest concentration of worker coops in the world iirc), and in some ways mid-20th century Yugoslavia

Terrell · Nov 9, 2020

hachikoma said:
you're not the first person I've seen talking about Coleman as if he's going to be in Congress. he was elected to the kansas state house, just so people know.

Whoops, you're right, too much national election talk and it all muddles together. Still though, if there are progressives out that way to ally with the others to push him out, still a good unity exercise.

TheHunter · Nov 9, 2020

Televator said:
You forgot the "/s"

I feel like that was implied. :P

iareharSon · Nov 9, 2020

Now that the election is over, I'm right there alongside AOC in lighting a fire under the party's ass. The belief that Progressives tanked the chances of more moderate candidates is 100% bullshit. You build campaigns around the needs and desires of your immediate constituents. Full stop.

DominicanPower · Nov 9, 2020

If Dems push out AOC, I'm done with them. I ain't voting for shit.

Leandras · Nov 10, 2020

This whole mess is making me incredibly jaded on US politics. I feel like liberals are trying to gaslight leftists into passivity.

Saying things like they don't like labels when leftists say they aren't liberal or that liberals have more in common with leftists than leftists want to admit. Or how it's the left who are at fault for not playing ball.

All of this is such obvious bullshit. There are very clear destinctions between the two factions and liberals have no problem using the "not really a democrat" line on progressives when they stand to benifit.

Being gaslighted by those that are meant to be your allies fucking sucks.

MisterSnrub · Nov 10, 2020

I've just been learning about Ronald Reagan again.

Don't give the republicans a fucking inch

Cotton McKnight · Nov 10, 2020

Kill3r7 said:
AOC is the de facto leader of the progressive wing of the party. What needs to happen is for other progressive candidates to win elections in solidly blue districts/states to grow the coalition. Otherwise they will remain outsiders no matter how much lip service they get from establishment Democrats. Also, the current leaders of the party are relatively old. So there will be a power vacuum in the coming years. She needs to bide her time and be ready to take advantage of the changing landscape.

It is going to take time, and it is the right way to go. use the levers of power to make changes. It would be nice if the progressive candidates could start flipping red areas. I'm happy to talk to anyone who is happy to hear me (in my red area) and I can usually get anyone I talk to on board with socialist ideas, until they realize the policy idea is not coming from a Republican politician.

Socialism is such a stupid scare word by everyone that just can't possibly deal with everyone having a better life. Once we can overcome that, we'll really be rolling in a better direction.

Codeblue · Nov 10, 2020

Leandras said:
This whole mess is making me incredibly jaded on US politics. I feel like liberals are trying to gaslight leftists into passivity.

Saying things like they don't like labels when leftists say they aren't liberal or that liberals have more in common with leftists than leftists want to admit. Or how it's the left who are at fault for not playing ball.

All of this is such obvious bullshit. There are very clear destinctions between the two factions and liberals have no problem using the "not really a democrat" line on progressives when they stand to benifit.

Being gaslighted by those that are meant to be your allies fucking sucks.

Things make more sense when you realize that they aren't allies and aren't interested in any justice that requires political courage.

Had this realization when I thought Dems were the "good guys" when they were aggrieved about all those that died in Iraq, then zealously defended the destruction of their own imperialism a couple of years later.

They are simply preferable to fascists.

Thatonedice1 · Nov 10, 2020

DominicanPower said:
If Dems push out AOC, I'm done with them. I ain't voting for shit.

Preach.

Deleted member 2145 · Nov 10, 2020

she's doing good work with the messaging

feels so good to actually have some representatives

fontguy · Nov 10, 2020

H.Cornerstone said:
This is what Socialist means in America:

The amount of people here and in the party who take moderate and/or right wing opposition to "socialism" at face value is embarrassing.

Rocket Man · Nov 10, 2020

Hasan just dropped some big truth bombs. Establishment Dems are jobbers.

AOC on Biden's Presidency, Democratic Party, and Her Future in Politics

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Bold Bur3n Wrangler

One Winged Slayer

User requested account closure