United States Politics Thread 46

[Torco]

great replacement doesn't mean demographic, cultural or religious change across historical time in general, I don't think, which is what you're talking about. all those are normal. GR refers to a specific conspiracy theory to the effect that "the elites" are engaged in a proyect to replace white people with non white people. There is simply no evidence to that effect. I like the tactic of adopting the terminology of normies-taken-in-by-fascist-ideology sometimes: it's useful to talk to each in the language of their heart. however there's a difference -sometimes missed by liberal progressives, though not in this case- between adopting the fascist's terminology and adopting the fascist's theory itself.

[xxx]

we must avoid ideological terminology,
duckspeaking blinds our thought
and prevents us from seeing,
and dealing with even the most obvious
problems facing our societies,
pointed out in votes and social movements......

[jcb]

The reason you're getting pushback isn't because you're criticizing the Democrats, it's because a) you do so in apocalyptic terms that make it sound like you haven't done any research,

Well, sorry not sorry. One of the lessons that I take from the second world war (or even something as low stakes as the fascist takeover of the Croation wikipedia ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiHDo5bqNXw )) is that once fascists have taken power within a system, there's no way to remove them except by a superior external power defeating them. Therefore, preventing them from gaining power in the first place is vitally important.

and b) you use Republican talking points.

I gave specific, concrete examples, that lay the elitism of the Democrats out clearly. If you refuse to see it, because the Republicans sometimes say the same thing (cynically and opportunistically, and with no intent or plan to help, of course), then I don't know what to say to convince you.

Here, for an example, is a story about how Biden personally intervened in the auto strike last year, walking the picket line, a first for a US president. He pissed off business— one industry guy said “It’s not only anti-business, it kicks 90 years of impartial mediation by a president to the curb.” Probably related: the companies signed a better deal with the UAW a month later. Biden also supported the striking screenwriters and actors. Here's an article summarizing the many things the Democrats have done for labor.

I know, that's great! I love it! Yet so much more needs to be done!

Basically, my frustration is that despite all those things, my life has still worsened over the last decade. The price of basically everything has risen dramatically, to the point where even simply eating at McDonalds is a luxury now. Sometimes, like at vending machines, prices double or triple overnight, yet wages haven't budged since I became an adult circa 15 years ago. Every new house built in my city is selling for half a million dollars and is located in an unwalkable neighborhood on the edge of town, and every new apartment building caters exclusively to rich yuppies. Healthcare, prescription medicine, and counselling are so egregiously expensive that I am forced to forgo them. I don't have kids, but my sister does, and she spends her entire paycheck paying for childcare.

Saying "Well, this is the best that liberalism can do." isn't good enough. I may be smart enough to realize that the Republicans are way worse, and refuse to vote for them, but other people aren't. If they vote for the Democrats and feel that nothing improves, next time they'll vote for the Republicans in a desperate attempt to change something, in the same way that if you flick a light switch, and the light you meant to turn on doesn't turn on, you don't keep flicking the same switch over and over again, but you flick a different switch instead, or not vote at all, in the same way that you might conclude that there's no connection between the switches and the lights and stop flicking switches all together.

But according to you the Democrats are "beholden to capital" and have no bond with organized labor.

So, are Democrats going to undo NAFTA then?

It may be sad, but parties go after centrist voters because those people vote. The whole Sanders thing was a bet that new voters would show up and win elections... hey, it was worth trying, and I voted for Sanders, but it wasn't an uproarious success..

And why don't many people vote? Because they feel that it does nothing, or there's no candidate worth voting for, or it's too inconvenient. So let's try to fix those things! Showing people that voting can and will immediately tangibly improve their lives is a good first step to motivating them to vote more!

Other ideas to increase voting:

• Change the system of voting to something besides first-past-the-post.
• Change the system to some kind of proportional representation.
• Make voting less dependent on geography by getting rid of the electoral college and the senate.
• Make election day a paid holiday.
• Provide more voting locations.
• Create a system for online voting, like Estonia. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vUYq_Lfs54 )
• Or, if that's too unsafe, allow mail-in voting for all people and elections.
• Punish them for abstaining, like Australia.
• Or, if that's too distasteful, do the opposite: reward them for voting. (Give them 200$, or whatever.)
• Repeal felony disenfranchisement laws, so nobody mistakenly thinks they can't vote when they actually can. (If they're unsure whether they can vote, they may abstain in order to avoid getting arrested if in fact they can't.)

Of course, these things can and should be implemented at not only the federal level, but also at the state level.

I have complicated feelings about all this. I think you've diagnosed the problem well, but then that just raises more questions, like "why do middle-aged people become fuddy-duddies?" and "why don't they get equally upset over right-wing outrages?"

On the first, there was a very interesting data analysis, which I've tried to find again but couldn't, that says that people don't become more conservative as they age; in fact they become decidedly more liberal. But society becomes more liberal faster than they do. So by the time they're old, they fit into right-wing parties better than left-wing ones.

In the current US, the younger generation has more interest in socialism than people have had for a century. It was by no means evident in the 1990s that this might happen

These things are related. Most people become fuddy-duddies when they own enough wealth to feel like they have something to lose in a revolution (economic or social). Due to capitalism's current crisis of overproduction/unaffordability, the younger generations have accumulated less wealth, and therefore are more interested in reforming or overthrowing the system.

[masako]

we must avoid ideological terminology,
duckspeaking blinds our thought
and prevents us from seeing,
and dealing with even the most obvious
problems facing our societies,
pointed out in votes and social movements......

If English isn't your first language, maybe try putting your thoughts into an online translator. As bad as it may be, I'd wager it would be easier to parse than this mish-mash. If you can't at least do that, then we are left to interpret your ramblings in almost any manner we see fit...even as the musings of a fascist-friendly extremist.

[bradrn]

we must avoid ideological terminology,
duckspeaking blinds our thought
and prevents us from seeing,
and dealing with even the most obvious
problems facing our societies,
pointed out in votes and social movements......

If English isn't your first language, maybe try putting your thoughts into an online translator. As bad as it may be, I'd wager it would be easier to parse than this mish-mash. If you can't at least do that, then we are left to interpret your ramblings in almost any manner we see fit...even as the musings of a fascist-friendly extremist.

I somehow suspect he writes like this in French, too…

(pour xxx,
comprendre votre style est très difficile,
peut-être ça vous il comprendra mieux
si j’écris comme ça,
mais écriter comme ça c’est fatigant…
il est fou, ce Romain !)

[Ares Land]

I suspect you're wasting your time. Being annoying vague and never quite stating the point is a tell-tale of the far-right.

Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.

Sartre is talking about antisemitism here, but I believe the statement can be fully generalized to all types of racism and prejudice.

[xxx]

far-right...Jean-Paul Sartre... anti-Semites... adversary... racism...

we must avoid ideological terminology,
duckspeaking blinds our thought...

far right/left violence for ideas disgust me,
JPS is a doublethink specialist he speak of himself,
I have no adversary,
antisemites and racism,
and even those who denounce them,
use the concept of race that is idiocy...

I somehow suspect he writes like this in French, too…

I'm afraid you're right...

[bradrn]

far-right...Jean-Paul Sartre... anti-Semites... adversary... racism...

we must avoid ideological terminology,
duckspeaking blinds our thought...

The irony here is quite astonishing.

[xxx]

the talking point is the evil of the 20th century,
but its abuse in the 21st
makes any ideological discourse inaudible,
unless one is intoxicated by it...

I think my conlanging activity,
which attempts to redefine language
without predefined words,
stems directly from this aversion...

I often play the devil's advocate here,
since all we have here is angelic discourse,
to remind us that there is no onthologically evil adversary...
just men, who you have to be able to love,
even if they have different interests,
but human, so human...