Also Democrats: Ve shall round up und eradicate ze undesirables from society!!! Ve shall put zem into ze camps and ve shall enslave them to benefit ze superior class!!!

https://fxtwitter.com/lastreetcare/status/1806869510483476829

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-7 points

You’ll notice that’s due to a supreme court ruling, the same supreme court trump managed to stuff last tkme he got power. If the Dems get a workable majority in both houses and the presidency you’ll at least have fighting chance that they’ll push back on some of this stuff. trump is slavering at the prospect of making it worse, and has been clear that he intends to.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s a lousy system and a poor set of choices, but one is clearly worse than the other, and they both actually have a recent track record of being president, so you can make an informed choice.

Critically though, this isn’t just about the president, but also every other position on the ballot too.

permalink
report
reply

Democrats aren’t being forced at gunpoint by the Supreme Court to mass arrest the homeless.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Like…I don’t know how I can stress this to you, there is no “pushing back on some of this”, even if they wanted to; which they don’t.
The Supreme Court is pretty much fucked for the next couple of decades, very vital decades!
Even with a fucking Blue Tsunami (which isn’t going to happen) the Democrats cannot legislate us out of this cluster fuck, and frankly seeing Democrats unabashedly take advantage of a massively reactionary and honestly fascistic Supreme Court ruling without a moment’s hesitation should really wake you up to whose side they are actually on and who this system truly serves.

God, I hate liberals.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Seriously. Just a couple weeks after Trump was ‘invoking Hitler’s language’, liberal politicians were saying “well, his language was deeply uncouth, BUT we do have a problem along our southern border”

They’re the same opportunistic shitweasels they’ve always been.

permalink
report
parent
reply
34 points

Yeah, the decision is not “you have to do this now,” it’s “this option is legal.” Dems on the LA City Council are choosing to be as punitive as they legally can be.

permalink
report
parent
reply

this is democrats taking advantage of the reactionary court ruling. “voting blue no matter who” puts/keeps democrats in power that do shit like this. they do not resist conservatives. they are the conservatives taking advantage of how uncritical the DNC is of conservative politics. when the DNC decided to cram the most ancient and reactionary piece of shit in the party into the oval office, the one who

  • was the major booster for the iraq war
  • fucked over student borrowers, all the way hard
  • spent entire career expanding the police and carceral state
  • made sure clarence thomas, the most corrupt judge in history, could elide the anita hill allegations and make it to the unimpeachable high court for life

…that should have been your clue that the democrats are not interested in what voters want and are content to chose a barbaric future of repression and cruelty for the masses. and here we are 4 years later, all social-program promises broken, the economy in meltdown, with two right-wing colonial proxy wars (one internationally recognized as a genocide) in two different regions, multiple coup attempts, and war mongering against china. one is not worse than the other. one is merely different than the other. it is a symbolic distinction without a material difference.

if the democrats had any interest in doing something better, they would not be backing biden and trying to bully everyone into supporting him. the longer the party keeps him in the slot, the more obvious their lack of true concern for a trump victory becomes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
56 points

You have been fooled by the most transparent good cop bad cop routine going.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Fooled? I think we’re looking at this from different angles then, because, as I mentioned, I know this situation sucks, but I also acknowledge that it’s not going to change before the election. Given that, what is your optimum move?

permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points

Optimum? Nothing that can be discussed in a public forum. Within electoralism? At the very least punish the democrats for allowing a vassal state to commit genocide by withholding support. They’ll probably respond to a blowout defeat by getting even more racist but maybe a few will see that we won’t vote for 99% Hitler

permalink
report
parent
reply

Given that, what is your optimum move?

permalink
report
parent
reply
45 points

You’ll notice that this is a city council run by Democrats.

The dehumanization and abuse of the homeless is a bipartisan position. This is because it is a fundamental product of capitalism, where those most impoverished do not have any humane guaranteed place to live. Compounding this, business owners, through the process of becoming more interested in their own profits than in the well-being of their business’ community, treat those who live on the streets near their businesses as merely a threat to their incomes.

Those business owners are who actually control your city councils and your presidencies and your frocked-up supreme court. They also fund the party and PACs and PR firms that are telling you this highly non-strategic advice of “just support this party it’s the good guys and very smart”. This is an example of why they are in power and you are not - they control your actual political brain.

In reality, you should join us in fighting against the system itself, as it will never deliver what is necessary, and it will actually fight against it instead. This does not mean never engaging in electoral politics, but it does mean actually understanding it and putting energy into that which actually builds our cause and helps our neighbors.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

In reality, you should join us in fighting against the system itself, as it will never deliver what is necessary, and it will actually fight against it instead. This does not mean never engaging in electoral politics, but it does mean actually understanding it and putting energy into that which actually builds our cause and helps our neighbors.

Depending on what you mean by ‘fighting the system’ I think we’re saying roughly the same thing. Electoral politics is upon us right now though, and in truth is always there to be dealt with, so needs to be engaged with constantly. Make sure your representative knows your name and what you stand for. From what I can see they mostly don’t get that much input from voters, so your voice is louder when you talk directly to them.

The electoral system can be changed, but as you say, it’ll take fighting for that. Fighting the system directly won’t gain much as it’s just that, a system. It’ll have to be a ‘hearts and minds’ job amongst the electorate to show people there is a better way and get them to vote for candidates who support that. It can work, that’s ultimately how things have drifted to the right over time, people believe that’s the ‘better’ way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Depending on what you mean by ‘fighting the system’ I think we’re saying roughly the same thing. Electoral politics is upon us right now though, and in truth is always there to be dealt with, so needs to be engaged with constantly.

I’m saying the exact opposite. Electoral politics is something to spend something like 1% of your political thoughts on unless you are personally running or supporting an electoral anti-capitalist campaign. It is a distraction that gives you the false impression that your lone vote or nagging people to vote for capitalist politicians is doing anything good, let alone worth spending any real time on. If you’re spending much of your political focus on this you’re just a dancing monkey for the ruling class. This includes local campaigns. If you deviate from this line you’ll actually be working against the oppressed and marginalized people around you and in other countries.

Make sure your representative knows your name and what you stand for.

A complete waste of time. You do not matter, politically, as an individual. The other people who have their ear have tens of thousands of dollars to drop on them. You think you’re going to compete with that by having the super smartest arguments and “a relationship” with this stooge that knows exactly who butters their bread? At most they will use you as a prop for their own ends. And if they are a capitalist politician, which is nearly all of them, you will be speaking to a brick wall that will never do what is necessary for justice.

From what I can see they mostly don’t get that much input from voters, so your voice is louder when you talk directly to them.

Bruh liberals are constantly organizing letter writing campaigns and calling offices and trying to get meetings with their reps. They are routinely ignored. Only organized actions with leverage ever do anything and again, it’s only within very limited confines of capitalist discourse.

In contrast, donors get to go to special events at the mansions of party insiders where they get to tell the candidate all about their latest Brown Child Exploder 3000 and how important it is that they don’t get in the way of its sales and hey here’s $30,000 from all of our executives that just happen to be donating to you as individual private citizens.

You do not register on their radar. You’re the goofball they make fun of to their sides later. At most they will use you as practice for how to handle people that want things they will never be provided with.

The electoral system can be changed, but as you say, it’ll take fighting for that.

In your mind, what does it mean to change the electoral system and how does it compare to what is necessary to undo the intrinsic violence and disposession of the capitalist system?

Fighting the system directly won’t gain much as it’s just that, a system.

Why not?

It’ll have to be a ‘hearts and minds’ job amongst the electorate to show people there is a better way and get them to vote for candidates who support that.

You do need to communicate with the public but feeding into the false notion that you’re just going to vote out capitalism will lead to almost immediate distrust because you will fail right away.

It can work, that’s ultimately how things have drifted to the right over time, people believe that’s the ‘better’ way.

You think people have drifted to the right because they were offered a better future by politicians that had personal relationships with random right wing constituents?

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

If the Dems get a workable majority in both houses and the presidency you’ll at least have fighting chance that they’ll push back on some of this stuff.

Imagine still believing this

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I did say a fighting chance. The thing is, that chance improves if politicians see their voters want it to change and will abandon them if it doesn’t. That realization takes time and effort though, and isn’t going to happen in a substantive way by November.

Persuade more voters to think like you, organize enough chances for your local representative (regardless of party) to see that change and things might start to change, otherwise you’re just screaming into the void.

permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points

The thing is, that chance improves if politicians see their voters want it to change and will abandon them if it doesn’t

Imagine still believing this

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

shut the fuck up liberal

permalink
report
parent
reply

perhaps more eloquent and succinct than my response

permalink
report
parent
reply

Y’all are the two wolves in me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

when it comes to hexbear users, be nice and thoughtful and give benefit of doubt, when its anybody else that comes in here with some stupid liberal bullshit treat them like shit, fuck them

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

A pithy response, to be sure, but rather lacking in any noticable thought.

The reality, as it stands, is that, baring any unforseen events, come January one of either Biden or Trump will be the president of the United States of America. This is, to put it mildly, suboptimal, however it is pretty much inescapable at the present time. Assuming you are elegible to vote in the upcoming ekection, any action, or inaction, on your part will have an effect on the totals. Whether that effect actually carries any weight will be down to whether you’re in a swing area, which, again, is suboptimal but won’t change between now and then.

The time to change these underlying facts is after the election, pushing one, or both, parties to change their policies for the next election, or even the one after. They can’t/won’t make actual, meaningful changes before November in fear of scaring their base voters, so change is going to be slow, and needs to start at the grassroots level. Persuade enough voters that the change you want is needed and they’ll be more inclined to vote for those who support those changes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

A pithy response, to be sure, but rather lacking in any noticable thought.

Reddit brain

permalink
report
parent
reply

The time to change these underlying facts is after the election, pushing one, or both, parties to change their policies for the next election

you are fucking lost if you see this shit and think the answer to this is more electoral bullshit forever

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Shut the fuck up reddit

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points
*

If the Dems get a workable majority in both houses and the presidency you’ll at least have fighting chance that they’ll push back on some of this stuff.

The Supreme Court can undo any legislation in a few years, if not sooner. And the current Court is the culmination of a decades-long right-wing project to exercise exactly that sort of control – that’s the whole reason the Federalist Society was formed, and it’s the reason Republicans blocked Obama from appointing anyone to replace Ginsburg Scalia. They are actually trying to wield power, Democrats are not.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s a lousy system and a poor set of choices

The Supreme Court is such a bad system that the bare minimum position from Democrats should be “we are going to pack the court with 10 justices to the left of William O. Douglas.” There’s a whole set of ideas like this that at least match the scale of the problem (an unelected body acting as a super-legislator), but Democrats aren’t interested in any serious solutions. Just like they aren’t interested in serious solutions for climate change, healthcare, education, foreign policy, or practically anything else.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

and it’s the reason Republicans blocked Obama from appointing anyone to replace Ginsburg

Scalia

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Ah, you’re right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I agree with all of this, in that the Dems seem ineffective in actually getting things done. The issue isn’t whether the Dems are a good choice though, they’re not. The issue is whether they or the Republicans will do more damage over the next term. From that perspective, the Dems seem like the least bad choice. It’s a bad place to be, but only concerted effort from a large enough base, over an extended period, is going to change that. As you say, the Federalist Society worked for decades to get here. It’s likely to take effort of a similar magnitude to push it back, unless the Dems get in with a large enough majority at each level that the more sane ones can cause some useful change, and that’ll only happen if they’re pushed by the electorate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
35 points

Bro Biden is going to die in the next four years regardless; he could personally shoot every conservative supreme court justice. He chooses not to. How can you respect that?

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Would be the one thing he could do that would potentially restrict the power of the president, too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Whilst it’s an amusing thought, I really don’t think that advocating assassinating your judicial opponents is a good idea. Remember that once it starts, it wont stop, so even if you get someone who aligns with your views, they’ll likely be eliminated in short order.

Term limits, age restrictions or even just a robust anti-bribery system would likely achieve similar results.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Considering the Supreme Court basically just legalized bribery, what do you think the odds are that we’re going to get that?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

anti-bribery

I’ve got some bad news for you lemmitor

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Whilst it’s an amusing thought, I really don’t think that advocating assassinating your judicial opponents is a good idea. Remember that once it starts, it wont stop, so even if you get someone who aligns with your views, they’ll likely be eliminated in short order.

The US omniparty already murders its political opponents. It murdered sitting politicians, it murdered political candidates, it murders the leaders of political parties, it murders non-electoral political pressure groups, it murders loose-knit groups of single-issue activists, it murders outspoken critics of its policies, it murders union leaders, it murders union members, it murders foreign heads of state, it murders foreign political figures, it murders members of NGOs that counter its interests.

This is the factual, repeated, and continued to this day, history of the United States of America.

And, admittedly depending on what you believe, its possibly murdered a sitting president.

permalink
report
parent
reply

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

I absolutely agree with your point. The amount of hero worship that went on was positively alarming and she absolutely should have been persuaded to retire. Unless I’m missing something though, neither the president nor congress can force a judge to retire, short of impeaching them. Even if they could, you’d likely end up in a situation similar to Obama’s, where the opposite side blocks your attempts to instate a replacement.

permalink
report
parent
reply

So you’re just going to accept Republicans always get their judges and Democrats never get them?

Why don’t Democrats block the Republican judges?

There’s always going to be some excuse stopping the “good guys”. Ask yourself why that is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Unless I’m missing something though, neither the president nor congress can force a judge to retire, short of impeaching them.

What does it say about a party if it can’t get members on their deathbeds out of positions of power? What does it say about a party if members on their deathbeds don’t do this on their own?

A competent party should be preparing younger members to take the reigns, cultivating the mentality that members shouldn’t cling to power until they keel over, and should remove members who stick around too long. It should shape the rules of the institutions of government to do this as well.

Democrats never did this, and haven’t come close to taking these questions seriously for decades.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points
*

“Bbbbut trump!!”

yes Trump made Biden not fix this by packing the courts

Before you wag some liberalism at me about congress or whatever, packing the courts is explicitly something Biden has said he will not do, so, lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

packing the courts is explicitly something Biden has said he will not do, so, lol

Yeah, he’s definitely not playing smart there, although he has said that the next president will likely be able to appoint two new members to the supreme court, which sounds like a hint that he wants to swing the balance. I know he’s again expanding the court, which would be the easy short term fix, and that sort of makes sense as it makes it easier for the next guy to do it too, or at least reduces the resistance to it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

If you pack the court, the point is to then ram through laws that strengthen your position so that it’s harder for the other side to feasibly challenge it, to pack the court in the other direction. You can’t change things without exerting power, and the court is a tool of authority. You gotta use and abuse that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

It’s not that he’s “not playing smart,” JUST FUCKING THINK! IF he has an option, and he CHOOSES to not use that option, he MUST SUPPORT the current state of things!

FUCKING

THINK

PAST

THE

PROPAGANDA

permalink
report
parent
reply

What are you going to do if the next republican just packs the court anyway?They can just do that you know.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

i am begging you to shut the fuck up

Death to America

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

they could decriminalize homelessness right now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Do they have the numbers to actually push that through? If so, yes that sounds like a good move. Tell your representative to get on it. If enough people do things will start changing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

THEY DON’T NEED NUMBERS! BIDEN IS THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE! THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH WHICH CHOOSES HOW TO ENFORCE LAWS.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

the states that are predominantly controlled by the DNC definitely do. i know they don’t want to though, these places all have a bunch of laws in place that can be more forcefully enforced now.

we aren’t going to get anywhere bargaining with capitalists. i’m aware of the methods that they use to suppress alternative parties, but at this point we just have to figure out how to defeat them in a way that opens the door to move the overton window left. things have been moving right for a while, no point in pretending there’s any actual potential for progress from a center-right liberal party that regularly collaborates with the far right.

permalink
report
parent
reply