braces for down votes and possible ban
braces for down votes and possible ban
I've been seeing a worrying number of these people on Lemmy lately, sharing enlightened takes including but not limited to "voting for Biden is tantamount to fascism" and "the concept of an assigned gender, or even an assigned name, at birth is transphobic" and none of them seem to be interested in reading more than the first sentence of any of my comments before writing a reply.
More often than not they reply with a concern I addressed in the comment they're replying to, without any explanation of why my argument was invalid. Some of them cannot even state their own position, instead simply repeatedly calling mine oppressive in some way.
It occurred to me just now that these interactions reminded me of nothing so much as an evangelical Christian I got into an argument with on Matrix a while ago, in which I met him 95% of the way, conceded that God might well be real and that being trans was sinful and tried to convince him not to tell that to every trans person he passed, and failed. I am 100% convinced he was trolling -- in retrospect I'm pretty sure I could've built a municipal transport system by letting people ride on top of his goalposts (that's what I get for picking a fight with a Christian at 2AM) -- and the only reason I'm not convinced these leftists on Lemmy are trolls is the sheer fucking number of them.
I made this post and what felt like half the responses fell into this category. Am I going insane?
You're viewing a single thread.
Look. A lot of people are sick of what looks an awful lot like bullshit. We've seen what liberal politics gets us. We see that the victories of the past were won in spite of liberal moderates, rather than with their cooperation. If you find more people taking hard line stances, maybe it is self defense against being dragged into mealy mouthed excuses about why we have to vote for leaders who support genocides.
We've seen what liberal politics gets us:
-
Fighting to Slow and Reverse the Effects of Climate Change
-
Free Libraries
-
Free or Cheap Public Transit
-
Free Schooling
-
Free Daycare
-
Free Medical Care
-
Paid Sick Leave
-
Paid Maternal Leave
-
Border Policies That Accept Good People and More Effectively Removes The Bad
-
Protections for Human Rights
-
Separation of Church and State
-
Right to Love Whoever You Want to Love
-
Reluctance to Enter Foreign Wars
-
Better Economies
-
Lower Deficits
-
Free Care for Chronic Mental Illnesses
But sure, BoTh sIdES baD, Vi JinPeeng the Pooh can save us! RusSiA iS wInnING thE WAr aGaInST wHiTE SuPReMaCIsT aNtI-cHrIStianS
Are you trying to create an earthquake by making every Union fighter spin on their graves by giving their achievements to the people who opposed them?
Liberal is an Ideology, not a party, so if they opposed these then they were by definition conservatives.
But yes, most if not all examples of these policies was a DNC achievement. The RNC haven't been known for much except Evangelical Theocracy, Cutting Taxes for the Rich, Creating Deficit, and Gutting Regulatory Bodies since the Reagan Administration.
Let me clear something up that really shouldn't be this prevalent: The opposite of conservative isn't liberal, it's progressive. Both US parties are liberal.
Historically the USA is not a place filled with liberal policy, being conservative contradicts being liberal and being progressive absolutely is liberal. In practical examples, recent and historic, the GOP want to restrict who can marry, what bathrooms you use, what books you're allowed to read, which gods you're allowed to worship, and who is allowed freedom to live in which places.
The closest thing to Liberal Policy in the GOP playbook is giving corporations the freedoms to harm others and dodge taxes, by gutting regulation.
This isn't controversial, you're just filled with cognitive dissonance, your worldview doesn't align with reality.
Historically the USA is not a place filled with liberal policy
Tell me you know fuck all without telling me you know fuck all
Are you kidding? Almost none of these points are true. We have almost none of these points besides libraries which are constantly being refunded, and schools that are all but useless.
We are doing nothing more than a token effort to fight the climate collapse, no such thing as free daycare, there is not free medical care, paid maternal leave is laughably short, and so on.
We have every single thing on this list in at least some places in the USA to the point that it would be a much longer list to show every policy and example.
And you're right, it's all under attack. By Conservatives.
-
And your solution is reverting to authoritarianism?
There are leftist ideas which don't route through autocracy, but for whatever reason internet leftists seem to hate these just as much as they hate... everything else. That leaves many to conclude that they are more interested in campism and dumb revolutionary fan service than actual leftist ideas.
Wouldn't these people want to choose their opposition by voting? I assume it would be easier to win victories in a liberal democracy than a Russia-like authoritarian state (which the GOP seems like they're shooting for).
I think you're looking at this backwards. Why wouldn't the democrat party want to attract these voters on the left by fighting for policies they want? I assume it would be easier to win over a potential group of voters by listening to their needs, rather than insulting and blaming them.
The keyword is "potential group of voters". The raw truth is that centrists are more reliable voters than leftists. Sanders showed this very well in the 2020 primary. His plan was to get an overwhelming number of supporters and turn out like minded people, and that failed.
Bernie championed progressive causes, but not enough progressives showed up to polls.
The whole point is that you won't get a set of people to reliably vote for you if you don't reliably deliver the results they care about. I think the Sanders campaign was actually a success if you consider how much he was able to engage people that generally feel unrepresented by candidates. I know a lot of people, myself included that donated money towards a campaign for the first time ever (we are in our 40s). There's a lot of energy out there that is ready to work for sincere leadership.
The "left" or "progressive" wing is a small part of the people who help them campaign, vote in the primaries, and donate large amounts to them. I assume they think they'd turn off more people/support than they would gain by catering to the left. The DNC establishment (and the money behind them) are the opposition to the left (but they at least share some values, such as bodily autonomy and some domestic human rights, unlike the GOP).
Small enough to ignore when it comes to policy, but big enough to blame for losing elections.
It sounds a lot like the rhetoric of the right, black/brown/immigrants/Jews/etc. They are weak but also a significant threat. It's just inverted. The left/progressives don't have enough votes to listen to, but they need to fall in line.