this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2025
830 points (98.5% liked)

DeclineIntoCensorship

149 readers
66 users here now

founded 1 week ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 78 points 1 week ago (5 children)

And Democrats were warned that they need to stop putting their thumbs on the scale to push the most dog shit candidates that don't promise anything that will help the working class. Fascism happens when democracy is unresponsive to the needs of the working class, and for the last 50 years Democrats have just been great at finding excuses for why they can't do something. Do you think Trump will listen to the parliamentarian if they disagree with something?

Fuck, Democrats have even been voting for his cabinet picks, despite claiming Trump is a fascist. They all voted to confirm Marco Rubio.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

And Democrats were warned that they need to stop putting their thumbs on the scale to push the most dog shit candidates that don’t promise anything that will help the working class.

what about biden? Dude was pretty popular with blue collar workers, and pushed a lot of good relevant legislation.

Fascism happens when democracy is unresponsive to the needs of the working class

this is factually, not fascism, i feel like im speaking with nazis trying to "subvert" the normie population and "enlighten" them or whatever the fuck groypers do.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You're either purposely misunderstanding my post, or just obtuse. I'm saying fascists get elected when democracy fails to solve people's problems, not that that unresponsiveness is fascism itself. Look at Weimar Germany and Italy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

to be clear, what you said is an extremely obtuse way to say that "people elect fascists when they want a fascist"

people are acting like it's some fucking new world order plot to overthrow the US government with fascism, but like actually, a bunch of idiots with the ability to vote did it.

also, if you wanted to make that statement more generally accurate, "fascism happens when the people feel that traditional government has failed them" since fascism tends to be primarily opportunist by nature.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And voters were warned with years of inaction that they needed to start being more engaged.

The reason we have so many shit candidates is because people don't show up for the real ones.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 week ago (2 children)

"The purpose of a system is what it does". If our system consistently produces shit candidates, shit policies, shit results and demoralizes voters... Then we have a shit system and nothing will ever improve until we demand a modern multiparty democracy with proportional representation and safe guards against fascism.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Multiparty democracy would be fantastic but that's a goal if we make it through this crisis. A more realistic (yet still fanciful) plan would be to destroy the Democratic party and create something new from the ashes. First past the post is here to stay for a long time.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Going to one of the many forms of preferential voting/ Ranked Choice Voting would work. That both major parties vehemently oppose changing first past the post should tell you that such a change would be effective in breaking their power.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

That's exactly what I'm saying. It's easier to destroy the Democrats and replace them than fix FPTP voting.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

“The purpose of a system is what it does”.

This is certainly a viewpoint, but I don't necessarily agree when people state it as if it's a foregone conclusion.

Starve the beast exists. They purposefully cripple these systems, and if you were to adhere to that statement, then it means that we should do away with the systems altogether because they're currently broken (read: sabotaged).

That is a bad take imo

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Someone responded to me with this a while back. The purpose of a system is what it does. I shot back some shit, but then I thought about it. They're right. The purpose of a system is what it does. It became clear to me. It literally does not matter in the real world what the creators of a system say it is for. The purpose of the system is what it does.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I mean... no. The purpose of the Department of Education has been very clear. Just because they fire a shitload of people, and make it so they cannot perform their function for the time being, does not mean that the purpose of the Department has changed.

The purpose remains, the Department just needs to be fixed so that it can continue to serve its purpose.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This is how I used to think. But we need to simplify things in order to approach them with appropriate action. The original purpose of USAID, NOAA, Department of Education, those don't matter at the moment. It's hard to articulate, but when you get down to it, the purpose of the system is what it does. No, over arching beliefs, vision, or plans from the founders will not work right now. The purpose of a system is what it does.

I don't want to argue with you anymore comrade. Please give a read to the link. Just a few days ago I would have had the same response as you.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I believe that's wrong, sorry. At least in the case of government agencies. Maybe it applies to other types of systems, and maybe it even applied to government agencies prior to Trump's actions, but no. Not anymore at least. I feel like maybe you don't understand how government agencies are structured and how they function if you believe it's that simple and lacking in nuance.

These agencies are not monoliths. There are still people working in the Department of Education, career bureaucrats, experts in their specific field, that are still working toward the stated goals of the Department of Education. They will continue to do so until they're forced to stop. Capitulating and just admitting defeat, just because the fascists that have seized power have made those goals far more difficult to achieve, is exactly what they want you to do. Don't fall for the trap.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I hear you. What I'm advocating does veer into philosophy when what we need is action. I don't claim to know every nuance of these bureaucracies, but I have worked within them, as a civilian. I do understand that this pump action shotgun approach to surgery is absurd. Believe me, you and I are on the same team here!

I don't advocate admitting defeat at all. In fact I think everyone 'resigning in protest ' right now is just taking the easy way out. I do hope for an end to this madness, but it seems like the train's just left the station.

What I'm advocating is an approach to systems theory, nothing more. Stay safe in the months ahead.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

cool... still you're wrong.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

the Department just needs to be fixed so that it can continue to serve its purpose.

All this means is "don't give up." You acknowledge it's not serving its purpose right now, it's serving some other purpose.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

No. It means don't throw out entire agencies wholesale because of some bullshit misunderstanding.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yes, of course. Who is talking about throwing the Department of Education out wholesale?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

For real? Have you not been paying attention?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I have. Sauerkraut was talking about voting reform. Which, I'll point out, still does not require the complete dissolution of the voting system we have.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Democrats were warned

So, the litmus test of this logic is this: Do we blame the opposition for the Nazi party? Should we start doing that too after 80 years?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's a concurrence. Who do you blame for the rise of the nazi party: the nazis who kept rigging the deck in their favor and sowing discord, the conservatives who enabled them, the ineffective social democrats whom people were disillusioned with, the people who held out against voting for them, or the people who basically were screaming at the latter three to do fucking something.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

With the amount of screaming and championing that the Dems have ignored I refuse to believe it's incompetence or ignorance. This is wilful and active support for the party they claim they're in opposition to.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago

Cool but I'm actually asking who you blame in the 1930s. In the 2020s I think the dems loved the idea of opposing Trump when they thought it was easy and not when they didn't. But i can also see scenarios in which they acted how they did while hating the whole situation

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s a concurrence. Who do you blame for the rise of the nazi party: the nazis who kept rigging the deck in their favor and sowing discord, the conservatives who enabled them, the ineffective social democrats whom people were disillusioned with, the people who held out against voting for them, or the people who basically were screaming at the latter three to do fucking something.

Yup, in other words post WW1 German society as a whole. People don't get to blame Dems without laying blame on themselves as part of this present society.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The antifascists are the only ones who weren't partly to blame. But also on a scale of who's most to blame, it's the nazis.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

on a scale of who’s most to blame, it’s the nazis.

yup. that's my point, sometimes users on Lemmy (and other left-leaning sites) imply that Dems are much more to blame than trumpists. Ultimately it's the people who voted for trump and then the people stayed at home, and then the Democrats.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

Yes, we should, as liberalism works for capitalism and capitalism always leads to fascism. Rosa Luxembourg said it best, socialism or barbarism. But Marx and Engels described the end stage of capitalism almost 100 years before fascism.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They're not an opposition. They famously will not act like one. They're complicit. After this loss and the lack of resistance I'm done. I've canvassed and fought for Dems for almost two decades and I could count our number of "Wins" on one hand. What a colossal waste of my time and effort.

Dems/Reps aren't the same because they're just as bad as each other, they're bad because they're both on the same team. The Dems had multiple chances to stop this and actively chose not to. It was a trolly problem with no one on the other tracks.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That’s not true, the professional managerial class (“coastal liberal elites”) that Harris laundered a billion dollars through only to lose and their donors aka the “good billionaires” (words of the new dnc chair not mine) were on the other tracks.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

We have no opposition party lmao. Was it worth it for Harris to throw the election by siding with Israel? Neoliberals are also fascist.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

The division is the point