politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
And the racists winning without you is an even bigger loss.
@agamemnonymous
The biggest loss would be aligning with racists.
I'm wondering if some people actually understand what being on the progressive left even means.
Partnering with racists makes you a racist, win or lose.
No, the biggest loss would be fascists staying in power and eliminating racism by eliminating all but one race. Material conditions are much, much more important than ideals.
Is the life of every minority a worthy cost for standing by your principles? If, I hypothetically, you knew for a fact that losing would mean total ethnic cleansing, would you still refuse to accept the support of racists to elect someone you knew for a fact wouldn't do ethnic cleansing?
@agamemnonymous
Yes, we've all seen the Trolley Problem. It's bullshit.
Just like this entire question. People who hate DEI aren't trying to join the left. No one on the left has to reject racists because racists hate us too.
This whole thread is basically trying to split the left. But the funniest part is pretending the fascists and the racists aren't the same people.
That's not an answer. Is it worth it or not?
That's what you got from this? It's overwhelmingly people rightfully pointing out that these line-in-the-sand ideals are what's splitting the left.
@agamemnonymous
Sorry, but I'm not interested in hypothetical game theory.
I'm not going to apologize for drawing a line in the sand that excludes racists. It's a line that must be drawn.
If the left doesn't oppose racism, it stands for nothing.
Good, me either. My hypothetical has nothing to do with game theory or the trolley problem, I didn't know why you brought it up.
The hypothetical was about lines in the sand, and how they lead to absurdities. You still haven't answered the question, which indicates to me that you know quite well that if you did answer it, you would expose your idealism as hollow virtue signaling.
Racism isn't even the point. It was just an example of ultimatums doing more harm than good.
If the left can't act strategically and make incremental progress, its stances are materially irrelevant.
@agamemnonymous
Yes, racism is the point.
You're claiming that rejecting racists as allies means the left is obsessed with purity, whatever the hell that is supposed to mean.
My point is that if you expect the left to accept racism, you probably don't know diddley shit about the left.
The left is all about incremental progress. That's all we've been able to do for centuries. Again, y'all don't seem to know anything about being left in the USA.
No, it isn't. Making every issue a core issue was the point. Drawing lines in the sand over dozens of single issues, contributing to the erosion of an effective voter base was the point.
Racist "allies" were an offhand example, offered by someone else, to illustrate that point. You don't win elections on principles, you win them on votes. Sometimes principles gain votes, sometimes they cost them, but at the end of the day it counts down to how many people pulled the lever.
You don't have to let the casual racists determine the ticket, you just have to let them pull the lever.
But again, it's not about racism. It's about every single stance that's equal to or objectively better than the elegant alternative which is snubbed for not being good enough. When it's between Bad and Worse, and people are lining up by the millions for Worse, being one of 12,000 votes for Perfect isn't really helping anyone.
The call is coming from inside the house comrade. Big tent with Bad to keep Worse at bay until Good is prepped to make a break for it. Good isn't ready yet. Keep Worse out long enough for Good to gestate. Accelerationism is cringe and privilege-pilled.
@agamemnonymous
Yes, racism is the point.
The extreme centrists can ally with them. I won't.
Thanks for your advice on how to left properly. I think I'll ignore it and keep voting left in Democratic primaries. We just need more Mamdanis and fewer Fettermans.
No argument from me. I'm envious that New York has the political climate to support a Mamdani. I'm totally on board with more of his ilk in as many races as they can win.
But some districts aren't going to elect anyone left of Fetterman, and Fettermans are at least better than whatever R would have otherwise won that district. I'm all for whoever's the furthest left candidate that stands a reasonable chance of winning any given district.
Draw your lines in the sand after the office is filled by the least obstructive reasonable contender. Put their feet to the fire for reelection, don't gamble with the more obstructive contender.