You're doing the thing. You're grandstanding while not engaging with the substance of what I wrote.
I never said leftist have to become liberal. Did I say that? Where did I say that?
I've heard this diatribe a thousand times. It's like you guys share the same copy pasta so you can fellate endlessly to how "neoliberalism is fascism in disguise".
Enjoy your circle jerk. Some of us are going to roll up our sleeves and get to work trying to make the world better.
I don't care what sub I'm in. All I want is leftists to learn to become politically effective. I want leftist objectives to become mainstream. I want to get us out of this endless loop of whining and pandering to virtue signals. I'm going off the starting topic above about how leftists refuse participate in the electoral process because the candidates put forward are not idealistically aligned 100%. This is shortsighted and gets nothing accomplished. These next four years the Overton window will move so far to the right we might as well start over from scratch. It's one thing to clap all day about progressive values. It's another process altogether to become politically effective. Some of that requires building coalitions. Doing the groundwork to set up foundations. You know, politics.
Yes I'm on my phone on the go. It's sometimes not easy to type it out as I had in my mind. I think everyone can understand what I intended unless they are brain dead.
Kamala was too centrist for people so they didn't show up. But two things can be true: leftists generally don't participate in politics and dnc candidates tend to skew to the middle. Because guess what? Older people show up more to polls.
How can you in one breath confirm Kamala wasn't progressive enough and an the same time claim people did not turn up not because of the lack of appeal to leftist politics? Which is it? It's the whole argument of this thread. What do you think we're discussing?
I agree with most what you're saying but I think you're minconstruing the abundance book. Ezra has been clear and very vocal about wanting to execute the goals of the left. He's just calling for a more fluid mechanism that doesn't put up dozens of roadblocks throughout the process. No one ever addresses the elephant in the room: the upper echelon progressive home owner class. This group alone is blocking every progressive movement indirectly while also spouting the usual progressive rhetoric.
I'd be careful with this one. Being verbose in non-fiction does not produce good writing automatically. In my opinion the best writers in the world have an economy of words but are still eloquent and rich in their expression
I'm not doing a good job communicating what I'm trying to say and I take full responsibility.
To me the Dems are liberals -- or republican lite with sprinkle of some progressive social policies.
I know the left is constrained to building its coalition within the big tent that is the democratic party. But when I look at the way the left goes about building power --especially when looking at the nature of online discourse -- I get the sense they are not interested in building effective power or accomplishing their goals. It feels more like verbal mental masturbation 99% of the time.
One of them can actually pass policy unfortunately
Edit: I'm not saying I agree with their policies dumbasses. I want the left to pass policy. But until the left understands how to become politically effective and build coalitions we're stuck in this quagmire forever
You're doing the thing. You're grandstanding while not engaging with the substance of what I wrote.
I never said leftist have to become liberal. Did I say that? Where did I say that?
I've heard this diatribe a thousand times. It's like you guys share the same copy pasta so you can fellate endlessly to how "neoliberalism is fascism in disguise".
Enjoy your circle jerk. Some of us are going to roll up our sleeves and get to work trying to make the world better.