1355
Bernie Sanders blames election loss on Kamala Harris choosing billionaires over the working class
(www.the-independent.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 May 2025
1355 points (98.0% liked)
politics
23874 readers
3926 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
"I stand against fascism and want more rights for the common person." "I am willing to aid fascists when it makes me money or helps win elections"
Yeah let's unite with them, surely nothing bad will happen.
If you don't unite with them then history shows what you fear is guaranteed to happen.
Except the conservative the liberals were supporting, Hindenburg, won without the socialists support, while the socialists ran their own guy with the slogan "a vote for Hindenburg is a vote for Hitler is a vote for war". And then Hindenburg put nazis in all the major positions of power, in the name of unity.
History shows us:
It also shows us that socialists won't compromise to meet liberals in the middle, while the right unifies.
No, Socialists will not compromise with the people handing power to the fascists. Our objectives are mutually exclusive, we want socialism, liberals want capitalism and will support fascists to maintain capitalism.
Liberals are part of the right, Lenin was correct a century ago: social democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism.
Then you will lose to fascism and fascists kill socialists. The capitalism vs socialism debate is meaningless if democracy is lost.
The SDP were the next in the camps after socialists. Working with liberals cannot stop fascism because liberals create the conditions for fascism and would rather fascists in power than socialists.
And you would rather fascists be in power than work with liberals. It's easier to blame others than to compromise for the greater good of stopping fascism. This attitude is exactly the problem I am talking about.
The two arent equivalent, because socialists dont work with fascists or create the conditions fir fascism like liberals do, and supporting liberals supports the rise of fascism.
Liberals will work with whoever gives them the best chance to retain power. That could be socialists or fascists. By refusing to work with them, you leave the fascists as their only option to retain power. You create the exact environment fascism wants - a divided left.
Liberals are not the left, the longer they remain in power, the more fascism grows. When liberals work with fascists, they give them power. When liberals tell socialists to work with them, they mean "shut up and help us maintain the conditions that give rise to fascism". Do you think if the socialists supported Hindenburg, Hindenburg would have given power to the people who dont want billionaires to exist? I dont get how this isn't getting through, working with liberals is just another path to fascism.
I would argue that fascism is an inherent weakness of democracy that must be constantly guarded against. The public will always be vulnerable to those who would manipulate their worst impulses. Hate, fear, vengeance.
All who wish to preserve democracy need to band together. Anything else is secondary.
You're not looking at this from a materialist perspective; people don't just fall to hate, fear, vengeance or decide to support capitalism or socialism or whatever because they have a big discussion and decide that's the best idea and would have decided something else if only someone made the right argument at the right time. Ideology, culture, etc, the superstructure, is determined by the structure, the relationship with means of production.
Liberalism is not a stable system; the rate of profit declines over time if new markets aren't being added or capital destroyed. In response to declining conditions, the "middle class", due to their privilege, aren't going to question the system that privileged them, that leaves them with weird conspiracies blaming minorities and foreign countries for their declining conditions. The big bourgeoisie will always prefer this to socialism.
We could debate this all day, but it is irrelevant to the question of democracy. If we want democracy, everyone must band together to fight fascism. Fascism kills democracy.
Liberalism is incapable of fighting fascism, if liberals were to support the socialist project (this doesn't happen), fine lmao, but for socialists to abandon creating an alternative to fascism to support liberalism, which is what liberals really mean when they say "work together", is self-destructive.
We've seen what happens when liberals get their way; fascism grows stronger and any alternative is crushed, until liberals are ready to hand over power.
This is factually untrue if you learn history. The only times fascism was defeated is when capitalists, socialists, anarchists, liberals, leftists, etc join together against fascism.
You know liberals and capitalists are kinda the same thing? Liberalism is the philosophy of capitalism, and anarchists and socialists are both leftists?
Also the entire lead up to WW II had the socialists trying to ally with literally anyone to deal with Germany, but was rejected, as France and Britain signed Non-Aggression Pacts with Germany and gave them and Poland Czechslovakia in hope that Poland and Germany would invade the USSR and deal with what they perceived as a greater threat. Britain literally tried to join the winter war on the side of Finland and Germany.
The point is even in WWII, the liberals preferred fascism to socialism until they were literally being invaded, and if the socialists supported the liberals aims, the fascists would have won.
We could argue the semantics of different philosophies all day. The point is that everyone has to put their differences aside to fight fascism.
And what were the socialists in Germany doing in the lead up to WW2? (Hint: what is Nazi short for?)
The socialists in Germany were getting murdered by fascist paramilitaries the liberals armed in the 20s, and fighting them in the streets in the 30s while the liberals' policies continued to nurture them. If you think that having socialist in the name meant the nazis were socialist, I invite you to eat a urinal cake, then actually study history.
Not really. The National Socialist Party drew in strong socialist support with its talk of uniting the workers and a strong social support system. The fascists used the socialist's votes to gain power and then betrayed them on the Night of Long Knives. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives
The socialists voted for the KDP candidate. Hitler didn't gain power with socialist votes, the liberals promoted Hindenburg as a unity candidate, and won, Hindenburg proceeded to staff the government with nazis and made Hitler chancellor, unifying against the socialists. The nazis "socialist" side were no more socialist than Israelis who romanticize kibutzim as communes.
Sorry, but it's absurd to claim all socialists voted for one candidate. The KDP was a minor party in the Weimar period after the failed Spartacist uprising, getting only about 10% of the vote. Many socialists, especially war veterans, were social Democrats who were anti-communist (anti-Bolshevik really). They flocked to Hitlers nationalist, anti-banker (aka Jew), pro-veteran rhetoric. Once Hitler had gained power, he no longer needed the socialist elements of the party and purged them to make way for his authorization takeover.
(Note that I am absolutely not anti-socialist. Quite the opposite really. I just recognize that people are fallible and socialists have fucked up in the part too)