this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
39 points (91.5% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7234 readers
636 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Cheney was Bush's vice president right?

Democrats being 2000s Republicans is no longer a meme.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

Correction, Dick Cheney was Bush's president.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Dick Cheney, Welcome to the Resistance!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

Absolutely not. His ass can stay shunned for eternity. I don't care if he starts supporting everything I do, the shit he's done is unforgivable

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

Trump is just too fascist— even for Dick Cheney…

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don't think that's true. Cheney's just not part of Trump's in-crowd. Cheney would go full fascist if he were at the top of it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

A competent war criminal politician is far more dangerous than a fascist. Historically, fascists burn themselves out trying to kill the left and expand without a sufficient base of control. Liberals like Cheney still employ the most horrific methods of fascism but do so without public opposition that could derail their agenda and with a more stable base of capitalist support. Indigenous peoples in what is now the United States were genocided by these kinds of people and the programs they designed and implemented. The fascists, particularly Nazis, used this as inspiration for Operation Barbarossa and Lebensraum, but were much less effective in their genocide.

And to be clear, Trump isn't really a fascist in this sense. There is no left for him to oppose, he has no fascist program of expansion and his policies were pretty similar to those of his predecessors. He is just rude, opportunistic, and reactionary. These are popular attributes in the United States and have been for decades, centuries. Blaming marginalized groups for all your problems is as American as apple pie and is clearly 100% compatible with liberal democracy. Democrats are currently doing it with euphemisms, they are outflanking Republicans on immigration policy from the right.

A person like Cheney wants to see someone slick like him more competently doing PR for the machine. Someone erratic like Trump throws a wrench into the plans sometimes because he's a self-interested idiot.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

You know libs, when the butcher of Iraq throws his support for your candidate, maybe it's time to accept that you are the baddies.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

If I were running for president I would simply reject the genocidal war criminals' endorsements.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Hey this is really well said. Please accept my thanks for your quality work here

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

More proof the Democrats are blue conservatives. Ranked choice voting or bust. Going bust is okay if thats what yall want, I literally don't care.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ranked choice voting is a cargo cult. Without changing the underlying structure of who has money and influence in society you're not going to have a democratic system in the first place. Look at what happened in NYC. Ranked choice voting didn't make the dominant class the most populous one. The landlords didn't even have to settle for a sycophant with a progressive mask.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You know that the perfect doesn’t have to be the enemy of good right? Both of you are right.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

As finite beings, we have to prioritize realistic actions and should set our expectations for what we will accomplish with an approach. Many people expend all of their political energy on reformist dreams that can never accomplish the needed changes. Instead, they should place more of their energy into realistic and historically proven methods.

These things are also often at odds. Reformism is at odds with a revolutionary approach. Not just in methods but by spreading an unrealistic idea of what can be accomplished. Now the revolutionaries have to debunk that reformism on top of all the rest of their work! Everyone's time is wasted. We could do more with higher numbers and better focus.