166

Do they think people will just move on from the fact that their entire ruling class is in a cabal of Zionist pedophiles? They may get away with it, in fact they probably will, but it will always be at the back of the mind. For everyone.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] Ishmael@hexbear.net 95 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Socko was right

"And every politician, every cop on the street, protects the interests of the pedophilic corporate elite"

[-] RedWizard@hexbear.net 31 points 6 days ago

Thanks Socko!

[-] nasezero@hexbear.net 81 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I don't think it matters to them, tbh I'm expecting the midterms to be the deathblow to US liberal democracy. ICE agents are gonna be terrorizing swing districts if not outright raiding voting centers, and I can't imagine that the current Trump & co. would honor results that they know will strip of them power. Idk, just feels like the current Trump coalition is pretty deadset on ending liberal democracy, and that's gonna include ignoring/throwing out any election results they don't like.

[-] 9to5@hexbear.net 35 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Im not an American. Do you believe Trump would/could run for a 3rd term and win ? I guess thats the question since that would be the most blatant death of liberal democracy I could imagine.

Mind you I dont think it matters thaaaat much. Republicans could just run a lot less charismatic candidate like Vance and fix the elections as you said. Would give them the out that the elections were / are fair even if its bullshit.

I guess it comes down wether the people in power wanna play pretend that the USA is still a democracy (which does come with a number of benefits in the west)

[-] GoodGuyWithACat@hexbear.net 56 points 6 days ago

If Trump does run for a 3rd term and it's treated as a legitimate election, then he's already won.

[-] Le_Wokisme@hexbear.net 38 points 6 days ago

if trump won in 2020 like his supports claim this is already his 3rd term

i think he'll die before 2028.

[-] into_highest_invite@lemmygrad.ml 46 points 6 days ago

yeah the problem with all this speculation about 2028 is it ignores that he is 80 years old and believes exercise is bad for you. but then again i thought biden was gonna be dead by the end of 2021 and he just beat cancer.

[-] unaware@hexbear.net 20 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

No fucking way, he beat it???!!! why do ghouls always live forever...

(edit: added punctuation to clarify tone)

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] queermunist@lemmy.ml 34 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I think if he was 20 years younger, absolutely.

I expect him to at least be bed ridden by 2028, if he even lives that long.

[-] TrustedFeline@hexbear.net 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

That would be so funny if we get a couple years of bedridden Harkonnen-maxxing Trump

[-] durruticore@hexbear.net 17 points 6 days ago

Maybe not worth much, but might be warm news. There's a guy on ig who has a doctorate in neurosomething (he's a lib tho) who says trump's got fronto-temporal dementia. He consistently puts out videos with other specialists on that field talking about the symptoms he's shown in public (leaning forward, confusing greenland with iceland...) and says trump's got 1-3 months left to live.

[-] simpletailor@hexbear.net 7 points 6 days ago

Confusing Greenland and Iceland might also just be par for the course American understanding of geography

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Wolfman86@hexbear.net 16 points 6 days ago

Every day around mid day i expect to read "Trump found dead when his nurse went to wake him".

[-] Kefla@hexbear.net 33 points 6 days ago

He and his goons have repeatedly said he plans to "run for a third term" even though that's not a thing, what they actually mean is he intends to be president for the rest of his life no matter what people put in the ballot boxes and no matter whether that life ends in 2027 or 2197.

[-] hotcouchguy@hexbear.net 30 points 6 days ago

I think he absolutely would, if he was 5 or 10 years younger.

if he runs for a third term he's already broken with the norms of liberal democracy in this country to such a great extent that rigging the election for him to win would be a given, an afterthought. he's not gonna take that step if there's any risk of losing involved

probably a moot point though given his rapidly declining health

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] 9to5@hexbear.net 53 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I mean I do think that there has been a general eroision of trust in liberalism since the beginning of the Trump Era back in 2016. Maybe even back in 2008 but these days its much more out in the open.

At least I get the vibe that there are a metric fuckton of unhappy people which also explains the rise of neo-reactionary politics and groups.

I w i l l say. though... I also think that even some rightwingers are slowly getting disillusioned with Trump/Maga.....which could go either way into an even more extreme right turn or a return to more lib politics.

Just looking at the USA here since I assume that is what OP is talking about. Even though I think Europeans being spineless weasles also will help to delegitimize liberalism.

[-] hotcouchguy@hexbear.net 44 points 6 days ago

Liberalism accomplished everything it ever dreamed of after the Soviet Union fell, after that its only remaining political objective was preserving the status quo. And as that status quo got worse, and liberalism couldn't acknowledge that, it was inevitable it would lose credibility.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Dort_Owl@hexbear.net 49 points 6 days ago

I think they're betting on it not mattering and people being too downtrodden to do anything about it

[-] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 21 points 6 days ago

They don't have an alternative.

[-] eldavi@lemmy.ml 5 points 6 days ago

this is how it will be because there are FAR too many who are fine with the system as it is and many, many more that are not positioned to give af

[-] Leegh@hexbear.net 33 points 6 days ago

Did the Romans care that the Senate and their patrons destroyed the legitimacy of the Roman Republic in the 1st century BC? No, they just moved on and allowed them to create the Roman Empire which lasted for another 400 years.

I like to think we've moved on from antiquity, but the mentality of the average American is making me question this. As the saying goes, history repeats itself...

[-] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 24 points 6 days ago

The Roman proletariat and serfs got some important concessions that improved their standard of living between the end of Sulla's dictatorship and Octavian becoming emperor (and more before that which were undone by Sulla). I think that's a pretty big difference because the burgerreich just keeps making life worse for its workers and they somehow keep lapping up the fascism.

[-] Arahnya@hexbear.net 36 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

certain topics definitely become more prominent in the social sphere, as they become more relevant or recognized : like climate change (or covid.) But like climate change / covid, there will also be compartmentalization and denial.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Horse@lemmygrad.ml 38 points 6 days ago

it doesn't matter if it's "in the back of the mind" if no one is going to do anything about it, which they won't because for all their posturing, am*ricans are thoroughly housebroken

[-] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 41 points 6 days ago

Americans are too lazy, stupid, and cowardly to ever do anything meaningful about it.

[-] plinky@hexbear.net 42 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Did clinton stop entryism into democratic party? Treatlerism will prevail

You can observe as a proximate: 0 quits over genocide, even rashida still changes them from inside, they, at the end of the day, are power hungry poops, who will not lose power on principle or risk

[-] Le_Wokisme@hexbear.net 23 points 6 days ago

0 quits over genocide, even rashida still changes them from inside,

at some point i don't think it's entryism so much as taking up space. If the squad ditched the party and ran as independents they would be taking on an uphill battle against democrats' entrenchment to be in a more morally pure position with the same or less power.

Bernie had an I next to his name for years and look at him. There's a low ceiling on electoralism and i don't think leaving the party makes a difference one way or the other. Is attempting to normalize third parties worth losing congressional seats? Depends how valuable a congressional seat is and whether you're vulnerable to redistricting or primarying anyway.

[-] into_highest_invite@lemmygrad.ml 28 points 6 days ago

i think normalizing third parties should be the primary short-term goal of electoralism. there just isn't anything else for "left-wing" electoralism to do when the first party is designed around sabotaging, co-opting, and destroying left-wing movements.

[-] Le_Wokisme@hexbear.net 15 points 6 days ago

that's reasonable for a movement, but is it the interest of a sitting congresswoman? (and that consideration is another limitation of electoralism) It makes sense for Sawant, but i think all the democrats ran as democrats with the objective of being democrats rather than entryism per se.

you're right for now but i think it's a delicate balance. if any "left" democrat does something cool, they might all start getting pushed out of the party, depending on what the donors think. but i guess the dnc itself is too smart to do that sort of thing all at once. idk maybe this whole train of thought is a dead end.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] AOCapitulator@hexbear.net 2 points 5 days ago

I love watching this conversation during hitlers rise to power its very funny, talk about the parlimentarian next!

[-] into_highest_invite@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

well so long as you're gonna vote, you ought to vote third-party. so long as you're gonna run, you ought to run third-party. otherwise you're not doing anything electorally to stop hitler's rise to power. and in that case, why not just stay home on erection day and masturbate?

[-] AOCapitulator@hexbear.net 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

otherwise you’re not doing anything electorally to stop hitler’s rise to power

you cannot electorally stop Hitlers rise to power what are you talking about?

Unless you are roundabout calling destroying liberal capitalist democracy and therefore stopping it from letting hitler seize power 'stopping hitler electorally'

all i'm saying is if the left wants an electoral strategy, this is it. i'm not saying we should have an electoral strategy. i'm just saying if you're gonna vote anyway, vote third party

[-] fort_burp@feddit.nl 20 points 6 days ago

Well under Democracy with American Characteristics, political parties are private corporations. Participation in the presidential debates is also run by a private corporation, who declared early on

After studying the election process in 1985, the bipartisan National Commission on Elections recommended "[t]urning over the sponsorship of presidential debates to the two major parties".[3] The CPD was established in 1987 by the chairmen of the Democratic and Republican Parties to "take control of the presidential debates".[3] The commission was staffed by members from the two parties and chaired by the heads of the Democratic and Republican parties, Paul G. Kirk and Frank Fahrenkopf.[3] At a 1987 press conference announcing the commission's creation, Fahrenkopf said that the commission was not likely to include third-party candidates in debates, and Kirk said he personally believed they should be excluded from the debates.[3]

The heads of the CPD are usually ex-leaders of the two corporations that make up the Democratic and Republican parties, and when those corporations want to bypass the CPD, they just negotiate with different corporations.

In May 2024, the Biden and Trump campaigns struck a deal to circumvent the CPD and participate in two debates (on CNN on June 27 and ABC on September 10), breaking a longstanding tradition of debates organized under the auspices of the CPD,[10] throwing the future of the CPD into doubt.

[-] fort_burp@feddit.nl 23 points 6 days ago

Hold up I just got a text from said Democracy (the will of the people)

[-] Ram_The_Manparts@hexbear.net 10 points 6 days ago

Is attempting to normalize third parties worth losing congressional seats?

Yes. Absolutely.

It's not going to happen though, because none of these people are socialists.

[-] plinky@hexbear.net 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

it's not even socialist as such, they just don't have strong moral convictions. some liberals are also horrified at entity behavior, some (best) of them even quit their jobs over it (say in state department) around 10 people in 12000 department or some numbers around that, it's basically consistent number that people with morals are less than 1% of people (i would like to say it's uniquely seppos, but same is true in europe and middle east and asia), we have several representative samples across populations when push comes to shove they all vote/continue to work for/shop at/entertain for better burgers. which means socialist should brings morals by backdoor of treats, which would require extraordinary individual/organizational duality.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SootySootySoot@hexbear.net 28 points 6 days ago

But this fact has already been in the back of peoples' minds of decades. I don't see anything having really changed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] umbrella@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 days ago

remember panama papers?

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2026
166 points (100.0% liked)

Chapotraphouse

14266 readers
744 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS