• BriniaSona@piefed.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    16·
    3 days ago

    So the answer is let the Republicans keep winning because fuck the system right? Which is what happens because people don’t go vote and the rotting old boomers always vote no matter what.

      • rbn@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        9·
        3 days ago

        So to lower the death toll of the two party system, you (a third party) suggest a war?

        • lumpenproletariat@quokk.auOPMEnglish
          8·
          3 days ago

          To end the otherwise never ending death toll, yes.

          To end the death toll, you suggest slowing the rate of killing?

          • rbn@sopuli.xyzEnglish
            4·
            3 days ago

            I don’t claim to have an ultimate solution. I just doubt that a big war is the right approach if you want to end people dying. To forcibly change the system, you need to get rid of many opponents. Just look how many people still support Trump after all the insane things he did and does. And even if, hypothetically, you wanted and could 100% eliminate everyone who isn’t on your side - do you think this situation will remain stable forever? Never again revolts, never again misbehavior, no crisis, no external opponents?

            Unfortunately, I think it’s a genetic fault of the human species that we always seek to agglomarate power: more wealth, more luxury, more influence. I fear that, unless we decide as a species one day to collectively modify our own genome, the dying will continue. People are too diverse with too many different opinions to get along peacefully, no matter how good of a leader we have or how many parties there are.

            This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to make the world a better place or question the system. But I think the measures have to be more targeted and thought through than just ‘fuck over everything and see what happens’.

    • Vegafjord demcon@lemmy.mlEnglish
      2·
      2 days ago

      Great imagery! Democracies are for giving legitimacy to the machine. Tricking us into concent.

      By removing our concent, we remove their right to exist.

    • davi@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      2·
      2 days ago

      translates to wherever a √2 party system exists.

      that’s effectively true everywhere and everywhere pretends that the other parties are viable for appearances sake

  • Canaconda@lemmy.caEnglish
    26·
    3 days ago

    America is a system of checks and balances. One of those being primary elections. Americans continue to give incumbent DNCs a free pass while MAGA continues to primary challenge anyone not extreme enough.

    Knock Down The House which lays out the steps. IMO it’s how AOC got elected that is the key to fixing America. Americans need to make that happen every single election. Systematic problems need more than 1 presidential term to reverse after all.

    1. Independent local grassroots electoral movement. Dedicated to getting/organizing volunteers, signature gathering, door knocking, everything from getting candidates on the ballot to winning in the election.

    2. Candidate nominations. AOC didn’t sign up, her BIL or someone nominated her and the Grassroots Movement approached her to run.

    3. PRIMARIES. PRIMARIES. PRIMARIES. Target establishment DNCs who clearly have more in common with corporate lobbyists than their own constituents.

    4. Run the numbers game. Only 1/4 of their candidates won. Democrats should face a primary EVERY SINGLE ELECTION.

    • Rothe@piefed.socialEnglish
      4·
      3 days ago

      America is a system of checks and balances.

      Trump has long since buldozed through all of those fabled checks and balances, proving them to be build upon nothing but good faith.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      3 days ago

      Knock Down The House

      Idk. This elections/ primaries since 2024 have been a mixed bag. Its pretty difficult when you’ve got elections like Illinois 9th, where the only viable progressive candidate has to face down two AIPAC funded candidates at once, while Mike_from_PA is putting her on blast for not being a “perfect progressive”. And she still came within two points. This came on the tails of the Jersey race where the AIPAC candidates cannibalized and the progressive made it through. AIPAC reorganized, re-strategized, and got their candidates through across the board that Tuesday, while the Tankie coalition ate up the slop and tore down the one chance we had at getting a socialist into that safe blue seat.

      Just saying that Knock Down The House is getting more and more out of date, and elections are changing in REAL time, with extraordinary pressure being placed on candidates, with fundraising expectations being raised to basically impossible levels. AND EVEN when the fundraising goals are met, thats still not necessarily enough when we’ve got an entire pro-Israel/ pro-Zionism media apparatus working to shut candidates down.

      I’m not saying it couldn’t work, but a big part of AOC’s victory was catching an incumbent off guard in a safe blue seat. They’re on their guard now. If AOC was running today, I think she would still win, but it would be much more difficult.

      • Canaconda@lemmy.caEnglish
        4·
        3 days ago

        First off. Did you watch the documentary? Because saying its out of date tells me you didn’t.

        I’m not saying it couldn’t work, but a big part of AOC’s victory was catching an incumbent off guard in a safe blue seat. They’re on their guard now. If AOC was running today, I think she would still win, but it would be much more difficult.

        It worked because they brought together people who normally wouldn’t vote. Less than 2/3s of americans vote. So this is entirely replicable.

        If indeed >50% of americans are maga racists than the United States will dissolve.

        edit: I’m Canadian and I will never set foot in the USA again. If y’all wanna roll over that’s your prerogative.

        • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          3 days ago

          Bruh I literally phone banked on her campaign in 2018. And I worked Bernies 2016 campaign. And more campaigns in 20’, and 22’, and 24, and even as recently as a few weeks ago. And I stand by my point that what it takes to win elections has changed since 2018. I’m not saying the basics of the formula don’t apply, but incumbents are far more aware of their vulnerabilities than they were previously.

          So this is entirely replicable.

          I promise you, that if you did a lift and shift of AOC’s 2018 campaign in a new district (not that its even possible), you wont win. The incumbents are ready for you. Mamdani is a great example of how you start with the AOC/ Bernie approach as the basis, but adapt to changing times. Just like AOC’s 2018 run was a huge change in how to run a campaign, 2026 campaigns also need to continually shift tactics. And I agree whole-heartedly with the voter registration aspect and getting non-voters engaged.

          Insurgent strategies have to continue to adapt and change, because incumbent strategies also continue to adapt and change.

          • Canaconda@lemmy.caEnglish
            4·
            3 days ago

            Bruh I literally phone banked on her campaign in 2018.

            So you didn’t watch it. It’s actually about 5 candidates not just AOC. Everything you just said is addressed in the documentary by people who’ve been phone banking and door knocking since before you were born.

            Just fuckin watch it god damn buddy jfc

              • Canaconda@lemmy.caEnglish
                2·
                3 days ago

                You don’t know what you don’t know.

                Can lead a horse to water… but you can’t make him think.

                • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  3 days ago

                  You can engage with the points I’ve made or you can continue to suck your own dick.

                  But its clear which path you’ve chosen.

                  Have you ever run a campaign or been a part of one?

        • maypull@lemmy.caEnglish
          1·
          3 days ago

          if you can’t articulate your argument, no one should believe you nor devote their time to watching your favorite film

          • Canaconda@lemmy.caEnglish
            4·
            3 days ago

            False dichotomy.

            Besides, if Americans are too lazy to vote they certainty wont revolt. Especially revolution edge lords. You guys are the laziest.

            • brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.caEnglish
              7·
              3 days ago

              I mean, that’s definitely not a false dichotomy, that’s a real dichotomy…fixing it does not destroy it and destroying it doesn’t fix it…they’re definitely mutually exclusive lol

              And I agree, the american left is cooked, no doubt. I used to be an energized organizer and I am pretty burned out. Call it lazy if you like! Still, no matter how much energy I have i’m not wasting any of it on bourgeois party politics, supporting one heinous future or another.

              • Canaconda@lemmy.caEnglish
                2·
                3 days ago

                Okay. Well first I apologize for lumping you in with the edge lords.

                So the false dichotomy is that the system functioning as designed requires the entire thing to be destroyed.

                1. The usa is a system in which the american people are the most powerful and fundamental of the checks and balances. However Americans have checked out and stopped participating. The system is working, it’s Americans that need to do their part.

                2. I deal with violence as a profession. So I have grave concerns about the ability of Americans to successfully destroy the system, and even graver concerns about the ability to rebuild institutions after the fact.

                3. Why would billionaires destroy a system designed to serve them that’s impervious to the will of the working class? IMO the “destroy the system” people have both given up and are playing right into the Epstein Class’ hand.

                • brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.caEnglish
                  3·
                  3 days ago

                  Hmm, I think you may have missed the point of the meme? Your point 1 seems to just be an articulation of the first panel (a liberal idealist perspective: “the system is broken, we need to fix it”). If the second panel isn’t clear (the left materialist perspective), maybe this helps.

                  1 Power to the people

                  The statement “the system is working as intended” is to point out that our only two options are two bourgeois classes, both hellbent on exploiting working people as much as possible. There cannot be other options…this is the system. It’s working as intended…it was intended to be a committee of the bourgeoisie to arrange their affairs, and it serves that function fine, whether the American people turn up to “legitimize” it with their rubber stamp approving of Bourgeois Party A or Bourgeois Party B, or stay home. It doesn’t really matter. It doesn’t matter whether it’s trump or Obama or Reagan or FDR. All of them represent the system continuing to work as intended: a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. The people’s lack of power is intended.

                  2 Violence

                  If you deal with violence, you probably know how unbelievably expensive state violence is. It requires bullets and bombs, it requires food and clothing, it requires administration and healthcare. These are things that can only be provided by the working class. Destroying the system is unquestionably possible, the question is, what’s the cost, and is it worth it?

                  Rebuilding, is an issue too, for sure. That’s why dual power and organization are so important! Though I’d be pretty surprised if the struggle of destroying the system wouldn’t create the organization necessary to rebuild.

                  3 Billionaires?

                  The billionaires would not destroy such a system? I’m not sure what you mean by this point…the system is great for them…and I don’t just mean under trump, it’s been great for them the whole time (and always will be - which is why destroying it is correct and “fixing” it is not)

      • Vegafjord demcon@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        2 days ago

        The trolley is the government and can be symbolized as a beating heart. The heart has walled in a chunk of earths land which is called the walldom, this walldom is protected by police, law, courts and military. The heart gives rights to other bodies in exchange of them pumping life force to the heart. These bodies are called pumperies. The heart and pumperies are mutually dependent upon each other.

        In this analogy, the heart has to be stopped for the trolley to be stopped.

        Pumperies comes in the shape of entities that is paying taxes.

        The machine is the structure of might and it’s interconnectedness. In todays society we are very bound to the machine, but by making ourselves independent from the machine, this enables us to withdraw ourselves from it. This independence can take shape as democratic confederalism. When we as a society collectively make us independent from the machine, we are denying the heart life force.

        Might will however not stand idly by while we are denying it to live. So we need to be prepared for resistance. We can take inspiration from Zabatistas and PKK.

        This is how we stop the trolley.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          1·
          2 days ago

          Okay? Not sure I completely understand your proposed course of action, but it seems generally to fall under collective organization and action.

          How do you suggest we establish that organization?

          • Vegafjord demcon@lemmy.mlEnglish
            1·
            2 days ago

            The course of action is to integrating ourselves into our local societies and being the change we want to see. I view this as changing language to reflect reality, bringing about independence from the machine and living with instead of against nature.

            Being the change would mean to acknowledge our change force, our ability to bring about change. To understand that what we do matters for the totality.