you [...] think that change comes from a grassroots movement to tear the whole system down. We are wayyyyyyyy past that. This isn’t 18th century Europe. We have satellites in space [...] Without a full destructive reset, there is no tearing the system down. It has to change from within and it has to change over time.

This is a hypothesis without any analysis. There is no logical reason to believe that satellites make revolutionary change impossible.

Between the 2 parties, the better leadership comes from the Democratic Party

Oh come on. You can’t be serious right now! ALL of the evidence is against this claim.

Who are you even comparing the Democrats to?

Republicans are clearly better at leadership. They know how to use power, execute their plans, understand the threats ahead of time. Democrats have good PR, but they suck at leadership. Except when it comes to preventing any move towards the political left. Then they're suddenly the most cunning, intelligent operators in the country.

a 2 party system… So if we have to pick one [...] I’m picking the one that’s not going to ship my friends to camps and try to become a dictator. [...] It starts there and stops there until a 3rd party puts their hat in and uses the law to fight Corporations.

This is the fundamental problem. Democrats increased funding to ICE, increased the use of solitary confinement (internationally recognized as torture) on immigrants, including children. Solitary confinements went up under Biden/Harris. You're still talking about good cop/bad cop, though. The good cop says "Hey, sorry about my partner. Listen, I won't ship your friends to camps and won't act like a dictator. You can trust me." But the good cop never stops the bad cop. Why? Because there isn't a two party system in reality. There is a one party system with a good cop and a bad cop. Do you know why, despite 250 years of this country, a third party has never been viable. Why a third party has never used the law to fight Corporations? Because the "2 parties" literally collaborate to prevent it. They are friends. They break bread together. They have reasonable conversations with each other. They send each other Christmas gifts. They donate to each others campaigns. Stop basing your entire argument around this idea that the 2 party system is legitimate. It's not. It's a totally illegitimate, undemocratic, dictatorial system by which the elite and ultra-rich run the country.

[List of Democrat achievements]

These are called concessions. This is literally the job of the Democrat party. They are the Good Cop. The Bad Cop is not allowed to give you a donut (most of the time) because it breaks the effectiveness of the psychological arrangement. The Good Cop gives you a donut and a coffee and then turns around and expenses it back to the precinct. Because the concessions are part of the process of managing the population. This is why EVERY time fascism has emerged it's emerged from a liberal democracy, and why every single time a social democrat in South America or Africa made some progress during economic high times, the progress was always rolled back by the right wing in economic lean times. Because the function of the Good Cop is to get you to legitimize the system, to believe there is nothing outside the options provided, and that the Good Cop is worth fighting for and sacrificing yourself for.

give me a quick list of what Republicans have done for America when they are in power

• Ended acid rain with cap and trade (G HW Bush)
• The Americans With Disabilities Act (G HW Bush)
• The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (G W Bush)
• The EPA (Nixon)

But you're still missing the point even with these things. Even Trump had Operation Warp Speed. Why did Trump do that? Because the conditions in the country effectively forced him to. The government had to do something. That's exactly how civil rights legislation got passed. Black people, not just MLK's peaceful protestors, but the Black Panthers and other movements, created conditions that the government had to respond to. It's not Democratic leadership that did those things. It was grassroots threats to legitimately disrupt the entire country. It's always been this way. The 8-hour work day was won with general strikes that shut the country down. You don't win by voting. You win by fighting. History has shown us this over and over and over again.

But that's STILL not the point. Republicans do things that make their voters think they support what the voters support. Democrats do things that make their voters think they support what the voters support. When the Rs raise taxes, they do it quietly and when they cut taxes they do it loudly. The Democrats are the opposite. Why? Because Republican voters want lower taxes and Democrat voters want more social services. The two parties cannot significantly cross over this boundary because they would lose their voters. I don't know why this is so hard for people to see, but if Republicans increased taxes to pay for social services they would LOSE. And if the Democrats cut social services to increase corporate profits, they would LOSE.

And yet, corporate profits are better under Democrats! Shocker, right? The Democrats working for the corporations?! People point at the ACA and say "Look at how the Democrats got more people access to health care" ignoring the fact that they easily could have extended Medicaid. It would have been cheaper. It would have helped more people. It would have been easier. But it wouldn't have created profits for insurance companies.

Both parties are driven by the maintenance and expansion of global capitalism and they only give to the people as a concession

Think about it. Let's say you have one group. Everyone in the group want the same things: world dominance, fascistic control over the people, unconscionable wealth for them and the elite. That one group has one brand. They go and get people to vote for them, but they make the voters lives worse. What happens? Eventually the people throw them out. Now they can't achieve their goals.

Take that same group, but they form two brands. One just openly does what they want, pandering to a subset of the population. The rest of the population gets angry. They want someone else. So the same group deploys B team. B teams says "we're here to help" and then continues to maintain and expand global capitalism, continues to execute world domination plans, continues mass incarceration, continues increase super profits for the ultra wealth. Now the people are upset with B team. What happens? A team comes back in on a winning message and continues the slaughter, the slavery, and the extraction.

That's what is happening here.

We don’t know what ICE would have been like under Kamala, but I sure hope it would have had less actual Nazis and less actual white supremists leading them

Again. Tom Homan was an Obama appointee. And the US vetoed the UN resolution condemning the glorification of Nazis under Obama and under Biden.

Operation Paperclip, under Harry Truman (D), collaborated with the Vatican to save 10k Nazis from justice and relocated them throughout South America, giving them money, property, jobs, government protection, etc.

All we can have is fascist dominance.

If that’s is to be true, then why not try to pick the fascist dominance that’s going to do the least harm?

Wow. I mean, if this is your position, you're well and truly gone. You support the fascists that give you and your friends the donuts. Sure they put toddlers in solitary. Sure they sodomize septuagenarians with bayonets. Sure they train death squads that kill entire villages. But you and your friends got a little more comfortable and honestly isn't that progress?

With how strong of an influence DJT and the psyops had on Americans, would arresting DJT and more been seen as a political power play and caused a civil war then

Oh man, wouldn't want to have open conflict! That would be terrible. Better to just let a fascist take over without any resistance. Listen to yourself. No one in their right mind thinks like that. They're all on the same fucking team is why they did it.

The fact that all of this was out in the open and many states were still Red shows just how effective the psyops was to begin with and how entrenched a real [bad] fascist opposition had become

SMDH - no. America was not corrupted by psyops. This is who America is and has been from the beginning. The country was built on human trafficking. Thomas Jefferson was a pedophile serial rapist. The pilgrims prayed thanksgiving after every time they slaughtered an entire Indian village, including children and elderly. We have people living today who participated in lynchings and are upset that black people have their own universities. It's not a psyop. It's America.

No, but we’re a long ways off from doing that now. America is one step forward and 2 steps back because of division politics.

Again, completely wrong on the misattribution. The reason for prison slavery is not because of division politics. It's because it's a bipartisan consensus. Same with prison slavery. Same with torturing people at the border. Same with spying on Americans. Same with bombing anyone and everyone in the Global South. Bi-partisan consensus. Get it through your head. Look at the voting records. Look at the historical records. Look at the death records. Look at the budget numbers. 70-year bi-partisan consensus It has nothing to do with division and everything to do with unity.

There’s no country the size of the U.S that is any better and arguably they’re all much worse and have been for a lot longer.

Just go research prisons and parole around the world. Compare with America. It's a hellscape here.

What practical solutions do you have outside educating people of the flaws of the system?

Use voting only to choose which enemy you'd rather fight