“Jeffries didn’t even whip the vote,” one critic said about the House minority leader, who wants to be speaker. “This is why people want a stronger leader.”

As House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries seeks to become speaker when Democrats retake Congress in January, critics questioned his leadership Tuesday after the Republican-led lower chamber effectively blocked a bid to impeach Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth by just seven votes—an outcome that may have been averted if more Democrats showed up to vote.

The 211-204 procedural vote effectively torpedoed Congressman Thomas Massie’s attempt to impeach Hegseth by sending the outgoing Kentucky Republican’s resolution to the House Judiciary Committee, where it will likely gather dust during the remainder of the GOP-controlled congressional term.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 18 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (8 children)

Edit: this became a distracted rant somewhere along the line, so please feel free to disregard.

The GOP loves playing games, this is them playing games and you're falling for it.

The whole thing is a spectacle. One side plays the comical baddy which some people turn to in ineffectual anger, allowing this anger to be dissipated against the usual scapegoats of the state (in short, minorities of any kind), and so not allowing it to congeal into any kind of threat to power.

Meanwhile the other side plays to fear around the comical baddy (who does do real harm, using exactly the same tools that they themselves dutifully maintain, and not infrequently use); to the point of effectively platforming some of the worst of them; as they flounder around realising they can't offer anything but austerity and token gestures (most often repealing offenses against the population carried out in legal form, see slavery, segregation, gender rights, the list goes on) without stepping on the toes of power.

Realistically, the past both sides of this are yearning for is one that worked in a period of prodigious exploitation of new avenues and expansion of old ones as they related to the new (or growth, if you prefer).

This is no longer the case as the appearance of anything that has the momentum to keep the whole mass of debt moving becomes a rarer and rarer event, LLMs are/were the next big thing that was being banked on to keep it all going for the next decade or two, but even if that pays off the same crisis is looming down the road.

Neither 'side' has a satisfactory solution to this problem as their power all acts through the same levers, hence the recurring patterns absolutely everywhere. Insofar as I can see, the answer has to come from us seizing back power to dissipate its concentrations throughout us as a whole, or these things are going to keep happening.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 17 hours ago (7 children)

    Totally agree.

    Unless someone wants to organize a revolution, "progressivising" (made that up, there's probably a real word I could have used) the Dems is our best option IMO.

    Blue Wave today. Progressive wave 2028.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 16 hours ago (6 children)

    Best option for what exactly? The ends are completely different there, progressive wave or not, if you leave the fundamental structures and power relations intact we end up back here. The best we can expect are calls to alter some relatively superficial aspects that get quickly moderated once in power, as ever before.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (5 children)

    To change the system. People write laws, so put people that care in place, and have them enact better laws.

    Like I said, unless you're starting a revolution...

    Edit: fixed a typo

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago* (4 children)

    That is not how systems work, there are myriad problems that stem directly from the hierarchy of ruler and ruled (whether they nominally represent you or not, the reality is that their lived experience isolates them from you and your lived experience), and they require that dynamic to persist in order to enact their will no matter how benevolent the current rulers might be.

    The whole arrangement relies upon always having incorruptible, benevolent and competent people in charge, and even then there are material realities such as market crashes that will derail things, the idea is a caricature of instability.

    I am starting a revolution in a sense, I have been for a long time, it just isn't focused on some quick and easy (for presumed onlookers such as yourself, at least) miracle event that fixes everything, because in reality to beat structures you have to build your own- in this particular case one fundamentally built upon mutual aid is what we aspire to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

    You write a lot for someone who seems intent on insult and argument.

    I don't come here to read essays even though I've read yours.

    I hope this has been helpful to you. My intent was to highlight that these articles play into GOP startegies. That is all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

    I suppose all of these conversations blend into one after a point in some regards, that isn't your fault so sorry for being so ranty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago (1 child)

    I appreciate everything you've said, and don't really disagree on the overall intent. I'm working on my community to build up a level of support as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago

    I just find it frustrating, everyone argues about the fluff and the system grinds on unabated. I am far from alone in shouting about this, for centuries now, and the predictions always seem to come true anyway...

    Where you direct that support matters, if you send it above yourself just please be conscious that you are ceding that power to someone who can hold it above and use it against you, unless you have some mechanism to retract it (maybe instantly recallable representatives, for example).

    I don't know, I may be preaching to the choir here, and I am not meaning to be condescending nor (incidentally) proselytise or anything, people need to come to their own conclusions.

    Either way, good luck and I hope that it all works out, I suspect this ride still has a way to go.

  • source
  • parent