Either would be an upgrade at this point.
post
The next line should read
Liberals: "You're not who I'm trying to convince."
The top-one is soc-dems. Liberals are more like "👏 More 👏 black 👏 women 👏 CEOs!" and "👏 They 👏 go 👏 low 👏 we 👏 go 👏 high!", sometimes even "Obama proves that real christians see secularism as a christian value, because «love thy neighbor», we need a second Obama instead of meaningfully fighting the dominionist cult!".
Leftists really need to drop the "Holier than thou" ego. Like many social-democrats have their political worldview specifically because they are/have vulnerable people in their life.
Like I want stronger, higher societal floors built from recycled pieces of ceiling. I want a society that is built to support people from the bottom not control people from the top. I don't want my standard of living to be held up by the backs of other people sacrificing their lives, domestic or abroad.
Everyone trying to divide voters left of center are either misguided or misguiding.
voters
More than voting matters. Im not sure viting does.
There's a pretty hard attempt at making voting irrelevant by the right. I think this proves, that voting matters. I do however not fully blame you if you got disillusioned by voting, due to liberals masquerading as leftists.
Or the left beong ratfucked constantlu.
The whole harris thing. I worked with that monster's victims for years. Trans women that shit pig put in the rape gulag. Then i see them choosing it as their presidential candidate because it's its turn. Then being yelled at because i couldn't support it or a party that would do that. Nope. Not bothering with bourgoise electoralism again. The investiture of power in a non-revocable idiot is already a compromise, the culture is more toxic than watching 'rick and morty' at the afterparty of a 'tool' concert. Im done.
Yeah, if you don't do it it doesn't work, duh.
But if you can get enough power to do whatever you mean by more, you can just use it to elect whomever you want, and if you can't do even that, than you don't have any power.
All this talks about "stop voting better do my version of firebombing wallmart" just reveals that you want to do your version of firebombing wallmart and don't actually want meaningful changes politically
elect whomever you want
I dont think anyone suould be invested with that kind of power, and compromising on that seems to always end in epic ratfuck or betrayal that feels like straight up diablous ex machina. If you remember that time we elected a charismatic community organizer from w rough neighborhood, the time we elected the kinda tech literate environmentalist former vp, or the various sanders campaigns here in the states.
Concentration of power always leads to disasters, that's absolutely true
Not just that, but compromising with the bourgouse american electoral version always seems to end with betrayal that makes the bolsheviks look like steadfast loyal friends in comparison.
Oh with that take you can fuck right off to the deeps of whatever hell produced you.
The constitutional right to basic living necessities; food, water, shelter, and medical treatment. Capitalism would still be there, but anyone could fall back on these "minimums" whenever they wanted ... no questions asked.
Is that "left of leftist"?
No, that's modern social democracy, which is generally considered fairly centrist. The issue with that is that capitalism still allows massive accumulation of power into the hands of individuals who can they leverage that power in an oppressive manner which is difficult to combat by ordinary folk.
They will just roll it back eventually.
I would honestly just start making so much of my own stuff for just myself, do only gig work for the occasional extra, produce and sell food. If everyone did as I did, we would only have the bare minimum alright...
They will just roll it back eventually.
Capitalists will always try, which means that leftists will be forced into the position of either wasting effort defending those hard-fought-for rights, or be discredited by their failure to do so (see: literally every leftist critique and analysis of popularity of mainstream parties in Western democracies for the past 40 years).
It doesn't mean that what has been gained is doomed, and certainly not that it's worthless. But it does mean that as long as capitalism lives, it will always fight against everything that's been torn from it.
Tear if there's nothing more to be done at a given moment. But kill it if you can.
We have to how do I put this...rig things, so that there can be no rollback.
Specifically, empower the individual enough, that it will be really hard to convince them that they need a government at all.
I think that goes under 'killing capitalism'.
Everything comes down to "billionaires should not exist" literally, a couple of thousand people vanishing off the Earth would start fixing things.
We need a Death Note.
"Left-Right" isn't really a cohesive model of politics, but it's a hard sell for any form of capitalism to be considered left of socialist economics. Like PugJesus said, you've generally described modern social democracy (not to be confused with democratic socialism). It's an improvement, but still a long way away from 'left of left'.
Liberals; no one working 40 hours a week should live in poverty, bit what are you gonna do?
Proper leftist argument that glitches liberals’ material conditions:
Don't force poverty on the incapable to overperform you.
top 82 comments