this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
506 points (85.3% liked)

politics

19241 readers
2259 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"Progressives should not make the same mistake that Ernst Thälmann made in 1932. The leader of the German Communist Party, Thälmann saw mainstream liberals as his enemies, and so the center and left never joined forces against the Nazis. Thälmann famously said that 'some Nazi trees must not be allowed to overshadow a forest' of social democrats, whom he sneeringly called 'social fascists.'

After Adolf Hitler gained power in 1933, Thälmann was arrested. He was shot on Hitler’s orders in Buchenwald concentration camp in 1944."

(page 7) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body. If the forces of democracy take decisive, terroristic action against the reaction from the very beginning, the reactionary influence in the election will already have been destroyed

Karl Marx 1850

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Are you doing a lot of things exactly the way they did in 1850?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Marx didn't live long enough to see just how ineffectual that line of thinking actually is.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Is the US Socialist? Has Socialism been brought about by establishment parties anywhere in history?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yes. Look up 'the New Deal.'

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (48 children)

FDR was a Social Democrat, not a Socialist.

load more comments (48 replies)
[–] [email protected] -4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Nope, which is part of the problem.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yep, which is why Socialists answered the Reform or Revolution question in Marx's time quite definitively. The answer is Revolution.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

careful what you say to jordanlund. he's a mod and despite his supposed love for socialism (and chaotic good t-shirt), he likes to ban accounts that promote violent revolution.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

If my relatively tame comments defending the basics of Marxism get me banned, then they will be doing me a favor.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Same capitalists trying the same failed tactics of voter suppression.

Every one of his perspectives of capitalism and it's bourgeoisie governments still rings true.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Rings true, isn't true in actual practice.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

Rings true in practice

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

I don't think "ineffectual" is the word you're looking for there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 3 months ago (22 children)

I’m not voting for Harris. I’m voting against Trump via Harris.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'm voting FOR Harris in the same way I was previously voting FOR Biden. Biden/Harris & Harris/Walz support policies that most closely match those policies I support.

If Trump died tomorrow I still wouldn't support Vance or any other Republican because they support policies that I am strongly opposed to.

I would like to have more options, but realistically those are my choices.

I don't have to agree with Harris/Walz on 100% if issues. I'm allowed to criticize them. But at the end of the day I'm voting FOR something and not just against the worst possible choice.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Given that she has the same stance on Gaza / Palestine as Biden, I vote against the orange bad rather than for her.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago
load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›