You guys keep calling these idiots far left. Thats a category error, or better put, a mischaracterization. They aren't far left, they are what you correctly stated in your roundtable: hipster, anti-Left. I break this down into two subsets: the nihilists/absurdists that, like its Dune, hooked on the insanity for money. They dont represent progressiveness. There are also overt communists, cheering on what believe will be the prophesized revolt of the workers. Just like with libertarian nuttiness, this will never happen, and they can retreat, no matter what, into bemoaning what could have been, the missed utopia. There are some here that are tolerable, as long as they are promoting something and its clear comedy like, say, Chapo. But there are many who have revealed themselves to be ok with suthortarianism if they think it leads to the promised land.
These people aren't progressives. They have revealed they don't believe in the system, and believe it to be beyond reform. Progressivism is sometimes called the far left. This is why this term, the far left, is so problematic to me. There are better words for them. These people are not of a kind with AOC, Bernie, or Omar. These later believe in systemic reform, not systemic destruction and replacement. The "baddies" here are much more like the former diseffected Trotskyites who became Neo Con. This moment has been revelatory. And revelation requires reidentification. So can you guys stop using that term Far Left. Call them what they really are: nihilistic Fash Friendlies.
There is one orher issue. I mention it not to destroy enthusiasm in the Ds like the motivated nihlists I mention it as a lover of my country, my home. The issue is reflected in your articles and your talking. It is the unspoken premise that the Ds are right. I think that thinking spawns two factors: you guys aren't hurting as bad as others are (an admitted guess) , and you believe the hype, not the record. I have yet to see anything critical of the Ds here. especially about whether they are acheiving their stated agenda. This is bad. Not because, as may be your fear, such criticism would fuel the insane right. Its bad because you fail to realize other peoples issues are valid, issues that need to be addressed. And thats a recipe for loss. Thats a recipe for endless griping about this or that reason, this or that or who blame (voter fraud is a key exception). Its, therefore, a recipe for grievence and stabbed-in-the back meraphors that make you feel good when you lose because your candidate/party has drifted so far away from what normal people want.
You blast the unfair failure of Bidens economic success to garner electoral recognition. My question is, how is the average voter experience this. What have you done for them? Things they can identify as on brand, that you can campaign on. If you dont have much, if all you can run on is aspirations that dont reach results (Damn that Manchin!) , you will lose because why should you win? What have you done for the common man, specifically, not generally. Nobody cares that infrastructure got done in so far as the common man doesnt know the Democrats did that. Still doesnt help them feed their family or make their life better.
So people will turn toward others because the results arent there. And no amount of scaremongering is going to motivate people. You need to win people over. Thats democracy.
Sadly, people tend to turn to fascism when they are suffering, and make no mistake, the current system has left many suffering by design. Ds can change that, have vision. But they have acted like the old center Rs for most of my life. I want that to change in time not to have us fall to fascism, because people will move to fascism because fascism makes the trains run on time. All kinds of horror comes with that, but the undenible fact is fascism often gets things done, as much as they terrorize and oppress. I could go on, but my question is: are you willing to autopsy the issues that will garner support? Will you advocate the Ds change to acheive success? Because it could still happen, but that has to happen. Real change for the people. Things that may go against the funders, that will be uncomfortable for the status quo while being being absolutely neccessary? Because it will do little to whine later. Unless your sole contribution is being a defense squad, eternal apologists, no better in this way than those southerners who yearn for their world that can never be again because America is different place and Americans are no longed antebellum minded?
You guys keep calling these idiots far left. Thats a category error, or better put, a mischaracterization. They aren't far left, they are what you correctly stated in your roundtable: hipster, anti-Left. I break this down into two subsets: the nihilists/absurdists that, like its Dune, hooked on the insanity for money. They dont represent progressiveness. There are also overt communists, cheering on what believe will be the prophesized revolt of the workers. Just like with libertarian nuttiness, this will never happen, and they can retreat, no matter what, into bemoaning what could have been, the missed utopia. There are some here that are tolerable, as long as they are promoting something and its clear comedy like, say, Chapo. But there are many who have revealed themselves to be ok with suthortarianism if they think it leads to the promised land.
These people aren't progressives. They have revealed they don't believe in the system, and believe it to be beyond reform. Progressivism is sometimes called the far left. This is why this term, the far left, is so problematic to me. There are better words for them. These people are not of a kind with AOC, Bernie, or Omar. These later believe in systemic reform, not systemic destruction and replacement. The "baddies" here are much more like the former diseffected Trotskyites who became Neo Con. This moment has been revelatory. And revelation requires reidentification. So can you guys stop using that term Far Left. Call them what they really are: nihilistic Fash Friendlies.
There is one orher issue. I mention it not to destroy enthusiasm in the Ds like the motivated nihlists I mention it as a lover of my country, my home. The issue is reflected in your articles and your talking. It is the unspoken premise that the Ds are right. I think that thinking spawns two factors: you guys aren't hurting as bad as others are (an admitted guess) , and you believe the hype, not the record. I have yet to see anything critical of the Ds here. especially about whether they are acheiving their stated agenda. This is bad. Not because, as may be your fear, such criticism would fuel the insane right. Its bad because you fail to realize other peoples issues are valid, issues that need to be addressed. And thats a recipe for loss. Thats a recipe for endless griping about this or that reason, this or that or who blame (voter fraud is a key exception). Its, therefore, a recipe for grievence and stabbed-in-the back meraphors that make you feel good when you lose because your candidate/party has drifted so far away from what normal people want.
You blast the unfair failure of Bidens economic success to garner electoral recognition. My question is, how is the average voter experience this. What have you done for them? Things they can identify as on brand, that you can campaign on. If you dont have much, if all you can run on is aspirations that dont reach results (Damn that Manchin!) , you will lose because why should you win? What have you done for the common man, specifically, not generally. Nobody cares that infrastructure got done in so far as the common man doesnt know the Democrats did that. Still doesnt help them feed their family or make their life better.
So people will turn toward others because the results arent there. And no amount of scaremongering is going to motivate people. You need to win people over. Thats democracy.
Sadly, people tend to turn to fascism when they are suffering, and make no mistake, the current system has left many suffering by design. Ds can change that, have vision. But they have acted like the old center Rs for most of my life. I want that to change in time not to have us fall to fascism, because people will move to fascism because fascism makes the trains run on time. All kinds of horror comes with that, but the undenible fact is fascism often gets things done, as much as they terrorize and oppress. I could go on, but my question is: are you willing to autopsy the issues that will garner support? Will you advocate the Ds change to acheive success? Because it could still happen, but that has to happen. Real change for the people. Things that may go against the funders, that will be uncomfortable for the status quo while being being absolutely neccessary? Because it will do little to whine later. Unless your sole contribution is being a defense squad, eternal apologists, no better in this way than those southerners who yearn for their world that can never be again because America is different place and Americans are no longed antebellum minded?