618
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 May 2024
618 points (77.7% liked)
Political Memes
5410 readers
4310 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Progressives are excessively difficult to win support from the Dems or Reps due to campaign interests and media spin. The only candidates that recieve enough backing are the ones that pose no danger to the wealthy Capitalists.
Progressives should take that backing as their chief objective, and start building systems to win. That means media and financial backing.
How do you get media and financial backing if you fundamentally go against that which maintains their funding?
I agree that leftists should organize, but more along the lines of the Black Panther Party or other groups actively making a difference first.
You develop funding from sources you find more ethical: macro union agreements.
I agree that organizing is fantastic, but the sheer difference in quantity of Capital is why it is necessary for a leftist party to focus primarily on delivering needs externally to the system before attempting to win over local and state level elections. Grow from the bottom up.
You need to look up present income inequality statistics. Billionaires are insane and inflation is making normal working class people tighten their budgets a lot. It's a very uphill battle or outfund billionaires.
The Black Panther Party is your standard for making a difference.
Yeah, that's about what I expected.
Not understanding the importance of the black panther party is about what I expected from you.
The group that came in at the tail end of the civil rights movement, murdered its own members, and then was effectively shuttered by the FBI?
THAT'S your standard for success?
A movement that helped secure the ADA with their support, and had the full weight of the state security apparatus turned against them. An organization that was so unimpactful the FBI assassinated their leaders.
They also started a lunch program that spread to multiple cities and was successful enough that the government stepped in to start one of their own so that they could not look as bad in comparison.
Almost a decade after the height of their power, you associate the Black Panther Party's support in giving meals to a disability rights protest as being important to the ADA, which itself would not be passed for another decade and a half after that.
That's... that's really what we're reaching for?
Yeah, I'm not sure that "The FBI under Hoover, which was terrified that homosexuals were secret Communist infiltrators, was scared of them" is exactly a great rational assessment of their threat.
Actually they also got gun control passed
Against Black folk, since we both know that Reagan and the establishment were utterly uninterested in disarming white folk at the time.
Yes, directly supporting and feeding children, supported gay rights, and promoted leftist theory and community building is good.
Hating on the Black Panther Party is about what I expected of you, funny enough.
Loving the Black Panther Party for having a nice ten points and a horrible record of not actually accomplishing anything substantial and murdering members of their own organization for not being sufficiently pure is about what I expected of an ML.
Helping children not starve isn't anything substantial, got it. They had a lasting impact, and the US murdered Fred Hampton because the organization was effective.
Never said I was an ML, but you sure do love lying about others when you get scratched.
That would require getting cozy with billionaires who are opposed to progressive causes. How is that supposed to work? What you're proposing is like starting a game of monopoly where the other players own 90% of the properties already and claiming that if you just play along and hopefully land on properties that aren't already owned then maybe you can trade your way up to establish yourself. How likely do you think this is to work?
The other options include: continuing to be a fringe platform, overthrowing a global system.
Materially, I think developing ever stronger unions (labor and otherwise) who can pool resources to compete in politics. Seconded by a strong push to win many more low level grassroots seats. Conservatives are winning these seats. By winning the lower seats, bureaucratic maneuvers are easier, and consensus is "cheaper".
We had a strong labor movement but it took decades of fighting, the largest economic crisis ever, and two world wars, among other things to establish a middle class as we used to know it. It took much less time for the rich to dismantle that. I agree we should keep working to push the power of labor, but reaching our goals while working within the system is going to be impossible. There's a reason why it took such catastrophic events to actually get anywhere.