control of corporate donors and the media makes the DNC extremely strong
You seem to be a bad listener, because you got it backwards. The DNC doesn’t have control over corporate donors and the media, corporate donors and the media have control over the DNC. They’re not actually weak, their supposed incompetence is a choice. They’re not actually incapable of winning elections and passing good policy that helps the people, they’re unwilling. The interests of the Democratic leadership and the interests of the people are misaligned, and they only appear weak because they misrepresent their values and goals.
The only answer is mass movements. If you can’t beat them with money you have to beat them with numbers. We have to continue the slow process of building dual power from the bottom up by engaging in mutual aid and taking into our own hands what the Democrats refuse to.
Money is power in this country, but at its core it’s only an abstraction of labor power. Unions can win elections and even run their own social programs if only more people choose to fight. Existing unions need to radicalize and more radical unions need to form.
The left is in a slump right now and has been for some time. Decades of repression have been successful in preventing mass movements (ones that challenge the status quo, at least) before they start. We can break through, but it will take a lot more people realizing that they can’t achieve their political objectives by working within the system, and then overcoming their apathy and hopelessness enough to take collective action.
A lot of people are stuck in the apathy and hopelessness stage right now, but I see rising revolutionary potential. More people are waking up, and the mass movement that finally breaks the siege may be on the horizon. Don’t give up hope.
Multiple progressives lost their primaries recently and blame AIPAC funding. Criticizing democrats for catering to donors. While losing to democrats because they catered to donors.
All while claiming they can win elections better than democrats.
Progressives will continue to lose until they give up their morals and descend into the muck of incompetence and greed like us fine fellows, and take the big money dick that is being offered. You’d be stupid to try any other way of winning.
Progressives will continue to lose because they think they don’t need to work with ideologies other than their own in a country where progressives are a small fraction of the population.
‘Don’t try to appeal to moderate voters! Why can’t we win elections?!’
‘Don’t compromise with republicans to get the votes needed to pass legislation! Why can’t we get legislation passed?!’
‘Is is us progressives that are to blame for our lack of progress? No it is the voters that are wrong!’
It is unironically the voters’ faults if things go to shit in a democracy yes. It sucks that we have bad education but nobody is stopping people from paying attention.
The point of progressives is they don’t support regressive policies
Appealing to oligarchs and embracing the Feudal system kind of goes against their core tenants
If the strategy of compromising with the right, appealing to moderate voters, and sucking up to corporate donors is so effective, why did it fail miserably at stopping the fall to fascism? Are you of the same mind as the Democratic leadership, that Kamala Harris ran a perfect campaign?
You’re making the same mistake that right-wingers make, blaming the powerless for the actions of the powerful.
If the strategy of compromising with the right, appealing to moderate voters, and sucking up to corporate donors is so effective, why did it fail miserably at stopping the fall to fascism?
Because China/Russia/Iran/North Korea and the billionaire class wanted Trump to win and used their propaganda machines to influence the elections. Not to mention billionaires doing underhanded stuff like buying votes. All while progressives fed the propaganda machine with their constant criticism.
Failing miserably would describe progressives’ refusal to work with other ideologies and thus losing elections consistently.
Are you of the same mind as the Democratic leadership, that Kamala Harris ran a perfect campaign?
There is no such thing as a perfect campaign.
You’re making the same mistake that right-wingers make, blaming the powerless for the actions of the powerful.
I’m blaming the people that tipped the scales and got Trump elected.
I’m not saying what is good/bad. I’m saying what wins/loses. You can be good and lose in the case of progressives. But then you can’t claim you know how to win better than the DNC.
Well, it’s a good thing we ran so fucking far to the right, then. Can you imagine if Harris had listened to progressives? She might have lost the primary we didn’t fucking have.
She lost to Trump because she did what you wanted. Don’t worry. The party will never fucking change.
Democrats have won the majority of the elections since the 90s using this strategy.
How many elections have progressives won?
There were a lot of black/female/indian democrat voters offended that anyone would even consider a primary instead of going with Vice President Harris. All those votes would’ve been lost.
She lost to Trump because that’s what China/Russia/Iran/North Korea and the billionaire class wanted. Whether intentional or not you’re just helping them out by scapegoating the DNC.
You’re putting words in my mouth in order to change the subject to one you’re more comfortable with. In this case, the subject you’re more comfortable with is gloating that AIPAC bought you some pro-genocide primary challengers.
The subject is: “why do progressives think they know how to win elections better than the DNC if they have never done so?”
To which I provided an explanation. They cannot win elections that the party makes certain they can’t run in. Now enjoy the results of the party’s recalcitrance.
How did any progressives get elected if our primaries are unfair?
How do progressives win against the GOP when they don’t play fair?
According to leftists, control of corporate donors and the media makes the DNC extremely strong. But simultaneously, the DNC is extremely weak.
You seem to be a bad listener, because you got it backwards. The DNC doesn’t have control over corporate donors and the media, corporate donors and the media have control over the DNC. They’re not actually weak, their supposed incompetence is a choice. They’re not actually incapable of winning elections and passing good policy that helps the people, they’re unwilling. The interests of the Democratic leadership and the interests of the people are misaligned, and they only appear weak because they misrepresent their values and goals.
Ok, so if leftists can’t win a primary because they have no support from donors and media, then how are they supposed to win a general election?
The only answer is mass movements. If you can’t beat them with money you have to beat them with numbers. We have to continue the slow process of building dual power from the bottom up by engaging in mutual aid and taking into our own hands what the Democrats refuse to.
Money is power in this country, but at its core it’s only an abstraction of labor power. Unions can win elections and even run their own social programs if only more people choose to fight. Existing unions need to radicalize and more radical unions need to form.
If mass movements can win a general election then they can win a primary.
Conversely, if leftists aren’t yet winning primaries with mass movements, then they can’t yet win general elections.
The left is in a slump right now and has been for some time. Decades of repression have been successful in preventing mass movements (ones that challenge the status quo, at least) before they start. We can break through, but it will take a lot more people realizing that they can’t achieve their political objectives by working within the system, and then overcoming their apathy and hopelessness enough to take collective action.
A lot of people are stuck in the apathy and hopelessness stage right now, but I see rising revolutionary potential. More people are waking up, and the mass movement that finally breaks the siege may be on the horizon. Don’t give up hope.
Well, that much is true.
They got elected despite the party’s interference.
The GOP doesn’t control national elections like the DNC/DCCC/DSCC controls primaries.
Multiple progressives lost their primaries recently and blame AIPAC funding. Criticizing democrats for catering to donors. While losing to democrats because they catered to donors.
All while claiming they can win elections better than democrats.
The GOP will also be catering to donors.
Yes, money is power and power is politics. What is your point exactly?
Progressives will continue to lose for this reason.
Progressives will continue to lose until they give up their morals and descend into the muck of incompetence and greed like us fine fellows, and take the big money dick that is being offered. You’d be stupid to try any other way of winning.
I am very smart.
Progressives will continue to lose because they think they don’t need to work with ideologies other than their own in a country where progressives are a small fraction of the population.
‘Don’t try to appeal to moderate voters! Why can’t we win elections?!’
‘Don’t compromise with republicans to get the votes needed to pass legislation! Why can’t we get legislation passed?!’
‘Is is us progressives that are to blame for our lack of progress? No it is the voters that are wrong!’
‘We are very smart’
It is unironically the voters’ faults if things go to shit in a democracy yes. It sucks that we have bad education but nobody is stopping people from paying attention.
The point of progressives is they don’t support regressive policies
Appealing to oligarchs and embracing the Feudal system kind of goes against their core tenants
This is a fancy way of saying they let Trump win instead of voting in their own best interests.
Are they achieving those tenants by letting Trump win?
If the strategy of compromising with the right, appealing to moderate voters, and sucking up to corporate donors is so effective, why did it fail miserably at stopping the fall to fascism? Are you of the same mind as the Democratic leadership, that Kamala Harris ran a perfect campaign?
You’re making the same mistake that right-wingers make, blaming the powerless for the actions of the powerful.
Because China/Russia/Iran/North Korea and the billionaire class wanted Trump to win and used their propaganda machines to influence the elections. Not to mention billionaires doing underhanded stuff like buying votes. All while progressives fed the propaganda machine with their constant criticism.
Failing miserably would describe progressives’ refusal to work with other ideologies and thus losing elections consistently.
There is no such thing as a perfect campaign.
I’m blaming the people that tipped the scales and got Trump elected.
Clearly the solution is just to sell out as hard as possible since there’s no other way to win.
I’m not saying what is good/bad. I’m saying what wins/loses. You can be good and lose in the case of progressives. But then you can’t claim you know how to win better than the DNC.
Well, it’s a good thing we ran so fucking far to the right, then. Can you imagine if Harris had listened to progressives? She might have lost the primary we didn’t fucking have.
She lost to Trump because she did what you wanted. Don’t worry. The party will never fucking change.
Democrats have won the majority of the elections since the 90s using this strategy.
How many elections have progressives won?
There were a lot of black/female/indian democrat voters offended that anyone would even consider a primary instead of going with Vice President Harris. All those votes would’ve been lost.
She lost to Trump because that’s what China/Russia/Iran/North Korea and the billionaire class wanted. Whether intentional or not you’re just helping them out by scapegoating the DNC.
I was talking about the way the party runs (or eschews) its primaries. You pivoted to international donors.
I’m talking about winning and losing primaries. You’re cherry picking examples.
This is what you initially responded to:
You’re putting words in my mouth in order to change the subject to one you’re more comfortable with. In this case, the subject you’re more comfortable with is gloating that AIPAC bought you some pro-genocide primary challengers.
This is my comment that preceded your quote.
The subject is: “why do progressives think they know how to win elections better than the DNC if they have never done so?”
To which I provided an explanation. They cannot win elections that the party makes certain they can’t run in. Now enjoy the results of the party’s recalcitrance.
If they don’t know how to win elections in the face of opposition, then they shouldn’t be giving advice on how to win elections.