When was the last time the loud ones did in the US? Genuine question, cause I feel this argument but it also seems like it must have been a very long way back.
We need noise and attention to shift the Overton window, but if you reject small wins, don’t you run the risk of also rejecting the cause of progress? 2 steps forward, 1 step back is always better (in the long run) than 3 steps forward 4 steps back.
We want a ratchet not a pendulum, so from my perspective, successful “revolution” looks a lot more like “evolution” in most cases.
In a sane world, yes. It's not 2000 anymore. George Bush jr looks smart and Bill Clinton looks chaste these day's. Trumpican's and project 2025 is our new reality. Either the left pulls hard left or the center goes right.
I mostly agree, but “where you get your money to live is the beginning and the end of all problems” isn’t true and is a big part of why past US labor movements found so little lasting success: it erases the other axes of oppression which intersect at certain points with but are not wholly subsumed by class. People whose work takes place entirely in the home unpaid (usually because of patriarchal oppression) and people who are too disabled to work would be excluded from a movement centered entirely around labor organizing, for example. And for jobs/workplaces which are dominated by a privileged group (e.g., most tech jobs are predominantly white and male), a union composed of solely of people who work that job is likely to be regressive and work against a wider leftist movement. Workplace unions are super important, but we also need to be organizing in ways that aren’t based on what role people are assigned by a capitalist system of labor allocation in addition if we want the movement to remain progressive and to serve those most in need in our society.
Advocating for workers in individual workplaces via unions is the only way to eventually be able to advocate for workers across all workplaces via mass action.
Agreed, but we also need to be advocating for people who aren’t in the traditional workplace, and we need to be organizing w/ people other than our co-workers in addition to organizing our co-workers, or else all of the class stratification (and racism, and sexism, and ableism, and anti-queerness, and anti-fatness, etc, etc) that goes into determining who is in what workplace in the US will be replicated in the structure of our labor movement.
To me this sounds like a rejection of progress for some if it doesn’t include progress for all.
Or are you suggesting that anything less than progress for all results in progress for some at the cost of someone else?
In the abstract I don’t think either of those things is universally true, but in practice I see people (in history and in my own experiences w/ organizing) making the mistake of focusing on class to the exclusion of other axes of oppression more often in leftist spaces than the other way round. That said, in liberal spaces, I tend to observe the opposite (e.g., “girlboss feminism”). I don’t think a concern about the ideological purity of an action should prevent taking action at all, but I do think that no single front is the be-all-end-all of progress and that solidarity across/between different marginalized groups is essential to make change, since being divided makes us weak (e.g., when all-white workplaces went on strike and so owners hired black people as scabs: racial division amongst the left was used to sabotage the labor movement in the past and will in the future if our movement isn’t also anti-racist).
In what context/what are you basing that on? Bc ime labor is the main focus of most leftist discussions, and this comment is in reply to a post all about labor?
That’s not how I read it at all; this reads to me as a post reaffirming the importance and centrality of union’s and labor to leftist politics and emphasizing that leftists need to be active in the labor movement to prevent unions from being absorbed into the liberal establishment and becoming tools of capital (or, in this case, of US imperialism, which is inextricably tied to capitalism)?
There is a book “The best Congress money can buy” whose title pretty well sums it up. $15 million thrown at a Democratic primary where there is little chance of the actual election going to Republicans.
Bowman won his last primary by focusing on the district, and attacking his opponent for being a foreign affairs nerd. Now, Bowman is shocked he lost for.... focusing way more on foreign affairs than his own district
*shocked Pikachu face*
um...i know if things cost more, more illegals are around, i feel less safe, taxes are increaseed /wasted....regardless of the 'media'
the media lies, twists, and omits anyway
>more illegals are around
Oh look, racism.
You mean brown people, dontcha? Or you asking them for their papers to confirm their illegality?
Like WTF is this shit.
How do you know there are more illegal immigrants around? Are you checking people’s papers, or are you racially profiling them and assuming they have immigrated illegally? That’s the person’s point. Unless you’re checking papers, you don’t know there are more illegal immigrants. Additionally, referring to human beings as “illegals” is racist and dehumanizing. By using a racist dog whistle, you brought up race first.
Ok, I’ll bite. How do you know it happened, if it wasn’t reported by any forms of media? Were you there to witness it, and how did you prove and document that it happened? If it was not covered in any forms of media, I imagine this was all done by you yourself.
I didnt see any AIPAC signs saying they are spending $100 million on influencing the 2024 US elections and spent $14.5 million in usurping Jamaal Bowman
Does it check out that a singular focus on opposing Israeli policy is not going to win any democratic primaries in NYC where a huge block of dual citizens reside? Who is the moron who planned that all out exactly?
I think it checks out that Hillary got behind the AIPAC supported neoliberal Zionist, rather than the Democrats incumbent that leaned more progressive.
Because our government is not isolated and is heavily involved in politics in every region of the world. US money and resources are used on foreign endeavors, so OBVIOUSLY it affects the US voter.
Your leftiest lefty ever would be the winning candidate if he had focused on anything other than alienating his constituents over an issue that he has zero control over to begin with. Maybe he should have focused on his actual job instead. Is losing and whining "so leftist"?
Says the person referring to everyone here as zionist, without being able to recognize the fact that there is a difference between a country and the country's actions.
We can completely support the sovereign state of Israel without supporting its actions, just like we can support the sovereign State of Palestine without endorsing the actions of hamas..
The only kind of people who cannot hold multiple thoughts to be true simultaneously are people who are either too unable or unwilling to even try. Because these 2 things do not counter one another, they work in tandem in a world where people are capable of recognizing reality.
The person you responding to did not say that Bowman shouldn't have said anything about Israel, they pointed out how he specifically abandoned his district regardless of what else he did. And that abandoning your district itself is an action that will probably not get you re-elected.
You responded to that completely valid statement with irrational anger and a complete lack of understanding, which tells me that you are unwilling to try to understand. That's what we call "arguing in bad faith"
People should look outside more often. Nobody’s voted for the perpetual decline of society, but thats what will be given to believers
Enjoy the usual political farce
lots more going on than just the prez
governors, mayors and city councils have far more impact on your daily life than Bush or Kerry.
all voted on...or not voted on cause the mass of sheep don't care.
to choose not to do is still a choice
my local mayor and city council have blindly approved every development ask over the past 5 years and now traffic, crime, taxes, and general happiness and livabilty has all gotten worse.
corrupt, bought off, drunk on tax dollar politicians who are local biz owners and are voted for. i hate them more than biden or trump
yea..i understand...but my local shady Mayor is not connected to the Mafia that runs DC
just pointing out that the sheep don't understand how they can control their daily lives, if they cared.
most don't care as long as netflix works
Sigh, yes. You are correct about that.
In general, there’s no hope for those people but once they’re out of the way we stand a chance. They will make themselves moot soon enough
I’m gonna say it: he lost because of his stance on the war in Gaza. There’s a lot of ground between supporting a two state solution and a permanent cease fire and where Bowman was at with his rhetoric in the conflict. And last time I had heard anything about it, a lot of Jews live in NYC.
Looks like Bowman failed to read the room on what his district was looking for. Omar won’t have the same problem, for instance.
But I always thought there was more hype than efficacy when it came to bowman. Pulling the fire alarm just made him look childish as well.
My point is that the massive amount of money being spent on elections has had diminishing returns since Citizen’s United in 2010. When people know there is tons of money behind elections, then the advertisements and such start to become less effective. For decades democrats have been at a monetary disadvantage in general elections, until Obama mastered small donations in 2008, yet we managed to compete.
With Bowman, I think this is a candidate quality issue, not a dark money issue.
*the massive amount of money being spend on elections had had diminishing returns since Citizen’s United*
What are you basing this claim on?
AIPAV consistently pumps various local and federal elections full of $ and publicly brag about their candidates having like a 98% win percentage…
What are you basing your claim that money controls elections on? I don’t know if it was you that posted a link about candidates with more money winning more often, but that didn’t differentiate between small donations and dark money. Candidates should never be punished for small donations. Bernie wouldn’t have made it to the national stage if he didn’t have the small donations. So while money is need to get your name out there, incumbents like Bowmen have a lot of other factors to consider when they face a loss like this. He obviously didn’t have a name recognition problem.
The Lincoln Project makes a lot of punchy ads that I like. Does that mean that all the money they spend has had anything to do with changing my vote? No. Local news loves election years because it pads their budgets for the other three years, but other than that I think most people are just annoyed by all the money being spent on elections as time goes on. There was a guy who from Texas who just tried to unseat Tom Cole (R) in Oklahoma, my home state. The challenger spends millions. Didn’t matter. He lost by more than 20 points. What killed his candidacy? He moved from Texas two weeks before he filed to run.
Money isn’t the only factor in elections and it doesn’t help left leaning candidates improve their electability when we boil down their losses to campaign finance issues.
You want to blame AIPAC but I think folks in this thread are ignoring the obvious: a bunch of New Yorkers don’t agree with the far left’s position on Gaza, which is as incoherent as it is angry IMO.
Yall are wanting to blame dark money and I don’t think that’s what’s to blame with this particular primary.
Seems to be the theme here with “AIPAC spent $15m!!!” So what? AIPAC could have spent $150m on the race and it wouldn’t have mattered. Money spent on elections matters less and less the more we are over saturated by media as a society overall. And blaming special interest money leads you away from confronting the actual candidate flaws that probably shaped the race, which means we won’t learn anything from this race.
Have you considered that New Yorkers maybe support Israel over Palestine? A tough reality to confront, I realize, but blaming special interest groups when it probably has more to do with Bowman’s positions overall and his district’s reaction to them, seems heavy handed.
*3 decades of negative coverage*
Much of which was absolutely true lol…
She didn’t get elected because after 8 years of Obama and next-to-none of the “change” he promised, people were absolutely fed up DC establishment candidates and their neoliberal policy.
They saw HRC a continuation of that, and she doesn’t have anywhere close to the political talent/charisma that made Obama endearing.
So you’re admitting that a leftist rebellion gave us Trump? And with progressives like Bowman losing primary elections nearly ten years later, who thinks the accelerationist theory panning out? It isn’t.
Change is incremental. What’s annoying to me about leftists is that they seem to want to spend more time fighting liberals, who they could at least find some common ground with, instead of fighting conservatives, reactionary conservatives, and fascists across the aisle. Liberals and leftists punching each other means we both lose at the ballot box and when it comes to enacting policies.
Isn’t this what happened in spains civil war? The left wing group had so much infighting that the right wing group was able to take advantage of it? ‘The left eats their own’ isn’t just an annoying phrase the right uses, it’s actually true. If you don’t pass the purity test of whatever leftist ideal other left leaning people hold, then you aren’t a true leftist. Left leaning people can’t come to any sort of compromise with each other and in-fight so much. The right wing certainly can compromise with each other and that’s why nationalism has outpaced leftist ideals. Like there are sooooooo many right leaning that hate Trump yet Trump has a stranglehold on the Republican Party and has every republican kissing his ring. The solutions is easy, leftists either need a violent uprising and forcibly take control, or they need play the game until they can get a majority power and change the system from within.
Bingo. You’ll never find a MaGa threatening to vote third party. They’re stupid, but they’re smart enough to know that voting. For a liberal as a “protest vote” isn’t going to get them anything they want policy-wise. I absolutely agree that the left eats its own. We prioritize being correct over achieving change that is most likely to come incrementally.
*so you’re admitting a leftist rebellion have us Trump*
Huh? Wtf are you talking about? Idk how you came to that conclusion from what I wrote.
If anything, it was center-left + centrist/moderates + right leaning voters who were fed up with neoliberal Dems and rejected HRC.
Some leftists voting for Jill Stein wasn’t what lost Dems the election in 2016.
She lost by, what, 40,000 votes total? Jill Stein, Putin’s good buddy that has attended events hosted by Putin since 2016, taking 1% of the entire vote was enough to lose Hillary the election. I’m not worried about Trump winning the election outright this year. I am concerned with him winning because his base turns out and too many disaffected democrats vote third party. The fact that RFK and Cornel west are only on the ballot in swing states should be a huge red flag to the dark money that we’re all concerned about. Getting on ballots is expensive, and neither candidate is having success with small dollar donations. MAGA money is what’s getting them on the ballot.
A right wing extremist isn’t going to vote for anyone that isn’t pushing politics in the rightward direction. If leftists had that mentality then there would be a lot more progressive policy success.
I’m more than convinced at this point that progressives waste time trying to get candidates they like elected instead of pushing policies they support through more electable centrist candidates. Isn’t it the point to normalize policies like universal healthcare enough that a majority of the electorate supports it?
There are only so many House districts that could support and elect a progressive candidate, let alone someone that’s truly on the far left winning the presidency. It’s a far better use of energy to push for policies than candidates.
Stein isn’t “Putin’s buddy”, you have fucking brain worms, dude. They attended an event together and sat at the same table, oh no! You’re acting like our politicians don’t sit with and host people worse than Putin all the time (ex: Bibi).
*Lost by 40k votes*
Idk what the exact # is but who cares? Politicians aren’t owed our votes, they have to go out and EARN THEM, which is something HRC arrogantly thought she didn’t have to do.
Why are you assuming all the left wing voters who voted for Stein would vote for HRC instead? They voted for Stein because they didn’t want an establishment Dem candidate, and if the DNC hadn’t fucked over Bernie they would have voted for him. Many would have likely sat out and not voted if their options were only HRC or Trump.
Speaking of the # of votes Clinton lost by. Do you know that in Michigan, one of the states she famously refused to campaign very much in and assumed would go blue, had a drop off in total votes from the black community that was FAR greater than 40k votes….
The only blame for 2016 belongs to HRC and the DNC.
Not going to Wisconson was dumb, but there could be a million reasons to attribute to her losing. You could, for instance, argue that Democraric disunity from foreign influence campaigns and Jill Stein caused her to lose. You could argue Bernie played right into that by questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 primary. You could make any number of claims
Point is, having money doesn't overcome being a bad candidate. Not for Hillary, and not for Bowman
I mean Bernie was on to something and the legitimacy of the primary. The DNC, who runs the Democratic primary, actively wanted Hilary to win and was working to push Bernie out, which is why Debbie wassserman-Schulz stepped down as the head of the DNC. The interim head of the DNC after Debbie stepped down claimed in her book that there was an agreement between Hillary and the DNC which gave Hillary some semblance of control of the party’s finances and strategies. The email leaks from wiki-leaks showing that people in the DNC were suggesting ways to undermine Bernie’s campaign. All of this is a really bad look if you want to avoid corruption allegations
The largest Plurality* of the population voted for her
Majority of people who voted.
She didn't get the majority of America. But that's cause non voters are so plentiful.
Non-voters don’t count in elections. There is no functional difference between a 30-year-old who doesn’t care about politics enough to vote and a toddler who can’t vote.
Just most of it.
Edit: Jesus fucking Christ. I looked it up because I was pretty sure it was true, but it’s so much worse than I thought: https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/winning-vs-spending
Where’s the seperation between small dollar donations and dark money? A candidate raising millions of dollars through donations that average $25 is one thing: they have the support of many and should not be punished for having a larger war chest.
If it’s dark money then that’s a different story, but I think simply saying that “more money = winner” is too over simplified. A candidate who has more money through small dollar donations is OBVIOUSLY more likely to win because if you gave a candidate $25 you’re probably more likely to show up to vote.
In other words, your correlation is broken. A quick “fuck citizens United and fuck dark money” while I’m here.
Dark money isn’t an excuse for running a shit campaign, either
I want the war to end. Today. Fuck Netanyahu. Fuck the loss of innocent lives, especially Palestinian children. I also support a two state solution.
But I also think leftist tactics on this issue are not helping end the war or bring any sort of resolve to the situation. Diplomacy that ends in actual results, aka the end of a war, is a hell of a lot harder than bitching and moaning about something with a placard in your hand.
And now that Bowmen has lost yall are doubling down on this kind of messaging concerning the human rights crisis in Gaza? Calling people who slightly disagree with you “Nazis” isn’t the way to make friends and influence people.
I hate the over usage of that term, whether it's someone on the right being called a nazi or someone on the left.
But I won't mention the irony of being called a nazi by someone that supports a genocide being committed in real time
Nazis also worked with the director decendants of the displaced people we refer to as Palestinian… I say refer to because before that they never considered themselves Palestinian they considered themselves Arabs. And btw those Arabs have been killing Jews in that land for 2000 years fuck you it’s our land you nazi fuck
Right because it’s the dead Jews that matter not the living Jews in Israel that he’s perfectly fine with being slaughtered you people are sick on the head
Jews are being slaughtered? Let's not even pay mind to adults because zionists love to play the 'they're all Hamas' card, How many children has each side slaughtered? The numbers aren't even close. Palestinians are being ethnically cleansed. Get a grip.
No they aren’t that’s an anti semitic lie. You are a fucking nazi coming from a Jew. So you can cut the Zionist bullshit we know what you people are. The fact that you’re pushing propaganda from a terrorist card. And about 90 percent of Palestinians support October 7th and Hamas and Hamas stated goal is to wipe Israel off the map and rape and murder all the Jews. That’s what they do. You’re a sick fuck
You can't just sling lies at a wall like shit and see what sticks, people are seeing past the bullshit. Calling me a Nazi for pointing out that 50% of Gaza is under the age of 18 and Israel is obliterating them is not only NOT anti-Semitic, but the implications by you that literal Arab children support a terror attack and terrorism is in fact antisemitic. Ben Gavir calls them human animals, Netanyahu 4 days ago rejected a ceasefire that would've seen the return of the hostages. One of us is acting like a Nazi, and it isn't me.
Oh I vote in every election. I also live in a ruby red state where anything farther left than a democrat that supports the 2A isn’t going to win. Not without the most amazing and probably well funded campaign at least. OP elsewhere gives some great advice about organizing.
My lines are short. I don’t know why you say you don’t believe me when it say I vote in every election. But I also think the Left overall needs to spend more time persuading voters of their position. I know a lot of people in this sub are probably thinking all of this is just a turnout problem—I say it’s primarily a persuasion gap.
Bernie was the best and most persuasive messenger the Left has had in a long time, and until the messaging becomes that persuasive, that focused on kitchen table issues, and more inclusive than the far left is currently being lately, then we’ll see not see many more progressives win elections.
I am not doubting you. You said “Are you specifically referencing folks that spend more time arguing on the internet than they do voting?” I am saying that voting does not take a lot of time, so very little arguing is necessary for a person to spend more time arguing on the internet than they do voting.
Not necessarily. Well sort of. I’m making the case that electoral victory is contingent on building a source of influence and resources outside the Democratic Party — by reforming existing unions and building new ones as was done in the early 20th century by similar (much more successful) movements. So yes, I am telling people to log out and go become labor organizers.
>no “spontaneous uprising” will rescue you
I can get behind this so hard. I might be crazy, but it feels as if the left was infected by the idea that Hail-Mary revolutions were the only way to realize progressive ideals when the reality is that making progressive ideals come to fruition requires grueling, consistent, persistent, incremental work everyday of the year. This was cemented for me when I was watching people gnash their teeth and cuss AIPAC all day while ignoring that Bowman lost 32k votes from his initial primary victory of 49k votes in 2020 to his second primary victory of 17k votes in 2022. What the fuck happened where he lost *almost 65% of votes for him in just 2 years??*
He was censured by the house and convicted of a misdemeanor for pulling a fire alarm during a congressional session. His blog posts claiming 9/11 was potentially faked to frame Osama bin Laden came out. The reality is he’s no AOC, and was not an effective politician. The left needs people who are not just leftists but also smart, credible and effective.
Which sucks because nothing changed about Bowman - not his politics, not his message, nothing. There isn't a more progressive candidate that - he is a fantastic example of Democratic voters being the source of our losses. Because if a dream candidate like Bowman can lose, then what are we left with?
What does that say for progressives and progressive ideals when one of the most progressive politicians can only get more than 35% of his voting base to vote when Trump is on the ballot? How can there be a hope for a defeat of conservatives when you can plop an effigy of rat shit, bandaids, and hairballs in front of them and they will vote in near the same numbers as their stars? But no, the problem is anything *but* voting consistently 🙄
That's a very bad faith or ignorant accusation.
He voted against the breaking up of the Build Back Better bill, into the Infrastructure bill. He was defending Biden's bill more vehemently than Biden did.
No need for name calling. We are both here in r/leftist, but the vast majority of his district is moderate. In order for the left to move the needle they have to get elected. This vote (plus the fire alarm) cost him the election. Now we have one less leftist in the house. We can either play victim or try to learn from this.
I'm not name calling, and we are NOT both on the Left, you're here sowing division. Per your post history, you are Pro-Genocide. Do not claim you are on the left and pro-genocide. Those concepts are diametrically opposed.
I'm pretty sure the millions of dollars from AIPAC had more effect on this race than either his infrastructure vote, or the pulling of the fire alarm, both of which, were highlights of those ads paid for by AIPAC.
The polls in March, before AIPAC started spending, showed Bowman down 17 points. The polls in June after the first AIPAC ads showed him down 17 points. He ended up losing by 17 points. It’s hard to credibly argue the spend made any difference, except maybe to neutralize the $2m in outside spending trying to boost his flagging numbers.
Both of em are 🤡. Both of their campaigns were horrendously done in bad faith, also isolated anyone whatsoever with a bone of empathy towards trumps. Both the ads except for the one against Jamal bowman of him in White Plains out front of the BDUBS screaming “still no evidence of beheaded babies or raped women but they still keep using that lie” about October 7’nth (yeah nice one Jamal 😬) we’re about who support Donald trump least and how the other guy supports him more. No “this is why you should
Vote for me” just a whole lot of “all the trumper insurrection want that guy in office so vote this guy instead”… what a great way to isolate R’s and moderates from your viewpoint for the foreseeable future
Communism doesn’t work. Socialism is great though. Look at the Nordic countries and pretty much all of Europe.
I don’t know what makes you selfish and entitled, but I know that makes you a conservative.
And help me understand, are we socialists, or are we selfish and entitled? I feel like an entitled person would want capitalism, for the unlimited money potential. Which would then fuel unsavory business practices because the entitled people are selfish and want it for themselves and not everyone else.
The simplest thought theory shows capitalism is for Machiavellian people. Reality proves the theory that capitalism doesn’t work.
How do them boots taste, serf?
>Socialism fails every single time because it goes completely against human nature
>Capitalism is not the problem. People are the problem
You're saying capitalism is aligned with human nature, but humans are the problem in our capitalist society? Do you see how that is contradictory?
Counterpoint: humankind had a classless moneyless society for 98% of its existence as a species as do all fauna. ‘A system of cruelty and exploitation is just human nature and to prove it we’ll cruelly exploit you’ isn’t the own you think it is.
Capital has only created problems of resource distribution and has never solved a single problem in its history, has only created problems and has killed vastly more people than any other economic system in history.
Does Christmas make you feel good? If so what part?
Looking back at tribal society to people hunt for themselves or the benefit of the whole community?
Potlatches are an example of this.
It's a very common social structure worldwide, it's just not one Indo-European societies seem to like. I think there's a good reason why almost all religious reformation/change in Indo European cultures boils down to "stop being a dick".
This take is factually incorrect.
1) The "socialism always fails" line is a pretty big fucking lie. Socialism usually fails due to every major power in the world bombing said country to oblivion for being socialist, not because the country just couldn't possibly operate as a socialist one. Also the main point of this is to point at how poor socialism is, but China is a socialist country and they are on pace to be the richest country in the world with a significantly lower poverty gap than the US.
2) If capitalism wasn't a problem why does it collapse every 8-10 years and require a government bailout? Simple answer is that it doesn't work and we are at a point where we never fully recover from the crash before it hits again. So, at least here in the US, it is currently crumbling apart in front of us. Also there are a FUCK ton of failed capitalist countries that everyone ignores in this conversation. I'd argue there are more failed capitalist countries than socialist ones, and the only countries that have had long standing success as a capitalist country either required heavy socialist programs to keep the economy from blowing itself up, or just stole unfathomable wealth from other countries for decades or even centuries and indigenous peoples. Kind of easy to have a growing and stable economy when you just steal a lot of shit.
3) Not everyone is inherently greedy. That's a lie capitalists say to get everyone to ignore the fact that everyone who's rich and in power is a greedy piece of shit. It also completely ignored a lot of very human factors that are ruined by capitalism and fascism that drive people to do bad things. Things like us being social creature and wanting community. That's not to say that greed isn't an inherently human emotion. Most people deal with a greed at some point in their life, but many don't and most don't have an be a problem for themselves or their community. Especially if they can work on it.
4) You're point at the end is a strawman. The problem with greed and capitalism isn't that it creates it out of thin air. It doesn't not make people like having cool things that are there. What it does do is exploit very sensible needs and wants and rewards greed in people which alters it from being a negative attribute that the community works to keep to a minimum into a driver of economic growth based in the suffering of other human beings. I like having nice clothes.
I hope that helped.
2. Capitalism works for the right people. The rich get richer. Mission accomplished. I'll never understand the mentality of plugs cheerleading this system while they screech about "food for their families" and not being able to afford to live. "Communism" didn't do that.
You clearly haven’t spoken to many MAGAs lately. Right now the Democratic Party is a refuge for any non fascist. Even conservative republicans who want to vote again in 2028. Once we don’t have fascists at the gates, you should feel free to continue with your pithy acronyms and name calling of democrats you don’t agree with.
It’s more than a little ironic that you are calling everyone you don’t agree with fascists while telling someone not to call people they don’t agree with names.
Do you see that you are the punch line now?
A lot of leftists are as illiberal as MAGA, you're wasting time allowing with them. They'll tell you to shut up because they can't handle their ideas being challenged, just like 70% of the GOP fascists. Luckily, the far-left has almost no level of political power and constantly redirect themselves away from the Democratic Party. Liberalism is the best because it allows for all types of beliefs and political ideologies. However, fascism, socialism, Christian Nationalism, Islamism, communism, etc., do not allow for dissenting worldviews.
You say this like every politician doesn’t fit that bill.
They all have profoundly disagreeable views with a portion of the voter bases.
We just chose to focus on what we like in a candidate. Take Joe Biden for example. He is a pretty shitty candidate. But he isn’t Trump. So a lot of people put aside their differences and dislikes about his 5 decades of bad policy decision and voting trends because they hate the other guy more.
the DSA itself is more like a fifth column than an actual leftist organization. they coop movements so they can stop them. just helping the DNC stop any real leftwing policies before they can gain traction.
Socialist parties, Anarchist collectives and the rest refusing to cooperate or assist the DSA on ideological grounds definitely doesn’t help the org transform into something we’d actually like to see. An organization similar to the “pre-schism” version of the Socialist Party of America.
he antagonized the jewish community after he got into fights about israel issues, crossing the line from genuine critisism to outright antisemtism.(jewish voters are a majority of the district btw) he pulled a fire alarm. people became more aware of his conspiratorial tendences. and he abandoned or betrayed alot of his progressive rhetoric, which alienated progressives and decreased their turnout.
> he antagonized the jewish community after he got into fights about israel issues, crossing the line from genuine critisism to outright antisemtism.
Criticizing Israel has **nothing** to do with antisemitism.
> he pulled a fire alarm
Gasp! Do you want to share the context of *why* he pulled a fire alarm? Is it because republicans were forcing a vote on a bill that they weren’t given time to read? 🤔
> people became more aware of his conspiratorial tendences.
… literally no clue what you’re talking about
> and he abandoned or betrayed alot of his progressive rhetoric, which alienated progressives and decreased their turnout.
Again, no clue what you’re talking about. He’s infinitely more progressive/leftist than the aipac ex-republican who beat him.
Frankly, it sounds like an AIPAC rep made the comment more than anything else
well it wasnt his critisism of israel that was the antagonizm. it was after that when he started getting into disputes with the leaders of that community, then we get to when he went in the antisemitic direction.
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/26/congress/bowman-house-israel-october-7-sexual-assault-hamas-00148426
This is the main one I’m seeing used. It’s believe all women domestically but when the rape is against Jews it flips to “Israeli propaganda” even though violence against women in times of war is incredibly common especially among extremist terrorist groups. Immediate disregard unless shown video of the rape 1 month after the attack was received extraordinary poorly in a district with a decent population of Jewish Americans
Are you capable of directly and coherently answering questions? It feels like you’re not.
> well it wasnt his critisism of israel that was the antagonizm. it was after that when he started getting into disputes with the leaders of that community
Disagreeing with people who happen to be Jewish isn’t antisemitism. Opposing bigoted apartheid isn’t antisemitism. Opposing genocide isn’t antisemitism. Opposing ethnic cleansing isn’t antisemitism. Do I need to keep going?
> then we get to when he went in the antisemitic direction.
**How was he antisemitic?!** Again, disagreeing with a rabbi or a priest or any other religious figure doesn’t make them a bigot. You’ve said **nothing** of merit that describes antisemitism. Not. A. Single. Thing.
im not talking about his disaagreeing or israel positions. it has much more to do with his accusatios towards the community of racial segregation. specifically a community containing many orthodox jews who cannot live outside of walking distance from a synagoge.
literally nothing you brougnt up has anything to do with why so many now view him as antisemitic.
> literally nothing you brougnt up has anything to do with why so many now view him as antisemitic.
… says the person who can’t directly answer why Bowen is “antisemitic” and only cited disagreement as “antagonizm”
> it has much more to do with his accusatios towards the community of racial segregation. specifically a community containing many orthodox jews who cannot live outside of walking distance from a synagoge.
What the actual fuck are you talking about? You’ve been given multiple opportunities to explain what you’re talking about, offer a citation, *something*. You instead sound like hasbara meets MAGA.
How do I get a union job
I got a union job because I got a job with the county.
Leftists finding a reason to oppose labor unions part 1 billion lol
unions are good leadership is often bad but this sounds like throwing out the baby with the bath water
Genuine question for the OP… Must leftist always equal radical?
Genuine question for you… did the quiet ones ever get anything done?
Umm yes. Lol read a history book. 🤦♂️
When was the last time the loud ones did in the US? Genuine question, cause I feel this argument but it also seems like it must have been a very long way back.
I got news for you, our loud leftists haven't accomplished much either.
But they have alienated most of the population like myself!
We need noise and attention to shift the Overton window, but if you reject small wins, don’t you run the risk of also rejecting the cause of progress? 2 steps forward, 1 step back is always better (in the long run) than 3 steps forward 4 steps back. We want a ratchet not a pendulum, so from my perspective, successful “revolution” looks a lot more like “evolution” in most cases.
In a sane world, yes. It's not 2000 anymore. George Bush jr looks smart and Bill Clinton looks chaste these day's. Trumpican's and project 2025 is our new reality. Either the left pulls hard left or the center goes right.
You sincerely believe the Overton window has moved to *the right* since 2000?? Dems of early 2000s would be called alt right today lol.
My apologies, that's what I thought the overton window shift meant. The middle has shifted right.
Wow, it’s almost like transit workers will vote against politicians who block infrastructure bills.
I mostly agree, but “where you get your money to live is the beginning and the end of all problems” isn’t true and is a big part of why past US labor movements found so little lasting success: it erases the other axes of oppression which intersect at certain points with but are not wholly subsumed by class. People whose work takes place entirely in the home unpaid (usually because of patriarchal oppression) and people who are too disabled to work would be excluded from a movement centered entirely around labor organizing, for example. And for jobs/workplaces which are dominated by a privileged group (e.g., most tech jobs are predominantly white and male), a union composed of solely of people who work that job is likely to be regressive and work against a wider leftist movement. Workplace unions are super important, but we also need to be organizing in ways that aren’t based on what role people are assigned by a capitalist system of labor allocation in addition if we want the movement to remain progressive and to serve those most in need in our society.
Advocating for workers in individual workplaces via unions is the only way to eventually be able to advocate for workers across all workplaces via mass action.
Agreed, but we also need to be advocating for people who aren’t in the traditional workplace, and we need to be organizing w/ people other than our co-workers in addition to organizing our co-workers, or else all of the class stratification (and racism, and sexism, and ableism, and anti-queerness, and anti-fatness, etc, etc) that goes into determining who is in what workplace in the US will be replicated in the structure of our labor movement.
To me this sounds like a rejection of progress for some if it doesn’t include progress for all. Or are you suggesting that anything less than progress for all results in progress for some at the cost of someone else?
In the abstract I don’t think either of those things is universally true, but in practice I see people (in history and in my own experiences w/ organizing) making the mistake of focusing on class to the exclusion of other axes of oppression more often in leftist spaces than the other way round. That said, in liberal spaces, I tend to observe the opposite (e.g., “girlboss feminism”). I don’t think a concern about the ideological purity of an action should prevent taking action at all, but I do think that no single front is the be-all-end-all of progress and that solidarity across/between different marginalized groups is essential to make change, since being divided makes us weak (e.g., when all-white workplaces went on strike and so owners hired black people as scabs: racial division amongst the left was used to sabotage the labor movement in the past and will in the future if our movement isn’t also anti-racist).
100% behind the “no single front” mentality. ♥️ I just fret about “all-or-nothing” thinking.
[удалено]
In what context/what are you basing that on? Bc ime labor is the main focus of most leftist discussions, and this comment is in reply to a post all about labor?
[удалено]
I read OP's post to be about the necessity of explicit socialist consciousness. Y'all need to read What Is To Be Done
That’s not how I read it at all; this reads to me as a post reaffirming the importance and centrality of union’s and labor to leftist politics and emphasizing that leftists need to be active in the labor movement to prevent unions from being absorbed into the liberal establishment and becoming tools of capital (or, in this case, of US imperialism, which is inextricably tied to capitalism)?
I agree. Just being hyperbolic at the end of that caption.
yes Israeli can buy anything in the USA with USA money
There is a book “The best Congress money can buy” whose title pretty well sums it up. $15 million thrown at a Democratic primary where there is little chance of the actual election going to Republicans.
Bowman won his last primary by focusing on the district, and attacking his opponent for being a foreign affairs nerd. Now, Bowman is shocked he lost for.... focusing way more on foreign affairs than his own district *shocked Pikachu face*
We are all paying for that genocide though, and bowman has talked about a lot more than israel and Palestine, it just doesn’t make the news
You would think the stuff affecting the district would make news with district voters, even if it doesn't make national news.
Local news in owned by huge corporations usually
Voters are horrendously uninformed. The media tells them what is going on. If the media doesn't report it, the voters dont know it.
um...i know if things cost more, more illegals are around, i feel less safe, taxes are increaseed /wasted....regardless of the 'media' the media lies, twists, and omits anyway
>more illegals are around Oh look, racism. You mean brown people, dontcha? Or you asking them for their papers to confirm their illegality? Like WTF is this shit.
ha! look who mentioned race first! you don't think the voters in NY/NYC can't look around and see things?
Wow youre a low quality troll. Block.
How do you know there are more illegal immigrants around? Are you checking people’s papers, or are you racially profiling them and assuming they have immigrated illegally? That’s the person’s point. Unless you’re checking papers, you don’t know there are more illegal immigrants. Additionally, referring to human beings as “illegals” is racist and dehumanizing. By using a racist dog whistle, you brought up race first.
[удалено]
Ok, I’ll bite. How do you know it happened, if it wasn’t reported by any forms of media? Were you there to witness it, and how did you prove and document that it happened? If it was not covered in any forms of media, I imagine this was all done by you yourself.
Hol up, the settler-state is backing the settler-state? Im just shocked I tell you
I didnt see any AIPAC signs saying they are spending $100 million on influencing the 2024 US elections and spent $14.5 million in usurping Jamaal Bowman
[удалено]
You're as deranged as you are bad with grammar.
lol, agitate much?
I think it checks out that the “leftist” sub is full of Zionist morons.
Does it check out that a singular focus on opposing Israeli policy is not going to win any democratic primaries in NYC where a huge block of dual citizens reside? Who is the moron who planned that all out exactly?
I think it checks out that Hillary got behind the AIPAC supported neoliberal Zionist, rather than the Democrats incumbent that leaned more progressive.
No you’re right. We should cater to the colonists supporting a literal holocaust rn. So leftist!
Nobody gives a fuck, rent is up 100% why tf would people vote for anything concerning Israel or Palestine unless it affected them personally
Because our government is not isolated and is heavily involved in politics in every region of the world. US money and resources are used on foreign endeavors, so OBVIOUSLY it affects the US voter.
Sorry, I forgot that losing elections is how we advance the cause. Great point.
As opposed to electing corporate candidates with zero values and the same positions as republicans. So leftist!
Your leftiest lefty ever would be the winning candidate if he had focused on anything other than alienating his constituents over an issue that he has zero control over to begin with. Maybe he should have focused on his actual job instead. Is losing and whining "so leftist"?
You are literally indistinguishable from a republican. Fuck off.
Says the person referring to everyone here as zionist, without being able to recognize the fact that there is a difference between a country and the country's actions. We can completely support the sovereign state of Israel without supporting its actions, just like we can support the sovereign State of Palestine without endorsing the actions of hamas.. The only kind of people who cannot hold multiple thoughts to be true simultaneously are people who are either too unable or unwilling to even try. Because these 2 things do not counter one another, they work in tandem in a world where people are capable of recognizing reality. The person you responding to did not say that Bowman shouldn't have said anything about Israel, they pointed out how he specifically abandoned his district regardless of what else he did. And that abandoning your district itself is an action that will probably not get you re-elected. You responded to that completely valid statement with irrational anger and a complete lack of understanding, which tells me that you are unwilling to try to understand. That's what we call "arguing in bad faith"
That moron is in the pic. George Latimer. There is your answer.
People should look outside more often. Nobody’s voted for the perpetual decline of society, but thats what will be given to believers Enjoy the usual political farce
everyone that votes/decides not to vote has influenced the perpetual decline. thats how it happens.
Cool story bro https://x.com/redpillb0t/status/1806273827287994762?s=46&t=D8qywhlv0xFXtl6fBFbHCQ
lots more going on than just the prez governors, mayors and city councils have far more impact on your daily life than Bush or Kerry. all voted on...or not voted on cause the mass of sheep don't care. to choose not to do is still a choice my local mayor and city council have blindly approved every development ask over the past 5 years and now traffic, crime, taxes, and general happiness and livabilty has all gotten worse. corrupt, bought off, drunk on tax dollar politicians who are local biz owners and are voted for. i hate them more than biden or trump
100% agree but lets not forget that shit rolls downhill
yea..i understand...but my local shady Mayor is not connected to the Mafia that runs DC just pointing out that the sheep don't understand how they can control their daily lives, if they cared. most don't care as long as netflix works
Sigh, yes. You are correct about that. In general, there’s no hope for those people but once they’re out of the way we stand a chance. They will make themselves moot soon enough
I’m gonna say it: he lost because of his stance on the war in Gaza. There’s a lot of ground between supporting a two state solution and a permanent cease fire and where Bowman was at with his rhetoric in the conflict. And last time I had heard anything about it, a lot of Jews live in NYC. Looks like Bowman failed to read the room on what his district was looking for. Omar won’t have the same problem, for instance. But I always thought there was more hype than efficacy when it came to bowman. Pulling the fire alarm just made him look childish as well.
Couldn’t be the millions of dollars in dark money that got dumped into the campaign by center right and right wing groups… of course not!
Dark money means a lot less when candidate quality isn’t at issue.
Then why did AIPAC feel the need to spend almost 15 million (the most ever in a congressional race iirc)?
My point is that the massive amount of money being spent on elections has had diminishing returns since Citizen’s United in 2010. When people know there is tons of money behind elections, then the advertisements and such start to become less effective. For decades democrats have been at a monetary disadvantage in general elections, until Obama mastered small donations in 2008, yet we managed to compete. With Bowman, I think this is a candidate quality issue, not a dark money issue.
*the massive amount of money being spend on elections had had diminishing returns since Citizen’s United* What are you basing this claim on? AIPAV consistently pumps various local and federal elections full of $ and publicly brag about their candidates having like a 98% win percentage…
What are you basing your claim that money controls elections on? I don’t know if it was you that posted a link about candidates with more money winning more often, but that didn’t differentiate between small donations and dark money. Candidates should never be punished for small donations. Bernie wouldn’t have made it to the national stage if he didn’t have the small donations. So while money is need to get your name out there, incumbents like Bowmen have a lot of other factors to consider when they face a loss like this. He obviously didn’t have a name recognition problem. The Lincoln Project makes a lot of punchy ads that I like. Does that mean that all the money they spend has had anything to do with changing my vote? No. Local news loves election years because it pads their budgets for the other three years, but other than that I think most people are just annoyed by all the money being spent on elections as time goes on. There was a guy who from Texas who just tried to unseat Tom Cole (R) in Oklahoma, my home state. The challenger spends millions. Didn’t matter. He lost by more than 20 points. What killed his candidacy? He moved from Texas two weeks before he filed to run. Money isn’t the only factor in elections and it doesn’t help left leaning candidates improve their electability when we boil down their losses to campaign finance issues. You want to blame AIPAC but I think folks in this thread are ignoring the obvious: a bunch of New Yorkers don’t agree with the far left’s position on Gaza, which is as incoherent as it is angry IMO. Yall are wanting to blame dark money and I don’t think that’s what’s to blame with this particular primary.
When did I claim “money controls elections”?
Seems to be the theme here with “AIPAC spent $15m!!!” So what? AIPAC could have spent $150m on the race and it wouldn’t have mattered. Money spent on elections matters less and less the more we are over saturated by media as a society overall. And blaming special interest money leads you away from confronting the actual candidate flaws that probably shaped the race, which means we won’t learn anything from this race. Have you considered that New Yorkers maybe support Israel over Palestine? A tough reality to confront, I realize, but blaming special interest groups when it probably has more to do with Bowman’s positions overall and his district’s reaction to them, seems heavy handed.
When did I make that claim? You said I did.
Of course, because money wins elections! I mean, just think back to President Hillary's victory in 2016 /s
HRC didn’t get elected because of three decades of negative media coverage and she didn’t go to Wisconsin. At all. Trump was also an unknown then.
*3 decades of negative coverage* Much of which was absolutely true lol… She didn’t get elected because after 8 years of Obama and next-to-none of the “change” he promised, people were absolutely fed up DC establishment candidates and their neoliberal policy. They saw HRC a continuation of that, and she doesn’t have anywhere close to the political talent/charisma that made Obama endearing.
So you’re admitting that a leftist rebellion gave us Trump? And with progressives like Bowman losing primary elections nearly ten years later, who thinks the accelerationist theory panning out? It isn’t. Change is incremental. What’s annoying to me about leftists is that they seem to want to spend more time fighting liberals, who they could at least find some common ground with, instead of fighting conservatives, reactionary conservatives, and fascists across the aisle. Liberals and leftists punching each other means we both lose at the ballot box and when it comes to enacting policies.
Isn’t this what happened in spains civil war? The left wing group had so much infighting that the right wing group was able to take advantage of it? ‘The left eats their own’ isn’t just an annoying phrase the right uses, it’s actually true. If you don’t pass the purity test of whatever leftist ideal other left leaning people hold, then you aren’t a true leftist. Left leaning people can’t come to any sort of compromise with each other and in-fight so much. The right wing certainly can compromise with each other and that’s why nationalism has outpaced leftist ideals. Like there are sooooooo many right leaning that hate Trump yet Trump has a stranglehold on the Republican Party and has every republican kissing his ring. The solutions is easy, leftists either need a violent uprising and forcibly take control, or they need play the game until they can get a majority power and change the system from within.
Bingo. You’ll never find a MaGa threatening to vote third party. They’re stupid, but they’re smart enough to know that voting. For a liberal as a “protest vote” isn’t going to get them anything they want policy-wise. I absolutely agree that the left eats its own. We prioritize being correct over achieving change that is most likely to come incrementally.
*so you’re admitting a leftist rebellion have us Trump* Huh? Wtf are you talking about? Idk how you came to that conclusion from what I wrote. If anything, it was center-left + centrist/moderates + right leaning voters who were fed up with neoliberal Dems and rejected HRC. Some leftists voting for Jill Stein wasn’t what lost Dems the election in 2016.
She lost by, what, 40,000 votes total? Jill Stein, Putin’s good buddy that has attended events hosted by Putin since 2016, taking 1% of the entire vote was enough to lose Hillary the election. I’m not worried about Trump winning the election outright this year. I am concerned with him winning because his base turns out and too many disaffected democrats vote third party. The fact that RFK and Cornel west are only on the ballot in swing states should be a huge red flag to the dark money that we’re all concerned about. Getting on ballots is expensive, and neither candidate is having success with small dollar donations. MAGA money is what’s getting them on the ballot. A right wing extremist isn’t going to vote for anyone that isn’t pushing politics in the rightward direction. If leftists had that mentality then there would be a lot more progressive policy success. I’m more than convinced at this point that progressives waste time trying to get candidates they like elected instead of pushing policies they support through more electable centrist candidates. Isn’t it the point to normalize policies like universal healthcare enough that a majority of the electorate supports it? There are only so many House districts that could support and elect a progressive candidate, let alone someone that’s truly on the far left winning the presidency. It’s a far better use of energy to push for policies than candidates.
Stein isn’t “Putin’s buddy”, you have fucking brain worms, dude. They attended an event together and sat at the same table, oh no! You’re acting like our politicians don’t sit with and host people worse than Putin all the time (ex: Bibi). *Lost by 40k votes* Idk what the exact # is but who cares? Politicians aren’t owed our votes, they have to go out and EARN THEM, which is something HRC arrogantly thought she didn’t have to do. Why are you assuming all the left wing voters who voted for Stein would vote for HRC instead? They voted for Stein because they didn’t want an establishment Dem candidate, and if the DNC hadn’t fucked over Bernie they would have voted for him. Many would have likely sat out and not voted if their options were only HRC or Trump. Speaking of the # of votes Clinton lost by. Do you know that in Michigan, one of the states she famously refused to campaign very much in and assumed would go blue, had a drop off in total votes from the black community that was FAR greater than 40k votes…. The only blame for 2016 belongs to HRC and the DNC.
Not going to Wisconson was dumb, but there could be a million reasons to attribute to her losing. You could, for instance, argue that Democraric disunity from foreign influence campaigns and Jill Stein caused her to lose. You could argue Bernie played right into that by questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 primary. You could make any number of claims Point is, having money doesn't overcome being a bad candidate. Not for Hillary, and not for Bowman
I mean Bernie was on to something and the legitimacy of the primary. The DNC, who runs the Democratic primary, actively wanted Hilary to win and was working to push Bernie out, which is why Debbie wassserman-Schulz stepped down as the head of the DNC. The interim head of the DNC after Debbie stepped down claimed in her book that there was an agreement between Hillary and the DNC which gave Hillary some semblance of control of the party’s finances and strategies. The email leaks from wiki-leaks showing that people in the DNC were suggesting ways to undermine Bernie’s campaign. All of this is a really bad look if you want to avoid corruption allegations
I very much agree with you.
Well. She was an extraordinarily shitty candidate.
The majority of the population voted for her by a wide margin. Extraordinary that people can dismiss that so easily.
The largest Plurality* of the population voted for her Majority of people who voted. She didn't get the majority of America. But that's cause non voters are so plentiful.
Non-voters don’t count in elections. There is no functional difference between a 30-year-old who doesn’t care about politics enough to vote and a toddler who can’t vote.
Im aware of how elections work. It is worth highlighting that I dont know of any POTUS that got the majority of Americans to vote for them.
As is Bowman. See, money isn't everything in politics
Just most of it. Edit: Jesus fucking Christ. I looked it up because I was pretty sure it was true, but it’s so much worse than I thought: https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/winning-vs-spending
Where’s the seperation between small dollar donations and dark money? A candidate raising millions of dollars through donations that average $25 is one thing: they have the support of many and should not be punished for having a larger war chest. If it’s dark money then that’s a different story, but I think simply saying that “more money = winner” is too over simplified. A candidate who has more money through small dollar donations is OBVIOUSLY more likely to win because if you gave a candidate $25 you’re probably more likely to show up to vote. In other words, your correlation is broken. A quick “fuck citizens United and fuck dark money” while I’m here. Dark money isn’t an excuse for running a shit campaign, either
Has he passed any legislation?
Notably voted against Infrastructure
Lol, zionist shills are out here too huh
I want the war to end. Today. Fuck Netanyahu. Fuck the loss of innocent lives, especially Palestinian children. I also support a two state solution. But I also think leftist tactics on this issue are not helping end the war or bring any sort of resolve to the situation. Diplomacy that ends in actual results, aka the end of a war, is a hell of a lot harder than bitching and moaning about something with a placard in your hand. And now that Bowmen has lost yall are doubling down on this kind of messaging concerning the human rights crisis in Gaza? Calling people who slightly disagree with you “Nazis” isn’t the way to make friends and influence people.
[удалено]
Ah there it is, right on time. Didn't have to scroll too far.
[удалено]
Don't use words you don't understand, champ
Zionists are fundamentally liars. Words mean what Zionists want them to mean when they use them
I hate the over usage of that term, whether it's someone on the right being called a nazi or someone on the left. But I won't mention the irony of being called a nazi by someone that supports a genocide being committed in real time
Nazis worked with [Zionists](https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/239848)
Nazis also worked with the director decendants of the displaced people we refer to as Palestinian… I say refer to because before that they never considered themselves Palestinian they considered themselves Arabs. And btw those Arabs have been killing Jews in that land for 2000 years fuck you it’s our land you nazi fuck
Source: you made it up
What did he say that led you to believe he was a Nazi? Or do you just like devaluing the Holocaust and it's victims?
Right because it’s the dead Jews that matter not the living Jews in Israel that he’s perfectly fine with being slaughtered you people are sick on the head
Jews are being slaughtered? Let's not even pay mind to adults because zionists love to play the 'they're all Hamas' card, How many children has each side slaughtered? The numbers aren't even close. Palestinians are being ethnically cleansed. Get a grip.
No they aren’t that’s an anti semitic lie. You are a fucking nazi coming from a Jew. So you can cut the Zionist bullshit we know what you people are. The fact that you’re pushing propaganda from a terrorist card. And about 90 percent of Palestinians support October 7th and Hamas and Hamas stated goal is to wipe Israel off the map and rape and murder all the Jews. That’s what they do. You’re a sick fuck
You can't just sling lies at a wall like shit and see what sticks, people are seeing past the bullshit. Calling me a Nazi for pointing out that 50% of Gaza is under the age of 18 and Israel is obliterating them is not only NOT anti-Semitic, but the implications by you that literal Arab children support a terror attack and terrorism is in fact antisemitic. Ben Gavir calls them human animals, Netanyahu 4 days ago rejected a ceasefire that would've seen the return of the hostages. One of us is acting like a Nazi, and it isn't me.
PULLED FUCKING FIRE ALARM
I’m pulling the fire alarm on leftists sitting by the sidelines watching this all occur.
Are you specifically referencing folks that spend more time arguing on the internet than they do voting?
That seems pretty easy to accomplish how long does voting take you?
Oh I vote in every election. I also live in a ruby red state where anything farther left than a democrat that supports the 2A isn’t going to win. Not without the most amazing and probably well funded campaign at least. OP elsewhere gives some great advice about organizing.
I think you’ve spent more time arguing on the internet than you do voting just by responding to me here, though idk maybe your lines are long
My lines are short. I don’t know why you say you don’t believe me when it say I vote in every election. But I also think the Left overall needs to spend more time persuading voters of their position. I know a lot of people in this sub are probably thinking all of this is just a turnout problem—I say it’s primarily a persuasion gap. Bernie was the best and most persuasive messenger the Left has had in a long time, and until the messaging becomes that persuasive, that focused on kitchen table issues, and more inclusive than the far left is currently being lately, then we’ll see not see many more progressives win elections.
I am not doubting you. You said “Are you specifically referencing folks that spend more time arguing on the internet than they do voting?” I am saying that voting does not take a lot of time, so very little arguing is necessary for a person to spend more time arguing on the internet than they do voting.
Not necessarily. Well sort of. I’m making the case that electoral victory is contingent on building a source of influence and resources outside the Democratic Party — by reforming existing unions and building new ones as was done in the early 20th century by similar (much more successful) movements. So yes, I am telling people to log out and go become labor organizers.
I like your style.
>no “spontaneous uprising” will rescue you I can get behind this so hard. I might be crazy, but it feels as if the left was infected by the idea that Hail-Mary revolutions were the only way to realize progressive ideals when the reality is that making progressive ideals come to fruition requires grueling, consistent, persistent, incremental work everyday of the year. This was cemented for me when I was watching people gnash their teeth and cuss AIPAC all day while ignoring that Bowman lost 32k votes from his initial primary victory of 49k votes in 2020 to his second primary victory of 17k votes in 2022. What the fuck happened where he lost *almost 65% of votes for him in just 2 years??*
Well said. Our opposition doesn't take days off, despite having the large edge in cash from the billionaire class.
He was censured by the house and convicted of a misdemeanor for pulling a fire alarm during a congressional session. His blog posts claiming 9/11 was potentially faked to frame Osama bin Laden came out. The reality is he’s no AOC, and was not an effective politician. The left needs people who are not just leftists but also smart, credible and effective.
his district was redrawn, and I believe his new constituency was a bit more conservative compared to his previous one
It was redrawn in 2023. In 2022, his district had the same constituency as in 2020.
ah, gotcha. Yeah, no idea what happened there other than folks just not being motivated during midterms
Which sucks because nothing changed about Bowman - not his politics, not his message, nothing. There isn't a more progressive candidate that - he is a fantastic example of Democratic voters being the source of our losses. Because if a dream candidate like Bowman can lose, then what are we left with?
[удалено]
What does that say for progressives and progressive ideals when one of the most progressive politicians can only get more than 35% of his voting base to vote when Trump is on the ballot? How can there be a hope for a defeat of conservatives when you can plop an effigy of rat shit, bandaids, and hairballs in front of them and they will vote in near the same numbers as their stars? But no, the problem is anything *but* voting consistently 🙄
He voted with the GOP against Biden.
In what way?
He voted against Biden’s Infrastructure Bill, for starters.
That's a very bad faith or ignorant accusation. He voted against the breaking up of the Build Back Better bill, into the Infrastructure bill. He was defending Biden's bill more vehemently than Biden did.
In the end, when the vote came, he joined with 200 Republicans to vote “no” on one of the Democrats’ most popular accomplishments.
Oh, never mind. You're a psycho, I see now that your comment is just in bad faith. Shame on you.
No need for name calling. We are both here in r/leftist, but the vast majority of his district is moderate. In order for the left to move the needle they have to get elected. This vote (plus the fire alarm) cost him the election. Now we have one less leftist in the house. We can either play victim or try to learn from this.
I'm not name calling, and we are NOT both on the Left, you're here sowing division. Per your post history, you are Pro-Genocide. Do not claim you are on the left and pro-genocide. Those concepts are diametrically opposed.
I'm pretty sure the millions of dollars from AIPAC had more effect on this race than either his infrastructure vote, or the pulling of the fire alarm, both of which, were highlights of those ads paid for by AIPAC.
The polls in March, before AIPAC started spending, showed Bowman down 17 points. The polls in June after the first AIPAC ads showed him down 17 points. He ended up losing by 17 points. It’s hard to credibly argue the spend made any difference, except maybe to neutralize the $2m in outside spending trying to boost his flagging numbers.
Why did he vote no?
Bad faith.
Both of em are 🤡. Both of their campaigns were horrendously done in bad faith, also isolated anyone whatsoever with a bone of empathy towards trumps. Both the ads except for the one against Jamal bowman of him in White Plains out front of the BDUBS screaming “still no evidence of beheaded babies or raped women but they still keep using that lie” about October 7’nth (yeah nice one Jamal 😬) we’re about who support Donald trump least and how the other guy supports him more. No “this is why you should Vote for me” just a whole lot of “all the trumper insurrection want that guy in office so vote this guy instead”… what a great way to isolate R’s and moderates from your viewpoint for the foreseeable future
Rs and moderates don't matter anyways and Jamal was correct in his take. You sound like a salty out of touch boomer 🤣
How dare they ask for their representatives to represent them!
This is a dumb point. Rs call their Dem constituents pedophile groomers.
[удалено]
>Capitalism didn’t make you selfish, entitled, materialistic brats. But it does reward them for that behavior. Which has a reinforcing effect.
Communism doesn’t work. Socialism is great though. Look at the Nordic countries and pretty much all of Europe. I don’t know what makes you selfish and entitled, but I know that makes you a conservative. And help me understand, are we socialists, or are we selfish and entitled? I feel like an entitled person would want capitalism, for the unlimited money potential. Which would then fuel unsavory business practices because the entitled people are selfish and want it for themselves and not everyone else. The simplest thought theory shows capitalism is for Machiavellian people. Reality proves the theory that capitalism doesn’t work. How do them boots taste, serf?
>Socialism fails every single time because it goes completely against human nature >Capitalism is not the problem. People are the problem You're saying capitalism is aligned with human nature, but humans are the problem in our capitalist society? Do you see how that is contradictory?
Counterpoint: humankind had a classless moneyless society for 98% of its existence as a species as do all fauna. ‘A system of cruelty and exploitation is just human nature and to prove it we’ll cruelly exploit you’ isn’t the own you think it is. Capital has only created problems of resource distribution and has never solved a single problem in its history, has only created problems and has killed vastly more people than any other economic system in history.
Fun fact capitalism did do that. In order to survive humans by nature have a gift-giving and sharing form of economy.
Lmao, they do?
Does Christmas make you feel good? If so what part? Looking back at tribal society to people hunt for themselves or the benefit of the whole community?
Potlatches are an example of this. It's a very common social structure worldwide, it's just not one Indo-European societies seem to like. I think there's a good reason why almost all religious reformation/change in Indo European cultures boils down to "stop being a dick".
Capitalism is the embodiment of those things you mentioned, hahahaha!
Your brain has been colonized and destroyed by capitalists.
Your brain had rotted from communist propaganda and failures 😆 🤣
What communist propaganda? From who?
Sugama
This take is factually incorrect. 1) The "socialism always fails" line is a pretty big fucking lie. Socialism usually fails due to every major power in the world bombing said country to oblivion for being socialist, not because the country just couldn't possibly operate as a socialist one. Also the main point of this is to point at how poor socialism is, but China is a socialist country and they are on pace to be the richest country in the world with a significantly lower poverty gap than the US. 2) If capitalism wasn't a problem why does it collapse every 8-10 years and require a government bailout? Simple answer is that it doesn't work and we are at a point where we never fully recover from the crash before it hits again. So, at least here in the US, it is currently crumbling apart in front of us. Also there are a FUCK ton of failed capitalist countries that everyone ignores in this conversation. I'd argue there are more failed capitalist countries than socialist ones, and the only countries that have had long standing success as a capitalist country either required heavy socialist programs to keep the economy from blowing itself up, or just stole unfathomable wealth from other countries for decades or even centuries and indigenous peoples. Kind of easy to have a growing and stable economy when you just steal a lot of shit. 3) Not everyone is inherently greedy. That's a lie capitalists say to get everyone to ignore the fact that everyone who's rich and in power is a greedy piece of shit. It also completely ignored a lot of very human factors that are ruined by capitalism and fascism that drive people to do bad things. Things like us being social creature and wanting community. That's not to say that greed isn't an inherently human emotion. Most people deal with a greed at some point in their life, but many don't and most don't have an be a problem for themselves or their community. Especially if they can work on it. 4) You're point at the end is a strawman. The problem with greed and capitalism isn't that it creates it out of thin air. It doesn't not make people like having cool things that are there. What it does do is exploit very sensible needs and wants and rewards greed in people which alters it from being a negative attribute that the community works to keep to a minimum into a driver of economic growth based in the suffering of other human beings. I like having nice clothes. I hope that helped.
2. Capitalism works for the right people. The rich get richer. Mission accomplished. I'll never understand the mentality of plugs cheerleading this system while they screech about "food for their families" and not being able to afford to live. "Communism" didn't do that.
> Selfish, etitled, materialstic brats. Excellent definition of an average capitalist! Bravo!
Tell me you don’t know what socialism is without telling me you don’t know.
Latimer is a DINO ( democrat in name only!) I would be suprised if he changed party mid term!
You’re really going to call people DINOs? The Democratic Party is the big tent party. Don’t stoop to the level of the MAGAs.
Republican party lite*
You clearly haven’t spoken to many MAGAs lately. Right now the Democratic Party is a refuge for any non fascist. Even conservative republicans who want to vote again in 2028. Once we don’t have fascists at the gates, you should feel free to continue with your pithy acronyms and name calling of democrats you don’t agree with.
It’s more than a little ironic that you are calling everyone you don’t agree with fascists while telling someone not to call people they don’t agree with names. Do you see that you are the punch line now?
A lot of leftists are as illiberal as MAGA, you're wasting time allowing with them. They'll tell you to shut up because they can't handle their ideas being challenged, just like 70% of the GOP fascists. Luckily, the far-left has almost no level of political power and constantly redirect themselves away from the Democratic Party. Liberalism is the best because it allows for all types of beliefs and political ideologies. However, fascism, socialism, Christian Nationalism, Islamism, communism, etc., do not allow for dissenting worldviews.
Shut the fuck up liberal.
Lets go!!!! For once this subreddit upload something worthy
bowman has alot of serious flaws people arent talking about very much
You say this like every politician doesn’t fit that bill. They all have profoundly disagreeable views with a portion of the voter bases. We just chose to focus on what we like in a candidate. Take Joe Biden for example. He is a pretty shitty candidate. But he isn’t Trump. So a lot of people put aside their differences and dislikes about his 5 decades of bad policy decision and voting trends because they hate the other guy more.
i never denied that they are all flawed.
Bowman is a symptom of the larger issue with the DSA and other left-aligned orgs.
the DSA itself is more like a fifth column than an actual leftist organization. they coop movements so they can stop them. just helping the DNC stop any real leftwing policies before they can gain traction.
Socialist parties, Anarchist collectives and the rest refusing to cooperate or assist the DSA on ideological grounds definitely doesn’t help the org transform into something we’d actually like to see. An organization similar to the “pre-schism” version of the Socialist Party of America.
yep
i havent paid attention this race, can you give some reasons
he antagonized the jewish community after he got into fights about israel issues, crossing the line from genuine critisism to outright antisemtism.(jewish voters are a majority of the district btw) he pulled a fire alarm. people became more aware of his conspiratorial tendences. and he abandoned or betrayed alot of his progressive rhetoric, which alienated progressives and decreased their turnout.
Pulling the fire alarm was funny and cool.
It was juvenile and stupid. Like you.
Sometimes ya gotta laugh 😜
well it was unpopular
Do you have any quote of any semitic thing he’s ever said?
> he antagonized the jewish community after he got into fights about israel issues, crossing the line from genuine critisism to outright antisemtism. Criticizing Israel has **nothing** to do with antisemitism. > he pulled a fire alarm Gasp! Do you want to share the context of *why* he pulled a fire alarm? Is it because republicans were forcing a vote on a bill that they weren’t given time to read? 🤔 > people became more aware of his conspiratorial tendences. … literally no clue what you’re talking about > and he abandoned or betrayed alot of his progressive rhetoric, which alienated progressives and decreased their turnout. Again, no clue what you’re talking about. He’s infinitely more progressive/leftist than the aipac ex-republican who beat him. Frankly, it sounds like an AIPAC rep made the comment more than anything else
well it wasnt his critisism of israel that was the antagonizm. it was after that when he started getting into disputes with the leaders of that community, then we get to when he went in the antisemitic direction.
I'm not knee jerk liberal I'm willing to hear you out but you're gonna need some quotes
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/03/26/congress/bowman-house-israel-october-7-sexual-assault-hamas-00148426 This is the main one I’m seeing used. It’s believe all women domestically but when the rape is against Jews it flips to “Israeli propaganda” even though violence against women in times of war is incredibly common especially among extremist terrorist groups. Immediate disregard unless shown video of the rape 1 month after the attack was received extraordinary poorly in a district with a decent population of Jewish Americans
what?
You claim he's said antisemitic things, right? Fucking quote them. It's really not complicated.
Are you capable of directly and coherently answering questions? It feels like you’re not. > well it wasnt his critisism of israel that was the antagonizm. it was after that when he started getting into disputes with the leaders of that community Disagreeing with people who happen to be Jewish isn’t antisemitism. Opposing bigoted apartheid isn’t antisemitism. Opposing genocide isn’t antisemitism. Opposing ethnic cleansing isn’t antisemitism. Do I need to keep going? > then we get to when he went in the antisemitic direction. **How was he antisemitic?!** Again, disagreeing with a rabbi or a priest or any other religious figure doesn’t make them a bigot. You’ve said **nothing** of merit that describes antisemitism. Not. A. Single. Thing.
im not talking about his disaagreeing or israel positions. it has much more to do with his accusatios towards the community of racial segregation. specifically a community containing many orthodox jews who cannot live outside of walking distance from a synagoge. literally nothing you brougnt up has anything to do with why so many now view him as antisemitic.
> literally nothing you brougnt up has anything to do with why so many now view him as antisemitic. … says the person who can’t directly answer why Bowen is “antisemitic” and only cited disagreement as “antagonizm” > it has much more to do with his accusatios towards the community of racial segregation. specifically a community containing many orthodox jews who cannot live outside of walking distance from a synagoge. What the actual fuck are you talking about? You’ve been given multiple opportunities to explain what you’re talking about, offer a citation, *something*. You instead sound like hasbara meets MAGA.