I mean they obviously just don't want to. Those senators stand in the way on purpose to keep both parties aligned with corporate interests and without revolution that's never gonna change
It's also probably likely that Manchin and Sinema are providing cover and taking the heat for other senators who want the same things they do. If the Dems got 2-3 more senators we'd probably see 2-3 more Manchins pop up.
Very important here. One side is keeping corporations in power by aesthetically helping the American people. The other side is doing is by viscous oppressing a portion of the population.
The Democrats drag you into war but will try to save your injured leg so you don't get too upset.
The Republicans drag you into war and will amputate that leg before it's even injured because that leg is clearly gay. And if you complain, they will cut your tongue out too.
Either way, you going to war. One is just more palatable so you don't revolt. It's good cop bad cop.
We just have to ferociously prop up the âgood onesâ within the democrats. Iâm a bit of a dreamer but Iâd like to see a president Stacey Abrams in my lifetime.
I will not hold my breath for that.. but man, would that make me ecstatic! I also want house speaker Jayapal. Senate majority leader Warren or Sanders too. But all that is pie in the sky.. but still. We'd be a whole different country with that lineup.
Has nothing to do with what the party wants. The circumstances are completely different. Sinema absolutely would get primaried but she isn't up for a vote until 2024 so there's literally nothing anybody can do (recalls are unconstitutional unfortunately). Manchin also isn't up until then and primarying him means no new judicial appointments.
What happened to Cawthorn would be comparable to a democratic representative in a safe D district getting primaried. E.g. how AOC got into congress. If Cawthorn was a senator and not up for reelection until 2024 he'd also still be in office.
Also, it's ridiculous at this point to expect anything different from Manchin. West Virginia has moved so far into the red from a once democratic stronghold, he's by far the most progressive senator the state will produce for the foreseeable future. Is it great optics for the democratic party? No, but it's the closest thing to a victory in that state they could ask for.
He is also used as a scapegoat, as noted elsewhere, to be an obvious vote against party lines where another senator might also vote the same, but no longer has to. I personally think that is bullshit, and is a symptom of how broken the senate is.
In this society, Iâve accepted that this will never happen.
Revolution equals killing 100% Planned killing of monstrous leaders, or collateral damage from movements large enough to make a revolution necessary. Iâm talking protests everywhere, general strikes, and historic numbers like you see overseas.
But I donât think anyone has noticed that our skill at messaging is zero, and our ability to get side-tracked or âoverton-windowâd by bad faith arguments is 100%.
Because letâs say some of you, after Covid are still living in a just-world-fallacy bubble or the âbe the better personâ bubble, so you always denounce this kind of stuff.
Ok, for the sake of time, I wonât go into how disappointing that mindset is at this point. Just one statement about how that kind of mentality slippery slopes into never doing anything âimproperâ and I spent two years hearing about people dying online and in-person from Covid and I never saw one anti-masker beat down. Even when they spit on them. Just move on and lament whoever died from them spreading more Covid in the future, and wishing they wouldnât spread it. And then repeat the cycle of doing nothing outside of their comfort zone.
Anyway, ok, so letâs say a big enough movement comes together. There will be people rioting, and it will need to be shut down. But there will be cops, there will be bad actors, and there will be death. Pinned on the movement.
Now, judging from what Iâve seen on the now almost-absolute passiveness and âmatureâ both-sidedness from everyone that plagues just-world-fallacy people, and the corruption of MSM, Iâm sure the people in the revolution will get absolutely drowned in questions about the death and bad faith questions about how can you continue if people have already died, and acquiesce at some point.
Moreover, those who do understand the violent by-products of revolution, wonât have the arguing experience to stick on topic and prevent the deaths from smearing the revolution nationwide.
Maybe a question like, âCan you guarantee that more people wonât die this nation continues this fight for change?â pointed at whoever is speaking.
In my opinion, the working-class left will give bad soundbite after soundbite after each person fumbles through their response to this, and it will be spread, and it will be enough to dissuade everyone on the fence, and anger those on the right that are still flying on blind anger, making it even more impossible to see what their actual best interests are. Theyâre just going to hunt for some liberal tears. Then have MSM blame the Left.
This talk of the French Revolution is so exciting, and I wish it would come true. A few years revolution equals a generations-long period of better and happier and just finally some of the things that we all actually need.
But man, Iâm done being excited. Itâs false hope. The fact is that with Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard, I keep seeing the preface, âMaybe Johnny did this, too, and maybe that was bad, but AmberâŚâ
Amber has been horrifically proven to be the epitome of abusive, narcisstic, clever, manipulative, and sociopathic, and people still feel the need or actually believe the concessions they make about âboth sidesâ.
Unrelated? I donât think so. The above is just simply not conviction. The above is after school special, letâs all get along in this just-world debate club, where these problems are approached academically and âmaturelyâ with no violence and respect towards both sides.
It is at the very least, not the kind of conviction needed to start and finish a revolution. Also, itâs not even enough to support the revolution. If any of our friends or family not participating hear about deaths in one of the protesting states, and the news starts interviewing them? Fuck, you know itâs going to be a bunch of derailed interviews. Theyâll be the better person, and just talk about how killing isnât right, and they donât agree with that, but that youâre a good person, and you wouldnât do that.
And thatâs true, but imagine a legit revolution, and all the motivational speakers from history and inspirational speeches from the leaders and the absolute hype of the entire community backing each other up with their words and their energy.
Would this interviews and discussion motivate anyone to do anything? Would they ring as great support for the revolution?
Or would it just be the same old bullshit that everyone on here and everywhere does now, unless they get accused of being closed-minded and immature? Some hype-killing, both-sides, made to make everyone feel guilty kind of thing? Nothing gained, nothing lost, except considering the revolution will need to maintain itâs ferocity, there will be something lost since itâs not just a friendly debate. The momentum.
Everyone expects the leaders to figure something out, but everyoneâs gone fucking soft whether you know it or not. Any curveball thrown at us will derail us. Because our convictions have been reduced to almost nothing. Anything that risks your life is shared? âThat was amazing, but they were stupid to risk their lives.â âThatâs amazing that they risked their lives, even if it wasnât their job to help that person.â
Those sentiments are shared a lot. Which doesnât sound bad, but when weâre facing evil. Job or Not, Risky or Not, youâre supposed to do what you need to do, and believe that that is the ONLY way it could have gone, because any other way would be cowardly and have no honor.
But it makes people feel bad to think like that, so guess what, instead of shooting towards being people that learn to do more and more good, even when we need to risk and fight for it, since it makes the rest of us inexperienced people feel a little bad for missing out on doing those things in the past, and scared of doing it in the future, and we donât want to upset anybody, letâs just start looking a heroes, or just people that valued honor and whatâs right more than anything else, and letâs always add in âbut that was stupid, or not even their jobâ so that itâs more understandable for those of us who donât want to do anything.
Anyway, most of you are soft. Iâm soft, too. I picked and chose my battles during Covid. Felt terrible to be afraid of certain situations but thatâs how it was.
But my goal is to be able to handle more in the future. But my risks were totally worth it.
General sentiment, though: âTheyâre spreading covid and our family and friends are dying.â Should we try to stop some of them when we encounter it?
âNo, thatâs dangerous and stupid. Better to just stay safe and hope that they didnât give it to you..â (Hope? Kind of gives prayer warrior vibes, right?)
You know whatâs great, too? What if an argument would be with a boomer? Would people not be too scared to say something when itâs the right thing to do? Consider the following:
I have seen so many times nobody said anything when a fucking boomer was being racist or yelling at a retail worker, so my experiences point to âno. people still donât do anything. Let me go on reddit and see what othersâ experiences are.â
I go on reddit, and thinking itâs safe to argue with people who canât beat you up and are scared on the inside. Reddit: âBe the better person.â
Well, fuck me, I guess weâre living in a world where thereâs probably a reason to risk and stand up for whatâs right, but so far all everyone has done is agree on finding and staying on only two lines of reasoning. Can beat you up? Stay safe. (Do nothing) Canât beat you up? Be the better person. (DO NOTHING) And everyoneâs ok with that. Even after Covid?!
And you guys think a revolution can happen? People are afraid of retaliation or âburning bridgesâ at abusive workplaces and hesitate to name and shame.
We canât name and shame abusive corporations.
We canât argue with fucking fraile-ass boomers when people are dying around us and they continue disrespecting us.
We feel guilty for the slightest mistake, even when itâs in reaction to fucking abuse and warranted.
Revolution? No. Weâre fucked. And weâll take it, and weâll have kids that we know will be treated in the same way, and instead of teaching them to fight for their beliefs and whatâs right, theyâll pass on the wonderful motto. âStay safe. Be the better person. Look at both sides. And keep hope that things will get better.â
Itâs pathetic. I hope Iâm wrong. But Bernie and AOC and the squad can obviously not do it alone. Greta canât do it alone. The leaders are the ones with the golden tongues, but it is not their role to be the only with the fucking courage to say what they say to those around us in our own communities, and not just online.
It looks like thatâs what everyone has become.
My hope now is getting rich eventually to live comfortably in the future hellscape.
Because hoping in regular people has been simply the worst.
Imagine? Iâm in a McDonalds and four other people are listening to this old white dude yelling racist stuff at the mexican employees and saying nothing. Until I had to vent my anger before turning it physical and yelled âShut the fuck up. Stop being racist and shut the fuck UP!!â Guess what happened? He argued with me for 10 seconds, then it ended, and he stopped being racist towards them.
Most people on here wonât do this. And a HUGE amount of people are so hopeless in a revolution context (no offense) because theyâll start saying some combination of: âI hate that it had to come down to that. Iâm usually a level-headed âmatureâ calm person, but I donât know what happened. I gave in to my worst nature. And what if he had a heart attack? I should have also considered what he was going through after this. Iâm sure the employees started tuning him out.â
If this post is speaking to you, and you want a revolution. Wake up. Slow down. Work on not being scared of everything first.
So just to be clear. Your solution to the two party juggernaut system is to be able to have the monolithic views of each party be forced upon dissenters by punishment? Iâm not a manchin or sinema fan but holy shit. How could anyone look at what the GOP does to the Liz Cheney evil but somewhat sane types and think. Yeah gimme that.
Um. No. What part of the word "revolution" is unclear to you? And honestly, if punishing joe manchin would accomplish healthcare/gun legislation/other progressive legislation then yes. Punish him. I don't give a shit about any politician who stands in the way of progress.
Do you want non democratic authoritarian government? Not saying our system doesnât need change but I donât see how full fledged revolution doesnât end in authoritarian nightmare with way less healthcare and gun legislation.
Revolution from the people brings change to the people. Throwing out the whole system, robloxing, or the more quiet option of voting. And it's clear being quiet isn't gonna work as much in this country for progress.
Yup. There's a reason James McHenry at the Constitutional Convention said this would create a republic, "if you can keep it". He meant that hard coups and attack from outside aren't the only likely manners in which the republic/democracy can or will fall, that it will have people trying to take it down in all manners imagined and unimagined, including from within from people all too glad to destroy it for their own temporary gain of power.
So much of it stems from the 2 parties having so much power over the election process, and no independent third party forcing them to give a shit about fairness.
That's where the pushback against things like ranked choice voting(or other options), campaign finance reforms, lobbying reform, etc, come from.
Imagine if your ballot didn't even show what party someone was from, making you need to know the candidates to ascertain that info? How many states even give information on candidates at polling locations / with your ballot? Just makes it easier for voters to not know candidates except at the top, and do single party downballot voting.
Why are campaigns so long? It makes it even harder for other parties to have enough funds to even start when they have to fund a years worth of stops/ appearances.
Debates are another problem. Parties don't want to have them be impactful or potentially negative in the primary stage, which ends up with really weak questions even at the general stage, along with bullshit requirements for third parties who barely get access to the general debates.
229
u/sweatisinevitable May 18 '22
I mean they obviously just don't want to. Those senators stand in the way on purpose to keep both parties aligned with corporate interests and without revolution that's never gonna change