No, the Democrats did not lose by going too far left.

[UltraChad]

The Democratic Party is no party of the left.

I disagree, and I'll explain ...but ok. I'll accept your POV is what it is.

It is a reactionary force to suppress class struggle and serves the interests of the financial elite.

So I see where we are disconnecting. Hear me out.....

Marxism while the dominant leftist ideology for a long time and where many leftist find their ideological roots, is not the left in general and is not what defines the left. That is to say Marxism is a specific type or subcategory of the general left but it is not THE left, which would be all the various ideological groups that share leftist values, primarily collectivism and equity. It is the collectivism and equity value that ties all leftist....how they view/apply it determines what kind of leftist.

For example, Trotskyites, democratic socialist, certain sects of anarchist, libertarian socialist and Maoist are ALL on the left but none of them are Marxist. The core values they all share? Collectivism and equity. They all view them differently, but they all have a collectivism and equity value preference.

Dems are modern western progressives, ideological cousins of Marxist in that they have a oppressor/oppressed dynamic that they see and resist, but they don't do class struggle .....their struggle dynamic is across race/gender demographics.

It undermines working class interests, backs war and counterrevolution, co-opts movements, divides with identity politics and misdirects attention away from class economic issues, and refuses to address ongoing, systemic crises.

Spoken like a mostly Marxist, all the class stuff I agree and I explained why above. War, I don't believe to be right or left, as all flavors of both have long historical records of engage in it whenever it suits them.

 

[Politruk]

For example, Trotskyites, democratic socialist, certain sects of anarchist, libertarian socialist and Maoist are ALL on the left but none of them are Marxist.

Actually, Trotskyists and Maoists are Marxists -- or, would say they are. Maoism is somewhat revisionist, I suppose, in that it treats the agrarian peasantry as a potentially revolutionary class -- Marx mostly dismissed them as irrelevant.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

“why has it never been tried?”

Many attempts at socialism were made; they were consistently undermined by external pressures, internal contradictions, and Capitalist encroachments. Remember that it is very much in ruling class interests to see that attempts at socialism end in ruin.

That a socialist experiment would succeed is, for the ruling class, a solitary horror. This is why such efforts are repressed [Red Scare, targeted attacks], economic sabotage [sanctions, embargoes], propaganda [Cold War rhetoric], coups and interventions [ex: ‘73, Chile], system manipulation [funding centrist, right-wing factions], and more.

But failures by specific regimes don’t argue against socialist principles. Democratic control, public decisions about resource distribution and development, ending exploitation and injustice, etc., these are not overturned by this, especially in the face of such opposition as I described.

 

[UltraChad]

No, it isn't. No more than feminism or LGBT rights are leftist.

Here's a good rule of thumb: If it costs the plutocrats nothing, it ain't leftist.

Yes it is....feminism is leftist, they want forced collectivism and equity for women in everything they do. That's why it's always aligned with the left.

That's not how the left is defined. The left is defined by collectivism and equity value alignment. Not their threat level to your imaginary boogieman.

Of course it is -- but it is not Democratic policy. Never was, not even in the FDR or LBJ years.

It absolutely is, that's why they are absolutely fanatical about having a thousand alphabet agencies going full gestapo with 900 TRILLION pages of microprint regulations backing that that effectively eliminate private property, free commerce and any rights to ones own labor.

RationalWiki is not like that at all. .

Keep lying to yourself...I'm sure you'll gaslight a few other gullible tards with no actual education, just a lot of time in a public babysitting center.

"Collective ownership under democratic control" has never been tried.

Yes it has, many times...it devolves into a dictatorship, every time. Just about if not literally every socialist experiment ever in the last 200 years. Because at the end of the day, SOMEONE has to make the call ....someone has to order tens of thousands of individualistic, liberal capitalist to the ditch or gulag.

And not shockingly most leftist look for any strong man they can find to abdicate THAT responsibility as fast as they can. So you get Stalin....Mao....Pot....Kim...Castro...Hitler...etc.

 

[Politruk]

Yes it is....feminism is leftist, they want forced collectivism and equity for women in everything they do. That's why it's always aligned with the left.

Equity has nothing to do with collectivism.

It absolutely is, that's why they are absolutely fanatical about having a thousand alphabet agencies going full gestapo with 900 TRILLION pages of microprint regulations backing that that effectively eliminate private property, free commerce and any rights to ones own labor.

None of that effectively eliminates private property, etc. The U.S. is significantly less regulatory than the social democracies of Europe, and capitalism thrives in those.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

“I disagree, and I'll explain ...but ok. I'll accept your POV is what it is.

So I see where we are disconnecting. Hear me out.....”

UltraChad — the thing about going on about Marxism all the time [and I’ve seen nowhere near enough of you to classify you in that], is that sooner or later, you bump into an actual Marxist. For you? This is that day.

And by the way, Trotskyism IS the Marxism of the 21st century. But you are very correct on this point … ‘we are disconnecting.’

Take care and have a good one!

 

[UltraChad]

Actually, Trotskyists and Maoists are Marxists -- or, would say they are.

In the same way that Cannibal Corpse and Dying Fetus is just like the Beatles or Elvis. Both are "rock" so they are related.....ok.

But they aren't the same, there are very well defined distinctions that separate them, that's why they have different names for them.

Maoism is somewhat revisionist, I suppose, in that it treats the agrarian peasantry as a potentially revolutionary class -- Marx mostly dismissed them as irrelevant.

Yes, and also Mao sewed some seeds that would become roots for modern western progressives with his ideas about the 4 olds and cultural revolution. And democrats being progressives support that part, they want to unburden what has been BIGLY.

 

[UltraChad]

Equity has nothing to do with collectivism.

Didn't say it did, I said those are the defining values of the left.

None of that effectively eliminates private property, etc.

Are you high?? LOL

Last I checked having to pay rent and ask permission for use and then being told how and when you can use, THEN having to give up 1/2-2/3 of everything you got from that use just to not have the state destroy you?? Isn't ownership of shit.....that's called serfdom, the socialist hell.

The U.S. is significantly less regulatory than the social democracies of Europe, and capitalism thrives in those.

Yes, and it's less capitalist than those social democracies. Because our regulations aren't about public safety or even wellbeing, they are about controlling the economy and extracting as much wealth from it as possible for the state.

 

[UltraChad]

UltraChad — the thing about going on about Marxism all the time [and I’ve seen nowhere near enough of you to classify you in that], is that sooner or later, you bump into an actual Marxist. For you? This is that day.

I'm not a Marxist and I don't really care if you are or not.

And by the way, Trotskyism IS the Marxism of the 21st century. But you are very correct on this point … ‘we are disconnecting.’

Interesting take.

Take care and have a good one!

You too.

 

[Politruk]

Yes, and it's less capitalist than those social democracies.

By no reasonable measure. None of them outranks the U.S. on the Index of Economic Freedom.

 

[Politruk]

Because our regulations aren't about public safety or even wellbeing, they are about controlling the economy and extracting as much wealth from it as possible for the state.

Nobody involved wants to do that. Nobody has a personal interest in directing money to state coffers. The state is not like a business corporation where the CEO gets bonuses and stock options based on company profits. No civil servant goes into it for the money, and any politician who does is thinking in terms of consulting fees and lobbying jobs after leaving office.

 

[YDB95]

There are a lot of obituaries going around and I am sure that eventually, there will be a consensus, but the gut feeling is that too many people looked at Kamala Harris and did not see the promise of a first (black) woman president or someone who looked like them, but someone who was out of their depth, inarticulate and too unserious to lead, the ultimate, absurd logical conclusion to AA and DEI and everything else championed as "fair." (This should be the jump the shark moment for those schools of thought.)

It's hard to take that seriously coming from anyone who thinks "out of their depth, inarticulate and too unserious to lead" doesn't apply to Trump. And I say that as a progressive who actually does think my side sometimes pushes identity politics too far.

The problem for my former party is that as the traditional party of the working man, they were coopted by the elites who do not think highly of the working man (me), but rather see him as a hapless ward whose life must be managed in he/she/its best interests but they have yet to be successful in enticing us into group identity. We still want to pursue our own happiness.

By voting for the party that always caters to the ultra-rich at everyone else's expense?

THIS is exactly why he won. Everything is still 'all white people are bigots" and that is literally all you have and have had for years, and what a surprise, you're still doing it because you cannot admit for a second that a political party needs more than name calling

No one here ever said that, certainly not me. As for what I do think about "exactly why he won", it's that too many people interpret any effort whatsoever to address racism and its effects as "all white people are bigots". As we all see nearly every time you post.

Keep going and in 2028 it will be Vance with 60+ senate seats and a massive house majority.

I doubt it. We've seen time and again that only Trump can be Trump.

They want to hate, they want to be angry, they want to feel morally superior, they are not happy unless they are not happy and want to be part of a self-righteous lynch mob. End of the day, all their anger is a projection of their own problems. So insecure and so deluded they cannot do anything but hate anyone who thinks differently.

That's the most eloquent description of the Republicans I've seen in a long while.

 

[UltraChad]

By no reasonable measure. None of them outranks the U.S. on the Index of Economic Freedom.

Several of them and over 20 nations total do. Read the index....we did this yesterday, you lost.

Nobody involved wants to do that. Nobody has a personal interest in directing money to state coffers.

LMFAO!!! Then why do they want to take 1/2 my labor and make me pay rent them on all the shit I supposedly own??

The state is not like a business corporation where the CEO gets bonuses and stock options based on company profits.

You're right it's more like the Mafia..... you pay them protection money to protect you from what they'll do to you if you don't pay them protection money.

No civil servant goes into it for the money, and any politician who does is thinking in terms of consulting fees and lobbying jobs after leaving office.

JeeBus H. Cristola........ I wish I could be the delusional. Have you never heard of Nancy Pelosi??? LMFAO.....how much (D) Kool-Aid do you chug every morning??

 

[ChloeTzang]

Those are all lies. Immigrants are no threat to national security. They don't want to harm this country, they want to live here.

You are correct. Immigrants are generally no threat to national security.

Illegal aliens are completely different from immigrants.

 

[UltraChad]

That's the most eloquent description of the Republicans I've seen in a long while.

It's also a democrat projection.

 

[LLCox]

That's not left stuff. See post #2.

Hey, I don't give a fuck. What I said still stands.

 

[Politruk]

You are correct. Immigrants are generally no threat to national security.

Illegal aliens are completely different from immigrants.

No, they are exactly the same.

 

[UltraChad]

You are correct. Immigrants are generally no threat to national security.

Illegal aliens are completely different from immigrants.

They can't acknowledge any difference or they have to admit they fucked up and that Orange Hitler was correct. NEVER happening.

They'll die on that hill.

 

[MasterAnimus]

You are correct. Immigrants are generally no threat to national security.

Illegal aliens are completely different from immigrants.

I agree - pretty, white, illegal immigrants are no threat. In fact, they can be FLOTUSes: https://www.vox.com/2016/11/5/13533816/melania-trump-illegal-immigrant

Apparently, Musk too: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuart...-illegally-says-about-the-immigration-system/

We need immigration reform in the country for sure, but Melania Knaus allegedly violated visa rules for the exact same reason many others from Central/South America do - better living.

 

[Politruk]

JeeBus H. Cristola........ I wish I could be the delusional. Have you never heard of Nancy Pelosi??? LMFAO.....how much (D) Kool-Aid do you chug every morning??

There is no way to make a LOT of money DIRECTLY, in salary, from government service. Even the POTUS earn chump change compared to a corporate CEO.

 

[UltraChad]

There is no way to make a LOT of money DIRECTLY, in salary, from government service. Even the POTUS earn chump change compared to a corporate CEO.

Gooning the market to stuff your pockets is pretty direct. They're fuckin' criminals and you'd see that if you took your tongue off Nancy's pumps for a second and get some self respect.

 

[TomTeacher19]

I disagree. By every reasonable and intelligent measure the nation in 2024 should be beyond ready to be far more open to what is considered "left" but they aren't. They are still mostly stupid and ignorant and sadly conservative. The one time we didn't elect an old white straight man as president was when he was half black and a once in a lifetime level orator and leader. The Dems keep thinking they can push more left but they can't. But they never learn. In 2028 JD Vance will likely win after four disastrous years because the Democrats will run a Buttegeig Rhonna ticket as they continue to ignore that 50 million voters in this country are totally consumed with their racist, sexist, misogynistic, bigoted beliefs that they shamefully hide until the ballot comes .

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

We used to have a term for this…Fellow Travelers.

If the Marxist shoe fits…

 

[UltraChad]

I disagree. By every reasonable and intelligent measure the nation in 2024 should be beyond ready to be far more open to what is considered "left" but they aren't.

What's intelligent about giving up your property and labor to a largely worthless state??

What's so great about being enslaved to the collective???

They are still mostly stupid and ignorant and sadly conservative.

We like our basic human rights.....nothing sad about that.

 

[TomTeacher19]

What's intelligent about giving up your property and labor to a largely worthless state??

What's so great about being enslaved to the collective???

Intelligence includes being able to read and comprehend what is written, which once again you continue to demonstrate an inability to do.

We like our basic human rights.....nothing sad about that.

The fuck you do. Half of what you want isn't a basic human right at all and if you really cares about basic human rights you wouldn't make a huge part of your platform and efforts to be taking away basic human rights from others.