The Democratic Party's Slide Into Irrelevance
Attaching a poll ... Dems unfavorability rating increased from 45% to 57% during the Biden Administration.
honestly I hadn't even seen your prior post and I responded in isolation. sorry about that.
Here's what you said beforehand:
What I was saying is that you are deducing from a past cashless society to the possibility of a future cashless society. But actually this is a faulty deduction because you can’t just point to something we have been doing for x thousand of years and from there deduce that it’s normative. Namely there could be reasons why it won’t work such as changing circumst
Paraphrasing (and contextualizing), "slavery worked then but we wouldn't go for it now" so we wouldn't reimplement slavery.
and afterwards:
The pattern was that the developed cultures had slaves and the isolated ones with little technology and resources didn’t.
But let’s say it wasn’t true for the sake of argument. If it were true, would that mean that slavery is suddenly something we should bring back?
the reason to forego the benefits of slavery is moral
does kinda indicate maybe a causal rather than resultant connection? I'm not totally sober right now and it's late, so sorry if I'm misreading.
Great, so by your logic then because slavery has been such a longstanding practice of humanity then we should keep doing slavery.
My logic says that we should get rid of money which has a legacy as long as slavery.
There is nothing in that which implies that I wish to preserve the institution of slavery. That's entirely a manifestation of the darkness of your heart.
Fetterman preparing to switch parties ..... he knows he can't win a Democratic primary again. Can he win as a Gooper ?
Huh?
Literally the first sentence of the article:
Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., said he has no plans to leave the Democratic Party, but he would be forced to if the party turns its back on U.S. support for Israel, The Hill reported.
Amazin'!
honestly I hadn't even seen your prior post and I responded in isolation. sorry about that.Here's what you said beforehand:Paraphrasing (and contextualizing), "slavery worked then but we wouldn't go for it now" so we wouldn't reimplement slavery.and afterwards:the reason to forego the benefits of slavery is moraldoes kinda indicate maybe a causal rather than resultant connecti
What I’m trying to intuition pump with those candidate counterarguments is that the inference from we used to do this thing and were fine to we can bring this thing back is a faulty inference. There’s nothing normative about what we used to do in the past.
I didn’t want to get into the weeds about why I thought my first analogy was fine, so I chose a different analogy that I thought would be pretty easy to agree with. Just because there was a history of past slavery and society was by and large fine (as in it didn’t go extinct, which is Nut Nut’s normative obsession) doesn’t mean it would work to bring it back.
You could be pro-slavery and still affirm that. Maybe you’re pro-slavery all things being equal and think in an ideal world, we would have slavery, but instrumentally you oppose slavery in the actual world because you know if we brought it back 99% of people would be against it, causing there to be mass chaos and riots.
Someone that is anti-money in an ideal world could take that same position.
I have a hard enough time w/ class guilt asking the grocery clerk not to mix meats while bagging.
The pattern was that the developed cultures had slaves and the isolated ones with little technology and resources didn’t.
But let’s say it wasn’t true for the sake of argument. If it were true, would that mean that slavery is suddenly something we should bring back?
huh? nobody is arguing the bolded.
I took contention with this part
We had slavery for thousands of years and the societies that had it were often comparably better off than the ones that didn’t
Right, and it wouldn't matter as much as people think even if we did because when the kids start taking their labor vouchers down to the comic con, the guy holding the Action Comics 1 isn't going to except the same amount of vouchers as the dude trading his Alpha Flights. The market is going to emerge regardless.
El-Sayed exposing the evil of corporate media in his interview with Jake Tapper
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/el-...
“I’m running for Senate in Michigan and, in Michigan, people can’t afford their basic needs. They don’t get the healthcare they need and deserve. They’re worried about the quality of their kids’ school. And the questions seem less to be about the interests of Michiganders than the fact of something happening 6,000 miles away,” he added.
(Response to Tapper trying to make the conversation about Israel)
El-Sayed exposing the evil of corporate media in his interview with Jake Tapperhttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/el-...
El-Sayed may not fully understand the distinction between being a Senator from Michigan and being a Senator for Michigan. The Senate is a federal institution, so if elected he represents all citizens, not just the citizens of Michigan.
El-Sayed exposing the evil of corporate media in his interview with Jake Tapperhttps://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/el-...
Huh? It’s progressives that constantly make every single race about Israel-Palestine. What a weird comment from him. Also this makes sense when you’re running for Mayor of NYC, but when you’re running for the US Senate, asking about your foreign policy takes is extremely relevant.
By the way, this is a pretty weak answer for someone running for US Senate and shows his temperament may not be the best for the role.
Tapper suggested that El-Sayed disagrees based on past remarks, where the candidate told CNN that support for Israel could only be about AIPAC influence and “not if you’re a Democrat and you believe in human rights.”
“So, it sounds as though — and correct me if I’m wrong — it sounds as though you and Mayor Mamdani disagree about how big this tent should be, whether there’s room … in the tent for Israel supporters,” Tapper said.
El-Sayed began saying that in the Democratic Party “there’s always room in the tent for folks.”
“Every time I come on CNN, you guys ask me the same questions about these theoretical rights of existence, or whether or not I agree with the mayor of New York,” El-Sayed said.
Having said that, I didn’t watch the full interview.
Huh? It’s progressives that constantly make every single race about Israel-Palestine. .
Jake Tapper is the one raising the issue here and he is not a progressive. And progressives need not be ashamed about their opposition to ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Bernie campaigned on socialist policy like Medicare For All, paid family leave, overturning Citizens United, anti-oligarchy. He did not make Israel-Palestine a big part of his politicking.
Jake Tapper is the one raising the issue here and he is not a progressive. And progressives need not be ashamed about their opposition to ethnic cleansing and genocide.
I agree. Which is why it was strange for El-Sayed to be taken aback by the question.
Bernie campaigned on socialist policy like Medicare For All, paid family leave, overturning Citizens United, anti-oligarchy. He did not make Israel-Palestine a big part of his politicking.
Israel-Palestine wasn't a big part of much of anyone's politicking in the 2016 and 2020 Presidential races. The topic became particularly hot on 10/7/23.
Jake Tapper is the one raising the issue here and he is not a progressive. And progressives need not be ashamed about their opposition to ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Bernie campaigned on socialist policy like Medicare For All, paid family leave, overturning Citizens United, anti-oligarchy. He did not make Israel-Palestine a big part of his politicking.
Those are not socialist policies by the way. Those are social democrat policies and you guys should stop lying about what socialism actually entails.
And progressives absolutely bring up the issue quite a bit.
Two recent incidents involving US congressional candidates on opposite coasts have blown up into major controversies, underscoring how the Israel-Palestine conflict has transformed US elections – and illustrating how aggressive protest tactics can spark backlash that overshadows the issues activists meant to highlight.
Scott Wiener, a gay Jewish state senator and trans rights advocate who is currently the frontrunner in the race to replace the longtime representative Nancy Pelosi in California’s 11th district, said he felt forced to leave last week’s annual trans pride march in San Francisco after a group of people ran up to him at a local park where the event was taking place, surrounded him and screamed at him over his positions on Israel’s war on Gaza.
Well, it took me about ten seconds to find this:
socialism
noun
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.
that doesn't answer the question tho here is their equally reductive definition of communism
a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
his question was what are the useful distinction between these two things.
by these two given definitions the difference is holding all property in common vs holding the means of production in common.
that doesn't answer the question tho here is their equally reductive definition of communism
a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
his question was what are the useful distinction between these two things.
His question was the difference between socialism and progressivism.
Liberalism (as a synonym for progressivism):
a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
His question was the difference between socialism and progressivism.
Liberalism (as a synonym for progressivism):
oh! tyvm.
but why would you use a synonym? the whole idea is to get the specific meaning
The point is that neither of those two definitions would describe AOC's or Sanders' (e.g.) stated positions.
yes, point taken
