this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2025

0 points (NaN% liked)

Chat

8723 readers

1 users here now

Relaxed section for discussion and debate that doesn't fit anywhere else. Whether it's advice, how your week is going, a link that's at the back of your mind, or something like that, it can likely go here.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

AskBeehaw

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

remington@beehaw.org

alyaza@beehaw.org

Brood Parasitism in Leftist Politics (beehaw.org)

submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by millie@beehaw.org to c/chat@beehaw.org

228 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I want to draw attention to the elephant in the room.

Leading up to the election, and perhaps even more prominently now, we've been seeing droves of people on the internet displaying a series of traits in common.

Claiming to be leftists
Dedicating most of their posting to dismantling any power possessed by the left
Encouraging leftists not to vote or to vote for third party candidates
Highlighting issues with the Democratic party as being disqualifying while ignoring the objectively worse positions held by the Republican party
Attacking anyone who promotes defending leftist political power by claiming they are centrists and that the attacker is "to the left of them"
Using US foreign policy as a moral cudgel to disempower any attempt at legitimate engagement with the US political system
Seemingly doing nothing to actually mount resistance against authoritarianism

When you look at an aerial view of these behaviors in conjunction with one another, what they're accomplishing is pretty plain to see, in my opinion. It's a way of utilizing the moral scrupulousness of the left to cut our teeth out politically. We get so caught up in giving these arguments the benefit of the doubt and of making sure people who claim to be leftists have a platform that we're missing ideological parasites in our midst.

This is not a good-faith discourse. This is not friendly disagreement. This is, largely, not even internal disagreement. It is infiltration, and it's extremely effective.

Before attacking this argument as lacking proof, just do a little thought experiment with me. If there is a vector that allows authoritarians to dismantle all progress made by the left, to demotivate us and to detract from our ability to form coalitions and build solidarity, do you really think they wouldn't take advantage of it?

By refusing to ever consider that those who do nothing with their time in our spaces but try to drive a wedge between us, to take away our power and make us feel helpless and hopeless, we're giving them exactly that vector. I am telling you, they are using it.

We need to stop letting them. We need to see it for what it is, get the word out, and remember, as the political left, how to use the tools that we have to change society. It starts with us between one another. It starts with what we do in the spaces that we inhabit. They know this, and it's why they're targeting us here.

Stop being an easy target. Stop feeding the cuckoo.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Claiming to be leftists

Encouraging leftists not to vote or to vote for third party candidates

Highlighting issues with the Democratic party as being disqualifying while ignoring the objectively worse positions held by the Republican party

Attacking anyone who promotes defending leftist political power by claiming they are centrists and that the attacker is "to the left of them"

Using US foreign policy as a moral cudgel to disempower any attempt at legitimate engagement with the US political system

Seemingly doing nothing to actually mount resistance against authoritarianism

Except for the one example you listed that I omitted here, you've just described, like, at least 1/3 of Lemmy, maybe more.

The obvious ones I blocked long ago. There were some I didn't block, but a good chunk of those up and disappeared right after the election in November, so that was not suspicious at all.

Frankly, I'm just about done with anything "political" on social media and am just going to start employing keyword filters. I'll just have to find some other void to shout into when I need an outlet lol.

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Yep. It's a damn mess.

I don't claim to know how to make them be honest about their motivations or, in the case of those few who are genuinely being taken in by this garbage, wake the hell up and realize what they're throwing away. But I know that having the idea out there in the open in a digestible way can at least help some people get a better view of what's going on. Maybe they'll follow suit and block some of the worst ones. Maybe they'll rely less on social media for their perspectives on the world and realize that Lemmy isn't the exception to its toxicity just because it's open source.

We need to be more aware of them than we have been, though, because it's getting worse.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I just don't know a good way to deal with that, TBH. I wish I did.

how to make them be honest about their motivations

It's tough. If I get a funny feeling about an account and think they might be a concern troll (I think that's the term that applies here; if not, someone please correct me. I think "false ally" is a sub-class of that, but I'm shooting from the hip here),

I'll typically look back through their history, try to put things in context, and get a feel from there. The ones I blocked were pretty much all one-trick ponies, so that was easy (though tedious as it took a while "vetting" each one).

The problem there is, yes, you've identified that person. But everyone else needs to do the same legwork and come to the same conclusion. You can't just put up a sign that says "Troll" lol. Depending on the community/instance, you could report them, but that often puts mods in a sticky situation because they usually don't want to suppress anyone's viewpoint as long as it's not violating any rules.

or, in the case of those few who are genuinely being taken in by this garbage

That's even tougher. First, you have to figure out if they're the troll or the one who was trolled (troll-ee lol?) . And one, very rightfully, can't /shouldn't just start calling people trolls or shills. For one, they might be the troll-ee; going out of the gate with name-calling and accusations is definitely not the way to convince them to re-evaluate their views. For another, it just sets a bad tone and gives the impression that "everyone who disagrees with me is a troll".

But sometimes they are. What do you do then?

Wish I had an answer that didn't involve writing multiple theses on a number of topics as they try to sealion me into submission lol.

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

So, everyone actually doesn't have to do the same legwork. If most of the posters in a community block someone, that person won't be able to post in most of the threads in that community and won't get the engagement they're looking for.

Whether they're trolls or whether they're useful idiots, I say block them. Not only that, actively encourage others to do the same. If we take to blocking these people on sight the moment they start spouting this bullshit, they very quickly will see threads full of "# additional responses" that they can't actually see or respond to.

In some cases it might actually be worth reporting them, too. A lot of them go well beyond the rules of the communities they're engaging with, but I've also seen at least one instance where a very prominent cuckoo-poster got chased off the instance by the staff. He was basically told to knock it off or leave and he chose the latter. Good riddance.

[–] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Don't the people you block still see your posts?

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm under the impression that they can't reply to them directly.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] peregrin5@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

This is just Lemmy and the whole "leftist" influencer sphere (read: people who watch Hasan Piker and take him seriously).

I completely agree with everything you mention here but you're going to make a lot of Lemmies very mad.

They aren't open to real discourse and will literally ally with Republicans if it means they can take down Democrats.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago

I'm not sure about that. But we will absolutely vote third, if they offer a platform that doesn't vote status quo or having no view record, advance a platform that offers us something tangible. If they betray us, we remember.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] sexy_peach@feddit.org 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think that leftists generally have a hard time calling out people who argue in bad faith

[–] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

We should genuinely be banning all tankies and accelerationists on sight. Allowing them to poison the debate to the extent they do really is our greatest flaw and the only real "leftist infighting" I've ever really come across.

Pretty sure leftist infighting is just a tankie dogwhistle at this point.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Stupid thing is that it's the humanity and empathy of the left that is both the draw and the weakness of the movement.

Conservatives can come into leftist discourse spaces and either pose as the extreme leftists you describe, or even just the more reasonable end of the conservatives (non facist/maga types, rare as they are any more) an they'll be engaged with in good faith. Since they're ultimately not there for a proper discussion though it results in nothing more than creating chaos and arguments

Liberal/leftists who walk into conservative spaces are greeted with scorn and derision, treated as lunatics from the start not worth listening to. Since the left would generally be coming in with honest intent though at best they waste their time shouting into an established echo chamber, or worse get convinced that there's a good middle ground to work towards.

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Absolutely. Conservatives have, unfortunately, sailed straight past us on political effectiveness in recent years. We're spending our time wringing our hands about doing the right thing and cajoling one another into doing the same. Unfortunately in a lot of cases modern leftism favors atomizing based on who a particular segment sees as having sufficient moral purity over solidarity. Meanwhile, conservatives don't really care about much of anything other than maintaining a socially conservative status quo. They'll even let people they hate pretend to be part of the club if they debase themselves enough to be politically useful. At the same time, they'll viciously attack anyone who isn't politically useful to them.

I'm not saying we ought to abandon our principles or start viciously attacking anyone who doesn't toe the line of being politically useful, but we need to remember how to build coalitions and think strategically.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Since the left would generally be coming in with honest intent though at best they waste their time shouting into an established echo chamber, or worse get convinced that there's a good middle ground to work towards.

I tried going to conservative spaces on Lemmy. The liberals wouldn't allow any dialogue. Not the conservatives, the liberals.

[–] ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 0 points 2 years ago

I'd need some examples to get what you mean here. My experiences, both personal and simply observed, is that you can you can roughly split both conservatives and liberals into two sub-groups, although the distinction on the liberal side is a lot more fuzzy.

There's the emotive/moralizing side that fight based on what they feel rather than any concrete justification. What's right is decided simply by an assumption of how the world should work, either collaboratively or selfishly looking out for yourself only.

Then there are the logical logical arguments. On the conservative side these end up being a lot more in the form of 'I am right, you need to prove otherwise' while liberals (myself guilty of it as well) will go through these elaborate deliberations backing one point with another and somehow hoping to convince these people who have already decided they're right of their error.

If you've ever tried beating your head into a brick wall you might recognize the feeling that last one, but it's hardly an obstruction to dialogue, just a frustration of trying to engage rationally with largely irrational beings.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Many of these people legitimately hold these views. I have a friend who is absolutely a socialist who is still very much in favor of my country not aiding Ukraine as it would support "imperialism" in his eyes. My impression is that he and those like him are unwilling to ever compromise on any ideal they hold, even if it means not supporting any position whatsoever. Like you can debate him as much as you want about whether or not aiding Ukraine in any capacity is imperialism or not, but at the end of the day his main concern is not contributing to something he perceives as evil.

That said, I do agree that many of these people aren't being genuine. I sometimes wonder if he's secretly an accelerationist or something. Many people that use the same talking points as him online certainly are, rather than fascists trying to take us down from the inside.

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago

I would argue that people who hold genuinely socialist views who laser focus on disempowering the left are nothing more than useful idiots for authoritarians and can safely be sorted into the same box as actual infiltrators and parasites. The intent of individuals isn't nearly as important as combating the behavior that's being exploited.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago (40 children)

I like to point out that Frederick Douglas worked for Lincoln even when Lincoln was not running on ending slvery.

It's amazing how many people on the 'Left' think that Douglas was a traitor to his principles.

When the bring out the MLK letter from Birmingham Jail, I point out that King never explicitly supported LGBTQIA+ rights, even though one of his most important aides was gay. Suddenly, understanding the historic situation becomes important.

load more comments (40 replies)

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

just do a little thought experiment with me. If there is a vector that allows authoritarians to dismantle all progress made by the left, to demotivate us and to detract from our ability to form coalitions and build solidarity, do you really think they wouldn't take advantage of it?

This is the same kind of argument that the tankies use to dismiss anyone who disagrees with them as a CIA plant. At least they name the CIA, you seem to be pointing to an even more ambiguous "they" that are out to get us. This is a conspiracy theory, dress it up all you want but your pointing to some ambiguous "they" and blaming them for your problems with no proof.

Occams razor is that they are leftists who hate the democratic party. They critique them more then the Republicans because the liberal side of lemmy covers that pretty well already, half the front page is shitting on trump right now. That's good but at a certain point your beating a dead horse, everyone here already hates trump and thinks he's bad, no point in reinforcing that past a point. A lot of people on here still have loyalty to the democratic party though that far exceeds the democrats loyalty to the left, so pointing that out can be effective and help change people's minds instead of posting/commenting trump is hitler for the millionth time.

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Your interpretation of Occam's razor is that no one ever lies? Do you really think all human beings being honest about everything they say requires the least number of assumptions?

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In a sense yes, people generally tell the truth more than they lie so the default assumption should be that someone is telling the truth, otherwise you enter into paranoia. That assumption can be broken when there is a clear gain from lying. Eg. You catch a thief outside the store they robbed they have a very clear reason to lie and say they were just walking by.

You're explanation on why they're lying isn't very clear. First off, you fail to name who these people are and leave it ambiguous to let the person reading fill it in with their enemy (maga, nazis, russians etc.) just like every other conspiracy theory. Since the subject isn't clear neither is the motive, you just sort of fill that in with "they hate the left, why do they hate the left? What are they gaining from convincing maybe a couple dozen liberals that the democrats suck on a very marginal social media? This isn't the politburo for the comintern, there is barely any power on here to diffuse, so why put effort into doing so when there are far larger platforms to influence.

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

I'd like to draw a parallel to data security. Why make a strong password if nobody's out there trying to break into accounts? Why secure your server's ports if nobody's going to attack them? Why take precautions against malicious collection of data to sell to third parties if we're not sure who or how that data would be used?

These are behaviors that we don't know the specific motivations for, we don't know the individual bad actors in question or who they're working for or what their specific plans are. But we know that if someone calls you claiming to be Geeksquad and tells you to go buy a bunch of gift cards to read to them over the phone, you're being scammed. We know that if someone pretends to be a representative of a company and comes asking for your password, you shouldn't trust them. We know that if certain kinds of traffic are spamming your ports looking for vulnerabilities, they don't mean well.

Why? Because we are aware of the threat vector and can move to protect it before knowing the details of who in particular is planning on exploiting it. I don't need to know specifically which hacker wants to break into my server to limit open ports. I don't need to know who wants to steal my Steam account to know setting up 2fA is worthwhile.

Assuming good faith in bad actors is a vulnerability. The exploit vector is an attack on the political power of the left. I don't need to know specifically who is behind it. I could speculate. Maybe it's MAGA, maybe it's Russia, maybe it's some foreign bot-farm being hired by some other authoritarian regime, but that doesn't really matter. What matters is that allowing the threat vector to remain open disempowers the left.

Why Lemmy? Why a small niche leftist platform rather than a larger platform?

Let's say you're a time traveler who hates punk music. What would be more effective to stop it before it starts? Sabotaging the planning for the Warped Tour in the 90s, or burning down CBGB in 1973?

CBGB was a small club at the time, barely notable at all. The Warped Tour, on the other hand, was a massive endeavor involving dozens of bands and thousands upon thousands of punk and ska fans. But if you know your history, you know that CBGB was a small venue with a massive impact on the American punk scene. It was a place where a lot of the bands that we know today got their start and came up. The Warped Tour, on the other hand, while probably influential on 90s teenagers who got to go see 20 bands in person for 20 bucks, was mostly just riding the wave of punk's popularity and capitalizing it.

Targeting leftist spaces, especially small leftist spaces, could potentially be much more effective than targeting more general spaces. Lemmy in particular selects not only for leftists, but for anti-corporate, anti-establishment people with enough of an interest in tech and enough social media presence to jump on the bandwagon of a relatively unknown protocol just so they don't have to rely on corporate social media. It has a barrier for entry that most of the public find to be either too daunting to bother to surmount, or that involves enough obscurity that they're not even aware of it to begin with.

Beehaw in particular has human-vetted signups and even has a history of defederating with instances that have open sign-ups in order to be able to deal with moderation. A lot of that moderation is literally just contending with social conservatives who show up spouting racism, queerphobia, sexism, and ablism.

In other words, we are a small space that caters to a particular crowd of people well outside the mainstream politically, socially, and technologically. Small, niche spaces have a tremendous potential for resulting in wider-spread influence.

It's not about convincing us that democrats suck. Most of us aren't particularly happy with the democratic establishment anyway. It's about demotivating us and frustrating our internal communications. It's about trying to sabotage a potential locus for resistance.

And it isn't just Lemmy. It isn't even just the left that's being targeted. We know social media is being used to pollute discourse and manipulate politics. We know there's an artificial rightward push going on, and we know that it isn't just the United States that's being targeted with it. But anyone who wants to advance this artificial rightward push has a strong motivation to exploit any vulnerabilities that can be found in the US because of our position globally. Now that that position is crumbling, they have a strong motivation to make sure it doesn't recover.

We have a responsibility to address that threat vector no matter who those parties are.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] NewDark@lemmings.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

As a leftist:

True, It's a piece of paper. If you think that will save us, you're a dumbass.
Mostly True, Look up the ratchet effect.
Mostly False, we've had due process. It's been unfair to minority communities, but in general it's existed.
Mostly False, He was mildly better. This is faint praise given he was a demented fossil facilitating a genocide.

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Mildly better. Well, if this post accomplished one thing it was self-identification of the people it is about.

[–] NewDark@lemmings.world 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Neat how you ignored the rest of the sentence there. Probably because those aren't contestable points huh?

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] djsaskdja@reddthat.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This post is beyond delusional. It’s like the meme about everything I don’t like is woke. The liberal version basically being everything I don’t like is a Russian/MAGA bot. Is it really that hard to believe that left leaning people don’t agree with the Democratic Party platform? You’re deeper in your bubble than you realize my friend.

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Oh look, someone who's generalizing op then tries to discredit them! Way to prove their point

[–] djsaskdja@reddthat.com 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

They didn’t make any type of platform or political argument to even debate against. Basically saying that everyone who dislikes democrats is secretly a republican. That’s all I’m calling them on. Total nonsense.

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] kittenroar@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Let's just get a few facts out of the way:

Genocide is the worst crime humanity is capable of
The US has a direct hand in multiple genocides
Record levels of homelessness in the richest nation on earth is unacceptable
Death from preventable illnesses in the richest nation on earth is unacceptable
Highest infant mortality in the western world in the richest nation on earth is unacceptable
Democrats are not interested in changing the status quo
Republicans want a return to chattel slavery
Neither party is willing to help us, nor will they ever allow us to vote third party by adding ranked choice or anything liek that
Therefore, our best bet to break the cycle is to collectively vote for, say, the green party

You think leftists are unrealistic for being disgusted with Democrats? The genocide was live streamed to the world. Did you not see any of it? Did it not move you?

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] dawnglider@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Happy International Worker's Day. Every single leader of emancipatory movements in the history of labor rights would disagree with you, having fought and been very vocal against the different flavors of oppression in order to get the liberal concessions that you seem to cherish today. Hopefully if you participate, you might find some leftists celebrating in the crowd. Please don't get too angry at them for not defending genociders, I'm sure a lot of them ended up voting for Kamala anyway, but at least they got the confirmation that even opposing genocide is too great a hurdle for them.

I'm tired but I guess I'll still address some of the traits you identified:

Claiming to be leftists

I'm a leftist

Dedicating most of their posting to dismantling any power possessed by the left

Okay that doesn't sound like leftist behavior, you're totally right. I just hope you don't mean that "power possessed by the left" is the democratic party, but sure, that broadly sounds like liberals or feds.

Encouraging leftists not to vote or to vote for third party candidates

There's a point to which you can push liberal concessions for damage control or for actually gaining some more concessions. I think criticizing voting is healthy since it's still playing the capitalist's game and a liberal "democracy" with almost no wiggle room anymore, but considering how little effort it takes to vote I'll always advocate to both play their game and also assume that nothing will come out of it without actual pressure.

I've mostly seen people advocate for withholding their vote in the favor of some concession (please don't do genocide), I've never seen someone say "don't vote and also don't do anything else", but I'm sure they exist, you find all kinds of confused people online.

Highlighting issues with the Democratic party as being disqualifying while ignoring the objectively worse positions held by the Republican party

Is genocide disqualifying for a political party or not? I'm asking you, specifically, if you think that a party that commits (funds, arms, protects, justifies, excuses, does constant propaganda for) a genocide in the face of their own atrocities, while actively silencing the voices within their own ranks that speak out, is worth defending? Again, I think the idea was to hopefully change the democratic party to the radical position of "anti genocide". That failure is on them, not the people who threatened not to vote for them.

Not highlighting that issue is frankly criminal.

Attacking anyone who promotes defending leftist political power by claiming they are centrists and that the attacker is “to the left of them”

Yeah that's leftism, that's always been leftism, but again I hope to god you don't mean that "leftist political power" here represents the democratic party, so I'm gonna assume you mean more broadly what they call "purity politics" and constant division in the left. I think it's fair to criticize people to the right of you, I'm to the right of anarchists and I welcome their criticism, even when I don't agree with it. If I spent my time shitting on them I think they would be completely legitimate in calling me out for someone with ulterior motives, or a reactionary shithead.

Using US foreign policy as a moral cudgel to disempower any attempt at legitimate engagement with the US political system

I want you to examine your own sentence just for a second. To disempower an attempt at legitimate engagement with the political system. Opposing genocide isn't used as a moral cudgel against whatever 10 steps removed version of power this is (and I'm not criticizing the way you put it, quite the opposite), it's used AGAINST GENOCIDE.

People are out in the streets and criticizing liberal complicity because we talk about GENOCIDE not some vague questionable US foreign policy.

Seemingly doing nothing to actually mount resistance against authoritarianism

So that's the democratic party, right? That's why I'm confused because leftists are out in the street, even the most liberal ones with their "fight oligarchy" campaign, while the democrats are still out defending genocide, doing filibusters without a cause, and generally trailing so far behind the average population that it's mind numbing. So I don't know what you mean when you say "leftists", because you seem to refer to two groups at the same time.

Anyway, voting goes both way, you can't pretend to vote in a vacuum for the lesser evil without recognizing that you empower them and their genocidal endeavors.

And I'll be a little more incisive: If you criticize a leftist of not caring about minorities (which I've seen a lot and is deeply ironic considering who did and didn't vote for the dems) you open yourself to be criticized for having proudly voted and called on everyone else to vote for a party that does genocide, and having attacked the ones that tried to actually make a difference in shifting their position or using that moment to show what their true colors are.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 0 points 2 years ago

Welcome to propaganda and people affected by it. You're not safe from the stuff online.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Maybe we want politicians who will actively work for us, economically as well as socially.

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sounds great. Vote them in.

I would love to see a push to the left in US politics and in the Democratic party. I voted for Sanders, and I think the kind of arguments he's been making consistently for decades would be a great perspective to see gain traction. The rallies he's been putting together with AOC and the responses he's gotten at town halls even in very red districts have been encouraging.

I fully support primarying Democrat politicians who fail to offer real solutions. 100% get them the hell out of office and replace them with people who will reconnect the party with the people and fight for affordable housing, medicare for all, and living wages. Let's chuck Schumer out on his ass.

But our approach needs to be viable. It won't happen by splitting the vote. That's just math. I don't like first past the post, and I'd love to get rid of it at the first available opportunity, but it's the system we're working with right now.

You can't play chess using only your knights because you like the way the horsey looks. You have to know what the pieces do and use them to their fullest extent. By all means, make your pawns into queens, but to do that you have to think about which moves you're actually capable of making on the board.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So here's the thing, on my state ballot last November, I had TVs corporate Democrat who votes with the Republicans half the time (the time it matters), and a new Dem who could or would not articulate a platform for or against anything. Bet I voted third.

[–] millie@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

So run for office or find a candidate who might and help them get to that position.

Voting for a third party, unless it's in a small local election where they might actually have a shot, will do literally nothing but get us a Republican.

If you're still sitting here in April of 2025 and saying that the Democrats are the same as the Republicans, though? Get the hell out of our nest.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago

The corporate Dem won and is still voting the Republican agenda. 🤷‍♀️

ETA: I would need funds to campaign and a means of travel. I also lack experience but am willing to learn. Suggestions?

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So run for office or find a candidate who might and help them get to that position.

This is literally 100% the answer. It could be within the Democratic party, it could be outside it, the details are details.

The point is that someone who comes up to you saying "I'm not voting for a DEMOCRAT, how could that ever help?" and also "I'm not voting! That will help, that's the answer, you should too." is definitely either lying or badly confused.

Like, yes, our system is corrupt and a lot of Democrats are a huge part of the problem. That won't go away if you refuse to engage with it. It will get worse.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Again, it takes money and transportation. If one is a city dweller, transportation may be easier. Rurally, not so much.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"I would have overthrown the bourgeoisie, but I couldn't find a ride."

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's pretty much it. Most of my rides have died due to preventable causes, and they were lifelong D voters. There's one left and they're not in great shape. The others are busy working several jobs and caring for children or elderly family members. We worked hard, even up to death, when jobs were available.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Oh no! I better stop being a D voter. You convinced me. It's super dangerous.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm not_trying_ to convince you. And your attitude that good people who would absolutely give you their last meal for days or literally stand in front of you to take a bullet that you may or not deserve are disposable lives certainly isn't convincing me to vote Dem, because that's the same contempt we get from them. You're bougie lifestyle wouldn't be possible if not for us, dropping dead with stage 4 cancer while we dig the wells for your summer homes, plow the fields for your organic corn, strawberries, lentils, or suffer cancers for the sprayed crops of conventionally grown foods while our skin blisters and weeps. Go pick your own damn cotton, harvest your own hemp, log your own trees and mill your own paper. One of my neighbor's lives is worth a million of yours, because we know_compassion_.

Eta: let me see you throw those fat, juicy watermelons up on a truck in 100+ f heat. Without water until next 10 minute break. Or install the solar farms.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

And your attitude that good people who would absolutely give you their last meal for days or literally stand in front of you to take a bullet that you may or not deserve are disposable lives

Literally no idea what you're talking about here.

One of my neighbor’s lives is worth a million of yours, because we know_compassion_.

Were you the one saying that it's okay if everyone in Gaza dies this month because of Trump coming to power and making things way worse for them, because it's all the Democrats' fault for not being good enough to vote for and that's what's really important? Or was that someone else? Maybe it was someone else.

Eta: let me see you throw those fat, juicy watermelons up on a truck in 100+ f heat. Without water until next 10 minute break

I've had early stage heat exhaustion from working outside. I've gotten bleach in my eye cleaning up and still finished my shift. I've worked a lot of different jobs. You don't know anything about me.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Of course you have no idea.

Were you the one saying that it's okay if everyone in Gaza dies this month because of Trump coming to power and making things way worse for them, because it's all the Democrats' fault for not being good enough to vote for and that's what's really important?

URL.

I know what you've shown me.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago

You see this comment? https://lemmy.world/comment/16774478

That's the attitude that drives away voters. Now, I do have a degree of higher education and thanks to the internet and not arrogant users who helped me continue informally learning, I'd say I'm decently literate, and well-informed. And that attitude in that comment pretty much guarantees I'm probably not voting D again in my lifetime, unless someone really in touch comes to be on my local ballot. The attitude in that comment is what many disenfranchised D voters have gotten from the last five national election cycles. I'm absolutely not voting R for the rest of my life either, but HRC, Biden, Harris and all the Democrat candidates when there were primaries did not inspire hope, let alone confidence. Sanders did, until the DNC routed him out and he rolled over for them that cycle and the next. The last time before that was Kucinich and he had reservation-causing concerns, but I would have voted for him and many of my friends would have, too. I voted Obama, not because I thought he was better, bit that he was less odious. Never. Again. If Democrats really want our votes, let them earn them. Cavorting with war criminals and their daughters while ignoring issues important to me ain't it. And for the record, socially left and economically right isn't left. We crave leftist candidates, socially, ecologically, and economically. It's our money, give it to us.

[–] obscureprodigy@pawb.social 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

stop saying this stupid shit about third parties. you could argue the same point for Conservatives who didn’t vote Trump. also which is it—are leftists so numerous they are a problem and ruin everything or are we small and useless and unimportant?

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

https://kbin.earth/m/chat@beehaw.org/t/1270160/Brood-Parasitism-in-Leftist-Politics/comment/6448892#entry-comment-6448892

There's your answer.

[–] obscureprodigy@pawb.social 0 points 2 years ago

no thanks lol

[–] kittenroar@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Pretty ironic that Millie here is concerned about insincere trolls, yet they come off as the biggest troll here. I have blocked them and I suggest any leftists here do the same.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments