• SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This time when we stomp down the corporatists we need to make it illegal for corporate interests to be considered when making policy.

    And collective ownership

    • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Funny thing the 1828 Tariff of Abomination, The Smoot Hawley Tariff and Donald’s Liquidation Day Tariff are all roughly a hundred years apart. Living memory of the consequences of such tariffs need to die out completely before a new generation tries this stupidity.

      It’s the same with the nativist bullshit. Memory of the peak of Know Nothing, KKK and now MAGA bullshit has to die out before it is tried again.

      My only hope is that this is viewed as the high water mark of the MAGA movement. MAGA incompetence is on full display.

      As much as I disagreed with Sen. Chuck Shumers decision to roll over on the budget. Shutting down the government and giving MAGA any excuse to blame Democrats for this economic slowdown would have been a bad call. Donald and the Republicans now solely own this disaster.

      For the MAGA faithful it won’t make a difference but for independents, moderates and low information voters this could be a huge turning point.

      • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Attacking Russia stops being a bad idea every 100 years or so too. Occupying government of France leading the cheerleading a common factor.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    We can’t afford to waste this chance…

    There is zero reason to settle for “not trump” we need to use Republican Inaptitude to get a decent progressive in power , there’s zero reason to compromise with Republicans after this shit.

    • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t know that there’s a ‘we’ here, as the billionaires run the Democratic Party too and have sued for the privilege of holding undemocratic primaries.

      With that said, the SHTA precipitating the historic Senate loss isn’t the only historical pattern working against Trump in 2026.

      Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden all entered office with control of Congress and lost control at the mid-terms, so it’s highly likely that will happen again.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        , as the billionaires run the Democratic Party too

        No, neoliberals have held the DNC chair for decades. And they did whatever billionaires said.

        The current chair of the DNC is not a neoliberal. He used to be Minnesota’s state chair, and if he acts like he did then he’ll be the most progressive chair we’ve had in 30 years, arguably 50 years.

        The fight over the party already happened and the neoliberals lost.

        Don’t blame the new guy for what the old guy did

        • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I will believe it matters when I see it, and I’m doubtful 40+ years of masquerading as progressives and ruling as conservatives is going to change anytime soon.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            and I’m doubtful 40+ years of masquerading as progressives and ruling as conservatives is going to change anytime soon.

            Then it sounds like you’re ignorant both of how the DNC works and Ken Martin’s history running Minnesota’s state party…

            The DNC chair is a dictator, he calls all the shots and is accountable to no one. For all intents and purposes the DNC chair is the national party.

            It’s been less than two months since Martin took over the DNC. Don’t blame him for what happened before he had total control.

            But seriously, look into what Minnesota has been up to. Loads of progressives and turned a battleground into a solid blue state.

            His main concern is winning elections, so he doesn’t fight progressives in primaries, because that’s what voters want.

            This isn’t blind loyalty. If I didn’t have valid reasons to support the DNC I can assure you I wouldn’t be doing it

            • crusa187@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Really admire your optimism here, but I’m far too cynical on Dems to think this can work without a whole new party to replace them. The Democrat brand is so incredibly tarnished by corruption and disingenuousness.

              While you’re right that the DNC chair does hold a lot of power in the party, I struggle to recall a single instance in my lifetime when any dem held real power and leveraged it effectively to benefit the working class.

              • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                instance in my lifetime

                Because since Jimmy Carter the DNC chair has been further right than the Dem voters base…

                And that stopped being true about two months ago

                Did it ever occur to you why about two months ago suddenly mainstream media started being ok criticizing Dems?

                The oligarchs want us to fail. Because we just won.

                Stop doing what theyre manipulating you into doing

            • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Don’t blame him for what happened before he had total control.

              Don’t expect me to ignore 40+ years of history on the basis of mere promises, when broken Democratic promises paved the road to the fascism we’re having to fight today. Frankly, it’s unreasonable, and no one should expect Democrats to do what they say they’re going to do until they demonstrate it.

    • Omgboom@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      They are already trying to setup Kamala for 2028. I have zero faith that the Democrats are going to learn anything from their failure

      • NoiseColor @lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        They don’t want to win. At least not with someone who would bring change. Why would they, they are all multimillionaires.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        They are already trying to setup Kamala for 2028.

        Who is “they”?

        We have a DNC chair that at worst will be impartial.

        And Harris has zero chance of winning a fair primary.

        The only way a neoliberal can win a primary is if the party hands it to them.

        The only way a Republican becomes president, is if the only other choice is a neoliberals.

        The only reason the Republicans have the house, is because of “victory fund” bankrupting stat parties.

        We really didn’t need much, and we got it. Which is why we desperately need to capitalize and move the Overton window as far left as possible while we can

        • Dadifer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Impartial” like when Bernie Sanders was winning, and every Democrat decided to fold for Biden.

          • Asafum@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            And the “Liberal MSM” started running “Bernie loves Castro” stories left and right. Hell one of the chucklefucks at “far left MSNBC” said that if Bernie won he’d put people like himself “against the wall” invoking an image of firing squad executions…

      • crusa187@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Get ready for “we had to pass the $6T in tax cuts for the rich and corporations, simply nothing we could do!” 🤑

        It is imminent.

        They are robbing us absolutely blind here, and using the tariff chaos as cover.

  • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just throwing this out there.

    If you expect conservatives to learn anything from this experience, I can promise you on my life that they won’t. They will not deviate from voting R under any circumstance in existence.

    Best we can hope for is independents getting a clue and helping swing the next election, if there is one, back to the grownup party.

    Not holding my breath though. This is a very, very stupid generation of Americans.

    • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Conservatives hate learning, especially from mistakes. Learning makes you go “Why do we do this tradition? This is stupid.”

      If a conservative learns something, its a failure of the conservative ideology. Keeping them dumb makes them unquestioning obedient workers and soldiers. You don’t have a soldier disobey commands to harm someone, you don’t have a worker disobey their boss.

      Conservatism is explicitly against learning.

  • limer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    They did not have computerized voting back then, it was paper ballots mostly. Until then I fully expect the same voting patterns as the last generation to continue; yes, democrats will win more at the mid terms. No, little will change. I fully expect democrats to win solid majorities in both houses in 2026.

    Americans, as a group, should look at exit polls and understand them, and use paper ballots as the rule, not the exception. Until then, it’s just an oligarchy. And they don’t have our backs .

    But I don’t think it will change any time soon

    • Vanilla_PuddinFudge@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is all 1000% on purpose.

      They intend to ride it out and profit from all of this, and we’ll let them due to cowardice and division.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      They LOVE massive depressions. They buy up real estate and failing companies cheap with their massive cash reserves.

    • wellheh@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      This guy is no business leader- he bankrupt his own casinos multiple times and just stiffs people on payment. He’s a grifter who happened to be born into money

    • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The so called geniuses of business have a better batting average than the average person but they are still prone to the same fuck ups and emotionally driven foolishness as anyone else. I was reading about the Theranos scam and how many supposed brilliant corporate leaders all threw big money at it without taking the time to investigate it first.

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    We got a Progressive Era out of it, maybe we’ll get another one?

    Edit: To clarify, I’m talking about the New Deal and New Deal v2 Progressive Eras (and the era of Progressive Democratic supermajorities that dominated congress)

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      We got a Progressive Era out of it

      • Jim Crow

      • Japanese Internment

      • Religious revivalism

      • The Wars on Crime / Drugs / Terror / Immigration, leading to the highest incarceration rate in the world

      • Two major Red Scares and a collapse in union membership

      • Intercontinent Ballistic Missiles with nuclear warheads

      Some progress.

      • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Jim Crow

        Before that was slavery. The Civil Rights act was the result of the Progressive Era.

        The Wars on Crime / Drugs / Terror

        War on Drug and War on Terror happened at the-end-of/after the New Deal Progressive Era

        Two major Red Scares and a collapse in union membership

        Xenophobia is nothing new. Again, the Red Scares were the backlash of Progressive policies, and marked the end of the Progressive Eras.

        The oligarchs in power want to make you feel powerless, they want to make you accept defeat, but don’t surrender, you have more power than you think.

        Progressiveism and Regressiveism is always in a tug-of-war, there will be constant progress and constant reactionary policies, but the general trend (across the world) is towards progress. Monarchies have fallen, eventually Oligarchies will fall. (Hopefully towards a stateless egalitarian future)

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Before that was slavery.

          Before Jim Crow was Reconstruction, which was the real Progressive Era for African Americans. The Freedman’s Bureau, elections overseen by the Union Army where black citizens were guaranteed a vote, mass migration out of southern plantations and into the industrialized north, and real (abet fleeting) economic progress for the millions of newly liberated peoples.

          War on Drug and War on Terror happened at the-end-of/after the New Deal Progressive Era

          The Federal War on Drugs began with the Smoking Opium Exclusion Act of 1909, squarely in the thick of the Roosevelt/Wilsonian Prohibitionist period. You could argue that prohibition wars were going on decades earlier, at the state level. Similarly, the War on Terror was an outgrowth of the War on Crime, which has its roots back to the post-Reconstruction South and the prison exclusion of the 13th Amendment.

          Progressiveism and Regressiveism is always in a tug-of-war

          The liberal/conservative tug-of-war over popular support for government is a tug-of-war. But the underlying policies have a strong through-line going back over a century. Policing, surveillance, and the administrative state bloat with each new administration, following different rhetorical lines but always moving towards the same effective end.

          Monarchies have fallen, eventually Oligarchies will fall.

          Monarchies rose and fell for thousands of years prior. They did not end, they only changed their form. Regional and sectoral dictatorships are alive and well in the modern era, from explicit Kingdoms in the Middle East to vertically integrated monopolies governed by tyrannical CEOs in the West.

          The only exceptions are where popular movements have successfully revolutionized the government, democratized capital, and hedged out foreign financial parasites.

          The United States is not one such place.

      • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        For what it is worth, Jim Crow predated and outlasted the Progressive Era in the US. I wouldn’t so much apply causation there.

        But it also ended in the 20s. It mainly achieved Women’s suffrage in the US.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          But it also ended in the 20s.

          Okay, so you’re talking about the 1890s-1920s “Progressive” Era of Prohibition and Sufferage.

          Not the 1930s-70s New Deal / Great Society period of progressivism that was great for middle class white people and maybe a little less great for African Americans, East Asians, and American Natives who had to claw their way into a post-industrial standard of living against all the best efforts of the settlers.

          Again, I might suggest you look back at the history of the T.Roosevelt to Wilson administration and reconsider whether this is the benchmark for progress you’ve been sold on.

          • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Okay, so you’re talking about the 1890s-1920s “Progressive” Era of Prohibition and Sufferage.

            Yeah, as that’s what that time period is called: “Progressive Era”.

            Not the 1930s-70s New Deal / Great Society period of progressivism

            No, I am not referring to the period following Prohibition Era and the Great Depression which was an intermediate (1920s-1930s) before New Deal.

            If you’re taking issue with the ‘Progressive Era’ being called ‘Progressive’ then sure. I get you then. It mostly just achived women’s suffrage as a meaningful milestone, as I said.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean yeah. That’s the cyclic nature of politics, we learn a lesson and get a bit better, forget that lesson, get away worse, only to overcorrect and end up better than the first. We move pretty consistently leftward politically globally but only as a reaction to incredible periodic swings to the right.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          We move pretty consistently leftward politically globally but only as a reaction to incredible periodic swings to the right.

          This is simply not true. We advance technologically and we often mistake the mass media that comes out of these advances as social progress. But what we have historically endured over the last two centuries has been liberal rhetoric whitewashing much more reactionary and authoritarian policy than what our ancestors endured.

          The long march has not been towards progress, but towards progressive pastiche.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is no legitimate argument that we haven’t moved leftward over the last thousand or so years.

            So progress that only seems like progress but progress is progress boss. I’m not sure what exactly you’re arguing but so far it seems… Outlandish and removed from reality.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              There is no legitimate argument that we haven’t moved leftward over the last thousand or so years.

              The colonial era of the 1400s to 1900s resulted in an industrial scale enclosing, enslaving, and extermination of entire ethnic cohorts. This was not a leftist move by any definition. It was 500 years of settler colonialism which resulted in some of the most abysmal living conditions in recorded history.

              We have not yet recovered from this massive global reconfiguration of human society. While we enjoy more advanced tools and industrial scale infrastructure, we remain both socially and physically less independent of our authoritarian oligarchs than we were prior to the European Imperialist Era.

              So progress that only seems like progress but progress is progress boss.

              We have a modern economic system that produces more homes than people, while guaranteeing a certain population will remain homeless their entire lives. We have a system that produces enormous surpluses of food, but guarantees a segment of the population will remain malnurished. We have a system that produces vast excesses of professional expertise, but guarantees only a fraction of the population can access professional services.

              All of our shortages are manufactured. Trump’s latest tariff wave is the most blindingly obvious example of how these shortages are imposed - not even via some convoluted market mechanism, but through the whims of an authoritarian madman.

              This is not progress in a social sense. It is a huge regression from our historical roots. We are prisoners of the state and of the economy, subject to arrest, torture, and execution at the whim of the local leadership. And the only reason you and I are not personally under a boot right now is because we haven’t been targeted yet.

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                we remain both socially and physically less independent of our authoritarian oligarchs than we were prior to the European Imperialist Era.

                Horseshit opinion.

                You described literal progress only to say it’s the illusion of progress. You aren’t even making logical sense.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You described literal progress only to say it’s the illusion of progress.

                  I’m describing the systematic roll-back of free travel, free trade, and freedom of individuals to co-mingle absent legal barriers.

                  We need paperwork to cross borders. We need documentation to legally accept offers for work. We need licenses from the state to formalize marriage. We can be arrested, detained indefinitely, and subject to physical and psychological abuse without so much as an official reason by state officials. We can be conscripted into war, extorted for our wages, and deprived of our homes and personal effects at the whims of state officials.

                  And to top it all off, we have an entire industrial education establishment that compels us to repeated the dogged lies that this is progress. We have state-sponsored celebrations intended to lionize our enslavers. We have parades of security service workers through the center of our townships, paid for with wealth looted from our own pockets, to drive home how occupied we all are.

                  How the fuck is that progress?

          • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Tell me, do you think a Black person is safer living 100 years ago in the USA, than today’s USA?

            Don’t get me wrong, innocent black people are still being murdered, but it’s nowhere as common as before. It was at least 100x worse 100 years ago.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Tell me, do you think a Black person is safer living 100 years ago in the USA, than today’s USA?

              Thanks to modern technological innovations, sure. Clean air/water, safer public transit, vaccines, etc go a long way towards improving quality of life for everyone, including the bottom of the social hierarchy. But has a black person in 2025 enjoyed the same degree of prosperity as a white peer over the intervening years? Absolutely not, and for the same reasons. They’re more predisposed to experience tainted air/water, they are comparatively less safe traveling, they have diminished access to modern medicine like vaccines and prenatal care, etc, etc.

              And this is a deliberate function of public policy. The sky-high arrest rate of African Americans (particularly while traveling) is the result of a Nixon Era campaign to over-police black and brown neighborhoods that every subsequent executive and governor seems to have endorsed. The higher rates of cancer, the higher rates of obesity and malnutrition, the higher rates of disease transmission and mortality from preventable illness or injury all stem from eugenics policies pioneered in the OG Progressive Era. Even some of the pseudoscientific theories around mental, physical, and social aptitudes have endured.

              it’s no where was common as before

              The arrest rates of black men peaked in the 90s, during the height of the Reagan War on Crime. They’ve fallen off somewhat in comparison to arrests and harassment of hispanics and east asians, but are nowhere close to comparable to white peers. This is downwind of the reactionary media hijacking progressive language and ideology and weaponizing it against a population that its leadership believes is subhuman.

              What we have in the modern era is rationalization of reactionary policy in progressive terms. The propaganda we experience is caped in progressive language. But the goals are the exact opposite.

  • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sadly their supporters will have to have their homes foreclosed on and eviction notices before they wake up. Farmers will have banks foreclosing on them like in the 1930s.

  • Saltycracker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe it is a good idea to get rid of senate seats with new people. 50 years the same people might be a bit too long

      • vodka@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not really a term limit, but here in Norway you’re not allowed to work a government job after passing 70.

        This also applies to elected officials, so hey at least we don’t have anyone over 70.

  • Guy Ingonito@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The thing about Smoot-Hawley is that when it happened everyone else also put up equal tariffs among one another.

    this time the EU, Japan, South Korea, Canada are only putting tariffs on the US. Not amongst themselves.