• 0 Posts
  • 116 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 8th, 2023

help-circle

  • Democracy isn’t the problem; it’s the money in politics, which is an intended effect of capitalism.

    Capitalism is the problem. Capitalism by its very natire is a system of economic distribution where you have an owner class who control a working class via wages, where the working class will never be paid what they are worth due to the profit motive that the owner class has when it comes to the profit of their business. Shareholder capitalism makes this even worse, as the profit year-over-year must ALWAYS go up, as that is how stock price increases. It is to the point where shareholders sue companies not for losing money, but for making less money than they did the year prior, and they win.

    Imagine an alternative where you could have democracy in your workplace (worker-owned coops). You would be able to hire and fire your boss with a vote. You will be able to determine the direction of the business, also with a vote. This could be the reality if we just forced all corporations to be worker-owned coops.

    This, combined with a hard wealth cap and a UBI, will prevent any one person (or small group of people) from gaining enough power to buy a government, and the addition of democracy in business will also make business interests harder to corrupt as well.


  • Yup. Mass organization is the only way we can resist anything, as workers and even consumers have the true power in a capitalist society, but only as a single, large group.

    The way that the robber barons were able to tear us apart is through very simple divide and conquer schemes. Turning people against immigrants, black people, trans people, Jews, etc. instead of people turning against the robber barons/people in power, who were always the ones doing the true damage in societu.



  • More generally, the founders wrote the constitution as if every leader will act in good faith. That has proven to be a bad idea, but also how do you even account for that? Their idea was a system of checks and balances, but that failed to account for when one party has control over every branch, and for when one branch goes rogue and starts ignoring the other two branches, as we are seeing now with the executive.

    IMO, limiting power (money in the case of a capitalistic society) is the only way. The founders had the right idea with the limitation of power, but they didn’t take that idea to the economic side of things. Force all corporations to be worker owned coops and have a hard wealth cap of $50 million by taxing anything over at a rate of 100%.





  • It’s mainly a mix of economic frusturation and a divide and conquer strategy by the rich in order to have the masses blame immigrants and people of other races/religions/genders/sexual orientations/etc. for all of their problems instead of blaming the elite class and capitalism. The lie of meritocracy being real also plays a big role here (“temporarilly embarrassed billionaires”).

    There is another angle, though, and that’s sexual frusturation. When a teenage male has issues getting laid and they look online for some kind of support, they find people like Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson who tells them that men who “get laid” are “alphas” or whatever and that women should be treated as subhuman or as slaves. These incels have likely never actually attempted to make friends with any women outside of a sexual or romantic context, because if they did, they would learn that women are the same as them, even when it comes to their struggles (even pertaining to dating/sexual frusturations).

    I think the latter reason (specifically Gamergate) sparked the fire that made the first truely possible on a scale that we haven’t seen in our lifetimes.

    There is also the additional piece of info that the majority of people won’t take action against what is happening in politics until it personally affects them, which is a very unfortunate reality.


  • And they were incorrect, unless they specifically supported him because of stuff like Project 2025, being massively corrupt, promising to give Elon power, bringing more devistation to Gaza, etc.

    Also the democrats lost about 6 million votes, and Trump gained about 3 million vs 2020. That’s 3 million prior voters who just decided voting wasn’t worth it in just 4 years. How Trump gained those 3 million votes is beyond me, unless they never directly watched Trump speak in the entire campaign and only watched editorialized content, which is entirely possible, if not likely.

    The media this past election cycle has proven to have an extreme conservative bias. The amount of sanewashing that occured with everything Trump said vs the extreme amount of scrutiny for everything Biden and Kamala said was disgusting to see. This includes all corporate media, including corporate-backed online media.


  • Compared to Trump’s dimentia-ridden campaign, which was probably the worst political campaign in American history? Yeah, the Democrats’ campaign was fucking perfect in comparison to talking about Arnold Palmer’s cock, giving a microphone a blowjob, or saying Haitian migrants are eating cats and dogs.

    Yes, both parties are corrupt, and yes, there is no party offering true change in a socialist direction. One party is literally fascist, and is clearly worse. I hate voting for the lesser of two evils, but this was the easiest election decision I’ve made in my entire life.


  • We get it. We live in a shitty, gerrymandered two party system thanks to FPTP and there is no true anti-war or anti-capitalist party. What’s your point?

    Saying “both sides bad” without mentioning one side being much, much worse is just being disingenuous. Not just that, but it attracts people on the worse side, who then will not accept criticism of their own side. Look at Jimmy Dore for a perfect example of this kind of audience capture.

    In this example, you have Biden on one side, who was being complacent in a genocide while saying publicly that he wants a ceasefire deal, but not doing what was in his power to actually make it happen, like cutting off arms and funding to Israel. On the other side, you have Trump who wants to nuke Gaza and commit ethnic cleansing himself (I’m sorry, I meant to say “displace Palestinians”) and rebuild it as a paradise in his image without Palestinians.

    Let’s just say Netanyahu publicly wanted Trump to win this past election, and there’s a good reason why.