374
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

Been a lot of whitewashing lately of people like Feinstein, Biden and Pelosi. And it seems like you can't even criticize them or you get called a Trumper.

[-] DarthBueller@lemmy.world 63 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Biden is not even in the same league of asshattery as Pelosi and Feinstein, despite a long career and being in the Executive twice. I’ll never forget Pelosi talking down to a high school student who asked her a question about economic equity—I don’t remember the kid’s question, but her response is seared into my brain. She got pissy and said “America is a capitalist country” like capitalism was handed down from god on high or enshrined in the Constitution. It was contemptuously delivered, to a degree as bad as I once heard Rick Santorum speak to a student who asked him about LGBTQ rights.

Feinstein was a regressive in a lot of ways, perhaps she escaped being labeled a DINO because her votes were more important than her sometimes asinine rhetoric.

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 24 points 11 months ago

I’ll never forget Pelosi talking down to a high school student who asked her a question about economic equity—I don’t remember the kid’s question, but her response is seared into my brain. She got pissy and said “America is a capitalist country” like capitalism was handed down from god on high or enshrined in the Constitution.

Here's the clip: https://youtu.be/MR65ZhO6LGA

[-] DarthBueller@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Ah, thanks... the questioner wasn't a high school student, but appears to be in their 20s. Pelosi's response is less flagrantly contemptuous than I remember, but revealed her to be a dyed-in-the-wool corporatist, which was equally upsetting and has colored my perception of her ever since. Feinstein basically wanted to publicly flay Snowden and took such an extreme view of state secrets (among other things), and I was always curious about the politics that led her to get reelected term after term.

[-] QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

What economic system would you recommend beyond capitalism? Are there any large countries that have successfully implemented this?

For economic systems, it seems like just about every country mixes capitalism and socialism, and some of those economies lean more towards one rather than the other.

Perhaps a better discussion would be over what the best mixture is rather than the simple: "Capitalism/Socialism is bad" that people seem to argue so much over.

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

Here you go...

Why It's So Hard To Imagine Life After Capitalism

https://youtu.be/PaASqPnpq5Y

[-] QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I was hoping for an actual discussion rather than a link to a 20 min video like that.

That 20 min video was all "capitalism is bad" and only for a few seconds near the end where he proposes "Communist Realism" without even attempting to explain what it is or compare any sort of pros and cons.

So to summarize the video for anyone else who doesn't want to waste their time (in the context of the questions I proposed):

What economic system would you recommend beyond capitalism?

Video: "Communist Realism, buy my book"

Are there any large countries that have successfully implemented this?

Video: "No, they weren't given a chance because capitalist countries overthrew them in one way or another."

Perhaps a better discussion would be over what the best mixture is rather than the simple: "Capitalism/Socialism is bad" that people seem to argue so much over.

The video didn't really address this other than:
Video: "Capitalism bad, people are stuck thinking there's nothing else"...

[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 13 points 11 months ago

You'll find, historically, Dems question themselves a lot more on average. As "Dems need to fall in love" with the party plan, they end up asking way more questions than the "GoPniks need to fall in line" bunch.

So, you may easily decide that you DON'T get called a trumper just by asking questions. It's in the nature to review and discuss things.

[-] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Being called a Trumper for criticising a democrat is no different than Christians who say you're a devil worshiper if you don't worship the Christian god. Just because I criticize a democrat, doesn't mean I'm a republican. It's not a knife edge. Someone like Pelosi is not anywhere near leftist enough for me, but if I criticize her for that, I'm somehow a Trump supporter?? How does that make sense?

[-] mayo@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Do you really get push back on that? Most of the Democrats are corrupt. I think Biden is relatively cut and dry but Pelosi is a crook.

[-] Daisyifyoudo@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

And it seems like you can't even criticize them or you get called a Trumper

/cue dramatic music

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

I'm a leftist and get called a Trumper all the time for criticizing Dems to be better.

[-] protist@mander.xyz 14 points 11 months ago

Talking shit about Biden and telling everyone to vote for a third party instead is not "criticizing Dems to be better," it's literally how you would put Trump back in the White House

[-] TreeGhost@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I'm not seeing anyone in this thread telling anyone to vote third party.

When it comes down to voting for Biden or whatever racist shitbag the GOP trots out, I'm going to vote for Biden. But don't tell me I'm not allowed to criticize him or the party. Acting like a political party is above criticism comes off as fascist.

And before you get on to me about only criticizing Democrats, I think we can all agree that Republicans are worse, but if we aren't allowed to call out Dems on shit, then we truly don't have a democracy anymore.

I get the impulse that talking shit about a political candidate is turning people off of voting or voting for the realistic candidate, but I would argue that doing shit like keeping old politicians in office does a lot more to turn people off of voting. If we want people to vote, then they need to be inspired by a candidate and feel good about voting. And of course they don't feel inspired when they hear criticisms about both parties, but clearly just telling people that they have to vote for someone to keep someone like Trump from office only seems to work for reelection, but it didn't stop him from getting in office in the first place. I'm pretty confident that Trump won't be president again, I'm not so confident about the next guy like him.

[-] protist@mander.xyz 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I took a brief look at the post history of the person I was responding to, that is what my comment was based on. Never anywhere did I suggest you shouldn't criticize Democrats, of course all our elected leaders should be scrutinized.

And of course Feinstein should have retired years ago, just like Ginsburg should've retired while Obama was president.

What I was arguing against is that guy"s "Biden is all bad, vote Green party" perspective, which only helps elect a Republican

[-] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

You're getting downvoted but it's what's happening here. The GOP is not even an option in terms of who to vote for, so I only focus on Democrats and how to fix their issues. But no, suddenly now it's a sin to point out any issues within your own party. It's toe the line, or get called a Trumper.

I think Pelosi, Biden and the older generation is way too conservative and centrist, I want a more socially progressive democratic party that will push forward a more leftist agenda, led by younger, more left leaning Democrats, why is that a "Trumper" view?? Why am I not allowed to call out the people on the side I'm on?

[-] DarthBueller@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

I want a progressive agenda but how do such ideas gain traction when the opposition messaging does such a good job at mocking progressives that the mockers' view of the agenda takes precedence over the actual agenda? Sometimes I feel like the progressive agenda comes preloaded with poison pills that are intended to give red meat to the opposition, aka is designed to fail.

[-] protist@mander.xyz -1 points 11 months ago

Who is calling you a Trumper? You keep saying that, but I haven't seen that anywhere here

[-] Maeve@kbin.social -1 points 11 months ago

“DoN’t BoTh SiDeS! FaLsE eQuIvAlEnCe.

[-] Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world -4 points 11 months ago

You say anything negative about dems and they come out in full force calling you a red hat.

[-] lingh0e@lemmy.film 10 points 11 months ago

Gtfo with that. There's plenty of legitimate shit talking about democrats. Just don't be a "both sides" asshole or a hexbear goon.

[-] Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

My reddit and lemmy history strongly disagrees with you. Any criticism of dems is met with downvotes. Ill also argue that excusing shitty behavior from those on the left because "they're not as bad as republicans" is lesser of two evils bullshit that has enabled us to continue slipping further and further in the wrong direction, as a whole.

[-] lingh0e@lemmy.film 4 points 11 months ago

Yeah, my reddit and lemmy history strongly disagree with you too, chachi. I've literally never been called out for criticizing democrats. But then again I don't engage in weak "both sides" bullshit like you do.

And it's funny how you initially said criticizing democrats gets you called a maga bootlicker, but now you say it's just "downvotes".

[-] Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

Comments and downvotes, now an exclusive response to comments online!

[-] lingh0e@lemmy.film 2 points 11 months ago

What are you trying to say? Yes, on a platform like Reddit or Lemmy, your options to respond are literally exclusive to commenting and/or voting.

Nice dodge, btw. You don't have to respond to the crux of my response if you focus on a lesser point.

[-] Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

My point was you make it out as if comments and downvotes are exclusive. As if downvoting doesn't send a message in itself.

The crux of your response? Saying that your personal online experience has been different than mine and somehow invalidates it? Was it really worth addressing? Maybe pay more attention to the comments you read through? You having not experienced it means nothing to those that have

[-] griefreeze@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Pretty sure the whole point of them sharing a personal anecdote wasn't to invalidate yours so much as to point out that your experience is, in fact, anecdotal and therefore not concrete enough of a justification to make the blanket statement of "you can't criticize Dems on left-leaning social media" (paraphrased).

It's certainly your lived experience, but to generalize entire platforms based on it is asinine. Need more data to make a statement like that and not be challenged.

[-] Bonskreeskreeskree@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

I understand where you're coming from, but myself making a statement that I have experienced something first hand and witnessed others experience such responses to criticism means a lot more than someone saying they have never. It's like someone saying I was bullied in high-school to then have others say I was never bullied in school, bullies don't exist. It's an irrelevant statement and is only trying to dismiss one's experiences.

[-] griefreeze@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Apologies for the late reply, I guess I didn't have notifications set up correctly.

I think I see the point you're making, but I don't think that it contradicts my point. Your analogy isn't quite applicable here because no one is saying vocal-toxic-leftists don't exist, we're saying that just because you have seen vocal-toxic-leftists you can't defensibly generalize large groups with such little evidence.

It's early and I haven't had coffee, so I apologize again if what I said isn't so clear.

[-] rDrDr@lemmy.world -4 points 11 months ago

The author of this article is almost certainly a democrat. And if you mention senile politicians without mentioning Trump, you are invariably a Trumper.

[-] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

I mean when we're all on the same side, must I add the most obvious ones? I'm not talking about the GOP and Trump, they're far gone off the crazy cliff, they're not saveable. I'm worried about the politicians I want to vote for, and point out the ones that make me angry and need a kick in the ass within the party I vote for.

this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
374 points (90.5% liked)

politics

18883 readers
5089 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS