You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
39 points
*

This shit is going to pass with full bipartisan support and libs are still going to be confused the next time someone tells them both sides parties are the same.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

You’re basically outright admitting that “muh both sides” is a right wing talking point.

But the fact that there are things both sides agree on does not mean both sides are the same.

It’s like saying that because Hitler and Lincoln both agree that eating shit is a terrible idea, that both republicans and Nazis are the same.

This is like extremely basic logic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

the point is that the democrats are a right wing party, as evidenced by their ongoing funding of war at the expense of their own citizens’ well being.

this is like extremely basic logic

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You know two things can be “right wing” and still not the same, right? Both Nazis and Republicans are right wing…but you’re smart enough to realize they aren’t the same, correct?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

My mistake, I meant “both parties,” as in Democrats and Republicans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I knew what you meant and your edit doesn’t change the my point at all.

permalink
report
parent
reply

The specific combination of factors in the historical formation of U.S. society—dominant “biblical” religious ideology and absence of a workers’ party—has resulted in government by a de facto single party, the party of capital. The two segments that make up this single party share the same fundamental liberalism. Both focus their attention solely on the minority who “participate” in the truncated and powerless democratic life on offer. Each has its supporters in the middle classes, since the working classes seldom vote, and has adapted its language to them. Each encapsulates a conglomerate of segmentary capitalist interests (the “lobbies”) and supporters from various “communities.”

American democracy is today the advanced model of what I call “low-intensity democracy.” It operates on the basis of a complete separation between the management of political life, grounded on the practice of electoral democracy, and the management of economic life, governed by the laws of capital accumulation. Moreover, this separation is not questioned in any substantial way, but is, rather, part of what is called the general consensus. Yet that separation eliminates all the creative potential found in political democracy. It emasculates the representative institutions (parliaments and others), which are made powerless in the face of the “market” whose dictates must be accepted.

Samir Amin, Revolution from North to South

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

If the claim was that they were the same in the support of capitalism, the economic system primarily responsible for making us the juggernaut that we are, then I would have not said anything. But when it comes to social, environmental, and how to use (if at all) that generated wealth to support the less fortunate among us, they differ drastically.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I believe that democrats should at the very least oppose genocide (rather than encourage it) if they want to be considered different from the republicans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Remember when Hitler and Lincoln both signed the “Don’t eat shit” Bill before one lost a war and ate shit while the other won a war and ate shit? Good thing they did, because otherwise your example would be shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

This shit is going to pass with full bipartisan support

Hell yeah

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

News from around the world!

Rules:

  • Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc

  • No NSFW content

  • No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Community stats

  • 37

    Monthly active users

  • 6.9K

    Posts

  • 27K

    Comments