• 1 Post
  • 45 Comments
Joined 22 days ago
cake
Cake day: March 8th, 2025

help-circle


  • Exactly, that’s my whole point. We got duped because we really let ourselves believe the candidate the DNC chose was going to actually be progressive. Hindsight shows we were wrong to believe in his campaign but it also shows the democratic party knew full well what they were doing when they put the establishment behind his campaign specifically

    In the fervour of trying to ensure an absolute crank like Dr. Oz wasn’t allowed to hold office we all collectively bet the house on democrats meeting the moment and putting forward a progressive. In reality, they saw the moment for what it was and used that opportunity to get a slam dunk institutional stooge into a seat for 6 years.

    The problem isn’t that we were duped, the problem is that we were made to believe anything other than a heel turn was the desired outcome. He was selected specifically for his ability to fake being progressive and have zero shame when confronted about it.

    We cant take their word for it anymore, if your candidate isn’t openly a socialist they might as well be a republican. Until our institutions work for us we cannot rely on them to do the work to get there. Go look at the zohran mamdani campaign and what they are advocating for to see what an actually progressive campaign looks like so you don’t get duped ever again. If your candidate doesn’t talk like THIS you are being lied to about their beliefs.



  • Oh for sure, this leads us back to the real issue at hand which is democrats choosing the most unfit, corrupt, or republican candidate they can run in any election that is being used as a “referendum on extremism” see henry cuellar in Texas for this same exact scenario in even more explicit terms

    Fetterman should’ve never been allowed in the party. If they truly believed in progressive values instead of optics and looking “moderate” someone with actual, tangible values would have been chosen to run. Anyone with the party machinery to run oppo research on fetterman should have said then and there that he has proven himself antithetical to progressivism. His behaviors both personally and in office are incompatible with the stated desires of the people he was chosen to represent AND his own claimed political beliefs. They just chose to keep it hidden and lean into “common sense.”

    There are plenty of people in Philly that could have blown the doors off dr oz and actually delivered for the state in congress. Not that Fetterman was worse than dr oz, he was just the literal next worst option there was. THAT is why he got the campaign money and not anyone who was going to argue against the DNC.

    Everyone let themselves be fooled into believing the dems were trying to move the needle. It would have made no difference if they just said “this guy is basically a republican but you’re gonna have to vote him in bc the other option is dr oz.” But they decided it would look better if he campaigned as a progressive and then betrayed that constituency once in office.

    Watch the NYC mayoral race closely, you see the same happening again. Propping up a proven sexual abuser with the money and media coverage and organizing power from the Democrat institutions just to destroy the campaign of a open socialist running to pass laws to benefit real new york workers. All because Cuomo would be running against Eric adams in an almost guaranteed loss for adams. Its disgusting. This is how fascism won.

    Idk what to do but call it out for what it is. We have to build an entirely separate power structure for real candidates like Zohran to make sure people like us have the backing to win these races against democrats in their own strongholds. All the political power and will is unified against allowing truly progressive candidates to run. Until there is a new national workers party fundraising for working class candidates we won’t see anything but more neoliberal-centrist “progressives” who vote to continue the orphan crushing machine out of loyalty to the structure and utter lack of loyalty to any constituency.

    Sorry for the rant, I’m just attempting to make a record of my frantic screams as water fills the lower decks





  • I mean tbh I hope he does, let’s get discovery on his Twitter account and the comms between him and open nazis he’s been signalboosting for years. You know, the evidence that he’s a nazi? It’d be great if some judge called dom lucre to the stand to testify that elon personally intervened in his account ban, after he posted CSAM with his own name watermarked on it.

    You know, defamation has to be provably false statements made intentionally with knowledge of the statement being a falsehood and being used to cause harm to an individual from said statement. None of those criteria are met by stating a well known and not hidden fact that elon musk is a nazi and has been, publicly, for at least two years. Nazi rhetoric, nazi salute, and nazi friends.

    Sue all you want bro. Courts can’t change the truth.









  • Sorry for getting heated, I initially read it as nitpicking but scaled back my reply when I read it a few more times to fully understand what you were saying.

    When I wrote the original comment I was just rattling off the most well known events and I honestly didn’t remember the Vegas shooter having not disclosed a motive or left clues.

    At first it seemed like an attempt to derail the conversation but I went and doubled checked all the reporting to make sure I didn’t have it confused. You were right, and I got defensive. I didn’t want the heart of the message to get lost in the combing through of each individual culprits motive.

    Either way, the dude was a piece of shit, and there’s 400 more open neonazis committing violence to pull from the database if we really want to make sure all our t’s are crossed and I’s dotted.

    Thanks for the reply, and for understanding where I was coming from. I did not mean to come off condescending.




  • Famously when the nazis demanded obedience they did so not by making laws outright banning speech. They simply made sure that nobody in any position of power would risk drawing attention and behave accordingly “of his own will”

    Its brilliant that a hundred years later people with access to any human in the world just… do the exact same shit Germans did.

    From They Thought They Were Free, the Germans 1933 - 1945

    […] "I gave them French and English literature, more so than before, although to do so was one of those vague betrayals of the ‘new spirit’; still, it had not been specifically forbidden. Of course, I always said, to protect myself (but I said it in such a way that I hoped the students would see through it), that the foreign works we read were only a reflection of German literature. So, you see, Herr Professor, a man could show some—some independence, even, so to say, secretly.” “I understand,” I said. “Many of the students—the best of them—understood what was going on in all this. It was a sort of dumb-show game that we were all playing, I with them. The worst effect, I think, was that it made them cynical, the best ones. But, then, it made the teachers cynical, too. I think the classroom in those years was one of the causes of the cynicism you see in the best young men and women in Germany today.”

    […]

    "Tell me, Herr Hildebrandt, what about [Shakespeare’s]Julius Caesar?”

    He smiled very, very wryly. “Julius Caesar? No … no.”

    “Was it forbidden?”

    “Not that I remember. But that is not the way it was. Everything was not regulated specifically, ever. It was not like that at all. Choices were left to the teacher’s discretion, within the ‘German spirit.’ That was all that was necessary; the teacher had only to be discreet. If he himself wondered at all whether anyone would object to a given book, he would be wise not to use it. This was a much more powerful form of intimidation, you see, than any fixed list of acceptable or unacceptable writings. The way it was done was, from the point of view of the regime, remarkably clever and effective. The teacher had to make the choices and risk the consequences; this made him all the more cautious.”