• archomrade [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    48 hours ago

    Your analysis is just vibes, bud, it doesn’t have any eye or consideration for any systems or material relations

    If tomorrow we passed a law protecting trans and minority rights, the next election the reactionary forces will push back and make it harder - if not impossible - to run on protecting them again.

    Why do you think it’s so hard for Harris to run on Palestinian liberation, or immigration reform, or trans rights? Because she’d lose, because the American voter base is frothing at the mouth and becoming more reactionary every election cycle, and your ‘analysis’ doesn’t even bother to see or acknowledge that trend, let alone address it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -15 hours ago

      Yeah , it’s almost as if you have to rally the troops and get out the vote in every single election.

      FDR’s New Deal held together for decades, until Ronald Reagan got in.

      • archomrade [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        24 hours ago

        Lmao, it’s literally all vibes

        “people stop wanting progressive policies because we stop pushing for them” is a take that’s completely divorced from physical reality. You have to be completely blind to how people’s material and cultural reality relate to each other if you’re to believe this.

        FDR’s New Deal held together for decades, until Ronald Reagan got in.

        If it wasn’t Reagan, it would have been another reactionary politician. Looking at history as if individual men/women dictate our reality as if in a decontextualized vacuum is maddeningly idiotic. Reagan represented a popular movement of reactionary conservatism - he didn’t invent it out of whole-cloth. There has never been a social-democratic government that hasn’t eventually been privatized or been subject to increasing austerity measures, and that pattern can be studied and rationalized as a dialectic.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          04 hours ago

          “people stop wanting progressive policies because we stop pushing for them”

          Nice made up quote that has nothing to do with what I wrote. We lost progressive policies because believed Reagan’s lies, not because he ran as anti-labor.

          Reagan sleazed in by sabotaging Carter with a backdoor deal Reagan made with Iran.

          Reagan actually ran as a New Deal loving Union President.

          https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a43368900/reagan-iran-hostages/

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              04 hours ago

              There’s you problem right there.

              I just double checked and re-read everything I posted in this thread.

              I didn’t use the word ‘reactionary’ once.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 hour ago

                  I’m not sure we are working from the same definition of reactionary.

                  That’s you using a word.

                  A word I never used.

                  Obviously, you’re confused and continuing would be a complete waste of time.

                  I mean, if I haven’t seen your comments, what is the point?