Okay, I see your flag and all of that, but I’m gonna take this in good faith.
The New York Times and other media have an opportunity to cast the Democratic Socialist Party as the cool kids, and even if that doesn’t align with the corporate Neolib agenda, it does allow them to make coalitions and leaves them to co-opt the DSP in the future.
TLDR, it is in the establishment Democratic Party’s interest to encourage and support the DSP. The New York Times in mainstream media is refusing to frame the politics that way.
It’s only in their interest if you assume their interest is in governance. If that is not their interest, if they are actually interested in maintaining the status quo so they can keep insider trading from congress, then it makes sense for them to fight against the rising tide of progress.
The problem with the DSA isn’t that they don’t align with the corporate neolib agenda. It’s that the DSA seeks to abolish the institutions that liberalism relies on for its power. It is not in the interest of the Democrats to support the DSA except in so far as it allows them to sheepdog proto-revolutionary energy into dead ends. That’s how they use Bernie and in the last decade or so it’s how they used the DSA.
Until people understand what liberalism is, this confusion will continue. Liberalism is what made Thomas Jefferson want to split from the crown. It’s also the philosophy that allowed him to argue against importing slaves from Africa to increase the price of the slaves he sold from his “breeding plantations”, or rape farms as they might be more rightly called.
Every conservative in the US today, with a couple rare exceptions, is a Liberal, and every Democrat in the US today is also a Liberal. They differ on how far liberal values should extend, but they rely on the same power system: private property, profit, corporate personhood, common stock, police, genocide, and ecocide.
The DSA will only be a part of the Democrats insofar as they are a) ineffective or b) abandon their anti-capitalist pole. Outside of that, the NYT is doing the same job it always has done - protect the ruling class from the masses.
Do I think the Good Cop in the Good Cop / Bad Cop routine is just as bad as the Bad Cop? That’s not the question. The question is why, after all this time, and everything you know, do you still think that cooperating with the Good Cop is in your interest. It’s not.
The Democratic Party and The Republican Party are two fronts for the fascist elite of the Eurocentric empire, they have a single shared purpose. They collaborate on that purpose and take up oppositional positions in the public sphere to maintain and divide the loyalty of the masses.
Democrats winning has done absolutely nothing to stop the march of fascism. In fact, Democrats actively participate in the never ending fascism that birthed and sustained the USA for its entire existence. Don’t forget, not only did FDR put anyone vaguely asian-looking into concentration camps, the government stole their private property as well, while they were also building the racist redlining program into the banking industry.
The Democrats can’t save you because they have no intention of saving you. They are active collaborators in the whole fascist system, and part of their role is to get you a coffee and apologize for the bad behavior of their partners. But they’re not doing that because they intend to fix it. They do it because it gets you to support them and ignore the alternative.
You’re using words as if English were an immutable language, which it isn’t.
Yes, FDR was president of a very racist country and Jefferson owned slaves. But neither one pointed to a minority, thought “I can scapegoat them”, and then used violence and terror to break the political system and commit genocide.
No one can stop you from using 'facism" as a label for what I might call eurocentric globalism, but if you do so please do not expect anyone to react as if you were talking about genocidal bigotry.
Especially when we have actual genocidal bigots more than happy for you to dilute their second-most infamous label.
Okay, I see your flag and all of that, but I’m gonna take this in good faith.
The New York Times and other media have an opportunity to cast the Democratic Socialist Party as the cool kids, and even if that doesn’t align with the corporate Neolib agenda, it does allow them to make coalitions and leaves them to co-opt the DSP in the future.
TLDR, it is in the establishment Democratic Party’s interest to encourage and support the DSP. The New York Times in mainstream media is refusing to frame the politics that way.
It’s only in their interest if you assume their interest is in governance. If that is not their interest, if they are actually interested in maintaining the status quo so they can keep insider trading from congress, then it makes sense for them to fight against the rising tide of progress.
The problem with the DSA isn’t that they don’t align with the corporate neolib agenda. It’s that the DSA seeks to abolish the institutions that liberalism relies on for its power. It is not in the interest of the Democrats to support the DSA except in so far as it allows them to sheepdog proto-revolutionary energy into dead ends. That’s how they use Bernie and in the last decade or so it’s how they used the DSA.
Until people understand what liberalism is, this confusion will continue. Liberalism is what made Thomas Jefferson want to split from the crown. It’s also the philosophy that allowed him to argue against importing slaves from Africa to increase the price of the slaves he sold from his “breeding plantations”, or rape farms as they might be more rightly called.
Every conservative in the US today, with a couple rare exceptions, is a Liberal, and every Democrat in the US today is also a Liberal. They differ on how far liberal values should extend, but they rely on the same power system: private property, profit, corporate personhood, common stock, police, genocide, and ecocide.
The DSA will only be a part of the Democrats insofar as they are a) ineffective or b) abandon their anti-capitalist pole. Outside of that, the NYT is doing the same job it always has done - protect the ruling class from the masses.
You are distracted by the term “the left.”
This article and and others that support this narrative, serve only to divide the Democratic vote.
Divide the democratic vote along any boundary and Republicans remain in power.
If you think Neolibs are just as bad as Nazis, then I can’t help you.
Do I think the Good Cop in the Good Cop / Bad Cop routine is just as bad as the Bad Cop? That’s not the question. The question is why, after all this time, and everything you know, do you still think that cooperating with the Good Cop is in your interest. It’s not.
The Democratic Party and The Republican Party are two fronts for the fascist elite of the Eurocentric empire, they have a single shared purpose. They collaborate on that purpose and take up oppositional positions in the public sphere to maintain and divide the loyalty of the masses.
Democrats winning has done absolutely nothing to stop the march of fascism. In fact, Democrats actively participate in the never ending fascism that birthed and sustained the USA for its entire existence. Don’t forget, not only did FDR put anyone vaguely asian-looking into concentration camps, the government stole their private property as well, while they were also building the racist redlining program into the banking industry.
The Democrats can’t save you because they have no intention of saving you. They are active collaborators in the whole fascist system, and part of their role is to get you a coffee and apologize for the bad behavior of their partners. But they’re not doing that because they intend to fix it. They do it because it gets you to support them and ignore the alternative.
You’re using words as if English were an immutable language, which it isn’t.
Yes, FDR was president of a very racist country and Jefferson owned slaves. But neither one pointed to a minority, thought “I can scapegoat them”, and then used violence and terror to break the political system and commit genocide.
No one can stop you from using 'facism" as a label for what I might call eurocentric globalism, but if you do so please do not expect anyone to react as if you were talking about genocidal bigotry.
Especially when we have actual genocidal bigots more than happy for you to dilute their second-most infamous label.
ok
thanks for sharing your carefully considered opinions