this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2025
335 points (97.7% liked)

United States | News & Politics

8241 readers
137 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Relevant rant:
๐Ÿ“บ Why the Democratic Party CANNOT and WILL NOT be Reformed
Democrats would rather lose to a Republican, to a conservative, to a fascist, to Trump, than address the material conditions of the American people.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca -3 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Of course you can. Just look at how the MAGA movement has taken over the Republican party. It started during Obama's term, with the Tea Party movement. One-by-one, they primaried the old-school moderate Republicans, and eventually held majority control over their party's policy decisions. Once they had that, the remaining moderates either chose to fall in line, or were forced to retire.

That's how democracy works. Revolution is just an excuse to kill people for their political beliefs, when you're too lazy to convince them to change their minds.

[โ€“] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

The MAGA movement is not opposed to the present system of capitalism. The US is not, and has never been, a democracy.

[โ€“] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca -2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's a representative democracy...which means you need to flip seats in Congress in order to take over a party. That's all. It's a gradual process, but one that is entirely possible within the current system. We the people, have the power to do this, just by voting.

[โ€“] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago

No, it is not entirely possible. The system is designed to aopear that way, but in reality those in power will use everything they can to prevent workers from taking from them.

[โ€“] eldavi@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

that's the approach that democrats advocate; but it's clearly not working well... or at all.

[โ€“] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The biggest problem is, that progressives are fighting against the money. Tea Party Republicans didn't have that problem, since most of their socio-political ideology aligns with Libertarian policies. No taxes, no regulations, no corporate accountability. That draws a lot of support from the kinds of people who were already dissatisfied with the compromise Democrats and Republicans had struck between the elites making more money, and the consumers they use to make it.

The Tea Party and later MAGA are all in on fucking us all over to benefit the ruling class. Most of their voters are just too gullible to realize that. They think they're somehow "sticking it to the elites", by giving them everything they could have ever hoped for.

In many ways, it was never a real grassroots movement. It was always just an astroturfed effort. But it demonstrates how you can fundamentally change the entire direction of a party in US politics. One seat at a time...until the new majority votes the way you want them to.

[โ€“] eldavi@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

that certainly is a problem; but the biggest problem is the oniony and entrenched layers of propaganda that each american must put a lot of never-ending effort into overcoming; it's the entire reason why there are so few american progressives in power to prevent political parties from catering to the oligarchies.

[โ€“] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

That catch-22 works both ways. Once there are more progressives in power, the effect will begin to reverse. I'm old enough to see it already happening. It's just a slow shift.

[โ€“] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You're suggesting the extreme in the opposite direction. Rs did it with a populist. Is that the only way?

[โ€“] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago

They didn't have a single populist in the beginning. They just had "Tea Party Republicans". Unfortunately, this new "flavor" of conservative was even more racist and unintelligent than the original recipe.

Their voters immediately gravitated towards them, because they were seen as relatable outsiders, whose biggest policy position was to do whatever it took to hurt "the left", and/or anyone who even suggested the idea of "working together" with them. (ie. RINOs)

Trump just eventually took advantage of this movement and declared himself its leader. But when it first started, he still considered himself a Democrat.