It’s not just “Uncommitted” activists who are pressuring Kamala Harris on Gaza policy. Her own delegates are speaking out.
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20240821013836/https://theintercept.com/2024/08/20/dnc-harris-gaza-uncommitted-protest/
The leftists outside looked from liberal to nazi, and from nazi to liberal, and from liberal to nazi again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
I am a liberal in the U.S sense. Not a leftist, nor a democrat, and certainly not a nazi.
I really bristle at the notion that there’s no room between liberals that want revolution, and party-line toting democrats.
There are literally dozens of liberals who don’t view the Democratic Party as representing them, but also aren’t all that interested what happens under Christian fascism if normal people don’t vote, or corporate takeover if the people overthrow the government. (Because, after the military, only large corporations have the organization, capital, and manpower to direct society - and they would, if given the chance.)
If I may, can you clarify what you mean by
In US political parlance, Liberal is typically synonymous with Democrats, and a broad, ill defined, ‘left’ of the political spectrum.
Outside the US, and in much of political science, liberal denotes a broadly centrist, status quo position, that can be left or right leaning.
And in neither of those definitions do liberals ‘want revolution’. At least not in the way that my fellow commies on Hexbear might typically conceive of it.
I have twice typed up huge novels and deleted them.
The very, very simple answer to your question is that I do not think the Democratic Party is liberal. They are a centrist party that pretends to encompass the left because U.S. election law is set up in such a way that only two parties can prevail at a national level.
The why? Those are the novels I keep writing - Election law/electoral finance laws and money. The parties won’t fix the laws, and money skews right. Thus, even the ‘left’ party is in the center.
I say I’m liberal because that’s where I fit with the understanding I have. I did stipulate a U.S. liberal, because - the ‘spectrum’ has always been understood by me to be roughly defined left to right as revolutionaries, liberals, centrists, conservatives, and reactionaries.
Reduced even further, it’s just left, center, right. Liberal, centrist, conservative.
Because I view liberals as separate from centrists, and the Democratic Party as centrist, I don’t view them as encompassing my beliefs. (And, there are a number of actions they’ve taken or not taken that run contrary to my beliefs, too.)
I think that I overlap with leftists on about 90% of views, honestly, but I’ve been attacked and told I support genocide in leftist communities when literally the only thing someone knows about me is that I don’t want republicans to gain power. I’m probably sort of sensitive to the assumption that liberals are supportive of every action of the Democratic Party. My ‘liberals that want revolution’ was a bit of an intentional reversion to the overly broad grouping I feel I’m subject to. Not intended to be an insult - more or less a dumb joke best accompanied by a shit-eating grin.
Bristle away, it won’t un-dismember all those Palestinian kids
Your sensible middle ground reformists are literally making plans to end the world
First, I appreciate your reference to literal dozens of liberals. 😁
Second, you’re right that most liberals don’t want revolution. Non-liberals too, for the most part! Unfortunately, in some corners of Lemmy, such as Hexbear or Lemmygrad, the ability to distinguish and discuss nuance is not included in what I would describe as their “community values”.
If you’re looking for a constructive discussion about policy issues, you’re barking up the wrong tree. Alternatively, if you prefer to discuss everything in terms of absolutes, and you love China and tanks, it could be a great time.
But I’m standing right here… Making a nearly identical point about liberals
You’re standing right here, on Lemmy.zip, not on your home instance, and the comment I was responding to was a response to a different Hexbear user who was literally saying that there is no difference between liberals and Nazis.
If I meant to reply to your comment, I would have done that.
It was incredibly jarring when I first got to Lemmy and started running into nutjobs who seem to be on some sort of crusade, spouting ideas so far out of touch that they’re either straight up trolling or they are state propaganda assets from a western adversary. Sometimes when people ask where these people are coming from, I like to provide something of an orientation, as the community will never survive off of nutjobs alone.
You’re missing my point.
I know full well where I’m posting. You’re talking about the importance of nuance, while painting all Hexbear users as somekind of monolithic hivemind.
Meanwhile, I a humble Hexbear user, am trying to ask a user from another instance, in good faith, to explain their ideological position in more depth. Because I earnestly want to know.
If you want to probe the “liberal=fascist” sentiment, we can. But that’s not the discussion I’m trying to have here.
You’re the pot calling the kettle black, my friend.
Friend, you’re right, I am missing your point.
I wasn’t trying to engage in a conversation with you at any point. I don’t know why you keep replying.
We seem to mostly be in alignment on the issue of liberals and Nazis not being the same. I was offering my viewpoint to the original commenter I replied to, just in the same way that you did, when you came at me with this “I’m standing right here” bullshit.
If you’re hurt because I’ve insulted your instance, that’s tough. If you hang out with Anarchists all the time, you aren’t allowed to get upset if someone calls you an Anarchist. I’m far from the only person who has pointed out the frequency of viewpoints that lack any connection to reality coming out of Hexbear. My comment was a PSA and I won’t apologize for calling it out.
Reddit shit
You keep repeating this smug, Thatcherite “no connection to reality” line and I think it’s really not helping your case when you’re trying to appeal to “nuance”. I don’t think you have a very good idea of what leftists actually believe, or you’d have more to say about its substance.