this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
799 points (85.7% liked)
Political Memes
9092 readers
2206 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem, in my mind:
republicans/regressives (read nazis) actually get in line and vote for the R next to any name that they've heard in the last week (if not just because it has an R), which means that they actually get shit done (making things worse, but they all get behind it is my point).
On the other hand, democrats/leftists/progressives all sit here and fight one another because of reasons, some good, and some just a little silly in the grand scheme of things. This group doesn't know how to effectively work together to slowly and surely get to the same end goal.
The differences here are why regressives are able to rat fuck an entire nation, collectively, because they don't bicker with each other, their allies, about the smaller details.
The democrats/leftists/progressives are too busy trying to fight hundreds of different problems/battles that would all be solved (eventually, mind you, not right away like we wish it would be) by banding together and keeping the movement momentum going AFTER winning the election.
For an example, gaza and trans rights issues. Both VERY valid issues, and they should be discussed. What happened was those same groups focused way too much on the smaller details instead of the big picture. What SHOULD have happened was we voice our concerns on the issues, vote for the person (at this time, Harris) who had the highest chance of those issues being solved, and then keeping the fire going by continuing to press these concerns to THAT administration.
Look at it this way, even though it is too late: if Kamala had won, you'd be able to sit there and protest any actions that weren't being made towards your/your groups issues, and if we could all get on the same god damned page, you would have more allies who are more at ease with the current admin who could protest with you, because things aren't dire enough for them to focus on them and theirs (read fuck you, got mine). Under the orange buffoon, you can now get deported for protesting anything, let alone trans rights and gaza genocide. So, those allies you could've had are now being deported, killed, or arrested, and that makes others scared to protest with you.
TL;DR: Allowing the nazis to win because democrats/leftists/progressives can't see the bigger picture, and choose to focus on their own issues only (or at the very least, make it their highest priority when we should know that's not how it works, unfortunately) is the reason we have the orange shitler in office right now. This group is trying to fight 100 different battles, while regressives lock step and take away all the good we had achieved, instead of banding together and just doing the literal bare minimum (vote in the "neo-lib"). Full stop.
@PugJesus@lemmy.world is right, whether you like it or not.
Absolutely correct.
But, let's ponder a little devil's advocate, Mind you, I'm not saying this is right, but there are hard questions.
Is the path out of this whole situation continuing to bunt? If we keep choosing the better of the two options while steadily losing ground, are we not still going to lose ground? Do we believe we're getting back all that ground because the left finally finds and backs someone who is willing to fight for what we need? Will they ever put someone, even truly moderate, out there, or will it be forever the less genocidal candidate?
If we continue to support them, will the left bring us left, or are they going to stay on the tit of the right and keep throwing us under the bus with concessions to fundamental moral questions?
Is this all miserable enough for us to agree to back a third party?
I voted blue because I don't want that moral blood on my hands. But are we just arranging deck chairs?
Become more involved. Do you know your mayor?
If you are not helping pick the candidates on the ballot, then you just need to pick the lesser evil. If you want to do more than that, then be part of the decision of WHO ends up on the ballot, because that process has already started.
There's a significant hurdle to run for even the mayoral office: it doesn't pay well relative to a corporate job, and doesn't have the same job security. People can only run for the decision-making positions when they already have enough wealth to be comfortable without a "real job." Help find or select people with your values and we can take this back.
If you are mad at your options, the solution is not to give up, but to make better options.
There's no lack of attempts at this. The deck isn't just stacked, it's designed not to let outsiders in, so you get insiders-only. From the entire party, how many insiders are even marginally close to what we're asking for? Anyone who would even consider anti-corruption would never see the light of day on the nominations. Hell, we more of less have an entire party (green) that's more or less there to make sure no one else gets close.
The problem isn't the lack of attempts, it's that attempts are hyper focused on narrow avenues of change. People are either all in on the rigged game or highly improbable home runs.
Forcing change strictly through grinding election cycles is as absurd as opt-out accelerationism and magic-wand general strikes. In reality, political action in 2025 requires more legwork on all fronts than ever before.
It does require harm reduction voting, but it also requires building up the social structures that have been lost (or sabotaged) in the last 100+ years. You need to form a union, join a mutual aid network, organize protests and boycotts and every other coordinated action of all shades of legality.
Obviously it's more than any one person can do alone, but every person making those connections makes the social web stronger and easier to build on for the next. The first step that 90% of people on here need to do is step away from the digital echo chamber and spend more time in real political world.
There's no mayor in my unincorporated town. The nearest mayor to me is a rather large city 30 minutes away, that presides over 500,000 people, and getting time with him is more than a little challenging. The best I have are delegates and representatives, and let's stay, we don't see eye to eye on social issues. The next closest delegate was an anti-vaxing doctor. They don't really care a lot about what I have to say; they have enough idiots around to keep themselves ensconced.