Did I ever claim establishment Dems are willing to put in the necessary changes to move progress forward? Because California Dems are about as establishment/corporatist as you can freaking get.
I never said “give establishment Dems another chance.” I said “fixing things takes time,” and that will still apply even if you oust all the establishment Dems and replace them with progressives.
Please take your strawman argument somewhere else if you’re not going to actually read what I wrote and respond to that.
So you believe that electing more progressive candidates within the party that operating exactly as designed is gonna change things? Any new politician that is deemed a threat to the status quo will never be placed into positions of power or influence that can threaten the existence of the status quo.
Do you not know how political systems work? Change the people holding the levers of power and you change the agenda that guides their policies.
Yeah, if you vote in enough progressive Dems then they can oust Schumer and Jeffries and replace them with people like Bernie and AOC. That’s how this entire system works and what it’s predicated on.
The reason that hasn’t happened yet is because progressives have as yet only been a minority within the party. There are signs that may change in the next few electoral cycles, but if you want to cry and break things like a petulant child because you don’t believe in incremental progress and can’t have everything you want right now, then don’t fucking complain when the broken system isn’t working the way that it should.
Incrementalism marches to the right, it always has. Liberals have claimed for decades they need more time, and everytime they are extended more they shift further to the right. Today’s Democrats are to the far right of 1980s Democrats
It’s okay, just keep not reading what I said and responding to points that I didn’t make. It’s fine, we don’t need to have a good faith discussion if you’re so intent on relying on strawman arguments.
And by the way:
Incrementalism marches to the right, it always has.
That’s demonstrably false. Emancipation was incremental progress. Voting rights were incremental progress. The Civil Rights Movement was incremental progress. None of those things were immediately perfect solutions, but they all made steps towards a more just system, and they all paved the way for further progress. That’s the definition of incrementalism.
Unless you want to argue that each one fixed everything perfectly as soon as it was implemented? If that were the case, then why would the ones that followed have been necessary? Or are you saying that the progress they achieved was actually marching towards the right? Because that would be as ridiculous as claiming that they achieved no progress at all simply because it wasn’t perfect.
Did I ever claim establishment Dems are willing to put in the necessary changes to move progress forward? Because California Dems are about as establishment/corporatist as you can freaking get.
I never said “give establishment Dems another chance.” I said “fixing things takes time,” and that will still apply even if you oust all the establishment Dems and replace them with progressives.
Please take your strawman argument somewhere else if you’re not going to actually read what I wrote and respond to that.
So you believe that electing more progressive candidates within the party that operating exactly as designed is gonna change things? Any new politician that is deemed a threat to the status quo will never be placed into positions of power or influence that can threaten the existence of the status quo.
Do you not know how political systems work? Change the people holding the levers of power and you change the agenda that guides their policies.
Yeah, if you vote in enough progressive Dems then they can oust Schumer and Jeffries and replace them with people like Bernie and AOC. That’s how this entire system works and what it’s predicated on.
The reason that hasn’t happened yet is because progressives have as yet only been a minority within the party. There are signs that may change in the next few electoral cycles, but if you want to cry and break things like a petulant child because you don’t believe in incremental progress and can’t have everything you want right now, then don’t fucking complain when the broken system isn’t working the way that it should.
Incrementalism marches to the right, it always has. Liberals have claimed for decades they need more time, and everytime they are extended more they shift further to the right. Today’s Democrats are to the far right of 1980s Democrats
It’s okay, just keep not reading what I said and responding to points that I didn’t make. It’s fine, we don’t need to have a good faith discussion if you’re so intent on relying on strawman arguments.
And by the way:
That’s demonstrably false. Emancipation was incremental progress. Voting rights were incremental progress. The Civil Rights Movement was incremental progress. None of those things were immediately perfect solutions, but they all made steps towards a more just system, and they all paved the way for further progress. That’s the definition of incrementalism.
Unless you want to argue that each one fixed everything perfectly as soon as it was implemented? If that were the case, then why would the ones that followed have been necessary? Or are you saying that the progress they achieved was actually marching towards the right? Because that would be as ridiculous as claiming that they achieved no progress at all simply because it wasn’t perfect.