Anti-voting rhetoric will be the death of the left. Literally.
Not a single fucking Republican voted to protect roe. It was fucking overturned in the first place bc trump got three Supreme Court appointments.
Every fucking thing wrong in this country is almost certainly the result of Republicans being in power. In 2020, Texas cut half of the polling places in black neighborhoods, and doubled them in white ones, regardless of population. It was Republicans bitching about mail in voting, and constantly, constantlyfearmonger about voter fraud. Literally, their platform is about making civil rights harder to practice.
Would you like to know why? It’s because Republican politicians know better than anyone that higher voter participation means higher republican loss.
But what do I see from the online left, champions of the oppressed?
“Voting doesn’t do anything, the parties are the same, the system is rigged, etc, etc”
Don’t sit here and tell me you give a fuck about marginalized people if you aren’t ready to march your ass to the voting booth and vote out the party actively stripping their rights away.
Protest, donate, community build, unionize, and vote, vote, vote.
By the time direct action is the only option, it will be too fucking late.
The U.S. mostly has a first-past-the-post voting system. The candidate with the most votes wins and there are no prizes for second place. If a district goes 49% Democratic and 51% Republican, the Republicans win the district
This makes a two party system almost inevitable because in a system with more than two parties, the instant one party gets the support of over a third of the population, the other parties cannot compete unless they join forces
And a two party system means, crucially, that if you want to get more voters, there are only two ways to get them:
Get more people to vote that ordinarily wouldn’t vote at all.
Take voters from the other party.
That’s it.
The reason Democrats are “not radical enough” is that, if they can’t turn non-voters into voters, to get more people to vote Democratic, they have to appeal to Republicans enough to convince them to change sides. There’s nowhere else to get people from.
The reason the country seems to “skew” Republican over time is not because of Democrats caving to goalpost moving, it’s because of gerrymandering and our system prioritizing land area over people’s votes
If 51% of voters in my district vote Republican, it’s a republican district. If 51% of districts are Republican districts, the state is a “red state.” That state can end up with all republican representatives even if there are barely more Republicans than Democrats
Being more spread out makes it easier for Republicans to dominate districts, too. It’s like the land is voting instead of the people.
I’m from Kentucky.
Here’s data from the Pew Research Center showing how many Kentuckians vote Democrat vs. how many vote Republican.
One percent. That’s how big the gap is in this overwhelmingly, solidly “red” state. ONE PERCENT.
Also, this is a state that has laws in place disenfranchising nearly ten percent of its population. If you are a convicted felon in Kentucky, you lose the right to vote, which means nearly ten percent of Kentuckians can’t vote.
HMM. I WONDER WHY.
This is why democracy is more than voting for President Daddy to come fix everything and then blaming President Daddy when he doesn’t.
This is why democracy means voting.
This is why democracy means organizing and then COMMUNICATING TO those folks who were elected. Writing. Calling. Emailing. Texting. To tell them that YOU are one of those votes that will keep them in or out. And what you want from them. Regularly. BOTHER THEM.
This is why democracy means not just voting for and then bothering elected officials about single issues. It also means bothering them about the system itself.
Push for population-based votes. Push for runoffs. Push for campaign finance reform.
As someone who has experienced disability leave and who technically still has a disability, this piece resonated with me. Here are some highlights:
“The proposal, like many of its policies regarding disabled people, shows a fundamental misunderstanding of disability and takes advantage of how social media operates in order to cut them off from the support they need. Disabled people don’t all function in the same way, and disability is not a set of stereotypes like taking selfies staring longingly at the world. They live lives while managing their energy for the activities they can handle and trying to make those they cannot more accessible.”
“Disabled people should be allowed to share the full scope of their existence without fear they’ll be accused of lying—and even fraud—by the United States Government which will likely reason that if a disabled person is seen going to the mall or taking time to swim or jog, they can be working.”
“The truth about disability is that it isn’t a series of down moments but both highs and lows that comprise the lives of the disabled.”
“This type of policy also plays upon the assumption that people with disabilities all function and move about in the world in the same way, which is entirely untrue.”
First the surveillance state came for the terrorists, and I did not speak out—because I am not a terrorist.
Then it came for those who appear vagely Muslim, and I did not speak out— because I am not a Muslim.
Then it came for impoverished minorities and dissidents, and I did not speak out—because I am white and not a dissident.
And now, Trump and the Republican Party want to expand use of the surveillance state against people with disabilities.
I say this because a lot of Americans believe that the surveillance state–or a form of police state, for that matter–doesn’t exist in this country; that is a myth held by those fortunate enough to not be one of the millions of people who experience America as a surveillance state and/or a police state.
It is incumbent upon all of us to agitate against the further growth of the surveillance state not only for our own interest but for that of our brothers and sisters whose lives are adversely affected by its existence and perpetual growth.
Donald Trump, many other Republican politicans and pundits, and even some Democratic Party politicians are literally playing games with Representative Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) life.
The bad faith arguments, lies of omission, blatant mischaracterization of Omar’s statements, fear mongering, and disingenuous appeals to patriotism that contribute to this need to end.
“The attacks on Omar have been steady and insidious, and it’s more obvious now than ever what they’re based on. When Crenshaw and Trump connect her to 9/11, and when commentators on Fox News question whether she’s ‘American first' and suggest that her hijab indicates she doesn’t follow the U.S. Constitution, the religious bigotry is clear. It’s no longer possible to deny.”
“Carlineo told the agents he is a patriot, that he loves President Donald Trump and hates radical Muslims in government, the complaint stated.”
This is the logical result of never-ending wars in the Middle East and of the rhetoric coming from Donald Trump, many Republicans, and segments of conservative and certainly far-right media.
White power adherents need to be fought vigorously, and the Democratic Party needs to more staunchly support Representative Omar (D-MN) instead of marginalizing her.
“Passage of the resolution, approved previously by the US Senate, marks the first time the United States Congress has acted under the War Powers Act of 1973, a Vietnam War-era law introduced to curtail a US president’s deployment of US military forces without congressional approval.”
Congress doing its job! This is a truly remarkable Friday.
Given the epic scope of the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, we should make a lot of noise if Trump vetoes the resolution. We will also need to press Congress to override the veto.
Looks like the single issue binding the conservative bloc together will be repealed. Wonder how long before the evangelicals and the neo-cons splinter?
Stop saying “this is what they want” when people act violently against nazis. What they want is a debate. They want genocide to be something polite society can agree or disagree with. They want to be elevated to the general public discourse by having their ideas argued with. Violence is the exact opposite of what they want. Richard Spencer didn’t want to get punched in the face, he wanted good people to keep quiet, to respect his rights and let him calmly discuss white nationalism. Violence throws a wrench in all their plans. It shows them their carefully planned tactics to infiltrate mainstream discussion are utterly failing. Punching a nazi will get you in legal trouble but don’t let people tell you it’s what they want.
I’m pretty pacifist but this is the first nazi-punching discourse post that’s made me go “this this THIS.”
If I may add – a lot of the guys like Richard Spencer talk a big game but have never really had to deal with violence being directed at them. so they fold like little babies, which makes them look pathetic.
A lot of their propaganda is based on them looking ~cool~ and rational and reasonable. If you can humiliate them, that can also help take their power.
Prior to entering the second world war, a lot of Americans were neutral about Hitler and his bunch. There was even a Nazi German-American Bund attempting to establish itself in the US to the point of holding a big event at Madison Square Garden.
But do you know what stood in the way and ultimately helped break them up?
This man right here, and other associates across the country.
Meyer Lansky was a Polish-American gangster. When the American Bund started up and targeted Jewish communities, Rabbis turned to Jewish gangsters for assistance.
In the 1930s, Lansky and his gang stepped outside their usual criminal activities to break up rallies held by the pro-Nazi German-American Bund. He recalled a particular rally in Yorkville, a German neighborhood in Manhattan, that he and fourteen other associates disrupted:
“The stage was decorated with a swastika and a picture of Adolf Hitler. The speakers started ranting. There were only fifteen of us, but we went into action. We threw some of them out the windows. Most of the Nazis panicked and ran out. We chased them and beat them up. We wanted to show them that Jews would not always sit back and accept insults.”
During World War II, Lansky was also instrumental in helping the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI)’s Operation Underworld, in which the government recruited criminals to watch out for German infiltrators and submarine-borne saboteurs. Lansky helped arrange a deal with the government via a high-ranking United States Navy official. This deal would secure the release of Luciano from prison; in exchange, the Mafia would provide security for the warships that were being built along the docks in New York Harbor. German submarines were sinking Allied shipping in great numbers along the eastern seaboard and the Caribbean coast, and there was great fear of attack or sabotage by Nazi sympathizers. Lansky connected the ONI with Luciano, who reportedly instructed Joseph Lanza to prevent sabotage on the New York waterfront.
Across the United States, Jewish gangsters stepped up to deal with the threat of Nazi sympathizers. They made a point of using violence while trying to avoid killing anyone, instead beating up and humiliating the Nazis.
The U.S. mostly has a first-past-the-post voting system. The candidate with the most votes wins and there are no prizes for second place. If a district goes 49% Democratic and 51% Republican, the Republicans win the district
This makes a two party system almost inevitable because in a system with more than two parties, the instant one party gets the support of over a third of the population, the other parties cannot compete unless they join forces
And a two party system means, crucially, that if you want to get more voters, there are only two ways to get them:
Get more people to vote that ordinarily wouldn’t vote at all.
Take voters from the other party.
That’s it.
The reason Democrats are “not radical enough” is that, if they can’t turn non-voters into voters, to get more people to vote Democratic, they have to appeal to Republicans enough to convince them to change sides. There’s nowhere else to get people from.
The reason the country seems to “skew” Republican over time is not because of Democrats caving to goalpost moving, it’s because of gerrymandering and our system prioritizing land area over people’s votes
If 51% of voters in my district vote Republican, it’s a republican district. If 51% of districts are Republican districts, the state is a “red state.” That state can end up with all republican representatives even if there are barely more Republicans than Democrats
Being more spread out makes it easier for Republicans to dominate districts, too. It’s like the land is voting instead of the people.
it’s kind of established that there is no “get out of a beatdown” role you can take other than being a cop yourself, right? media, medics, lawyers, all fair game.
Turns out that cops are just dudes who really like beating the shit out of defenceless people. There’s really no other qualification.
For those who hate lawyers I do want to point out that legal observers are sent by the National Lawyer’s Guild, which is the primary organization providing pro-bono legal defense to protesters and black community leaders who have been jailed to try to derail the movement. So, these are not the lawyers you hate.
Just to reiterate: the entire point of NLG legal observers is to deter unlawful or improper behavior on the part of the police / law enforcement personnel–and to document such behavior, if they aren’t successful in deterring it. In the U.S., they have to be trained and certified. Their job is to help you protest to the full extent of your constitutional rights and with minimal interaction with the criminal justice system. I cannot stress the extent to which they are on your side.
The National Lawyer’s Guild’s motto is “human rights over property interests” and was created as a direct fuck you to conservative and exclusionary bar associations. Their dues are way cheaper than other bar associations and you can join even as a jailhouse lawyer (a prisoner who teaches themselves the law to advocate for others).
And just because this is literally my job: your negative perception of lawyers is literally propaganda. The portrayal of defense attorneys as evil for defending criminals, the idea that suing people is something only rich or very greedy people do, the complete erasure of legal aid as a thing that exists, are all designed to make you afraid to advocate for your legal rights.
so the supreme court just ruled that wrongful convictions can be upheld against evidence of innocence. If you’re imprisoned and sentenced to death but you didn’t do it and can prove it, it doesn’t matter. Legal counsel and evidence don’t matter. The justification is some states rights bs
like do y’all get the need to demand the complete abolition of prisons and police?? where is the veil of “public safety” when people say the criminal-legal system isn’t a function of safety, because i don’t see it. Why is there greater commitment to defending this system than building a real society of safety?
wait wait i dont get it
so youre saying that they can imprison those who are not only innocent, but can BACK UP those claims?
The evidence was never allowed to be shown in court, as it came after the initial trial, and all requests for retrial were dismissed.
Ultimately, it’s more about how retrial due to ineffective counsel (aka incompetent lawyers) was denied, and the Supreme Court agreed that there should be no retrial.
In a bid to keep Jones and Ramirez on death row, Arizona petitioned the Supreme Court to review their cases. The state argued that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), a bill passed by Congress in 1996 that curtailed federal habeas review, did not allow federal courts to consider the new evidence in the two cases.
“Innocence isn’t enough,” Arizona Attorney General Brunn Wall Roysden insisted during oral arguments last year.
In other words, if an innocent person’s lawyer fails to present evidence of their innocence at trial, and their state post-conviction lawyer fails to argue the trial lawyer’s ineffectiveness, the innocent person is out of luck.
There are those who would say that holding grudges and chanting “We Told You So!” is a waste of energy, after the fact, that it’s mean-spirited, and vindictive, and maybe even cruel to rub people’s noses in it when they’re vulnerable and afraid.
And, philosophically speaking, I agree.
But I’m hurt, and angry, and I am going to stoop that low (I can be vindictive, too; I’m no saint).
Seven years ago, when Hillary Clinton was running for president against Donald Trump, we warnedthose of you who wanted Bernie Sanders to be your candidate, who said that Hillary Clinton was too center-right, that you just didn’t like her, who said if you couldn’t vote for Bernie, you wouldn’t vote for anyone.
We said: But if Trump becomes president, he’ll reshape the Supreme Court, and we will lose freedoms that we won’t get back for generations.
Snarky replies like this only reminds me that so many people don’t understand how the US government works.
Biden can’t make laws. He can only sign them. He can suggest and even champion them to Congress but he can’t say, “I am going to ban all guns as of today.” He doesn’t have the power. Congress can push for a law to do just that. Afterward, that paperwork goes to the Senate. If they like it, they okay it. Then it goes to Biden who signs it, making it a law. Then it’s up to the judicial branch to uphold it.
That’s how it works.
This is why for many things, your Congress person and Senator is more important than who sits in the Oval Office. Yes, the president can veto (that is political for “noping”) a law. When that happens it get thrown back to Congress where they rework it and send it back up the chain. But, again, there are very, VERY few things that a president can do without the approval of Congress and the Senate.
It’s the balance of power. The president is not a king.
You want gun laws? Vote for the right Congress people and Senators. And that means voting in the primaries for people who want these type of laws. They go on to run as the main candidate in the midterms and main elections.
I can’t say this enough, YOU HAVE TO VOTE!
Small elections matter just as much as the big ones. Heck, check out your city/town council meetings. You would be shocked at how much of a say you have at them. You want to be listened to? Go to them. Speak up at them. For many of these council members, they were elected by the difference of a few votes. Seriously. We are talking single digit numbers. So, they count on every solitary vote. That means you, the voter, has a stronger voice with them than with say the president. So, if there is something local your want, you go to them rather than writing to the White House. And from there you can climb up the chain.
It’s work. Make no mistake. But if you want results, this is what you do. It can be done. You just have to take that first step.
a lot of the power the president has is the soft power of being the formal head of his political party and empowered to steer their agenda, which is what biden is doing when he tweets like this. he’s setting the public face of the democratic agenda.
unfortunately republicans have a lot of power in the legislature and their shtick for a while has been arbitrarily sabotaging democratic agenda items even when everyone agrees they’re a good idea.
it is not actually a bad thing that the left and the center do not take biden tweeting half as seriously as the right took trump tweeting, but it does edge over into self-defeating disunity sometimes.
