• Grainne@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Leftists always have to shut up and fall in line. If we don’t we’re fracturing and we’re the problem, yet the centrist libs never make an effort to compromise or meet our modest expectations on the value of human life.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Because the ratio of libs to leftists is like 10:1 at minimum. Obviously they control the conversation, that’s how democracy is supposed to work. We can’t control the conversation from the minority.

    • frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      I think this stance isn’t quite the full picture. The issue I see in the US is that over 50% of the people in power federally, Republicans, don’t want even those very moderate positions voted in.

      It’s not an issue of leftists being too left, but an issue of there not being enough people sold on leftists views in all the red/purple states. When the 40 hour a week requirement isn’t even getting sold, of course those people further right aren’t voting in a more considerate option.

      Really, I feel the issues stem from many people believing that we were close to getting the liberal goals passed federally. Now, it looks like we’re starting back several steps with how much 2024 was a backstep. At this point, trying to get those leftist programs implemented at the state level is the most logical thing to do, specifically in blue states.

      I think blue states held off on implementing most of these programs since it is very expensive and it would have made way more sense to fund all these programs federally, but that’s not realistic now. Blue states need to be willing to go into debt to fund these progressive programs, and only after they are implemented and the people are benefiting is it likely that purple/red states also buy into trying these programs.

      Don’t get me wrong, the corporate Dems aren’t the ones trying to get these programs implemented at the state level. For that reason, we should primary the non-progressive Dems. Better yet, we should try to get an alternative voting system implemented in each of our states so we get more politicians like Mamdani in office.

    • primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Right but have you literally ever heard a shitlib say what compromise with the left might look like? Like ever? Any proposal? An elected figure or your cringe shitlib aunt or literally any of them?

      Or do they just mean ‘compromise the left’ as in ‘to a permanent end’?

      • frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        What do you mean? Compromise on what issues exactly?

        I agree with pretty much everything under the sun with left leaning policy. I’m a leftist-liberal since I don’t think those points are inherently mutually exclusive.