“(With) today’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed. For all practical purposes, there are virtually no limits on what the president can do. It’s a fundamentally new principle and it’s a dangerous precedent because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law even including the supreme court of the United States.”
Throughout his address, Biden underscored the gravity of the moment, emphasizing that the only barrier to the president’s authority now lies in the personal restraint of the officeholder. He warned vehemently against the prospect of Trump returning to power, painting a stark picture of the dangers such an outcome could pose.
But is he wrong? From Nixon, to Reagan, to Newt GIngrich, to Mitch McConnell to Trump, the Democrats have been feckless and refused to halt this march to fascism. They are complicit by tacit acceptance. This need to adhere to some vague Status Quo (Capitalist Donor Class) is why we are in this situation. It’s time to wake up and realize the Marxists were right all along. You can’t compromise with Capitalism.
Yes, he and you are obviously wrong. Even if everything you said was 100 percent true (lol) the people who failed to stop facism are obviously not the same as fascists themselves. Everything thinking person knows this , and Marx would too if he was alive.
Superior Orders, or ignorance of what is happening, does not absolve one of responsibility.
Again, that is not the claim that was made. You can’t even stay on topic. I bet Marx could stay on topic .
Marx abused alcohol, so not sure. The Republicans are capitalists. The Democrats are capitalists. To Marxists they are the same. Liberalism fails because it cannot address the contradictions inherent to capitalism, inequality and wealth accumulation. Capitalism requires inequality for wealth accumulation.
Social democratic reforms can alleviate the inequality and distribute the wealth more equitably, but, because it does not replace capitalism itself, it always falters.
So, although Democrats and Republicans differ on social policy, they both defer to capitalism. Capitalism rules both parties.
Meaningful, important distinctions can exist even when Marxists are unable to recognize them.
Explain? Because systems ultimately fail , it’s no good? Longevity and risilience are worthwhile considerations when designing and economic system to govern a civilization, but uktimate fallibility does not invalidate them entirely. More to the point, what evidence is there that Marxists societies do/would last longer?
Can’t speak for previously, but recently, a good chunk of Democrats’ failures have been because of a select few members holding out, no?
Hasan Piker explains this quite well.
Noooo please. Not that imbecile grifter…
Attack the messenger if you don’t like the message. What did he say that was incorrect?
This is a straight lie. It’s just feelings.
A democrat representative from West Virginia represents a completely different electoral base than a democrat from California. So when the House is a slim d majority there are going to be spoilers. Labor reform (and others) has passed many times when Democrats had opportunities. Hassan has a political science degree and knows this. Unfortunately, he is captured by his audience and has to pander to them so he lives in conspiracy land. It’s all feelings and no substance.
Like party whips don’t exist. They’re supposed to offer concessions to get bills passed. Pork Barrels are a thing. Stop defending these people, the planet is burning.
When a Majority of Americans support progressive policies such as higher minimum wage, free college, it’s not because of red states, it’s because the donor class doesn’t want those policies to pass.
I’m also glad we can pivot away from what a joke Hassan is.
I think you’re reinforcing my original point: with just a slim majority a big party tent won’t accomplish much. These are just facts. I’m not defending the democrats – this is just reality.
On another note: I’m curious about this prevalent binary invocation that happens on this site. You accused me of defending these people. I’m not interested in defending anyone --just discussing the facts. Why is everyone on Lemmy.world so intent on ascribing a team/position to everyone so earnestly? What is being gained with this tactic?
I’m also glad we can pivot away from the fact that a Majority of Americans support progressive policies such as higher minimum wage, free college, even Republicans, but they can never get passed.
I think you’re reinforcing my original point:
On another note : We are discussing the fact that Defending Democracy Through Elections Won’t Be Enough to Stop Fascism.
Just a guess, but it might have something to do with immanent critique