Not many read this back in February. It’s quite consistent with my own calls for an Urgent Reforms Movement. Everyone should find some time to read it.
Biden Must Reinvent What a Presidential Campaign Is - Simon Rosenberg
"But the aspiration of Democrats and our pro-democracy allies must be not just to win the election, but to win big, making 2024 a clear and unequivocal rejection of MAGA. For only once Republicans view MAGA as a political loser will they begin to walk away from their recent reckless embrace of extremism."
I feel similarly about the next NZ election in 2026. Somehow neoliberalism snuck back into our electoral politics, after being soundly rejected on both sides of the aisle around 2017. The zombie hybrid of Douglas and Richardson must not only be defeated in 2026, it must be utterly eviscerated, never to rise again.
"We left the broadcast era of politics long ago, and it is time to start building campaigns not around top-down advertising but around bottom-up and shareable organic content appropriate for the networked information age we are now in."
He opened so well, then totally lost me with the nonsense about...
"the rise of what is perhaps the most serious threat we’ve ever seen to the American-led, rules-based order...
...we will need to keep our economy strong and prosperous, persistently proving that democratic capitalism remains the best system for human advancement"
@shoq
It's pretty clear to me, after 20 years of watching capitalism dismantle the democratic internet of the 1990s, and the rise of capitalist-funded authoritarian rules across the world, that capitalism is not particularly compatible with democracy. One of the biggest challenges of the 21st century is to horizontally scale economic systems that are.
@strypey I agree with your diagnosis. But I’m having trouble finding the solution in your solution. How exactly do we “horizontally scale economic systems,” whatever that means, and nurture and then wield the political power that would be required to do it?
@shoq
> How exactly do we “horizontally scale economic systems,” whatever that means
Vertical scaling is what capitalism (and cancer) does. It's how the net ended up like 5 giant websites full of screenshots of the other 4. Horizontal scaling is what decentralised networks (and healthy organisms) do; adding more elements that interrelate, rather than continually adding more servers to one service.
@shoq
> How exactly do we “horizontally scale economic systems,” whatever that means, and nurture and then wield the political power that would be required to do it?
The separation of political power from economic power is an illusion. All political power is also economic and vice-versa, and always has been. What political power would states have if they couldn't tax and regulate economic activity? How would corporations grow like cancer without political power to limit tax and regulation?
@strypey Yeah, but that’s an old refrain. Sure, idealistically, in theory, we can all do so much better. But as yet, no one has managed to come up with a model that enough people would ever support without a massive sea change in human motivations and behavior. So until then, it beats existing alternatives by default, warts and all. You may disagree, but tell me which you favor so I have some context.
@shoq
I'm not sure if you noticed, but you didn't actually put forward a falsifiable argument. You just reworded the same tired There Is No Alternative rhetoric we've been hearing since Reagan and Thatcher. Which is exactly what I was rolling my eyes at Rosenberg for.
@shoq I agree with what this says, but it ignores wealth inequality. If we want to move most of #MAGA from destroying the country to being a positive voice for post-capitalism economic success we must pay attention. This point actually subsumes our climate threat.
@Runyan50 That’s all the point of any reforms effort. We cannot make change without legislation. And we cannot make legislation without power. A useful first principle: put first things first.
@Runyan50 Vigorously disagree. We have documented the causes for two generations. We know what the problems are. We know what the solutions are. There have been bills in Congress to address them all for at least a decade. We lack the political power to pass that legislation in the face of vicious obstructionism and corruption. More diagnostics will have zero impact.
@shoq We lack the power because money controls politics and capitalism controls money. We will not do enough in time to correct our problem because the ones controlling the purse strings won’t allow it. I honestly don’t know what the threshold is for action but it may be the loss of trillions of dollars or millions of lives over a short time. Capitalism is very reactionary.
@Runyan50 Agree. Which is why for years, I have maintained that we are post-electoral politics. We let the system degrade to a point where massive reform measures are needed. And the only way we will get those legislated is with a massive disruption of the status quo that threatens too much profit to be ignored.
@Runyan50 I agree with your central point, but I think we are so far away from talking about “post-capitalism” anything, I don’t see that as a useful construct to invest much energy in. The fact is, most people don’t understand what the word even means, and the rest will quickly defend it when you suggest taking it away without something proved better to replace it.
@shoq I don’t really like that view or the headline… seems like it’s saying it’s the Democrats responsibility to fix the Republican mess.
(Even though I wish it would happen)
@notwithstanding I don’t understand that. Would you expect Republicans to reform themselves out of existence? That would be like expecting a serial rapist to lobby for more floodlights in the park.
@shoq I understand what you’re saying - but it’s based on a view that all Republicans are as bad as serial rapists. There’s no possible reform then, one would just have to lock them all up.
What I mean is: assuming this last sentence of mine is not true, there are sane Republicans. It’s their responsibility to reform their party, not to be depending on something Democrats ought to do.
Otherwise, whatever happens is the Democrats’ fault. A bit like victim blaming (real victim here are people)
@notwithstanding But you’re still proposing something that is almost never possible: that criminals, corporations, industries and lunatics regulate themselves effectively. They never have and never will. So you’re proposing the unfeasible, when there are serious measures to be found in good governing that can regulate the excesses that make these Republican abuses of power and process possible. We just need a majority and the will to do it.
@shoq I realized something I must point out: the article makes a difference between “Republicans” and “MAGA”, and hopes the first regulate the second if the Democrats win by a landslide.
That’s my point: the first should regulate the second whatever happens, otherwise it’s dumping the responsibility on the Democrats.
You don’t seem to make a difference between the first and the second.
(I’m criticizing the article only, I do hope the Democrats win by a landslide for the sake of the world)
@notwithstanding He is not saying that MAGA is a separate demo. It’s just the Republican worldview now. Democrats can only change that worldview by crushing it at the ballot box. That IS their current prime directive, if not their responsibility. Our much bigger problem is reforms that make the GOP’s MAGA tactics— in and out of government—all but impossible to weaponize again. That SHOULD BE the Dem’s next prime directive. That’s my main point.
@Lassielmr Yeah, you’re right. I think Gaza is so important, we should just turn the country over to Trump and the 2025 Project right now, and skip all this election silliness. We’ll figure out how to unring the fascism bell later. It’s a great plan.
Add comment