|
The truth is that America is in a political crisis that I see is only going to get much worse as time goes on. Take a look at these figures:   (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...r-than-the-u-s/)  (https://news.gallup.com/poll/268766/socialism-popular-capitalism-among-young-adults.aspx)  (https://www.axios.com/socialism-capitalism-poll-generation-z-preference-1ffb8800-0ce5-4368-8a6f-de3b82662347.html)  (https://www.pewresearch.org/social-...gen-z-so-far-2/) What this shows is that there is a huge gap between people who are mid/young millennials and gen-Z vs older millennials and anyone older. The current issues of gen-X/older millennials vs boomers revolves around how to steer the current American engine of neoliberalism and mass intervention. The former and the latter both want low taxes, small government, and the country to carry a big stick to hit with. The issue is a matter of degrees. Both believe the tale of the United States being an exceptional country that stands along giants (or even alone), and thus gives them the right to enforce it's will on any other nation. And that by giving any substantial change to it's economic engine of neoliberal capitalism is unthinkable. In other words, despite their fierce disagreements on mask mandates, the morality of raising taxes 10%, whether or not racism...exists, at the end of the day they are all in lockstep with the Washington consensus. In contrast, mid-millennials and younger (especially gen-z) are not only onboard with the Washington consensus, but seem to be marching against it. Close to half don't see America as a country that is special at all, let alone one that is "exceptional". They also feel comfortable with the idea of not being the sole hyperpower of the world. And while we can argue what most of these mid-millennials through Gen Zers think "socialism" is (e.g. cue the person who quotes me and says "Many of them think socialism means Scandinavia not Trotskyism.  ") it does show that at least they seem to be open to changing the current economic engine more than just loosening/tightening some bolts.And on top of all this you have the backdrop of nearly half of mid to young millennials and (in just a few years) the majority of Gen Zers not identifying as white. You get a large share of the population who grew up in an America where within their age group whites weren't a majority just merely a plurality. The reason why I have illustrated so much of a backdrop is to drive across the point that the division in the country is only going to get worse, much worse. We will no longer have two sides arguing about the degrees of the direction the country should go in, but what the direction is period. The Republicans will likely position themselves as being more and more the party of the "Old America" that is firmly in-line with the Washington consensus. While the Democratic Party will increasingly find themselves in-between a rock and a hard place as they chase older voters who fit their ideology and thus increasingly alienate their younger voters. Now this looks absolutely terrible for the short term, but some context is needed. The majority of American already support a wealth tax on the rich: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-inequality-poll-idUSKBN1Z9141 The majority of Americans already support raising taxes on the rich: https://www.axios.com/biden-polling-tax-corporations-wealthy-34576e4e-d2d9-47ef-a67e-14429770c649.html The majority of Americans already support universal healthcare, with single payer having a plurality: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...-care-coverage/ It isn't perfect, but it's showing that things aren't as hopeless as they currently seem, let alone in the future. The world is going to undergo radical changes over the next few decades: - The United States will stop being a hyperpower, as China will rise into becoming a rival superpower. In many ways China already is. - Climate change is about to get real. The effects are here, we're feeling them now. We've already crossed the line of it resulting in a massive blow to society, now we have to try to avoid it being a complete and total catastrophe. - Immigration is making many countries have sizable minority populations, while the United States will have a plurality. This change will obviously result in a lot of social challenges as the right wing gets further ammo from "concerned" majorities. - Africa may begin to rise the same way Asia did during the 20th century, and just like Asia it will likely be the main arena of an ideological cold war. - Last but not least, capitalism as we know it will continue to decline. People will search for alternatives, and unfortunately so far these alternatives have come from the right. Adding all these world mechanisms to the existing domestic issues, makes ensuring the country goes in the correct direction all the more paramount. Unfortunately, the American electorate has a problem. Here is data of who voted in the latest election:  (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/01/05/americans-at-the-ends-of-the-ideological-spectrum-are-the-most-active-in-national-politics/) At first glance, it seems that the American left is very politically active and a kingmaker for the Democrats in elections. But let me share one more image with you:  (https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/11/09/beyond-red-vs-blue-the-political-typology-2/) "Progressive Liberals" are the smallest group of the American population. So while they are arguably the most reliable voting block, their numbers are also small. There is also this interesting excerpt from the link below the above image: quote:Progressive Left, the only majority White, non-Hispanic group of Democrats, have very liberal views on virtually every issue and support far-reaching changes to address racial injustice and expand the social safety net. This essentially signals that a lot of the mainstream American Left does not identify with the means of the American working class. The majority of America's poor and working class are not white. So the fact that this is the only Democratic voter bloc that is majority White (and non-Hispanic to boot), what exactly does that tell you? It tells you that they are terrible at reaching out to the poor and working class. I hope I don't sound like I'm pulling a Joe Rogan here, but being a minority myself and speaking with minority friends and people from a more working class background, the image of that is painted from many on the American Left just doesn't mix with the actual concerns. People don't give a poo poo about "safe spaces" or pronouns. And while there are absolutely concerns with racism, poverty, and law enforcement, how these issues are framed aren't painted anywhere near the same brush that say CSPAM paints them as, or even the forums in general. The primary concerns of these demographics are: jobs, wages, healthcare, education, and climate change (this surprises people, but statistics back this up). Now I am in no way, shape or, form saying that we should abandon fighting for things like pronouns in order to secure votes. But what I am saying that the American Left needs to focus on a clear cut message to recruit large sums of people from this demographic who don't typically vote. As of now, the American Left is looking to get more of the Latino vote out, but instead they can only get the Latinx vote out, and this why they continuously lose. I also wouldn't feel right continuing without addressing the elephant in the room if you actually looked at the charts, the "Outsider Left". The previous link mentioned how they are a voting bloc that is "liberal in most issues" and are frustrated with the current politicians. But I will point out that: quote:About half (49%) are White Which is the second highest outside of the Progressive Left. And while their financial situation is worse than average, almost half them are under 30 so some of that is due to age. They also are by far the least likely voting bloc to participate in voting, with many voting due to 2020 being such an abnormal and record breaking year. You can see them as an abdominally, or a sign that positive change is on it's way. But regardless I think we can mostly agree that the American Left needs to do more to appeal to people they typically don't appeal to. Much of this being apathetic minorities and those from working class backgrounds. Now to be fair this is gradually changing: https://twitter.com/axios/status/1408397058990555139 quote:Socialism has positive connotations for 60% of Black Americans, 45% of American women and 33% of non-white Republicans. Those numbers have grown over the past two years from 53%, 41% and 27%, respectively. Black Americans are the fastest growing group that prefers "socialism". The demographics are being built, now it's just up to them to organize. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Now I'm sorry for that whole essay, but I feel that I had to lay the groundwork before I give an answer to my question. As I've repeated before, where the United States goes in the future is contingent on whether or not the American Left can build a mass movement by recruiting and uniting enough of the poor and working class. Saying this, I see three potential futures for the United States of America: Optimistic Victory : Due to the American Left successfully achieving changing the United States coarse, the country adopts proper climate action, economic change, and addresses racial issues. Now whether if this is "New Deal Era 2: Newer and Dealer", or a full political/economic revolution more similar to that of Bolivia or Venezuela (e.g. yes I know it's an example). The former seems more realistic, but while it solves some problems in short and medium terms, in the long term it just kicks the can down the road. And realistic it's either a matter of time before the latter happens or the nation sinks. If such a political revolution is achieved, the United States will fly high, exit it's hyperpower status with some grace, and result in a higher quality life for it's citizens. What this change is nobody can say for certain, but I imagine it being some mix of Rojava, China, and Sweden. World politics wise, the nation will remain highly relevant as being equal to or just behind China in superpower status, due to the country still getting tons of immigrants which combined with birth rates results in reasonable population growth. Death Throes: Ever since the Soviet Union collapsed, Russia has been desperately trying to recapture it's glory days. In an attempt to do so it's basically incorporated all the bad aspects of the Soviet Union with none of the good ones. An authoritarian, corrupt, nationalistic country without the attempt of universal programs or mass industrialization that captured the world's attention during it's heyday. All this while increasingly becoming shunned and isolated from the world. Russia may be mocked by the world stage, but the same thing is gradually happening to their once rival superpower. Capitalism is gradually collapsing, and the United States is as much of a premiere nation for it as Russia was for Communism. Despite massive gains in GDP, outside of Spain, the United States is the only country where the quality of life for it's average citizens has declined over the past ten years. The reasons for this are obvious. Americans can't afford housing, healthcare, education, or really anything that matters. This obviously makes people angry and they need someone to blame. The people first went to the left but when they found promises of hope to be empty and change to broke, many grew apathetic or even moved on to try and make America great again. The country's shift to right wing politics has become more overt in recent years. I really shouldn't have to get examples of how anti-immigrant stances, anti-minority stances, and a desire to return to a comfortable past has become more common place. I'd imagine this America to be an evolution of Trumpism. More authoritarian, a strong push for the commodification of everything, a heavy fight for "whiteness" to be the standard by former oppressed groups who were "let in" due to optics, a stronger strangle on immigration, little to no regard for climate change, etc. All while inequality rises and America is less of a middle class nation and something closer to modern Brazil. Foreign policy wise, the United States will thrash about as it inevitably loses it's hyperpower status. It's actions will alienate itself from the world stage, and it will undoubtedly start even more wars. Like Russia, the United States will almost inevitably push itself into invading a region that is far too "modern" to sit right with the rest of the world, leaving it to be further shunned. It's all pointless though as despite it's tantrum, it gradually leaves the world stage with China, the EU, and increasingly India gaining more power and influence. Chaos & Breakdown: Simply put, the United States is becoming more and more polarized, much due to the fact that the government is in constant gridlock. However, many of those in government want this as things staying the same benefit the corporations and career politicians. Unfortunately as listed before, things getting harder for the American public. There is only so much they can bear. It's a matter of time before anger at the other side turns to hate. Secession will go from being some nerd fanfiction to something very possible. A poll found a little over half of Republicans and not far from half of Democrats were open to the idea. Now I don't believe there's going to be a Civil War 2.0 as everything but all out nuclear war will occur in the country. What I do expect in this scenario is general unrest and a rise extremist groups that tie themselves to state independence. This will culminate to referendums for secession for multiple regions. What the result of this will be I'm not sure, as I'd imagine some of these new nations would fair better than others. However, it would spell the end of America as any type of superpower, despite the region remaining influential. That's basically the gist of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_Human_Development_Index Lib and let die posted:It's on my 'I'll get around to it' list The movie just finally made it's way to Netflix, it's the perfect time to watch it. 
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2022 09:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:It's become pretty clear that what the majority of a country's population wants doesn't actually matter. The Democrats run screaming from policies that poll universally positive among Republicans because they make Republican politicians and media angry- despite that said politicians and media will have exactly the same 'commie mutant traitor' line to Democrats literally no matter what they do. Such a mass movement I described doesn't just refer to, or mostly involve electoral politics. It very well may not even involve the Democratic Party at all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2022 09:40
|
|
|
I find it odd that part of my write up was quoted when the small paragraph right above it gave it context. What I was saying that the groups I was speaking of earlier don’t have to be diehard for gender identity. But at least be willing to form an alliance with the existing leftwing factions to work on things that are in agreement like healthcare, bigger government, wages, inequality, etc. Similar to how there may be a divide between the Republicans and core issues like immigration or holding big corps accountable (from the same Pew Research source) but at the end of the day they vote for the American right doctrine of lower taxes, “states rights”, and imperialism. The issues brought into question wouldn’t be abandoned or stalled, they’ll just be worked alongside other issues at the same time as some working class/poor will see accepting such issues they are hesitant toward as a trade off for issues more akin to their survival. EDIT - To further elaborate, many minorities, poor, working class, and similar groups don’t see the Democratic Party and even further Left organizations fighting “for them”. They don’t feel that these groups are going to do things like give hard no string investments into their communities, jobs with higher wages, root out corruption, address public safety, give them healthcare coverage, so they don’t bother with them. They either see them as another cog in the system or idealists who don’t understand how things work thus are destined to fail. It’s up to the America Left to find ways to convince them that isn’t the case for the entire left of center of the country’s politics. This is the only way forward and where the nation goes hinges on this. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Mar 10, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2022 17:40
|
|
|
Looking at the data further there is something I need to address. Earlier I said the "Outsider Left" was the second whitest group of the Dem voting bloc. This is actually not true as they are a close third from "Establishment Liberals" (2% more White)] but requires a bit more context: These are the demographics for the Outsider Left: quote:Outsider Left are by far the youngest political typology group. Four-in-ten are under the age of 30 and 83% are under 50. They are racially and ethnically diverse: About half (49%) are White, 20% are Hispanic, 15% are Black and 10% are Asian. Women make up 57% of this group. Compare this to the demographics of "Democratic Mainstays" which has the most diverse demographics of any voting bloc: quote:Democratic Mainstays are among the most diverse groups in terms of race and ethnicity. Fewer than half (46%) are White, 26% are Black, 20% are Hispanic and 4% are Asian. It seems that the only demographic the Outsider Left lacks are from the black population. Our I would say if it wasn't accounting for the fact that they are the youngest demographic by far, meaning that naturally they should have a higher split anyway. Being that Hispanic is equal to other Democratic voting blocs it's safe to say they are underrepresented too, just not as much as black people. Fortunately, they are also the fastest growing demographic accepting socialism, so this will possibly start to turn. ANOTHER SCORCHER posted:You keep saying convince like the American "Left" (as if such a thing could meaningfully exist in the Imperial core) problem is one of marketing or image, or maybe at best one of priorities. That refuses to see that there is a conflict between the project of Mostly-White Progressives and the Mostly-Brown Working Class, and that conflict needs to be resolved. In fact, it is being resolved, in favor of the Mostly-White Progressives who ultimately benefit from low taxes, competitive charter schools, and what passes for meritocracy. I realize that many white liberals turning against forward thinking policies when it affects them isn't exactly a secret. However, when I say "the American Left", I don't mean people with CoExIsT bumper stickers or people who tune into Stephen Colbert, I'm referring to people who are part of legitimately left wing organizations, political parties, unions, and those with generally left wing beliefs and views who want to become active. I understand I lumped in the "Progressive Left" as an example of Americans on the left, but a point I made is that they are such a tiny cohort that on their own they have little political impact, even in cities. ANOTHER SCORCHER posted:Your proposed solution of priorities is to bribe the Mostly-Brown Working Class into not being the kind of bigot you dislike in exchange for money or social programs or better trade deals. Is it any wonder they reject that generous offer? I disagree with the idea that many minorities and the working class are staying away from the Democrats and left leaning politics in general due to trans issues. Rather it's due to the fact of them being apathetic since their communities and situations have largely not been addressed. I'm also not sure where you got the idea that "White Progressives" are going to "bribe" the black and Latino working class into being less bigoted. It's about building coalition on things you mostly agree with. You unite with the hard issues you agree with and make concessions. This is literally how politics has worked throughout all of world history. Lib and let die posted:Well that takes a hell of a loving turn It's amazing isn't it.  Pentecoastal Elites posted:Stuff. At the end of the day this is how collations work. Blacks and Hispanics can't take and rule the country by their power alone. Even the entire working class by itself won't be able to do that. You need to make allies with segments of the community. That's how a democratic system works, even after direct action is applied. As I told Another Scorcher above, when I say "the American Left" I don't just mean upper middle class white people. A left among people of color and the working class does exist, and is expanding. It's up for them to further build and find allies for a coalition to fight against the powers that be. Ghost Leviathan posted:You guys do know what happened to the Strasserists right It's a very strange suggestion, especially since while blacks and latinos are more conservative on that front, it isn't shown to be a wedge issue. When I said that the Democrats and the Left are seen as mostly "pronoun politics" it wasn't due to the fact that the fight for these things, but due to the fact that it's the only thing on their claimed agenda that they fight for. And looking at recent history it's true. Gay marriage is legal from sea to shining sea, yet healthcare and job security are nowhere to be found. I didn't imply to ditch or even lower the fighting of "rainbow politics" but rather have a stronger focus on economic, racial, and social welfare battles, things that are already top priority for these groups, and keep dialing it up the intensity until tangible results are achieved.. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Mar 11, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 03:38
|
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:Coalitions manifestly do not work on the basis of shared class consciousness. If they did they'd cease to be a coalition and just be one singular and indivisible group of a common class. You're still thinking and talking about this in atomized liberal racial politics, an approach that is one hundred per cent doomed to failure. The "entire working class" -- which is to say everyone who isn't a capitalist, everyone who sells their labor to survive -- can indeed take and rule the country by their power alone. In fact, you'll find this has happened multiple times in history! In living memory, no less! Hell, if you read the right German political theorists you might even come to understand that such a thing is inevitable If you are referring to the Soviet sphere of authoritarian dictatorships that ended up collapsing by popular revolt then I'd hardly use them as an example. Even MAS have coalitions outside of just straight up union workers and the poor (for example according to exit polls University students in the city vote majority MAS too). Obviously the back bone of these movements are working class which is why I gave American unions and left wing organizations as example. I also showed that while "left wing America" has traditionally been white, this is becoming less and less the case, likely as the groups from the previous sentence are doing leg work. It's not like the American Left is exclusively made up of metropolitan whites. Even going by the Pew Research study a third to half would qualify as working class/minority framework with them making up a majority of the next generation. Things are clearly shifting already, much due to the work of the previous groups I listed. These political revolutions just don't appear out of thin air, they take time. Using MAS as an example again, going from it's origin it was around a three decade struggle of gradual growth and escalation. America's previous swing to the Left (which was admittedly a bandaid in the long run) was decades in the making. However, my main concern is if things will continue progressing or if they will be overpowered by the right. And the threat of climate change makes the time table tighter. However, there is the advantage of communication and the access of knowledge never being so easy and plentiful to find, which is a new factor that wasn't included until the past decade or two. Pentecoastal Elites posted:Also, as someone who lives in Chicago, linking me to a Lori Lightfoot video to show me how the working class is meaningfully fighting "the powers that be" is... I don't know what to say. It's, frankly, astounding. The video isn't about Lori Lightfoot, it focuses mostly about the activist group trying to reach out to local youth and challenging the mayor candidates. Blame Vice for their usual stupid video titles. Pentecoastal Elites posted:If you want to actually make meaningful, material progress towards anything you might want to include in the liberal bucket of "trans rights" (which you absolutely should!) you will need people to understand -- actually understand, not just be roped in by clever messaging -- that an injury to one is an injury to all; that every trans worker imperiled is a direct threat to their own livelihood. I think the issue is that nobody actually said this, to the point where the main responses are "it isn't even a thing that is keeping blacks and latinos away from the left", yet it keeps being used as a pivotal, if not main argument despite it only being used as a brief example in my post. punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 07:23 on Mar 11, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 05:36
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It always seems so crazy when people express this sort of idea. This is a good point and I agree with the general premise. But to be fair the argument gets brought up primarily due to two reasons. The first is that up until recently, people primarily got their news from the same few networks. "The nightly news" used to be an American staple. This this was gradually eroded as the news became more for profit and polarized thus leading to Fox, MSNBC, and the like. Not to mention people are increasingly getting their information from social media and Youtube. The second reason is that a lot due to people remember a time when the internet wasn't so ideologically segregated. Facebook wasn't a political meme powerhouse, and talking about politics online you typically had people from multiple ideologies. Now you have sub-reddit and discords tailored to specific, if not hyper specific, ideologies. Sure there was always political chat but it seemed to become more dominant overtime. Again, I agree with your general premise as there was never this utopia of the left of center and right of center having constant friendly interaction with one another, but it's understandable why some may think a bit differently.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2022 02:37
|
|
|
Social media is a new medium and as such it's relationship with the public is going through the same "yellow journalism" phase that newspapers and magazines first did, as culturally people haven't grown accustomed to spotting bullshit like they currently do with tabloids. Social media is a fantastic way to connect people, educate them, in order to progress society. I highly doubt that statistics I posted for "socialism" radically gaining popularity, especially among groups that previous indifferent or unaware of it would occur to such a degree without social media. Actually social spaces like Facebook, YouTube, Discord, Slack, and the like are paramount for organization. Unfortunately, like almost all potential mediums, it's also a double edge sword that the right wing can use too. And keep in mind it's a very big and very sharp sword.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2022 20:53
|
|
|
There's a reason why nations achieving quality of life improvements or are currently in their "golden era" are rarely associated with a population peddling crazy conspiracy theories, but declining nations or places in turmoil are renowned for them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2022 21:00
|
|
|
quarantinethepast posted:So what might be an appropriate time period to say when the US began to decline as a world power, if we consider that the decline has already been going on for a while? Unless the U.S. breaks apart it's not going to lose world power status. The population is just far too large and there is no other nation in the Western hemisphere that has potential to compete with it. Going by the absolute best realistic methods out there outside of China, no other nation in the world is going to outclass US's monster GDP in such a way in the coming decades. If you meant the U.S. losing it's "hyperpower" status, well that was simply a matter of time. The U.S. can't simply snap it's fingers and add a billion people to it's population. It was only a matter of time before China or India surpass it. China technically already has in some aspects, while India is quickly rising (though they have some issues of their own). The answer to that question would probably be the mid-2000s when China's massive GDP growth clearly wasn't a fluke and their "state capitalism" was something tactile, real, and a threat to the neoliberal order. An absolute deathblow would be a major developing country copying China's economic system for the world to emulate, like say if EFF won and ran South Africa.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2022 21:18
|
|
|
quarantinethepast posted:I think this is already happening with Ethiopia. The page is paywalled but looking at Wikipedia pretty much the entire House is centrist or conservative parties: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Peoples%27_Representatives.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2022 10:07
|
|
|
quarantinethepast posted:Yeah so capitalist, nationalist, and authoritarian with a focus on rapid state-led development that's China, Singapore and Ethiopia. China's state capitalism seems much more involved as economic output is split nearly 50/50 (and growing in favor of the state). China also doesn't back neoliberalism. I looked online for somewhere explaining the situation that isn't behind a paywall I found this about the most recent prime minister: quote:The speech by Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s at the recent 2019 World Economic Forum in Davos was not without irony. In his speech, Abiy full-heartedly embraced the neoliberal doctrine of the free market—improving the “ease of doing business,” the power of the private sector, open markets and integration, including Ethiopia’s commitment to accelerating accession to the World Trade Organization. (Abiy repeated his commitment to capitalism as his favored economic model in an interview with the Financial Times at the end of February.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2022 05:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
fart simpson posted:if china replicates japan’s economic growth it will still end up being the richest and most powerful country in the world Pretty much. The ‘80s “Japanophobia” was insanely stupid for so many reasons, but one of them was that Japan had less than half the population of the U.S. Making it virtually impossible to be the premiere global superpower.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2022 18:00
|
|