4 ms·

So deep that we did absolutely nothing about it when we had the chance and now have elected someone that will make it even worse. Americans don’t realize that

So deep that we did absolutely nothing about it when we had the chance and now have elected someone that will make it even worse. Americans don’t realize that the country is exploitative in so many ways because they keep voting completely opposite from candidates that will help make their life better. >John Steinbeck once said that socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

tmpz22 2y ago
Historically exploitation is the back bone of America. Before we were even a country we were exploiting the British to clear the Ohio river valley for commercial gain. We didn’t want to pay for that so we took the opportunity to revolt which was paid for largely by the French. Then between manifest destiny and sniping half the continent from the French in the Louisiana purchase. Our early economy exploited hundreds of thousands of African slaves. And that’s just the first hundred years.
computerthings 2y ago
As an outsider what I see is that Trump claimed to stand for change, while the Democrats seemed to champion the status quo. Just the fact Biden promised to run for one term, then they lied about him not being senile, then Harris was anointed saying she'll basically be Biden, and don't you dare not go along because Trump is the end of democracy - that is just incredibly astonishing to me. And people wonder why that didn't work out? To me that's like talking about why this car with perfectly good tires hasn't won the race, when it has no engine and no driver and it's not even on the racing track but at the bottom on the ocean. With perfectly good tires admittedly, which pundits are examining with microscopes. From what I can tell all they ever offered is playing for time and rationalizations for why the boat should not be rocked, preaching to people who are treading water, who will never be in that boat. Basically "we're so proud of our achievements and excited to face even greater challenges with you" -- whereas Trump was screaming about making "them" pay and flipping tables. And even though "they" are a scapegoat, and even though he'll make it (so much) worse, at least the anger is something people vaguely recognize, whereas what came from the Democrats is mostly alien and alienating ivory tower talk. At the end of the day, I think the US needs at least one more major party. Two sides hiding all their own flaws behind the other is just unworkable. It makes people incredibly lazy intellectually.
scarecrowbob 2y ago
I like Grapes of Wrath, but I don't think that's a solid understanding of the current situation . I think that almost all of my friends who voted for Trump did so precisely because they think the US is exploitative in a variety of ways. They are often quite subject to that exploitation and aware of many of its specifics. From my position, which is anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian (or left libertarian, or anarchist or whatever label you'd use), they have very misguided understandings of the specifics of that exploitation. However, also from my position my many friends who voted for Harris also have similar shortcomings in their understandings of the world. My understanding is that 15M or so folks decided that Harris was not a candidate who wold make their lives better. The fact that the Democrats absolutely did not fix this system begs the question of why it did not get fixed. My understanding is that they did not want to fix the system, or that there are structural issues in the system which make it functionally impossible to reform. I believe that it could be reformed, but that since the donating classes to the parties did not want it the ACA became a massive handout to the insurance industry instead of some more universally solved solution. Thus your position that folks aren't voting for "candidates that will help make their life better" could be read in a couple of ways and I find it a bit ambiguous as stated. Like, I typically read stuff like that as saying "if they'd voted for KH, then this could at least maybe get fixed". But that feels internally contradictory given that when people did vote for a similar hope-and-change candidate it did not make things markedly better. At the same time, I think that folks stopped voting largely not out of apathay but out of a real awareness that they aren't selecting from "candidates that will help make their life better". So my position is that folks actually are voting for Trump for the same reasons they were previously voting for folks like Obama and not, for instance, for the Steinbeck-ian rational that led them to vote for Reagan or the Bush family.
- relaxing 2y ago
  > My understanding is that they did not want to fix the system, or that there are structural issues in the system which make it functionally impossible to reform. I beg you, read one article on how the US legislature functions. The bottom line is change is possible, if enough Americans vote as though they are not temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

tmpz22 2y ago

Historically exploitation is the back bone of America. Before we were even a country we were exploiting the British to clear the Ohio river valley for commercial gain. We didn’t want to pay for that so we took the opportunity to revolt which was paid for largely by the French. Then between manifest destiny and sniping half the continent from the French in the Louisiana purchase. Our early economy exploited hundreds of thousands of African slaves. And that’s just the first hundred years.

computerthings 2y ago

As an outsider what I see is that Trump claimed to stand for change, while the Democrats seemed to champion the status quo. Just the fact Biden promised to run for one term, then they lied about him not being senile, then Harris was anointed saying she'll basically be Biden, and don't you dare not go along because Trump is the end of democracy - that is just incredibly astonishing to me. And people wonder why that didn't work out? To me that's like talking about why this car with perfectly good tires hasn't won the race, when it has no engine and no driver and it's not even on the racing track but at the bottom on the ocean. With perfectly good tires admittedly, which pundits are examining with microscopes. From what I can tell all they ever offered is playing for time and rationalizations for why the boat should not be rocked, preaching to people who are treading water, who will never be in that boat. Basically "we're so proud of our achievements and excited to face even greater challenges with you" -- whereas Trump was screaming about making "them" pay and flipping tables. And even though "they" are a scapegoat, and even though he'll make it (so much) worse, at least the anger is something people vaguely recognize, whereas what came from the Democrats is mostly alien and alienating ivory tower talk. At the end of the day, I think the US needs at least one more major party. Two sides hiding all their own flaws behind the other is just unworkable. It makes people incredibly lazy intellectually.

scarecrowbob 2y ago

I like Grapes of Wrath, but I don't think that's a solid understanding of the current situation . I think that almost all of my friends who voted for Trump did so precisely because they think the US is exploitative in a variety of ways. They are often quite subject to that exploitation and aware of many of its specifics. From my position, which is anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian (or left libertarian, or anarchist or whatever label you'd use), they have very misguided understandings of the specifics of that exploitation. However, also from my position my many friends who voted for Harris also have similar shortcomings in their understandings of the world. My understanding is that 15M or so folks decided that Harris was not a candidate who wold make their lives better. The fact that the Democrats absolutely did not fix this system begs the question of why it did not get fixed. My understanding is that they did not want to fix the system, or that there are structural issues in the system which make it functionally impossible to reform. I believe that it could be reformed, but that since the donating classes to the parties did not want it the ACA became a massive handout to the insurance industry instead of some more universally solved solution. Thus your position that folks aren't voting for "candidates that will help make their life better" could be read in a couple of ways and I find it a bit ambiguous as stated. Like, I typically read stuff like that as saying "if they'd voted for KH, then this could at least maybe get fixed". But that feels internally contradictory given that when people did vote for a similar hope-and-change candidate it did not make things markedly better. At the same time, I think that folks stopped voting largely not out of apathay but out of a real awareness that they aren't selecting from "candidates that will help make their life better". So my position is that folks actually are voting for Trump for the same reasons they were previously voting for folks like Obama and not, for instance, for the Steinbeck-ian rational that led them to vote for Reagan or the Bush family.

relaxing 2y ago
> My understanding is that they did not want to fix the system, or that there are structural issues in the system which make it functionally impossible to reform. I beg you, read one article on how the US legislature functions. The bottom line is change is possible, if enough Americans vote as though they are not temporarily embarrassed millionaires.