Your core point here is actually something that deserves a little more of a response than I feel like typing up here. I’ll make a post in some “political discussion” community and maybe send you a note about it, because how we make forward progress and deal with the brokenness of the Democratic party is obviously a pretty important topic that is highly relevant to this story.
I just want to deal with this stuff a little, since you did try to tag me:
The core of their argument was that their cynicism was required to win elections. That we had to sacrifice our values, for whatever reason, to be able to “win” the election. To reiterate what our criticisms. Originally, it was with Biden. That without a serious pivot on Gaza and to right wing “enlightened centrism” that had guided his path to that point, he would lose the election. The later criticism was with Harris, and basically identical: That without pivoting and focusing on the issues the base was concerned with, that she would lose the election.
That wasn’t the core of my argument. The core of my argument was that, with the exception of Gaza, Biden already embodied every one of the values you’re claiming you weren’t willing to sacrifice: On income inequality, on climate change, on corporate corruption, on policing, on basically everything, he was the best leader we’d had in decades, someone who actually made some small amount of forward progress after, which is especially impressive given that he had to deal with a mostly-dogshit Democratic congress to try to get it all done with, and letting Trump win the next election just to spite the Democrats for not being “left enough” (which, yes, they are not) because of a mostly fantastical conception of what Biden even did in the first place, was going to lead to (1) a total cessation of any forward progress, in or out of politics (2) horrors that would have been hard to conceive of, some small number of which are coming true even now (before he turned the deportation machine into the third largest military in the world).
It was based on grabbing quotes and pretending they corresponded to policy, assembling misleading little talking-points, and outright lying. And, of course, pointing to Gaza. That was one thing that the anti-Biden crew had 100% in the bag without needing to misconstrue a damn thing. It was a horror, a stain on the world, and he was arming the whole thing the whole time through. So what could anyone say to defend it? Fair enough. And then, Kamala Harris came along, who hadn’t done any of that, and y’all blamed her for it anyway, and went back into this wild fantasy-land where the only answer to save Palestine was to let Trump win.
Anyway, now we’re in the timeline we’re in. I really hope that it is the catalyst for something better, the kind of popular revolution and massive upset to our politics that’s always been what we need, and not too many people have to die in the meantime to make that happen. I honestly don’t even really know what the answer is, in terms of finally making the American government a decent operation that can provide for its people some kind of decent life and future. I hope it happens before the whole world explodes.
I also know that you’re lying about what “we” said before the election, what Biden’s record was before the election, what the mods did before the election (I guarantee you you cannot find stuff in the modlog where someone was banned for posting a poll that showed Biden behind or something), what “our” (my at least) goals are in all of this, and all the rest of it. You’re trying to reframe it all in this innocent way by retconning that something totally different happened than what happened. So, that makes me suspicious of your motives, and of the honesty of all the constructive criticism you’re now trying to offer, yes.
Let’s hope Cuomo fucks things up for the establishment, let’s hope Mamdani gets somewhere and his message keeps spreading, with or without the help of the current people in power. Hopefully we can agree on that, at least.
I also know that you’re lying about what “we” said before the election, what Biden’s record was before the election, what the mods did before the election (I guarantee you you cannot find stuff in the modlog where someone was banned for posting a poll that showed Biden behind or something), what “our” (my at least) goals are in all of this, and all the rest of it.
Jokes on you, I’ve spent almost two years developing tooling to do specifically this because lemmy still lacks an adequate external API. Unfortunately, I’m not independently wealthy and I do have a day job and haven’t made much progress in a few months, but I am planning on releasing it as a public tool when I can get around to it. And considering I’ve finally found the line giving me shit at my day job, I’m going to have to keep it short.
I specifically am building it to document the relationship between how moderation operates as a power structure and structures narratives of the community. Its a work in progress but I’ve shared components of it with others (SatansMaggotyCumFart, for one, who wanted me to use it to do an investigation of UniversalMonk).
The issue is broad and isn’t able to be contained to just one sub, so its going to have to span many subs, but effectively I’m testing how moderation functions to support some narratives and inhibit others.
I would appreciate if you repost this to maybe one of the debate subs that I think someone started. Its probably better to house the discussion there then to create an endless series of responses.
I specifically am building it to document the relationship between how moderation operates as a power structure and structures narratives of the community. Its a work in progress but I’ve shared components of it with others (SatansMaggotyCumFart, for one, who wanted me to use it to do an investigation of UniversalMonk).
I think this is 100% an excellent idea. I am firmly convinced that you’ll find it works the opposite of the way you’re saying it does here (you’ll find that there are certain types of topics where flamewars develop, and some mods whose names aren’t really commonly spoken tend to sanction participants on one and only one side of the flamewar, more or less, the “pro-Democrat” side.) But I’d be happy to wait and see what the data on it is. Who knows, maybe anyone who spoke poorly of Biden was getting banned and it happened all the time but you really do need to build a whole analysis tool to give me even a single example.
I would appreciate if you repost this to maybe one of the debate subs that I think someone started. Its probably better to house the discussion there then to create an endless series of responses.
Agreed. Like I said, aside from all the backbiting about who said what before the election and whose fault it all is, there is actually a useful conversation to be had about what can even happen in American politics that’s good right now.
Your core point here is actually something that deserves a little more of a response than I feel like typing up here. I’ll make a post in some “political discussion” community and maybe send you a note about it, because how we make forward progress and deal with the brokenness of the Democratic party is obviously a pretty important topic that is highly relevant to this story.
I just want to deal with this stuff a little, since you did try to tag me:
That wasn’t the core of my argument. The core of my argument was that, with the exception of Gaza, Biden already embodied every one of the values you’re claiming you weren’t willing to sacrifice: On income inequality, on climate change, on corporate corruption, on policing, on basically everything, he was the best leader we’d had in decades, someone who actually made some small amount of forward progress after, which is especially impressive given that he had to deal with a mostly-dogshit Democratic congress to try to get it all done with, and letting Trump win the next election just to spite the Democrats for not being “left enough” (which, yes, they are not) because of a mostly fantastical conception of what Biden even did in the first place, was going to lead to (1) a total cessation of any forward progress, in or out of politics (2) horrors that would have been hard to conceive of, some small number of which are coming true even now (before he turned the deportation machine into the third largest military in the world).
It was based on grabbing quotes and pretending they corresponded to policy, assembling misleading little talking-points, and outright lying. And, of course, pointing to Gaza. That was one thing that the anti-Biden crew had 100% in the bag without needing to misconstrue a damn thing. It was a horror, a stain on the world, and he was arming the whole thing the whole time through. So what could anyone say to defend it? Fair enough. And then, Kamala Harris came along, who hadn’t done any of that, and y’all blamed her for it anyway, and went back into this wild fantasy-land where the only answer to save Palestine was to let Trump win.
Anyway, now we’re in the timeline we’re in. I really hope that it is the catalyst for something better, the kind of popular revolution and massive upset to our politics that’s always been what we need, and not too many people have to die in the meantime to make that happen. I honestly don’t even really know what the answer is, in terms of finally making the American government a decent operation that can provide for its people some kind of decent life and future. I hope it happens before the whole world explodes.
I also know that you’re lying about what “we” said before the election, what Biden’s record was before the election, what the mods did before the election (I guarantee you you cannot find stuff in the modlog where someone was banned for posting a poll that showed Biden behind or something), what “our” (my at least) goals are in all of this, and all the rest of it. You’re trying to reframe it all in this innocent way by retconning that something totally different happened than what happened. So, that makes me suspicious of your motives, and of the honesty of all the constructive criticism you’re now trying to offer, yes.
Let’s hope Cuomo fucks things up for the establishment, let’s hope Mamdani gets somewhere and his message keeps spreading, with or without the help of the current people in power. Hopefully we can agree on that, at least.
Jokes on you, I’ve spent almost two years developing tooling to do specifically this because lemmy still lacks an adequate external API. Unfortunately, I’m not independently wealthy and I do have a day job and haven’t made much progress in a few months, but I am planning on releasing it as a public tool when I can get around to it. And considering I’ve finally found the line giving me shit at my day job, I’m going to have to keep it short.
I specifically am building it to document the relationship between how moderation operates as a power structure and structures narratives of the community. Its a work in progress but I’ve shared components of it with others (SatansMaggotyCumFart, for one, who wanted me to use it to do an investigation of UniversalMonk).
The issue is broad and isn’t able to be contained to just one sub, so its going to have to span many subs, but effectively I’m testing how moderation functions to support some narratives and inhibit others.
I would appreciate if you repost this to maybe one of the debate subs that I think someone started. Its probably better to house the discussion there then to create an endless series of responses.
I think this is 100% an excellent idea. I am firmly convinced that you’ll find it works the opposite of the way you’re saying it does here (you’ll find that there are certain types of topics where flamewars develop, and some mods whose names aren’t really commonly spoken tend to sanction participants on one and only one side of the flamewar, more or less, the “pro-Democrat” side.) But I’d be happy to wait and see what the data on it is. Who knows, maybe anyone who spoke poorly of Biden was getting banned and it happened all the time but you really do need to build a whole analysis tool to give me even a single example.
Agreed. Like I said, aside from all the backbiting about who said what before the election and whose fault it all is, there is actually a useful conversation to be had about what can even happen in American politics that’s good right now.