this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2025
946 points (80.9% liked)

Memes

49915 readers
1779 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] steeznson@lemmy.world 28 points 21 hours ago (8 children)

From an outsider's perspective it seems like the Democrats behave like that because the US electorate is genuinely right-wing and need pandered to.

[–] ace_of_based@sh.itjust.works 10 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

If you're getting your perspective from billionaire-owned news, (which no fault to you, is most major news-sources) it's no wonder that you'd think that. By the way, that's the exact same narrative the "billionaire-bullypulpit" push here in the States, even though it isn't so.

These politicians and the media have the same lock step lie. They say they're moving to the right "because their voters are", but they're just gaslighting folks as cover for what they were doing anyway; whatever their rich donors tell them.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Our government behaves like that because it formally takes bribes.

If you look at the real issues ~60% want homeless fed and to help people back on their feet, healthcare and school to be affordable to everyone.

~40% want all those things, but they only want them for themselves and their families.

We're at about 60/40 POS.

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I'd say 60/40 is way off provably more like 80/20

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

That's where I want it to be. But I'm worried it's not

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Eh if you ask any random person if they'd rather kill or house the homeless people I'm pretty sure they would say they'd prefer the latter

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 6 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

It really isn't that right-wing, especially economically, but there's a lot of factors that make it seem that way. First is that it did go through a large, neoliberal shift in the 80s during the Regan years. When the economy crashed in the early 90s, the Democrats decided that, instead of returning to their New Deal roots, they would also run on neoliberal policies. The Republicans moved further right because of that, especially on social issues, and then the Rachet Effect described in the meme really started to ramp up.

Couple this with a lot of political illiteracy among the public in general, and you get a lot of people who actually don't know what they believe and default to partisanship. If you poll people if they support gun control, you will get a very negative response, but if you break gun control into individual measures (longer waiting periods, mandatory background checks, magazine capacity limits, etc.) you get much more support. It's the same on almost every issue; people don't support a, "big government takeover," of the healthcare system, but they broadly support Medicare for all. There's a somewhat famous picture of a guy holding a sign that says something like, "Get Your Government Hands Off My Social Security," that I think sums up this ignorance pretty well.

This attitude isn't limited to the right, either. If you asked a Democrat "Who deregulated Wall Street?" they'd probably tell you Regan, Bush, or the other Bush. In actuality, the most significant deregulation, which lead directly to the 2008 financial collapse, was Clinton's repeal of Glass-Steagal. Liberals think that Obama made significant progress on regulating Wall Street, but what he put in place was nothing compared to the deregulation that proceeded it.

Citizens United and the rise of mega donors also plays a pretty significant role in moving the parties away from policies that the general population want and towards the goals of a few oligarchs, but this reply is already way too long, so TL;DR: the country got pretty right-wing under Regan, both parties became more right-wing as a result, the population has become much more left-leaning since income inequality/cost of living went way up, but the parties are still both right-wing and most people are too ignorant to understand that.

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Good comment, but this bugs me:

*Reagan

Regan was Reagan's chief of staff for his last couple of years in office.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

Holy shit, I don't know when I started misspelling Reagan's name, but now I feel like I need to go through thousands of replies and figure it out, because this has definitely been going on for months.

[–] Corn@lemmy.ml 14 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Nope, when you poll on individual policies, they're way to the left of the democrats.

The democrats showcase healthcare bill wasn't "subsidies for employer-based health insurance, that you have no idea what it's going to cost and have to buy at a specific time of year by going to one of 50 sites provided by your state at a specific time of year and filling out a bunch of forms or face a tax penalty, with a sliding scale based on income, marriage status, and other factors" because that's more popular than "free healthcare".

Same if you ask americans about Biden (and Harris's) policies of "loan forgiveness for PELL grant recipients up to X dollars depending on age, loan repayment status, income, parent's income, and whether you were born on a prime-numbered date" vs "free college"

The democrats compromise their bills, not because there's a bunch of "moderates" who are exactly between democrat and republican who will vote for democrats if they promote garbage versions of progressive bills that don't actually help anyone, but because they know those versions are less likely to pass and be easier to chip away at, and therefore won't piss off their billionaire patrons.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago

Pandering only works if you're delivering more of what your audience wants than your opponent. It yields no votes from right wingers when they can choose fascists and get more of what they want.

But it does alienate people who would otherwise be your natural allies.

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 4 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Where do you get your opinion of Americans? The answer doesn't' matter because every media outlet, including social media, is owned by billionaires. Lemmy being the possible exception, but don't tell me you get the impression that Americans are right wing from here.

Doesn't it seem weird how many think pieces about Trump voters there have been in the past decade? I've never seen an article about an Anarchist. Not a single article about someone who didn't vote. Meanwhile, every algorithm takes you to the furthest right content you'll accept.

[–] steeznson@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I'm mainly basing my opinion on my experiences living in the UK where everyone complains about "right-wing tabloids" but these newspapers enjoy huge sales figures.

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 1 points 13 hours ago

I don't know much about UK politics, but Murdoch was pushing you right even before us.

I think about tabloids as "Propaganda that pays for itself". What better way to sow distrust in science than wild stories about nonsense? Repeat a lie enough times and people start to believe it.

Tabloids have comparatively high sales because they're pap aimed at the lowest common denominator. Young people don't read print papers, so the tabloids make a business of confirming the worst Boomer fears.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

The majority voted for trump, a fascist. Idk.

If you tell me you are a good person, I will require evidence. If you tell me you are a bad person, I will trust your word.

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

No, the majority of white people and the majority of people who voted voted for Trump. That is a big difference. As much as some liberals want to say "Not voting is the same as voting for Trump", that is not true.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 4 hours ago

Weird focus on white people if it adds nothing to your point.

Not voting is certainly not an indication that they didn't want trump and when dealing with a far right fascist, that is interesting. But we all can have some copium, so that we don't need to accept that a shocking amount of people are dumb as rocks and that consequently they don't quite care about stuff like due process, and don't mind a fascist Leader.

At some point, we need to accept that currently the general public is conservative because they know the old ways and care too little to learn the new ones but get scared of change.

[–] Yoga@lemmy.ca 1 points 17 hours ago

About 40% of it is.

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 0 points 20 hours ago

Stay outside and stop talking