this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
91 points (93.3% liked)
chapotraphouse
13949 readers
639 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I feel like it's worth zooming in on something he says about these people wanting power, wealth, fame, etc. There is specifically a trend in the DSA whose primary base is in NYC that believes power and fame are essentially the same - that AOC being a household name is equivalent to power for the DSA - so these people they helped to elect simply holding prestigious titles conveys power to the DSA in their worldview no matter what the elected person does.
I don't know if AOC agrees with that position or if she just personally likes the wealth and power. My guess is Zohran comes out of the tradition but will more or less carry out the same program of caving to the Democrats to maintain his position.
As long as this idea remains the dominant trend in leftist politics in the US we will always falter.
Difference being he's trying to be a mayor, not a Congressional Representative. He'll have actual power to make New Yorkers' lives better by virtue of his executive authority, something AOC lacks.
I'm sorry but I think this is fundamentally incorrect. The capitalist state is not designed for us to wield. Every single aspect of government will be holding back every single thing he proposes (assuming he even wins the election which is not a given like so many assume). The state and federal governments, the courts, and the city bureaucracy will obstruct and hinder him every step of the way and unlike historical reformers he is not the valve holding back a mass movement that is baying for the blood of the rich. He can't even stick to his guns about the intifada, how's he going to overcome a judge that says "fuck you you can't do that"?
Right but he'll (optimistically) implement things that are then rolled back by the superstructure. It requires the manifestation and alignment of capitalist power, unlike anything AOC has ever attempted (if she even has).
Argument could be made the Dems tried all this under Biden and the "capitalist superstructure" was the Parliamentarian. The difference will (optimistically) be in the character of his response.
You can apply this to anything we do including labor action. Yet we have both strikes that aren't shutdown immediately and union victories in new industries. They're not gods, they're not omniscient.
I agree with you and I think the party is the key for enabling and perpetuating this capitulation.
Look at how they have always been the more media savvy party, look at the career track of the Obama’s post presidency.
It’s not that we need to by cynical and assume that we can never trust a leadership, we simply cannot ever trust this party. We must build a party whose job is not only to cultivate and promote political talent, but also to hold them accountable to an ideological program. As much as I am dissapointed witb AOC and expecting to be dissapointed with Zohran. We were always foolish to assume or expect anyone could make a push upward with the load stone of the Democratic Party dragging them down. People cannot be an island and especially if they are expected to fight political conflicts along class lines.
This is not to excuse their actions but to understand why they capitulate. Again, not to be cynical, but people often are self interested and waging class war is fucking dangerous, no matter what the terrain is, soft or hard.
When the party presents every incentive to capitulate then eventually people fold because the stakes are very very high and pressure gets to everyone eventually. When you are backed by an organized party with an ideological line, it can steels one’s resolve and help keep everyone honest.
Is he actually a Democrat, as in he donates to Democrats or helps other, more right-wing, Democrats win? Or is he a "Democrat in Name Only?"
We shouldn't care about using the ballot line that gives us the best chance of winning as long as that's the extent of what we're doing with it.
Sure mayor Pete, but the posture must be one that prioritizes antagonism over collaboration.
I would posit it is better to advocate positions that are radical and populist enough as to demonstrate the inefficacy and malice of the party when they completely stymie any attempt to enact these policies and even reach across the aisle to do so. Omar and Talib are the best examples of this.
Better to be ineffective in legislation but effective in making your enemies reveal their true colors than to get your name on a few things and forget who has the knife to your back.
I agree with this