this post was submitted on 21 Jan 2025
101 points (99.0% liked)
askchapo
22850 readers
179 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
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
That kinda buttresses my point though, no? Abortion was functionally banned already in a lot of the anti abortion states such that it didn't really matter whether or not roe v Wade stood. In fact it being left basically intact would have been smart politics because it would have helped diffuse a leftwing backlash while still accomplishing the same goal basically.
...but that wasn't enough. They overturned it outright because the base and their ideology demanded it, the consequences be damned. I think we would do well to remember that when speculating about how far they're actually willing to go.
I think were both on different sides of the same dialectical reasoning, I wasnt refuting your point: I'm saying it wasnt a big ask ideologically because functionally, materially, it was already reality and I think what youre saying is that it was a big ask because while it was already reality it was still a shibboleth.
But I also think there wasnt really any consequences to be damned. We already know how far theyre willing to go, theyll do anything for material impact, shibboleths be damned.