this post was submitted on 22 May 2024
445 points (82.4% liked)

Political Memes

5223 readers
3243 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I think I got irritated and just abandoned the conversation, but we can continue.

What you just said actually made a lot of sense and as far as I know the history, I agree with it more or less completely (and would allocate blame for Trump at most of the Bill Clinton / Nancy Pelosi type Democrats in exactly the same way for exactly the same reason)

So if it sounded like I was exonerating them I was not. My point was, once Hitler comes around it doesn't matter; if you're still running a 13% spoiler candidate to weaken the alternative to Hitler, and then blaming the ones who won the election because they didn't do a good enough job of compromising with you... I mean, you may have a case, but you'll still be dead if Hitler wins. Surely that is relevant?

They sure didn't get the real material relief to the German people by not supporting Hindenburg; definitely not until 1945 and even then it came with some caveats.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Plenty of area of agreement I think.

I just don't think the NSDAP would have been defeated even if the SPD and KPD somehow fully united (I probably have as much knowledge of the history as you do, or less). Fascism doesn't work like that, it would have just continued to boil under their thin coalition until eventually they would have to put it down forcefully. Just like I don't think beating trump in a single election will defeat the fascist movement he represents. Whoever it is that's leading the opposition has to take (likely un-democratic) action against them if they really want to put it down, and honestly I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing that Biden wont cross that line.

Revolutionary movements generally don't fully resolve until the conditions that seeded them change, one way or the other. That's why it's important that whatever coalition that forms the opposition is serious about addressing them, and in my mind simply having the coalition isn't enough.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Just like I don’t think beating trump in a single election will defeat the fascist movement he represents

I don't think anybody is under the illusion that stopping Trump from winning would end republican fascism.

But at the very least, delaying it is preferable. Because in that delay time we can weaken their movement, help get trans people to safety, and so on.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Then Biden should be doing what he can to make that happen, and from where I'm standing there's at least one thing he's doing that his base is irate about

If the one thing he needs to do to kick the can is be popular then woah is he not the right candidate

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

he not the right candidate

He's the less wrong candidate. Sorry reality is this hard for you but them's the breaks.