• SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Look, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being a low information voter. People are busy, and reading endlessly about politics is an unproductive hobby, just one of many out there.

    But it is absolutely true that the most critical people on the left tend to be extremely vague on the specifics. Because they don’t know the specifics. And being baseline critical allows them to protect their ego. “Those powerful elites won’t fool me!” And don’t get me wrong, powerful elites are trying to fool you. But one of the ways they do that is by convincing you that nothing ever gets better. Nothing is worth supporting. That every policy is as bad as any other. Everything that looks good is actually secretly bad.

    Here’s an example. Lack of competition and enshittification is frequently in the news. Inevitably, someone will comment that “both sides” are corporate shills, and it’ll get a ton of upvotes. Anyone who knows anything about the current FTC knows that that’s insane. In a shocking move, Biden appointed a young progressive firebrand as the head of the FTC, Lina Khan. She literally wrote the academic article starting the super progressive New Brandeis school of anti-trust. This new FTC has been sometimes clumsy, but super aggressive against corporations. This was an olive branch to the far left. And it’s one of the many reasons why progressives who are paying attention begrudgingly appreciate Biden.

    • hark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      That’s nice and shows that we should continue to apply pressure so that they continue to put more progressive people and policies into practice.

      • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Totally agree. But pressure is both positive and negative. It means rewarding good policy, not just criticizing everything. Biden has made many moves to satisfy progressives. But if none of it matters electorally, why even try? Why not go back to pandering to centrists and conservatives?

        • hark@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          I reward them with my guaranteed vote, which happens to be guaranteed because the alternative is worse.

          • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            The progressive vote is hardly guaranteed. It’s fickle, hyper critical, divided, which enervates us as a voting bloc. Conservatives are the most reliable voters, and, surprise surprise, they wield outsized political power.

            • hark@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              10 months ago

              The progressive vote would be guaranteed if democrats would push progressive policies in earnest instead of constantly trying to be republican-lite.

                • hark@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Oh really? So what do you think all that pandering to “centrists” makes them? After republicans have pushed so far to the right and with democrats following after them for so long, insisting that “we must work with republicans” (while republicans are free to obstruct and undermine), republican-lite is an accurate description.

                  • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    This shows you don’t understand the US political system at all. The US system is intentionally designed to require compromise. The US also has extremely weak party discipline. Voting against your own party is unheard of in most parliamentary systems, but it’s normal in the US. That means there needs to be compromise even within a single party. If you want progressive policies, more progressive Dems need to be voted in.

                    There are people like you on the Republican side too. People who would rather the government shut down than compromise with Democrats.

                    Edit: if you seriously think a president Bernie Sanders wouldn’t also compromise with Republicans, then you don’t know the first thing about how legislation is passed.