Obviously you are stuck in your argument. It’s very clear to most intelligent people that although Harris was hardly progressive, she would not have been so extreme. She would have pushed back on Israel at least for the sake of maintaining support from the progressive dems in the house. She wouldn’t have egged Israel on publically like trump. By your own reconning, Trump did things worse even if you think Harris had the same general crappy plans. But I do not believe Harris would be threatening NATO countries’ sovereignty. The world is currently realigning away from the US because of the tariffs and general insanity of trump. Under Harris we also wouldn’t see the persecution of trans people being encouraged by the White House.
So they’re not the same. Trump is worse. Failing to vote for Harris helped install Trump. And that made things worse. There is no up side.
I’m not stuck in my argument I acknowledge that both parties are captured by capital interests and as such these outcomes are inevitable. Neither the Dems or Republicans have any interest in reigning in corporate power both foreign and domestic. Corporations are driving these interests - who gets rich when we go to war? Who wants oil captured abroad? Etc etc. These are policies that both sides are in lock step on the only difference is the optics in execution.
This is my issue with the push back. It fundamentally misses the point that out political system is designed to pump out these outcomes. Trump is a logical outcome. He is THE logical outcome. Kamala Harris was advocated for nothing that would change that dynamic she would only have slowed things ever so slightly. I can only forecast how things would have been based on her campaign promises - she would have continued the trend of not providing meaningful polices that would help the economic standing of the average person. No meaningful healthcare reform, no student loan relief, no infrastructure promises. All she promised was war and genocide. She promised to “follow the law” with trans people as a historic number of anti trans bills were being passed. She promised to have “the most lethal military”. She promised more endless billions to Israel as she had been helping run cover for their genocide.
If fascism was such an issue why did Kamala Harris run on a “fascism is bad but I offer no solutions for the conditions that lead to it” campaign? Surely if winning was so important she’d have taken all the data suggesting she was running a terrible campaign and course corrected no? No she doesn’t believe in making this country better she believes in further entrenching us in the violent systems of oppression that we all deserve to be free of.
US empire is bad. Supporting it and pushing it further is bad. Realignment away from the US is objectively a good thing for the vast majority of the world. The US wields our influence with oppression and violence worldwide. USAID every project was a way to strong arm countries who need aid because of the devastation western imperialism has wrought on their lands and resources. A multipolar would where the US is unable to act the impunity it does would be better - and no the UN and NATO do not constitute this because both of those are thinly veiled extensions of US power.
I’m not stuck in my argument I have a better sense for the material reality of our systems and the actors within than you do idk what else to say. Whoever you are getting your analysis from has an agenda they are selling you.
Obviously you are stuck in your argument. It’s very clear to most intelligent people that although Harris was hardly progressive, she would not have been so extreme. She would have pushed back on Israel at least for the sake of maintaining support from the progressive dems in the house. She wouldn’t have egged Israel on publically like trump. By your own reconning, Trump did things worse even if you think Harris had the same general crappy plans. But I do not believe Harris would be threatening NATO countries’ sovereignty. The world is currently realigning away from the US because of the tariffs and general insanity of trump. Under Harris we also wouldn’t see the persecution of trans people being encouraged by the White House.
So they’re not the same. Trump is worse. Failing to vote for Harris helped install Trump. And that made things worse. There is no up side.
I’m not stuck in my argument I acknowledge that both parties are captured by capital interests and as such these outcomes are inevitable. Neither the Dems or Republicans have any interest in reigning in corporate power both foreign and domestic. Corporations are driving these interests - who gets rich when we go to war? Who wants oil captured abroad? Etc etc. These are policies that both sides are in lock step on the only difference is the optics in execution.
This is my issue with the push back. It fundamentally misses the point that out political system is designed to pump out these outcomes. Trump is a logical outcome. He is THE logical outcome. Kamala Harris was advocated for nothing that would change that dynamic she would only have slowed things ever so slightly. I can only forecast how things would have been based on her campaign promises - she would have continued the trend of not providing meaningful polices that would help the economic standing of the average person. No meaningful healthcare reform, no student loan relief, no infrastructure promises. All she promised was war and genocide. She promised to “follow the law” with trans people as a historic number of anti trans bills were being passed. She promised to have “the most lethal military”. She promised more endless billions to Israel as she had been helping run cover for their genocide.
If fascism was such an issue why did Kamala Harris run on a “fascism is bad but I offer no solutions for the conditions that lead to it” campaign? Surely if winning was so important she’d have taken all the data suggesting she was running a terrible campaign and course corrected no? No she doesn’t believe in making this country better she believes in further entrenching us in the violent systems of oppression that we all deserve to be free of.
US empire is bad. Supporting it and pushing it further is bad. Realignment away from the US is objectively a good thing for the vast majority of the world. The US wields our influence with oppression and violence worldwide. USAID every project was a way to strong arm countries who need aid because of the devastation western imperialism has wrought on their lands and resources. A multipolar would where the US is unable to act the impunity it does would be better - and no the UN and NATO do not constitute this because both of those are thinly veiled extensions of US power.
I’m not stuck in my argument I have a better sense for the material reality of our systems and the actors within than you do idk what else to say. Whoever you are getting your analysis from has an agenda they are selling you.