The Democratic Socialists of America pulled its endorsement of Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York this week, accusing the progressive congresswoman of being insufficiently supportive of the Palestinian cause and efforts to end the war in Gaza…

Her approach has increasingly strained her relationship with some of the left’s most strident critics of Israel. When she rallied last month in the Bronx with Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Jamaal Bowman, dozens of pro-Palestinian demonstrators angry over her endorsement of Mr. Biden chanted “You’re a fraud, A.O.C.”

  • cabron_offsets@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yeah bruh, I’m a pragmatist. Israel sucks, but even more Palestinians will die unless we keep trump and the republican traitor filth out of office.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      How will this allow trump and Republican party filth into office?

      • aredditimmigrant@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        DSA: “hey, Biden sucks because he lets genocide happen”

        Rational person: “well, I don’t like genocide… who’s the alternative?”

        Dem party: … Biden is our candidate …

        Rep party: Trump Trump Trump!!!

        What they don’t tell you is that most American Jews on the super religious part of the spectrum love trump because he explicitly endorses Israel as well, and Bibi is the same friend of right wing extremists/dictators that Trump is.

        Personally, I’m not pro Palestine. I’m anti Hamas AND anti Bibi… Just Pro peace and both govts don’t want that for different reasons.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The official answer to that is “shut up.”

        EDIT: Sorry. “Shut up and pretend you’re happy.”

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    2 months ago

    Oh no the literal tankies are against her what will she do? These people are not Democratic socialists, they’re not even leftists. These people suck the dick of totalitarianism.

    • graymess@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Damn. I had no idea the opposite of endorsing genocide was totalitarianism. Seems obvious now that you’ve pointed that out, thank you.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        They’re not all “tankies:”

        In 1956, a “Tankie” was someone who endorsed the Stalin’s tanks driving through Hungary to suppress a counter-revolution.

        In 1989, a “Tankie” was someone who endorsed the Deng Xiaoping’s tanks driving through Tienanmen Square to suppress a student riot.

        In 2024, a “Tankie” is someone who thinks Netanyahu’s tanks driving through Gaza to suppress the Al Aqsa Flood has gone too far.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          The DSA aren’t all tankies, the socialist majority caucus within the DSA, a majority caucus, is very lenient on their position concerning Israel:

          Conditioning aid to Israel

          The NPC had a brief political discussion about the progress of the “No Money for Massacres” campaign. Renée framed the conversation by walking through potential scenarios of an Israel military aid package, including the possibility of amendments that set conditions for the aid. One example is a recent Senate proposal that would require foreign aid recipients to comply with international law.

          In the middle of this discussion, Marxist Unity Group members put forward a motion that would have, among other things. established DSA’s position as not supportive of harm reduction measures such as conditioning Israeli aid. This motion failed by a large margin with several abstentions, and it’s not difficult to see why: The motion was out of touch with our current political moment.

          Currently, a supermajority of Congress has not publicly supported a ceasefire and remains supportive of military aid to Israel. Barring a massive shift in public and congressional opinion—which DSA is working diligently to achieve—an Israel aid package likely has the necessary votes for passage.

          If aid is going to pass anyway, the very least DSA and our endorsed congressmembers can do is use the vote to propagandize. For example, when the House voted on a Republican Israel aid package last month, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez introduced an amendment to bar the use of white phosphorus against civilians.

          AOC was almost certainly aware that there was no chance her amendment would pass; indeed, it wasn’t even brought to a vote. That’s because it wasn’t intended to pass. Rather it was a strategic move to highlight the war crimes Israel is committing against the Palestinian people. And if the amendment had been brought to a vote, it would have put pro-Israel Democrats on the defensive and forced them to vote down a clear rejection of war crimes.

          MUG’s motion missed the point of why amendments like this are filed in the first place. The motion would have required DSA not to support amendments like AOC’s, blurring the message we are trying to send about Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza.

          That’s why we’re pleased that the NPC recently voted to endorse Sen. Sanders’ 502B© resolution, which would require the U.S. State Department to issue a report on Israel’s human rights practices within thirty days and cut off all security assistance if they fail to do so. Legislation like this can expose both parties’ blatant disregard for human rights and put pro-Israel congressmembers on the defensive.

          I’m posting this significant portion because many don’t have time to read the whole position. I would encourage you to expand your opinion of what the DSA represents and its capabilities.

          If you disagree with them, fine, but don’t misrepresent their positions.

    • xenoclast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      What does tankie mean to you in this context? Actually curious, because I don’t get it… it’s starting to become like “woke” in my mind.

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        ok, so people who pretend like the Russians and/or Chinese being communists and justifying their fascistic imperialist actions, while going on about American imperialism as the literal sole antagonist of the universe are by definition tankies.

        and the DCA are tankies, you can find it in a lot of their publications if you read them, for example, the basis for supporting the free Palestine students movement isn’t to support the Palestinian people in the creation of their own state, as a principle right of any group of peoples, but rather because they believe it would hemm in American imperialist power in the Middle East

      • syreus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Not OP but I think the groupthink here is just using tankie as a catch all whereas their main gripe is accelerationism.

        Accelerationism is the new Nihilism for the disenfranchised. It doesn’t take much to grasp and requires little to no input from its supporters in this phase.

        Accelerationism is not the answer. I am old enough to see what the traditional tactics have bought us. That doesn’t mean I am willing to watch the world burn so the soil is enriched.

          • ccdfa@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes and no. As with most things, it’s more complicated than that. While it’s true that not many philosophers would claim to be “pure” nihilists, instead opting to qualify their position, there are nihilists who do have a very doomer outlook so to speak.

            This is why in the article you linked, nihilism is qualified as “optimistic”. This kind of nihilism is often associated with Nietzsche and later as your article mentioned, Sartre. Though I’m not sure Sartre would say he was a nihilist; Sartre was a huge figure for the existentialists. However, the two movements have a lot in common and one could argue that optimistic nihilism and existentialism are close enough to be considered the same thing. I am aware of some scholars who consider, for example, Nietzsche to be an early existentialist. It must be noted, however, that the optimistic qualification is of utmost importance. Nihilism says flatly that there is no meaning, existentialism says that we are able to decide what is meaningful.

            Anyway, this is all to say that Nihilism (with a capital N) is a pretty pessimistic and “doomer” idea to have. Nietzsche himself argued that the solution to nihilism was to destroy all interpretations of the world so that we can start from zero and hopefully realize some actual meaning. Perhaps my understanding of doomer is wrong, but from where I’m standing, nihilism and doomerism are pretty much the same thing. Different flavours of nihilism will produce different conclusions about this connection.

      • graymess@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        “Tankie” is absolutely the chronically online moderate Democrat’s version of woke.

        • xenoclast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I laughed reading all the responses below… you’re the most correct just based on that alone.

          It’s like The People’s Front of Judeah sketch playing out in real time. Tribalism and the need for absolutism in uncertainty.

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Typical neoliberal. Still using homophobic insults. But surely you’re not a bad person.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s not a homophobic insult. It’s a more vulgar way of saying they’re in bed with them, which also isn’t homophobic. It just means they’re very close.

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    152
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    2 months ago

    Common DSA L.

    Fucking idiots. Pulling your endorsement of one of the top fucking 5% of most Pro-Palestinian Congresscritters for being INSUFFICIENTLY pro-Palestine.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      77
      ·
      2 months ago

      AOC doesn’t get elected without DSA in 2018.

      If you can’t pull back your endorsement as a political organization, you have no power.

      The progressive revolution that genuinely found its footing in 2015 is over. The figureheads have been captured and its going to be a ‘rebuilding’/ ‘consolidation’ cycle while we weather the facist takeover.

      • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        And if you don’t know how to build a coalition, you’ll never have power.

        Step one to building a coalition is to find someone you don’t agree with 100%.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        86
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        2 months ago

        If you can’t pull back your endorsement as a political organization, you have no power.

        Cool. If you pull back your endorsement of someone who is already one of the most aligned representatives of the fucking country with your agenda because you want her to go even further, why the everloving fuck do you think anyone will ever choose to align with you? You’re an unreliable ally who punishes your supposed allies for getting nearer your position, and empowering people who are MUCH further away from your (very much non-majority and non-plurality) position. Do you really not see how fucking counterproductive that is?

        But hey, since when have little concerns like “This is actually putting a corporate stooge in power” or even “This will lead to fascism winning” ever bothered Left purists? They aren’t the ones who suffer.

        The progressive revolution that genuinely found its footing in 2015 is over. The figureheads have been captured and its going to be a ‘rebuilding’/ ‘consolidation’ cycle while we weather the facist takeover.

        Jesus fucking Christ.

        • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          65
          ·
          2 months ago

          who is already one of the most aligned representatives of the fucking country with your agenda

          Is she? Show me. Show me how she is working for and supporting the policies that DSA is working for.

          Jesus fucking Christ.

          You realize your opinions are just a long series of mistaken views that don’t predict future states of the world right? Like, you have this hyperbolic reaction to things that you’re views don’t align with, but your views don’t predict the future. We’ve covered this. You should consider that your political calculus is just bad and maybe you should open up your view.

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            63
            arrow-down
            19
            ·
            2 months ago

            You have fun doing your best to welcome fascism with open arms and assist corporate cronies into power. I forgot that your opposition to Biden wasn’t because you didn’t think he could win, it was because you’d oppose any Democrat actually on the ticket for being insufficiently pure.

            • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              16
              arrow-down
              40
              ·
              2 months ago

              You just can’t help yourself can you? A year of having a wildly mistaken understanding of the political calculus around Joe Biden and what it takes for Democrats to win, putting out a view point and a particular rhetoric that was objectively helping Trump to victory; then the most minor of admonitions on your part that you were wildly in the wrong. But obviously zero introspection on your part as to why you were in the wrong. Have you considered why you were so wildly in the wrong as long as you were, to the point of basically costing the Democrats the ability to win any house of power in 2024?

              We’re talking about AOC and the DSA, and I’m making some specific points about how to wield political power and what it takes to stay “in” power when the “team” you are on would rather not have you. You, like some one who has no fucking clue what they are talking about, decide to make it personal and just go on the attack. Brother. You have the political calculus of a naked mole rat. Like, the beliefs you have around politics aren’t useful for predicting what will happen.

              You and many others here seem have attached your identity to a specific political team. And when that team gets criticized, you imagine yourself to be personally under attack. You (and many others here) can’t separate your identities. Maybe its because you are older, and haven’t spent the time to self-actualize and have that independent identity; maybe you are younger and haven’t had the opportunity. Maybe you have no real experience in politics or campaigning or institution building. Maybe you’ve never read on or studied power, how it manifests, and how it is wielded to great or little effect. Regardless, you obviously have significant work to do to train your understanding of the world to the point where the beliefs and things you think predict future states of the world, which, in my personal belief system, is the entire point.

              I put probably close to 3000 volunteer hours into squad/ squad adjacent campaigns. I’ve run political organizations, for years. I’ve worked directly with politicians as an outside organization. If you, as a political organization, can’t withhold your endorsement/ power: you have none. And when you are charged with managing/ growing/ building a movement; building power is your entire job. If AOC isn’t going to be on the right side of DSA, and they endorse her anyways, the DSA loses all power in the relationship and suffers (likely falls apart) as an organization.

              • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                44
                arrow-down
                15
                ·
                2 months ago

                God, it’s just… it’s a game to these people, where they win or lose. While the rest of us are trying to fucking survive and ensure as many others survive as possible. To them, any imperfection is a loss; fuck the totality of the results. I mean, fucking AOC and Bernie? For Christ’s sake. It’s not enough that these self-professed leftists vote for blowing our fucking brains out, they have to backstab some of the only vaguely left members of this fucking country’s legislature for being “Pro-Palestine, but not Pro-Palestine ENOUGH”.

                And they wonder why no one in power wants to fucking work with them.

          • ripcord@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            No one agrees with you. And you are working against your own goals and interests.

        • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          It stands for Democratic Socialists of America. They’re a member run left wing political group which grew rapidly after Bernie’s 2016 run. AOC is a member and up until recently she had maintained the endorsement of the national organization. After her surprise win in the 2018 primary, she has not been actively involved with DSA. As such, this outcome isn’t all that surprising.

      • Copernican@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        But DSA has a mission and core positions that are domestic and focus on economics, democracy, and equality. If you have a prominent member that represents those things, why are you kicking her out for something not defined in your core position and objective on a flimsy basis?

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Not since 2017:

          Among other resolutions, in 2017 the organization voted to leave the Socialist International, to prioritize support for the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement against the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and to strengthen solidarity efforts around the decolonization of Puerto Rico.

          • Copernican@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            But is that a core position where the dsa will revoke endorsements of members? Presumably members can have argument and debate about positions. Also, it’s questionable to suggest AOC is somehow strongly pro Israel. So why is there such a dumb headline stance on discussing anti semitism because some folks are afraid it might come off as pro Israel?

    • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      I wonder if some of them maybe hang out on social media where certain very vocal people they’ve never met tend to create a general picture of an overall narrative and what priorities seem important and what politicians are disappointing when seen in the light of that narrative

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        Not at all. There are at least 10 caucuses in the DSA. This decision is the compromise, ya know, democracy. The NY chapter still endorses her.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        You have that 180° backwards. The establishment is sucking Bibi’s genocidal dick. AOC stands with Bernie in opposition to the genocide.

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          30
          ·
          2 months ago

          She advocates for keeping Genocide Joe instead of swapping him out. Her actions have disproven her words.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The establishment is sucking Bibi’s genocidal dick. AOC stands with Bernie in opposition to the genocide.

          Sanders has been a staunch supporter of Israel since his mayoral days. Its one of the issues where he diverges most heavily from his “lefty” base.

          • frostysauce@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            No, he’s not. He’s one of if not the only Jewish lawmaker that is critical of Israel’s genocide.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              2 months ago

              https://www.timesofisrael.com/where-does-bernie-sanders-stand-on-israel-2/

              In a lengthy interview with Rolling Stone magazine published in November 2014, Sanders said that if elected president, he would “support the security of Israel, help Israel fight terrorist attacks against that country and maintain its independence,” while also vowing to maintain “an evenhanded approach to that area.”

              https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Where-does-Bernie-Sanders-the-Jewish-candidate-for-president-stand-on-Israel-412448

              “Has Israel overreacted? Have they bombed UN facilities? The answer is yes, and that is terribly, terribly wrong,” Sanders said. “On the other hand – and there is another hand – you have a situation where Hamas is sending missiles into Israel – a fact – and you know where some of those missiles are coming from. They’re coming from populated areas; that’s a fact. Hamas is using money that came into Gaza for construction purposes – and God knows they need roads and all the things that they need – and used some of that money to build these very sophisticated tunnels into Israel for military purposes.”

              This has been the Sanders response to Israel for decades. He’s a reliable vote on more US funding for military support. He routinely endorses resolutions favoring the continued “existence of Israel” in the form of occupied Palestinian lands. He talks about a “Two State Solution” while defending the right of Israel soldiers to respond with brutality and barbarity whenever they are challenged.

              Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib this guy ain’t. He votes as staunchly in favor of Israel as Ted Cruz or JD Vance.

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The system will always co-opt individuals seeking to dismantle it. This is why reform is nearly impossible.

        Edit: Thought experiment; think about what your price would be.

        • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I don’t even know if there is necessarily a price. I think on some level, people just start to realize certain issues take priority over others, especially when you’re fighting the opposing party. You have to compromise on some things. If she were out there cutting down Biden every day over Israel, it’s going to make it hard for her to get other things done. It’s also going to make it more likely that Trump wins. You have to pick your battles, rather than spending all of your political capital on a single issue that she won’t be able to have enough impact to actually change.

          To a large extent, this problem is systemic. We have a two party system that doesn’t allow a ton of nuance. Also, politicians are involved, and politicians are always thinking about elections. I wish we could just vote on the issues themselves in our democracy.

  • Aux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    Remember, guys, “left” wing in the US is further right than far right in Europe.

  • soratoyuki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    2 months ago

    AOC’s national endorsement was (and still is) preventing DSA from working on solidarity with Palestinian liberation organizations across the country. I get that to a lot of people, AOC is the ideal reformist Democrat, but that’s really just a condemnation of how bad even the ‘good’ Democrats are.

    From DSA’s statement on the issue:

    "However, members have raised their concerns regarding a number of her votes, including a vote in favor of H.Res.888, conflating opposition to Israel’s “right to exist” with antisemitism. AOC also co-signed a press release on April 20, 2024, that “support[s] strengthening the Iron Dome and other defense systems”

    Finally, AOC recently hosted a public panel with leaders from the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, lobbyists for the IHRA definition of antisemitism. On this panel, anti-Zionism and antisemitism were conflated and boycotting Zionist institutions was condemned. This sponsorship is a deep betrayal to all those who’ve risked their welfare to fight Israeli apartheid and genocide through political and direct action in recent months, and in decades past."

    Of course that behavior got her unendorsed. It’s fine if you, random Lemmy users, like her, but I’m glad that explicit workers-owning-the-means-of-production socialists are holding their endorsed electeds accountable. That shit shouldn’t fly.

    • john89@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      She’s still a great asset for progressives. I’m genuinely surprised that she’s being criticized for not supporting Palestine enough, simply because I expected the exact opposite.

      Still. Hold her accountable. Hold everyone accountable until we get direct voting.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It looks like it comes down to the fact she endorses Biden. She supports Palestine, but I guess you aren’t allowed to endorse the only legitimate option for president.

        • kautau@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The “single issue” voting thing is so stupid, because on the right it means “I like guns” so they will vote for who the fuck ever the NRA tells them to, and then on the flip side you have AOC, who is one of the most progressive people in the Democratic Party supporting Biden because he’s the only option to stop trump and people go “what about Palestine though?” As if not voting for Biden, putting Trump in power will somehow make it better, after knowing that his and his new VP pick’s policies are both 100% pro Israeli genocide against the Palestinians. So the right wins because they can just say “guns” on stage, and the left loses because someone can say “Palestine” in the crowd

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      She’s an incumbent in a heavily gerrymandered safe seat. Very little was going to pry her out shy of the kind of primary upset she used to take the seat in the first place.

      But even as the ostensibly far-left flank of the party, she’s constantly pulling her punches in order to avoid getting censored and reprimanded within the Democrat’s caucus. Its not inconceivable that she could be thrown out, the same way George Santos was, if enough of her colleagues decide being Pro-Palestinian rises to the level of an expulsion-worthy ethics violation.

      You can argue the DSA is unreasonable. And you can argue that Congress is so swarmed with AIPAC loyalists that not being censored is cause for alarm. But however you slice it, she’s putting her career ahead of any kind of personal conviction.

      • CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Do you mean New York is gerrymandered in the other direction? The 2022 map is +4% efficient gap for Republican. So she has her seat dispite the gerrymandering going the other direction.

        • RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m not with the tankies, but I do think you have a misunderstanding of how gerrymandering works, so I wanted to try explaining it.

          Part of gerrymandering is packing:
          The committee packs as many voters of the party they want to discriminate against, in as few districts as possible. This creates a lot of wasted votes in those packed (now safe) districts, which will benefit the other party in other more contested districts. So yes, the gerrymandering benefits the republican party when looking at ALL districts, but democrats within the packed districts have very safe general elections.

          AOC is elected in one of those safe packed districts, so in that way she “benefitted” from the gerrymandering. I’m not going to hold that against her though, she didn’t make the map and the fpp voting system isn’t her fault either.

          This picture shows it best imo: in one of the disproportiate examples there’s a majority of blue voters, but thanks to 2 packed blue districts, there are more yellow representatives. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#/media/File%3ADifferingApportionment.svg

            • RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              The statewide efficiency gap is when you look at wasted votes across all districts of that state, it is not applicable to any single district. It is not correct to state that aoc was elected despite a state efficiency gap, because that gap is not applicable to the single district that she was elected in.

  • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is a good example of why I left DSA. They are averse to pragmatism. They see the world in purely theoretical terms. They form their policies according to some hypothetical ideal, instead of reality.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      2 months ago

      There are plenty of political organizations for whom pragmatism* is their core political philosophy. Its not at all part of the philosophy of DSA. There is plenty of space for both. If you want an organization that is focused on pragmatism, there are plenty to align with. Specifically, organizations like DSA are explicitly idealistic, and the principals of socialism are also explicitly idealistic, which is effectively in opposition to pragmatism. If you are a pragmatist or one that espouses pragmatism in political philosophy, the fuck were you doing with the DSA? Its an intentionally and explicitly idealistic organization.

      *I assume you know that pragmatism is a political philosophy and identity of its own.

      • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        Pragmatism isn’t only an ideology, it’s also a methodology or an approach to problem solving. In that regard, a pragmatic approach can be taken in furtherance of an ideological goal that is not necessarily capital ‘P’ Pragmatism.

        I agree that DSA is an idealistic and not a pragmatic or practical organization, which is part of why I left. I didn’t feel that they really wanted to transform America into Democratic Socialist society, and instead they were content to virtue signal and bicker between themselves about theory.

        • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          2 months ago

          Maybe you just don’t get the relationships or understand how philosophy maps to effectiveness, but to be clear, idealistic organizations can and have been highly effective at making political changes. The DSA/ Our revolution/ JD are great examples of this. I know you think you are making a distinction here, but like, you are not fully correct in this. The idea of taking idealistic stance is an effective way to get things done, I mean, its how the DSA got AOC elected in the first place. She used the uncompromising idealism as an argument that helped get her elected. It really works.

          AOC could never have won her 2018 election as a pragmatist. Time will tell if this ends up being an effective strategy.

          You are making the assumption that pragmatism is inherently better or more effective at capturing political power, which I’m disagreeing with. All of the major power shifts in the previous decade (say, 2015 forward) have resulted as a direct extension of embracing idealism. Specifically, we did see a shake up within the DNC with progressives in 2016, 18, and 20: progressives expressing a clear and distinct idealistic vision of something very differently than what we have/ had.

          Likewise, you saw it on the right with Trump, and the rise of the alt-right, where voters flocked to candidates who were “uncompromising” in their views. They’ve built a huge political movement around that idealism, misplaced, distorted, scary, white nationalist idealism. But an idealism none-the-lessor.

          For both parties, you can go even further back to the Tea party, and Obama’s 2008 campaign for more examples of how a commitment to idealism gets you into power: this is a great example, because where the tea party stayed committed to their idealism, they continued to grow in terms of power and getting their agenda done (see project 2025); Obama abandoned the idealism of his campaign for what I would call the best modern example of political pragmatism, Obama’s governing style for his first and second terms.

          For Obamas pragmatism, he barely got heath-care done. For the Tea Parties idealism, they were effectively able to shift the entire political hegemony of the entire right-wing political apparatus of the country.

          The data suggest to me that in an age of populism, idealism as both campaigning and governing political philosophy is far more effective. And if AOC is retreating from her former identity as idealist, this will cost her. She doesn’t get power from being a moderate/ pragmatist. She gets power through idealism.

          I’m not really arguing for or against DSA, but they were important for AOC’s first run. Critical even. I am making an argument in favor of idealism; that pragmatism is not effective at gathering or wielding power in the currently political hegemony we find ourselves in.

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

            You are making the assumption that pragmatism is inherently better or more effective at capturing political power

            That’s not exactly what I said, I said pragmatism is a methodology that can be used to achieve a goal. There’s no reason why you couldn’t take a pragmatic approach to achieving an idealistic goal. It’s simply a matter of finding strategies that get you nearer to your goal and disregarding strategies that get you further from your goal. Several years ago, DSA was able to have a lot of success by putting forward an idealistic vision. Yes, I agree with that. However, since then the success of that strategy has waned significantly. Perhaps selling a kind of idealistic vision for America is still an effective strategy on the far right, but I think its effectiveness has declined dramatically among centrists and moderates, as well as progressives. Maybe it’s still an effective strategy in AOC’s district specifically (although, it seems she has become less idealistic and yet remains popular in her district, as far as I know), but that doesn’t mean idealism is an effective strategy in America, generally.

            • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              14
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yes, I agree with that. However, since then the success of that strategy has waned significantly.

              I just don’t agree with this. The DNC has been waging a war against idealism and against progressives since it began in earnest in 2015. Idealism is the only thing that can save the Democrats right now, but core DNC, pro-business, neo-liberal Democrats don’t get their power from it, so they opposed it with more energy than they’ve ever been able to muster against the actual “right” in this country. This is them having “flipped” AOC from that which got her into power to that which gets them into power.

              Bernie was polling at +15 to Trump in 2016. That was the power of idealism. Take this clip of Adam Smith from his recent CNN interview (timestamp 3:00). Adam Smith, one of the most corporate of the corporate Democrats making the point that they basically had to rat-fuck the primary to stop Bernie Sanders from winning. This is the quiet part outloud. Idealism works on the left. It takes the entire institution of the DNC working against an idealistic candidate to stop them.

              Idealsim works and I see little to no evidence that middle path, pragmatic approaches to electoral-ism are effective on the left or the right ( for the period starting very early at 2008, getting its footing strongly in 2016, at least before 2024). Pragmatism is a weak political strategy in this political climate and I see no evidence to the contrary.

              What you see from AOC is her capitulating to the party structure and internal party politics. This started in 2021 when she capitulated on internal party reform with Pelosi post DJT. AOC’s power has shifted from being primarily based in grass-roots organizing to being primarily based on the structure of the party. Any one who’s power extends from party structure is always going to tilt towards strategies that keep that structure in place. If you have data showing that moderation is winning elections (left or right), happy to discuss.

              • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                If you have data showing that moderation is winning elections (left or right), happy to discuss.

                Well, there’s the fact that Clinton won the primaries in 2016, and that Biden won the primaries (over Bernie), and the general, in 2020. If Congress or state legislatures have become more progressive, I’m not aware of it.

                • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  13
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  Did you even click the link?

                  Adam Smith. On record basically stating that party insiders rigged the nomination against Bernie because he was clearly running away with it in 2020. 2016, we have a literal supreme court decision telling us that the DNC rigged the 2016 primary against Bernie, and that its ok for parties to rig their nominations. He was polling at +15 against DJT and the DNC chose “middle path” pragmatism to their loss. You put idealistic candidates out there and you win elections.

                  The burden of evidence is on you at this point.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      For some Genocide and Apartheid is a red line.

      If you believe that is a radical statement for the left it might be time to reconsider the definition of left.

      • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 months ago

        I don’t think an organization as small and relatively insignificant as DSA has the luxury of being so idealistic. What strategic benefit comes from alienating your minimally influential organization from one of its most high profile political supporters? By all means, draw a red line, but you might find that you’re pretty lonely behind it.

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          2 months ago

          Seeing as the elections are coming down to having to scrape every small party to get over the line the DSA suddenly becomes quite significant. As is the uncommitted movement in Michigan which Biden has ignored.

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

        Look I truly hate that this is the situation we are in, but, If you want to have an absolutist point of view about Israel then your carbon footprint better be negative. Like home steader, grow your own food, no kids, no car, hunt for meat, no online shopping, etc.

        Because if not, youre indirectly but actively contributing to the suffering of millions of innocent and exploited people in underdeveloped nations. Not to mention millions of animals and plants.

        Innocent people will suffer famine, drought, and natural disasters. They will die by the hundreds of thousands in the coming decades. These victims will be people who did not participate in the modern consumerist economy by buying products from companies who actively deceive the public, practice regulatory capture, as well as bribing and corruption scandals all in the name of short term shareholder gains.

        It’s Absolutely hypocritical to condemn people who want to prevent a second trump term and thus recognize a need to vote for an imperfect Biden when there’s no way you meet the threshold required to have clean hands in regards to the climate crisis.

        The gut instinct is to say “well what can I possibly do about climate change” and that’s exactly my point. All you can do is limit the impact.

        You can’t reconcile excusing yourself from your part in climate change, however minor it may be, if you’re trying to uphold such a strict standard against Biden and Biden voters. why? because you already know the consequences if Biden fails to retain the presidency. You know what trump victory means for minorities, lgbtq, the climate, etc. and with project 2025 it likely will be way worse this time.

        You don’t get to look back and say you weren’t at fault if Trump wins because your ballot didn’t say trump. You know a vote for 3rd party or a no vote is a vote for Trump in the current system. That makes you complicit if he wins. Believe me, I went through that in 2016. I regret it.

        This is an extreme metaphor to help you see that sometimes you have to acknowledge that terrible things are happening but limiting the damage might be all you can do.

        You can vote for Biden in November and still criticize him and Democrats the entire time. That’s not being a hypocrite.

        Letting trump win and pretending you didn’t contribute to all the additional damage that follows is.

        • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Well said

          Almost as if there is a cunning and self-serving reason why genocide in Gaza is an absolutist red line, but the existential threat of climate change, genocide in Ukraine or China, mass deportations in the US, political violence and the collapse of democracy in the US, or Trump’s vocal and full throated support for genocide in Gaza among many other places, are not “red lines” for a decision about what would be best to do in this election.

          • DogWater@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s insane.

            I truly regret voting 3rd party in 2016. I thought I was really doing something by “punishing” the DNC for conspiring against Bernie.

            I have some empathy in that sense, but the difference is that I truly didn’t think it would be as bad as it was. That’s the only defense I have for my vote then. That ignorance is gone. We all know exactly what will happen because w have 4 years of data and that’s the BEST case. Selling state secrets, gutting crucial organizations like the EPA, tax cuts for wealthy corporate friends, extorting Ukraine for dirt on Biden, packing the supreme Court with justices literally unfit to sit on the bench…and on and on.

            That’s the BEST CASE.

            then read project 2025 and find out just how serious and insane the people who are trying to run the show for him this time actually are…Jesus.

          • DogWater@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Literally, yes.

            The problem is people are too fucking stupid to understand that they are flirting with forever losing the ability to improve society in the United States because they want to be obtuse and claim some moral high ground over Israel.

            All while allowing violence against women, minorities, and lgbtq domestically by helping trump win. It’s so hypocritical.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Not true at all:

          The Democratic Socialists of Americacondemns Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and demands immediate diplomacy and de-escalation to resolve this crisis. We stand in solidarity with the working classes of Ukraine and Russia who will undoubtedly bear the brunt of this war, and with antiwar protestors in both countries and around the world who are calling for a diplomatic resolution.

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

            This is taken directly from their official statement letter:

            DSA reaffirms our call for the US to withdraw from NATO and to end the imperialist expansionism that set the stage for this conflict.

            https://www.dsausa.org/statements/on-russias-invasion-of-ukraine/

            This is from official “condemnation” on Feb 26, 2022. Their condemnation just comes off as tone deaf when they say shit like this, especially right after the invasion. How tone deaf, but they double down on the Russian propaganda fueled stance:

            The war in Ukraine is a disaster for working class people in Ukraine, the region, and a terrible threat to us all, including increasing the danger of nuclear war and exacerbating global economic crises. We oppose the Russian invasion and call for the withdrawal of Russian troops through a settled ceasefire agreement. We recognize that the expansion of NATO and the aggressive approach of Western nations have helped cause the crisis and we demand an end to NATO expansion. We also oppose US and NATO military interventionism and the tens of billions in military aid and weapons shipments which only further exacerbates the war and undermine a negotiated settlement, as well as sanctions that will harm ordinary Russians. We call on the US and other countries to welcome refugees fleeing the war and provide needed humanitarian aid.

            https://international.dsausa.org/ukraine/

            And again:

            https://www.dsausa.org/democratic-left/dsa-and-the-war-in-ukraine-toward-a-mass-socialist-anti-war-movement/

            There seems to be a common theme going on. They “condemn” the invasion, but blame the US and NATO for it, push for negotiations that Putin wants, and try to justify Russia’s reasons for invading. Now, when Ukraine itself is against these narratives… who exactly is pushing them? Who is benefiting from this propaganda and misinformation? Oh that’s right, it’s Russia… which the DSA just happens to conveniently align with.

          • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            That person you replied to has been straight up lying in every post his thread. They come off as extremely America exceptionalism propagandized to me lol.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Not straight up lying directly. The DSA does have some of those positions. They are misrepresenting their goals as if they want to allow fascism. The DSA is entirely anti-fascist. To claim that these positions somehow allow the space for fascism is an equivocation fallacy.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        For some, it’s a red line letting full-strength Hitler style genocidal authoritarian fascism take over the most powerful country in the world, and resisting it is a better idea than pointless gestures of token resistance to somewhat more minor world power misbehavior, which ultimately benefit literally nobody at all

        But everybody’s different

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          23
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          And for others Biden is already that Hitler style Genocidal authoritarian.

          Demanding to not support Genocide is not a big ask. If Democrats are not even willing to abide by that they don’t believe in that 2025 talk as much as they claim.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            20
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            2 months ago

            Your definition of Hitler is clearly very different from my definition of Hitler

            • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              21
              ·
              2 months ago

              When I think of the bad things Hitler did it was the Genocide that bothered me more than his dictatorship.

              • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                17
                arrow-down
                11
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                I will say, the instant Biden puts 6 million civilians to death and starts a war that kills 70 million people I’m definitely planning not to vote for him.

                Or!

                I know, when people write books about fascism they write about all the weapons Hitler sold to other countries and how that was the real problem and what those other countries did with the weapons. Everyone knows such a thing was un heard of before Hitler, and now under Biden, it’s coming again. There are whole museums devoted to Hitler’s weapons sales.

                Or!

                I know… some of the holocaust survivors who were alive in 2016 had these sort of chilling interviews where they talked about the eerie similarities between Biden and Hitler and how they really hoped people would realize how important it was not to vote for Biden. They didn’t really put a lot of attention into who his opponent was, because they said that’s not the point.


                Take your pick, this one is a choose your own adventure

                • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  15
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  Wheres your red line between directly causing 6 million deaths and heavily funding and even sending airplanes to people who have killed 20k women and children. Because if one thinks its only genocide if you’re directly ordering the death of 6 million, you’re going to miss a lot of genocides that are clearly happening.

                  How about Russia and Ukraine? By the tone of your comment Id asusme that wouldn’t qualify to you either. So how far is to far? Or it is literally anything less than 6 million isn’t it?

  • BrotherL0v3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    Maybe not the best decision in the world.

    HOWEVER:

    1. Many DSA folks (at least in my local branch) are not happy with many of national’s decisions lately.

    2. Fuck you if you’re looking down your nose at the DSA while the extent of your political involvement is only just voting every once in a while.

    This was a tactical misstep, sure. But my local DSA is still out there showing up for protests and strikes and unions. They’re getting bills passed in through the city council and getting open socialists elected. If the DSA is the only leftist group near you and you let this blunder stop you from doing any real activism, you’re guilty of the exact same purity testing bullshit.

    • Ion@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      100 percent this. My local DSA chapter is often the only group showing up to school board meetings to pressure a vote that would protect LGBTQ+ kids from discriminatory and harmful legislation. We do mutual aid regularly to serve our homeless community. We organize rallies in support of unions, Palestinian liberation, healthcare access, etc. We network with other local non profits and engage in events that directly benefit the community like creating care packages for women (and girls) seeking abortion access. We have working groups for environmental restoration work. The list goes on.

      We have other political action groups in the area for both major parties. Wanna guess how involved they are with the most marginalized and underserved communities in the area?

      People need to log off social media once in awhile and actually work in their community before posting empty platitudes to an echo chamber.

  • Suavevillain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t understand the DSA’s purpose if it is just to funnel people into the Dem party. Their views will never line up with the corporate party.

    • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is the contradiction of capitalist reformation. While we organize, it’s purpose is to assert socialist interests into mainstream politics, while gauging support for socialist ideas.

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      They’re there to undermine progressives by pretending to be them. It’s a way of taking over and deflecting the movement.

      An example would be when Shontel Brown beat Nina Turner in Ohio. Brown took money from Republican donors and corporations, yet she got endorsed by “progressive” groups to help her against Turner, who is an actual grass-roots funded progressive.

      Same with Mondaire Jones backstabbing Jamaal Bowman (who had defended Jones in the past when he was under attack by the establishment).

      This is how Democrats try to co-opt what they can’t control, and why it’s critically important that voters make it a habit to monitor their candidates funding. The money will always tell the true story.

      (Opensecrets.org is a great resource for tracking what groups politicians get their money from)

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    239
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    2 months ago

    If you’re getting angry at Bernie and AOC, you’re probably on the wrong side of an issue

    • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      2 months ago

      The DSA are actually fucking brain dead. They have been on the wrong side of everything for at least a decade. They simped for all the dictators, tyrannical regimes, and terrorist groups. They’ve gone out of their way to hurt the Democrats in elections, while stimulations helping the Republicans. They’ve always adopted brain dead stances for domestic issues and endorsed disgusting ideologies that makes them repulsive to most people. They’re a tumor to the left that needs to be removed.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      94
      ·
      2 months ago

      Politics shouldnt be a matter of picking a team/ idol and supporting them blindly.

      If a politician you formerly supported does something stupid, like how both Bernie and AOC have done recently, you aren’t obligated to support them. You can and should rescind your support if they do something you disagree with. Both Bernie and AOC could be much much stronger on Gaza, and frankly, especially AOC has basically backstabbed/ abandoned the movement that got her into power. She’s got “star power” at this point, where “cheer leaders” are just going to support her regardless of her policies or effectiveness. Its sad, but its how modern politics works. You start on the outside, work your way in, and then abandon those who put you into power initially.

      There is no way the squad gets elected without Our Revolution/ Justice Democrats/ DSA, then venn diagram of which is pretty fucking overlapping. All of the squad minus Omar and Ro Khanna basically stopped taking any calls from progressives once we put Biden in office in 2020.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        53
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        2 months ago

        Both Bernie and AOC could be much much stronger on Gaza, and frankly, especially AOC has basically backstabbed/ abandoned the movement that got her into power

        • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          65
          ·
          2 months ago

          AOC and Bernie basically stopped going on progressive media post 2020.

          Ro Khanna and Ilhan Omar still do. There is a wide chasm growing among progressives: Those who still need the grass roots and those who dont. Once AOC started playing ball (under Pelosi), she no longer had to be worried about getting primaried by the DCCC, which is the sword the DNC uses to kill grass-roots campaigns.

          There has been a literal war against progressives within the DNC. AOC was neutered and is no longer a threat.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        87
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        What you’re saying doesn’t reflect reality.

        Sanders and AOC are incredibly active progressive politicians.

        AOC just introduced articles of impeachment against supreme Court Justices.

      • 14th_cylon@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You can and should rescind your support if they do something you disagree with

        that is childish.

        how many important questions are there to define your worldview?

        • do you support israel in the war? - yes/no
        • do you support abortion? - yes/no

        there is about 8 billion people in the world right now.

        log2(8billion) is roughly 32.9.

        2 to the power of 33 is roughly 8.6 billion. that is 8.6 billion different combinations formed by these 33 binary questions.

        that is for whole world; for usa with population of 350m the magic number is 29 questions (behold the power of exponential function 😆)

        in other words - if there is more than 33 binary questions to define your approach to world - there is statistically not a single other person in the world that would share your worldview completely (that is as long as the various worldviews are distributed evenly, which is probably not the case, but lets simplify here).

        that is why, if you want to find a common ground with someone, you sometimes have to compromise (as every person who has ever been married tells you).

        otherwise you will just end up alone and that is not strong negotiating position to change the world.

    • Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      I may be dumb, but I actually trust those two, unlike every other politician, I feel like if they are making strange decisions they must know something we don’t…

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        They’ve certainly built up the benefit of the doubt, especially Bernie.

        Their conduct behooves anyone to look into and fully understand what they’re doing before decrying them for a single act they instinctually might disagree with.

        Especially a criticism like “haven’t done enough”.

        I can’t imagine any “haven’t done enough” that overturns all of the very important work either of them have done or are doing.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      2 months ago

      Fuck that, AOC voted to protect the rail corporations from the unions striking.

      I’m just surprised that wasn’t the reason she has lost the support of the DSA.

  • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Maybe take the time to read the DSA statement on this endorsement before reading this comment chain and forming opinions.

    In the last several months, thousands of DSA members provided input about the prospect of a national endorsement through town halls, meetings, and engaging in their chapters’ discussions, and AOC was invited to speak at a member forum. Many members have supported national endorsement while at the same time demanding that AOC demonstrate a higher level of commitment to Palestinian liberation, self-determination, and the immediate end to the heinous genocide in Gaza committed by Israel that aligns with DSA’s positions and expectations of socialists in office.

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes. This wasn’t a knee jerk snap decision. It happened after much discussion and deliberation. And the NY chapter, the most prominent, continues to endorse her.