So the big argument seems to be that the nebulously defined here “working class”, or rather people who explicitly consider themselves such, don’t want things that the GOP has been demonizing for decades?
This is just an argument for dems to be more right to appeal to Republican voters. One of the citations is a link to an essay written by the senior editor of the American conservative.
What a worthless article.
That’s how I interpreted this as well.
Either that, or it reads that working class Americans aren’t very good people.
I used to think that but have come to the conclusion in recent years that people act the way they do because their lives are genuinely terrible and there is no possibility of them becoming better because there is nowhere for them to go. For those with great motivation, great intelligence, or great connections, there are plenty of things to do. For the average person brought up in and living in an average way, though, there is nothing but generational pain.
Sadly, most people don’t have enough imagination to consider how things could be better for them or everyone.
For the average person brought up in and living in an average way, though, there is nothing but generational pain.
And despite this, they seem hell-bent on perpetuating said generational pain.
Well what do they have to lose? And maybe with accelerationism something will change for them. Theres more hope there than in limping the status quo along. I keep hearing people on lemmy say you are either voting Dem or voting republican and theres nothing in between. But not voting in an attempt to hold the dems hostage for once is a possible choice too, and its as calculated and strategic as lesser evili-sm is.
That’s the unironically saddest thing in life.
You could be correct with that. Certainly, what you say about there being nowhere for people to go in terms of life improvement certainly seems to be the case. I’m not even sure if intelligence or motivation is enough for some in the worst positions over there.
I just can’t see these gaps between left moving Democrats and Americans wanting better lives. I certainly, from the outside at least, don’t see a gap where the healthcare question is concerned. My scope here is limited; I’m restricted to what I see on socials plus general articles on the topic.
The article just doesn’t seem right, it seems constructed to produce a particular view.
It’s difficult to get a man to learn a lesson when his paycheck depends on him not learning it.
I think they do understand. They just are unwilling to acknowledge it because then they would be expected to change, which would upset the corpos and billionaires.
This is willful ignorance
Yeah, blame Democrats while 14 billionaires fund massive anti-intellect campaigns.
You mean those same billionaires who fund the democrats?
Yes
Who is it you think Democrats are taking money from to ignore our material needs?
The billionaires I just mentioned, stupid.
“For every working class democrat we lose, we’ll get 2 or 3 moderate republicans in the suburbs” -Chuck Schumer, 2016
We just had governor elections in California and not one candidate was picked by the democrats to lead the charge. They don’t care
Don’t get? More like don’t care
What a strange way to say everyone, politicians have lost touch with people due to the constant infighting and across the aisle bullshit along with the temptation of easy money and no one can take control of the monsters they created.
No leader.
Sure there is. He just happens to be pleasing the Epstein class enough that the centrists don’t have to do anything to sabatage the party.
What we need is a leader with a strong progressive message.
What was Trump’s strong progressive message in 2016?
I would add that we keep producing leaders with our values, but then they get shot down by the super rich people who are actually in charge. Which then results in no leader. :/
maybe thinking that working class and two-car garage families are the same thing might be a place to start
Almost every American is working class. Part of the problem is using “working class” to mean “blue collar workers and poor people”.
Hear hear. I have a white collar office job and make a good deal as a tech manager. I get a salary from my employer; therefore I am working class.
Absolutely.
If most of your income comes from selling your labor, you’re working class.
If most of your income comes from owning things, you’re owning class.
That’s it. It’s that simple. And yes, that means that in some cases, some working class people are actually wealthier than some owning class people. A movie star or star athlete or even a specialized surgeon might have more money than a small-time landlord, but they work for their money, while the landlord gets money simply from owning a few properties. The former is working class, the latter is owning class.
And no, there’s no such thing as ‘middle class’. That’s a lie made up to pacify people. The only other class is the underclass – people who have little or no income at all. Prisoners, the homeless, the institutionalized, etc.
How is a 2 car garage not working class exactly?
Its a terminally online attempt at shifting the overton window of what it means to be “working class”.
I’ve seen a similar attack on Platner, that because their mom owns a restaurant, that means they aren’t working class. Its a perspective utterly detached from reality.
This idea that anyone who has enough wealth to be above the poverty line is “not working class” and “an unreliable ally” is straight out of Stalinism and one I see pretty frequently in lefty circles. Have a house? A paid-off car? A business? You’re a filthy kulak.
Tankies are very susceptible to that, sure.
They often fall into the trap of seeing ‘working class’ as more of an aesthetic than as a way of relating to capital. Which is why they’ll fawn over construction workers and coal miners, but dismiss baristas and office workers.
that because their mom owns a restaurant, that means they aren’t working class
Eh … that one really depends.
Is it a literal mom-and-pop place where she actually does most of the work? Then maybe she’s working class.
But if she owns a restaurant staffed by employees, which she only visits occasionally and collects profits from … that’s not working class. The ‘own’ in that statement is the big giveaway there: owning class.
This is the exact terminally online, head-up-ones-own-ass, shit that I’m talking about. You truly don’t know what the fuck you are talking about and shouldn’t. Shit like this just handed almost ALL the California races to the worst possible Democrats.
You truly don’t know what the fuck you are talking about and shouldn’t.
Okay then, mister dingdong. Since you know so much: Spill it. Go ahead and explain why she is or isn’t working class. I’ll wait.
First and fucking foremost: Its not a question worth answering. What are their policies? Are the M4A? Are they for taxing the billionaires? Are they for public financing of elections. Those are questions that matter in an election. What is the candidates policies. Period.
You even bringing this up as an issue: You just a piggy piggy piggy hog eating up the class-destructive slop. Oink oink piggy.
How does she make her money? Does she do work to make that money or is her money primarily from investments of capital, not doing work? Owning a fucking business doesn’t make you a fucking capitalist. You have no FUCKING comprehension of who the capital class are. The problem isn’t just how fucking ignorant about the basics of capital and labor you are, its also the exceeding amount of damage you are doing to our best chances at actually changing the system.
The reality is that politics were never meant for the working class, and still aren’t for the working class. Its basically impossible for anyone without a sufficient social safety net to run for office. Graham Platner is as working class as they come. Period. Preposterously so. The fact that you even contend that, you’ve been a victim to a propaganda campaign and just ate it right the fuck up.
*capital
Policies do not make one working class.
One’s relation to capital does. If she makes her money by owning a restaurant, she’s owing class, not working class.
The reality is that politics were never meant for the working class, and still aren’t for the working class. Its basically impossible for anyone without a sufficient social safety net to run for office. Graham Platner is as working class as they come. Period.
So, in other words, not working class. Just like you said: politics were never meant for the working class, and still aren’t for the working class.
“As close as they come” doesn’t mean anything. Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
Maybe she’s still a good politician or a good person despite being owning class. But that doesn’t make her working class. Working class doesn’t mean ‘good people’ and it doesn’t mean ‘allies of the working class’. It means ‘people who work for a living’.
A lot of places have relatively cheap housing with two car garages which are owned by the working class.
Let’s not lose sight here. The enemy is the upper class (typically billionaires, but a lot of time this includes politicians), and they want the lower class divided and shitting on each other so that they can do whatever they want in the meantime.
Lol this dude definitely has a one-car garage
I’ve never had a garage
Sure 👍
Because stupid. My dog can choose correctly between 1 cookie and 2. These people either chose worse or just noped out.
damn, didn’t ANYBODY in the comments section bother to read the article?
Nope! Most all everyone just reacts to headlines and doesn’t even click through.
I guess I’m just a coastal elite, but I didn’t find the argument that Dems have tacked left and the electorate has stayed the same particularly compelling. The part about the working class identity was annoying — there’s so many people who want to think of themselves as some kind of merchant or artisan class that I don’t think really exists, and they would be much better off if they realized that if you live off the income you get from your work, you’re working class. Overall, I didn’t find the analysis persuasive.
Everybody who says the democrats - who are right wing by international standards - are too left are just lying.
I agree. The author presents a thesis that Democrats have tracked left, and then presents two issues where they have (abortion, job guarantees), one issue where they have returned to where they were in 1990 and the working class has tracked right (healthcare), and then just an identity question (liberal) which is not actually an issue. It’s far from a comprehensive data analysis.
The author misses out on a huge area where Democrats (and the left in general) have consistently gotten worse at: communication and persuasion. Part of this is the failure of the Democrats to identify, push, and promote charismatic candidates (find a single human being who feels more excited about left ideas after hearing Pelosi, Jeffries, or Schumer talk). The other big part is the concentration of media power in fewer organizations and more ideologically right owners. Even more, the party of the young whiffed on social media entirely which could have lessened the impact of the latter part.
I also disagreed, but I can’t coherently argue why, which is obviously a sign to reflect on my opinions.
One thing that stood out to me was the broad, encompassing usage of “left”. The author lumps together the theatrical leftism like this photo with political leftism like codified worker protections.
I did think he made an excellent point that “down with oligarchs!” isn’t going to resonate with a lot of working class people.
edit: I also think the author failed to acknowledge that conservative think tanks and media savvy have certainly influenced opinions and even the LANGUAGE used to discuss topics among all classes, so to imply that the working class hasn’t changed at all isn’t fair.
They do know, they don’t care.
They don’t care, their first and foremost goal is to serve capital at the expense of the working class.
Oh there you go bringing class into it again . . .
