deleted by creator

They certainly are, I agree! But they’re cowards.

Republicans only want to fight the weakest opponents, in rigged matches, and they still gotta cheat. Even a little resistance, when we stand together, dissolves their cotton candy confidence.

I was lucky enough to see a small piece of what that kind of resistance looks like on Sunday after canvassing. The organizers did us a solid and got us into a rally in queens that was packed. The energy was really encouraging, especially seeing all the other volunteers and various groups that are actually showing up, to help and to fight. It mirrors a lot of the grassroots movements and community building popping up in many cities and towns across the country.

It’s encouraging because it illustrates victory directly. Standing up for each other in spite of those threats of violence is courage, and historically that’s the strongest “antifa weapon” we know, because fascism can only lose wherever courage remains.

deleted by creator

But there will be something, correct? Some fight, some resistance. Assuming you’re not planning on giving up that is.

And you can call the stubborn cunts of that resistance whatever you like, but good money’s on something with a lot of high-value name recognition like, I dunno, “democrats” or something.

Old dems are ded dude. They didn’t do anything before and that was their MO … true.

But the reason they will do nothing about it in the future is that they’re ghosts, electoral echoes of cynical centrist complacency.

The new dems will be different simply because they clearly must be different to even win votes.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

“Naughty corporations” made me chuckle, but “I don’t know what the solution is” definitely rang true.

Most boomers actually don’t know where to begin, even though many of the solutions would be a 6-year-old’s first guess, and are actually proven to work, simply because they grew up being told that every single one of those obvious, proven solutions were “socialist” and that socialism was anti-American.

That indoctrination was so thorough that these solutions can be put right in front of them, gift-wrapped, with a neon arrow pointing at an easy button labeled “fix that shit,” and they’ll still shrug and say “we’re all out of ideas, maybe ask a billionaire what to do, surely they know how to fix the system.”

And the sad part is that they do and, in fact, already did.

I will be voting, and all my neighbors, family, and friends will too. I wonder how many ballots they can manage to lose?

1. Public protests express implicit power.
They are a threat, demonstrating to those in power the magnitude of what is to come.

2. Public protests increase participation.
They express a promise to current and future participants that they have comrades who will show up, stand beside them, hold the line, and expect the same in return.

3. Public protests increase organization.
Onsite and post-event recruitment is not only the primary means of increasing participation, it remains the most organic and hard-to-digitally-replicate method of expanding organizational efforts on account of network effects.

4. Public protests are grounded.
They represent a ground truth condition that anyone can see for themselves. There are numerous effective strategies for obscuring, sandbagging, or sabotaging public campaigns conducted exclusively on digital networks and platforms, but it is next to impossible to conceal public displays of flesh-and-blood human beings collecting en masse.

E: removed fifth item to avoid frightening people

Fuck this country.

Counterpoint: the US is a fixer-upper democracy worth restoring… then consensually fucking for the enjoyment of all those involved.

Public protests are critically important building blocks for resistance. Here are just a few reasons:

1. Public protests express implicit power.
They are a threat, demonstrating to those in power the magnitude of what is to come.

2. Public protests increase participation.
They express a promise to current and future participants that they have comrades who will show up, stand beside them, hold the line, and expect the same in return.

3. Public protests increase organization.
Onsite and post-event recruitment is not only the primary means of increasing participation, it remains the most organic and hard-to-digitally-replicate method of expanding organizational efforts on account of network effects.

4. Public protests are grounded.
They represent a ground truth condition that anyone can see for themselves. There are numerous effective strategies for obscuring, sandbagging, or sabotaging public campaigns conducted exclusively on digital networks and platforms, but it is next to impossible to conceal public displays of flesh-and-blood human beings collecting en masse.

E: removed fifth item to avoid misrepresenting actual risk of authoritarian violence, which is expected to be low in most places, and thus discouraging those who might otherwise attend.

Since a bunch of dubious comments here are arguing for a general strike instead of tomorrow’s protest, I’m addressing them all together.

While theory generally supports the idea that general strikes, executed successfully, are the greatest explicit power, the huge caveat is that their effectiveness is directly proportional to organized participation among the rank and file. This leads directly to a few historically important corollaries:

0. A premature general strike is worse than no general strike.
Unlike protest events the general strike has no end date. It tests the reliability of mutual support networks and reserves of collective trust. When a general strike fails, the next attempt is twice as difficult.

1. Public protests express implicit power.
They are a threat, demonstrating to those in power the magnitude of what is to come.

2. Public protests increase participation.
They express a promise to current and future participants that they have comrades who will show up, stand beside them, hold the line, and expect the same in return.

3. Public protests increase organization.
Onsite and post-event recruitment is not only the primary means of increasing participation, it remains the most organic and hard-to-digitally-replicate method of expanding organizational efforts on account of network effects.

4. Public protests are grounded.
They represent a ground truth condition that anyone can see for themselves. There are numerous effective strategies for obscuring, sandbagging, or sabotaging public campaigns conducted exclusively on digital networks and platforms, but it is next to impossible to conceal public displays of flesh-and-blood human beings collecting en masse.

5. Public protests invite public demonstrations of authoritarian violence.
Note that I don’t mean incite an increase of violence, but that the violence which would be used regardless, must instead be executed in the cold light of day, out in the open, likely on camera. The recent photo of the pastor, mid-prayer, being shot in the face by laughing federal ICE troops would not exist if no one showed up that day.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

PSA for new folks: please don’t feed the troll in this thread.

deleted by creator

Clearly they’re not referring to that type of wealth.

This straw man is favored by conservatives, so to be clear: On the left when we refer to the problem of “generational wealth” we typically aren’t concerned with pedestrian forms of inheritance like a family farm, a house, leftover retirement savings, and so forth. We have in mind the kind of dynastic inheritance that far exceeds the surplus of many lifetimes of labor, since it begets our current crop of billionaire global elites, individuals completely detached from the experience of their fellow man yet powerful enough to control markets and topple democracies.

We can quibble over where to draw that line, but deliberately misinterpreting someone to inject a leftist idea is not how we win anyone over.

Right, OP refers to LCD, which is the older tech that works by selective occlusion.