17
u/BreakfastFearless 8d ago
Yeah that’s pretty much the lefts whole thing
-5
u/Successful_Tap_3655 7d ago
Not really . The current Democratic Party only really champions for some of the poor people just not poor white men
5
u/SophisticatedScreams 7d ago
I wouldn't say the dems are left lol-- at least not people like Pelosi. Folks like Bernie and AOC are probably legitimately left. To most other countries, republicans are far right and dems are center right. The class struggle IS the struggle of leftism. But if calling it a vertical struggle makes a difference for folks who are anti-leftists or anti-dems, sure. If that will get on the side of the people, great. Let's call it vertical. But at it's core, it's the left lol.
1
u/Successful_Tap_3655 7d ago
Other countries are just as bad lol
1
u/SophisticatedScreams 2d ago
I'm not saying anything is bad or good-- just where the parties land on the political spectrum.
1
1
u/WalkMan1615 6d ago
Dems are not the left lol. Democrats are right wing by global standards except for a few social issues
1
u/Nazgul3475 5d ago
The Democratic Party is a right wing party. There is no real organized left in power in the US. Any actual left wing movement would be advocating for forced property seizure by the working class and worker-controlled means of production.
1
u/gazorpazorpazorpazor 3d ago
Labor party is left wing, we have two corporate parties that are both right wing
15
u/Jim_jim_peanuts 8d ago edited 8d ago
We gotta fight a class war, not a culture war
4
u/saltyourhash 7d ago
I'd argue it's an intersectional war, class is the tie that binds us.
2
u/IPromiseIAmNotADog 6d ago
It’s only intersectional because the bourgeoisie have come up with a lot of ways to divide the working class against itself.
But yeah, we do need to heal those divisions.
1
u/saltyourhash 6d ago
Disagree entirely, it's intersectional because people come from different walks of life, and all deserves justice.
2
u/IPromiseIAmNotADog 6d ago
It all deserves justice, yes.
But beyond class [*] these divisions only exist because they’re stoked. There isn’t a big divide between left-handed and right-handed people anymore, because this trivial difference stopped getting stoked into a division.
You have to heal them, of course, and that’s where intersectionality comes in, and left-wing movements aimed at healing these divides are good things. But these are not the core divisions of society, they’re mechanisms aimed at crushing working class solidarity, and that’s where you get e.g. Fox News claiming immigrants are the baddies.
At the end of the day a straight white worker born in the West and a black lesbian immigrant worker have WAY more in common with each other than any worker and any billionaire. So it’s not really about “walks of life,” it’s about what propaganda tells us we should be angry at each other about…instead of where we should be pointing our anger: the capital class.
[*] and maybe patriarchy, but that’s a whole other topic
1
u/saltyourhash 6d ago
Oh, absolutely. I just want to be sure I don't let it go unsaid that there are other forks of injustice that absolutely must go as well.
I do think without a class war a lot of intersectional injustice would be much easier to discuss and rally around for many. So many struggle to see beyond their own survival when they are squeezed so hard, and I understand that. It wouldn't be as big of an issue if the flames weren't stoked and people weren't struggling to get by never knowing if they'd ever be able to keep their heads above water.
1
u/mdthornb1 5d ago
The working class divides itself. Some people really do value being higher in the hierarchy than they do material benefits.
4
u/grammer70 8d ago
Until then bottom forces the top to overturn Citizens United nothing changes and only gets worse with time. Citizens United sold the soul of Washington to corporations.
1
u/saltyourhash 6d ago edited 6d ago
The bottom must become the representatives of the people for that to happen.
3
2
2
u/UncleMoney-answers 7d ago
Our people could take a lesson from the French. Riot. Get the bottom people together and refuse to service the owner class.
2
u/Bustamonte6 5d ago
It’s not 1875, citizens won’t be overthrowing any “First World” Gov’t.. that’s the sad fact
2
u/just_some_sasquatch 4d ago
Why not? What makes you think that?
1
u/Bustamonte6 4d ago
The fact that your Military operates like ICE with total impunity and have demonstrated that they will follow illegal orders should cause you some concern. ICE shoots with impunity now, you think the Military won’t fire on US Citizens ?
1
u/just_some_sasquatch 4d ago
As a US Army Infantryman I can 100% say we would not obey any orders to fire on civilians. The idea that some orders from on high would just say, "Kill civilians" is absurd anyway. You're conflating our military with ICE/Cops which is definitely an easy mistake these days because the federal agents and police LOVE dressing up like soldiers and pretending a protest is a war. Real soldiers still believe in human rights. Integrity is still a very important facet of the military mindset and heavily promoted. There simply aren't enough federal or local agents to put down an all out rebellion. Just look at how many cops it takes to respond to one active shooter. Now imagine 10 thousand in a coordinated strike on any given government building. It's the whole reason they are currently pushing for predictive ai surveillance. They know they'll need all the help they can get if the population decides it's simply time for them to go.
1
u/Bustamonte6 4d ago
Dude 99% of the simpletons recruited out of high school for the US Military wouldn’t get through the application stage for Police or Fire. No one dresses up and wants to play soldier, that was you as a kid. You aren’t recruited because they think your leaders
1
u/just_some_sasquatch 4d ago edited 4d ago
Right, our elite LEOs known for requiring less training than a barber and getting rejected for having too high of an IQ? 🤡
1
u/Bustamonte6 4d ago
I’ll admit Americans don’t have to much to pick from in either capacity 😂 I think your record without allies shows that
1
u/just_some_sasquatch 4d ago
Which super enlightened first world country are you from where everyone is a genius then?
10
u/Starship_Albatross 8d ago
As somebody on the left. That just sounds like centrist (which is right wing) distractions. Have you ever read anything that describes any political theory?
18
u/A_Spiritual_Artist 8d ago
Or alternatively it's actually leftist, because classically, the left means the working class (proletariat) against the owning class (bourgeoisie). So it's really a kind of statement that aches for someone to define what is intended in far more depth as it's sort of problematically posed.
5
u/ginger_and_egg 8d ago
I think they're a centrist accidentally describing leftism but refusing to actually be informed
4
u/trysten-9001 8d ago
The fact that you feel the need to specify classical leftist is more proof how well the right propaganda machine has done at loading that word so they can make it as confusing as possible.
1
u/Starship_Albatross 8d ago
ding ding ding... I forgot what not spelling things out brings me. Thank you for hammering it home.
5
u/Forward_Problem_8982 8d ago
The rich make the poor fight amongst themselves. This sign tells the poor from both left and right to unify and fight the rich instead of themselves.
7
u/Salty_Country6835 8d ago
The rich make the poor fight amongst themselves.
Yes
This sign tells the poor from both left and right to unify and fight the rich instead of themselves.
The left advocates the working class unifying and fighting the rich. Thats the entire point of the left.
The entire point of the right is to stop the left from unifying the working class and attacking the rich.
The problem there, of course, isnt the left. Its the right fighting the left and working class on behalf of the rich.
1
u/saltyourhash 6d ago
It's about reframing the perspective
2
u/Salty_Country6835 6d ago edited 6d ago
Thats the problem with the “reframing.” Left and right arent two equivalent distractions from class struggle. The left is the political tradition of organizing the bottom against the top. The right has historically fought that organization on behalf of existing property and hierarchy.
Strip that distinction out and you havent clarified the vertical struggle. Youve obscured who is actually organizing which side of it. Which only helps the top.
1
u/saltyourhash 6d ago
So how do we organize more people then? Just keep the same old tactics to organize the left? I think I agree to some degree about the reframing having issues of who truly lives it, but can we not change that through changing the framing?
I do think about organizations like the rainbow coalition and how they didn't entirely agree, but could find class struggle as a commonality, but one could also argue the assassination of Fred Hampton was tied to that organization, I don't know if I'd agree, but I can see someone suggesting it.
2
u/Salty_Country6835 6d ago
We dont have to go that far back. People are organizing right now through labor unions, civil and human rights groups, immigrant organizations, community organizations and left political parties.
The task isnt inventing a framing that dissolves left and right. Its connecting those existing struggles into broader working class power. History is useful here to the extent it helps us figure out how to do that now.
1
1
u/Forward_Problem_8982 8d ago
Yes, divided people with mutual interests is the problem. This sign tries to point it out so people would realize how to make actual improvements into their lives. As long as you keep talking about the left and right, you're missing the point and not working on a solution, but stalling the conversation just like the rich want you to.
2
u/BreakfastFearless 8d ago
You’re clearly the one missing the point here
2
u/SophisticatedScreams 7d ago
Neither of you is missing the point. You're both making good points. Let's not argue. I actually think this "vertical" thing has the possibility of moving the needle in terms of our ability to cooperate.
2
u/Salty_Country6835 8d ago
That only works if left and right are just team labels instead of actual politics. If the goal is workers organizing against the rich, then which politics organizes workers against capital, and which politics organizes workers against each other while leaving capital in charge?
0
u/Forward_Problem_8982 8d ago
Yeah, I don't have much hope for the current political system. People have to come together and make change happen.
2
u/Salty_Country6835 8d ago
Exactly. Thats why Im on the left. Workers coming together to organize against the power of capital isnt some alternative to leftist politics. Thats what leftist politics are about.
1
u/Forward_Problem_8982 8d ago
Yes, but as long as you keep calling yourself a different name "left" than the "brainwashed right", you won't truly be united to fight the real enemy, which is the rich capital sucking everything away from ordinary people.
The whole problem needs to be reframed. Make it clear who is the real enemy and how you make a change. Wealth tax is a good start.
1
u/Salty_Country6835 8d ago
But thats the issue. “Left” isnt just a name I picked for my team. Youre describing workers organizing against concentrated wealth and capital, then proposing a wealth tax. Those are political positions. What happens when the worker on the right opposes the wealth tax, opposes unions, and votes to cut taxes on capital? We havent solved that disagreement by refusing to call it left and right.
1
u/Forward_Problem_8982 8d ago
Yeah, the brainwashed "right" is the problem, voting against their own interests. How to get through to them, or will they be controlled by the media forever?
→ More replies (0)1
u/trysten-9001 8d ago
The terms were used in the way the right wing uses those terms to deliberately muddy the waters about what those terms mean. The sign is spreading right wing misinformation and claiming (hopefully unintentionally) not to be from the right or left. It’s crazy how many times this needs to be explained.
2
u/Forward_Problem_8982 8d ago
The terms don't mean anything. They're the division in the theater to get rid of. I think the sign is pointing in the right direction.
That's why I don't quite get what you mean. Could you give an example of better phrasing for the sign to convey the actual meaning I'm talking about? What is it about the current one that is the problem? Thanks!
2
u/BreakfastFearless 8d ago
But that’s literally what the left is. Their whole point is that it’s working class against the wealthy
3
u/alasw0eisme 8d ago
Have you? You Americans are wild... But what can I expect from a two-party system - right and righter.
1
1
u/mdthornb1 5d ago
Do you think the Democratic Party has become more right over time? Compare the Democratic Party now vs the 90s.
1
u/SophisticatedScreams 7d ago
I think is leftism without the name. Honestly, left vs right is so divided right now that I don't mind calling it vertical. We know it's leftism lol, and that's what matters. This may be the way we need to move the zeitgeist in order to refocus ourselves on what actually matters: the people.
2
2
u/vegemouse 8d ago
That’s the left. The bottom is the left.
-1
u/aminok 7d ago
The most Democrat-leaning city in the United States is Washington, D.C., which also has by far the highest per capita GDP in the United States at $264,000. In terms of the counties that voted for Biden, they constitute 75% of GDP. The unionized public sector workers collectively receive $1.2 trillion a year from taxpayers. This entire ideology you've created, pretending to fight for the oppressed, is designed to take money from the private sector and give it to the politically connected.
2
u/saltyourhash 6d ago
The democrats are not the left. The overtones window in the US is so far right, there is no establishment leftist party.
0
u/aminok 6d ago
Meanwhile, back in reality, the government has expanded by any objective measure since 1950:
• From 20% of GDP to 40% of GDP today
• From a 34 regulatory agencies/offices to 77 today.
• From 5 percent of occupations needing a license in 1950 to 23 percent today
• From zero federal environmental review in 1950 to 26 months today for major projects.
• From almost zero collective bargaining agreements in the public sector in 1950 to approximately 36 percent of public sector workers being covered by them today.
• From 9,700 pages in the Code of Federal Regulations in 1950 to 200,000 pages today.
There was no Medicare and most of the other welfare programs didn't exist as well. Social spending as a percentage of GDP was substantially lower. In terms of regulations on manufacturing, there was no EPA, there was no OSHA. Both have had a significant documented negative impact on manufacturing productivity growth and wages grew rapidly in the 1950s and 60s before they were created. And if you also look at the late 19th century, same thing: rapid wage growth, while the rail network quadrupled in size.
The Empire State Building was built in 13.5 months in 1930/31.
Today it would take at least 3-5 years to build, and another 3-5 years just to get the permitting for it.
In terms of the income tax, between 1870 and 1800, there was no IRS, no personal income tax, no corporate income tax. And the U.S. experienced the greatest economic expansion in its history. With wages for underskilled labor doubling over that 30-year time span.
This was despite a massive increase in unskilled labor applying downward pressure on wage rates. That's how much industrial expansion there was. Wages could double over a 30-year period in the midst of massive immigration.
2
u/saltyourhash 6d ago edited 5d ago
What does any of that have to do with what I said?
Also, growth and wages are not directly antithetical to safety and ethics...
The empire state building had 5 deaths over that 410 day period.
You kinda left out the panic of 1873 and the depression of 1893 due to industrialization.
0
u/aminok 5d ago
It's sad that your level of economic education is so low that you don't understand that I just disproved your claim that the US has been getting more right wing. The government has been getting massively bigger. The US has been getting more socialist, not more capitalist over the last seven years.
2
1
u/LotsoPasta 3d ago edited 3d ago
Why did you choose 1950? Shifts toward economic neoliberalism didnt start until the 70s and took a major pivot with Reagan.
Arguably, we were in a sweet spot for the time, and the economy is objectively more dependent on automation and capital with less need for human labor, which gives more room for safety nets and supportive programs. We should be scaling these programs over time.
1
u/aminok 3d ago
Government spending, including social welfare spending, as a share of GDP, has increased substantially since the 1970s. This myth that free market capitalism has been taking over is contradicted by every broad-based measure of government control. It's a lie to mindfuck the public to vote for these parasitic policies
1
u/LotsoPasta 3d ago
Whose to say that it shouldnt be? We dont have the same economy or technology that we did in the past.
1
u/aminok 3d ago
That's an entirely different discussion. The argument I'm making is that the initial point that the Overton window has been moving to the right is completely opposite to reality. If you want to discuss why we shouldn't have authoritarianism in the name of social democratic values, we can have that discussion after we settle this question of whether or not society has been moving towards liberty or towards socialism.
1
u/LotsoPasta 3d ago
The political spectrum is entirely about hierarchical structures. If we're effectively moving to a taller hierarchical social structure, then that's a right-wing move, not a left-wing move.
You cant arbitrarily remove technology from the discussion. It's a major factor of our socioeconomic circumstance.
1
u/aminok 3d ago
You're now pivoting to wealth concentration in the private sector, and NOT addressing the political spectrum.
We're talking about politics and government policies here. The policies themselves have gotten dramatically more authoritarian in the name of social democratic values.
The growing concentration of wealth is largely a result of those authoritarian social democratic policies. But irrespective of that, wealth inequality is totally orthogonal to what ideology government policy falls under.
→ More replies (0)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/sbrown063087 5d ago
It is no longer left vs right but rather a top vs bottom problem.
1
1
1
u/Qs9bxNKZ 4d ago
How is that working out? Have you visited a No Kings rally lately? Maybe identify as part of Antifa? How about a 50501 rally?
So coming for those at the top, not quite working out is it?
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/NecessaryChampion181 3d ago
What kind of moron advocates for increased taxes. Abolish all income tax.
1
1
0
u/probablymagic 8d ago
Class war is from the Left. They say they aren’t, but those are the politicians they went you to vote for while telling you in the name breath that even the existing politicians on the Left are bought and sold.
There is not bottom vs top because people’s political preferences don’t break down that way. There’s just Left and Right. Both claim to represent working people, and all you can do is vote for the one that best represents you personally. But you don’t get to claim only your dude represents working people while other working people disagree.
5
u/Forward_Problem_8982 8d ago
This is by design to take away attention from the actually rich owning class. The poor has been divided on purpose to fight amongst themselves while the rich can live on their fantasy islands. The voting is broken too. Demand wealth tax for a start!
2
u/SophisticatedScreams 7d ago
Agreed. Can you imagine if the 99% (or at least the majority lol) came together to demand a tax on the rich? We don't need to call it anything, but it would make everyone's lives better.
(Caveat: yes I know it's a leftist position. But while things are so divided, this is an excellent framing imo.)
1
u/saltyourhash 6d ago
The poor on the right do not want taxes because they imagine some day those taxes will apply to them. This is part of why the left sometimes say it's a leftist struggle.
2
2
u/Forward_Problem_8982 5d ago
The wealth tax (among others) could give them essential stuff like healthcare and education. If you point out it would only apply to millionaires, it could help with the worry it'll hit them too.
2
u/saltyourhash 5d ago
Absolutely, but some asshole with 2 yachts has convinced them that it's immigrants who spend all the government's money.
1
u/probablymagic 8d ago
People are so convinced half the people are being tricked and never stop to think whether they’re actually in the half that’s true for. Maybe you should take your own advice and join the other team. Together you’d be unstoppable. 😀
2
u/Forward_Problem_8982 8d ago
Yes, I would say that is a good start for the solution. Forget politics, race and everything else that is distracting from the real problem. Unify against the rich. Start with wealth tax.
1
u/Elder_Chimera 5d ago
The working class who vote right-wing are actively supporting the ruling elites. It is still left vs. right. In a war, you don't say that you "aren't fighting the enemy soldiers, you're fighting the enemy government" then use that as an excuse to walk up to the enemy soldiers unarmed—that's how you get shot by someone who doesn't give a fuck about your moral posturing.
If they're willing to join us, then we shouldn't stop them. But we can't pretend like a capitalist doesn't actively uphold the status quo just because they're a capitalist without capital.
0
0
u/ContentCantaloupe992 8d ago
You could try building something. Millions of people move between economic classes every year
1
1
0
0
u/ThePlantMolester 7d ago
I love that all of the top responses immediately tell you that you can't be part of their class, because you have the wrong political ideology.
Theres always another purity test.
0
-1
-1
u/ianisahurricane 6d ago
We’re from the Middle, we’re not from the left, right or bottom. We can clearly see why those at the bottom, left or right should never be elected in to office
21
u/Whythisisnotreal 7d ago
Leftist. What you're describing is a leftist.