• merthyr1831@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    inb4 the “divided left” this article is referring to is actually a bunch of united socialists being told to suck it up and vote for a deeply unpopular ex-banker who barely scraped ahead of le pen the last time he and his paedophile wife were declared the “last hope” against fascism

  • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    One oft-leveled criticism was the heavy concentration of its electorate in certain social categories — present in large urban areas but far less so among other parts of the working class in towns and rural France. This issue is especially important given that Marine Le Pen’s far-right Rassemblement National has enjoyed real momentum in these areas

    Damn, it’s like there’s a common theme here with America’s failing to reach the working class in towns and rural America leaving the right strong and the left divided.

  • AmosBurton_ThatGuy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    ITT: leftists arguing with each other even if they probably agree on 90% of things. If you don’t pass the purity test then you’re just a shitlib and no better than a MAGAt according to a huge chunk of this place.

    The right doesn’t give a shit about purity, as long as they’re on the same team they’ll work together.

    For the record, I’m an NDP voter which is the left most party in Canada.

    • ZwoofBlaf@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      The probem is, leftists are the only ones who still have principles. The (especially extreme) right just tell the voters whatever they want to hear that day. Just blame it all on the immigrants and trans people, done. Of course they get on great together because they have no beliefs.

      Of course it is much harder to get in line when you actually believe in your talking points.

  • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is what certain “leftist” accelerationists are pushing for in the US, too.

    • cyr0catdrag0nz@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      IMHO, ur wrong. Liberalism is a curse everywhere. You can’t water down a good solution in politics. Give fascists a inch and you’ll give 'em a mile

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        You MUST make solutions that appeal to enough people to have a coalition. Refusal to negotiate on anything, and taking an all-or-nothing approach is what will fuck us all.

        Republicans have been strategic; it’s taken them nearly 40 years of work, but they’ve managed to throw out Roe v. Wade. They took a lot of small nibbles over time, fought the battle on a lot of fronts, and by dog, they eventually won. They’re also fighting this on public education, religion, and a hundred other fronts, and because they’re able to largely form working coalitions, they’re winning. (This latest House, with the Freedom Caucus, has been an exception rather than the rule.) The left needs to fucking learn this lesson, instead of each faction not giving a goddamned inch and fighting to the bitter end over everything. Fracturing and circular firing squads aren’t helping the left, they only help the right.

        • cyr0catdrag0nz@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          Lol ur so wrong and mad. Good solutions appeal to people when implemented- If the rich lived in fear, or better yet were eliminated -life WOULD be better for the rest of us. You sound like a steamroller pacifist.

          • jack@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            History is replete with examples of individuals who believed they could create a utopia by killing enough people. Of them, you’re not the most enlightened, just the latest.

              • jack@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                I think your primary motivation is violence, not progress. I don’t need to be a shill to recognize that.

                • cyr0catdrag0nz@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  No, thats the billionaires you’re thinking of again. And the conditions which uphold your likely quite cozy, insulated life and opinions.

          • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            You thinking a solution is good doesn’t mean everyone thinks the solution is good. Additionally, “rich” isn’t a single point, but a continuum, so the idea that you can eliminate the “rich” and make life good for the “non-rich” is ridiculous. Is someone that makes $75,000 a year “rich”? They certainly are to someone that makes $15,080 (full time, federal minimum wage), despite $75,000 being the median household income in the US.

            • cyr0catdrag0nz@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              Point went over your head. Good solutions will amaze when implemented and win over people who previously had doubts. By the rich I mean billionaires, not middle class folks who get taxed to shit bc the former won’t pay to make this country any better. Anybody who makes 75k a year is equally right around the corner to poverty by comparison, especially with the consumerist trappings of a american lifestyle factored in.

              • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                No, I understood what you were trying to say. But you’re not understanding me.

                You’re operating under the–likely false–assumption that there’s a single solution that will make all people (or, all the people that don’t fit your arbitrary definition of “rich”) happy once it’s implemented. Of course, how you get to implementation prior to everyone buying in to the idea is just skipped over, since that’s inconvenient. (If you only count billionaires as the rich, that’s a total of about 3200 globally out of 8.1B people, or .000039% of the global population. If you widen that definition to people that own $30M+ in assets and liquid wealth, you can widen that out to about .01% (note that this was as of 2017, so that number is quite out of date).

                This is where politics and building consensus comes in. Even on the left there’s not broad agreement on every policy point, or how to get to a particular place, and you’re going to need more than just “the left” to get any kind of proposals passed, unless you prefer an authoritarian-style of gov’t that uses force and violence rather than building consensus.

                • cyr0catdrag0nz@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I prefer no government but maybe that’s just me. People have simple NEEDS and they’ve been made to believe satisfying those is a lot more complicated than it is. Food, shelter and healthcare can all be distributed and managed, perhaps even more effiecently WITHOUT a strongly centralized power structure. which IMHO, are inherently anti-democratic and self-serving.

      • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Lol, what a perfect fucking example. This post is about left unity and not being able to get together despite agreeing 90% of the time. You start out calling everyone who doesn’t agree with you a lib and in the next fucking sentence you’re calling them fascists.

        • cyr0catdrag0nz@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Well imho, if ur not enabling radicals ur enabling fascists. The anthropocene is upon us. The time for debate is long past- I just call it like I see it.

  • index@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    5 months ago

    In France, and in the rest of the world “left” and “right” are two buzz words used for propaganda