How much time? Ideally none. But the real world isn’t idealistic, and breaking more shit because you can’t have what you want right now is what petulant children do.
I’m not defending the establishment Dems’ inaction, but I am cautioning against setting unrealistic expectations. Even if you vote out all the republicans and replace all the democrats with progressives, it will still take time to fix things.
And people’s ignorance about this fact is a key part of the republican strategy that keeps getting them reelected every other election cycle. They always break shit on their way out, leaving a mess for their successors to clean up, and they blame it all on the democrats in office after them.
So promoting this idea that you can fix everything overnight is only helping the republicans.
Incrementalism is a tool of fascism to prevent progress.
No, incrementalism is a necessary reality. The reason it doesn’t work is partly because the right people aren’t in office to implement it, and partly because when the right people are in office they don’t have enough time in office to implement it fully.
Get someone with the right intentions in office (a progressive), and give them enough time (at least two terms), with a congress that supports their agenda, and you’ll see incrementalism work as it’s intended.
Or you can complain that you can’t have everything you want immediately, and attack anyone who doesn’t give you everything you want right now, and when they never get into office for long enough with enough congressional support because nobody can pass your purity test, you’ll have plenty to complain about when literally nothing good gets done because you categorically rejected the idea of incrementalism.
California has a bulletproof Democrat supermajority and does not have livable wages, universal healthcare, affordable housing, affordable COL. So the argument that Democrats need more time Is verifiably false
Did I ever claim establishment Dems are willing to put in the necessary changes to move progress forward? Because California Dems are about as establishment/corporatist as you can freaking get.
I never said “give establishment Dems another chance.” I said “fixing things takes time,” and that will still apply even if you oust all the establishment Dems and replace them with progressives.
Please take your strawman argument somewhere else if you’re not going to actually read what I wrote and respond to that.
So you believe that electing more progressive candidates within the party that operating exactly as designed is gonna change things? Any new politician that is deemed a threat to the status quo will never be placed into positions of power or influence that can threaten the existence of the status quo.
Do you not know how political systems work? Change the people holding the levers of power and you change the agenda that guides their policies.
Yeah, if you vote in enough progressive Dems then they can oust Schumer and Jeffries and replace them with people like Bernie and AOC. That’s how this entire system works and what it’s predicated on.
The reason that hasn’t happened yet is because progressives have as yet only been a minority within the party. There are signs that may change in the next few electoral cycles, but if you want to cry and break things like a petulant child because you don’t believe in incremental progress and can’t have everything you want right now, then don’t fucking complain when the broken system isn’t working the way that it should.
Incrementalism marches to the right, it always has. Liberals have claimed for decades they need more time, and everytime they are extended more they shift further to the right. Today’s Democrats are to the far right of 1980s Democrats
It’s okay, just keep not reading what I said and responding to points that I didn’t make. It’s fine, we don’t need to have a good faith discussion if you’re so intent on relying on strawman arguments.
And by the way:
Incrementalism marches to the right, it always has.
That’s demonstrably false. Emancipation was incremental progress. Voting rights were incremental progress. The Civil Rights Movement was incremental progress. None of those things were immediately perfect solutions, but they all made steps towards a more just system, and they all paved the way for further progress. That’s the definition of incrementalism.
Unless you want to argue that each one fixed everything perfectly as soon as it was implemented? If that were the case, then why would the ones that followed have been necessary? Or are you saying that the progress they achieved was actually marching towards the right? Because that would be as ridiculous as claiming that they achieved no progress at all simply because it wasn’t perfect.
How much time? Ideally none. But the real world isn’t idealistic, and breaking more shit because you can’t have what you want right now is what petulant children do.
I’m not defending the establishment Dems’ inaction, but I am cautioning against setting unrealistic expectations. Even if you vote out all the republicans and replace all the democrats with progressives, it will still take time to fix things.
And people’s ignorance about this fact is a key part of the republican strategy that keeps getting them reelected every other election cycle. They always break shit on their way out, leaving a mess for their successors to clean up, and they blame it all on the democrats in office after them.
So promoting this idea that you can fix everything overnight is only helping the republicans.
No, incrementalism is a necessary reality. The reason it doesn’t work is partly because the right people aren’t in office to implement it, and partly because when the right people are in office they don’t have enough time in office to implement it fully.
Get someone with the right intentions in office (a progressive), and give them enough time (at least two terms), with a congress that supports their agenda, and you’ll see incrementalism work as it’s intended.
Or you can complain that you can’t have everything you want immediately, and attack anyone who doesn’t give you everything you want right now, and when they never get into office for long enough with enough congressional support because nobody can pass your purity test, you’ll have plenty to complain about when literally nothing good gets done because you categorically rejected the idea of incrementalism.
California has a bulletproof Democrat supermajority and does not have livable wages, universal healthcare, affordable housing, affordable COL. So the argument that Democrats need more time Is verifiably false
Did I ever claim establishment Dems are willing to put in the necessary changes to move progress forward? Because California Dems are about as establishment/corporatist as you can freaking get.
I never said “give establishment Dems another chance.” I said “fixing things takes time,” and that will still apply even if you oust all the establishment Dems and replace them with progressives.
Please take your strawman argument somewhere else if you’re not going to actually read what I wrote and respond to that.
So you believe that electing more progressive candidates within the party that operating exactly as designed is gonna change things? Any new politician that is deemed a threat to the status quo will never be placed into positions of power or influence that can threaten the existence of the status quo.
Do you not know how political systems work? Change the people holding the levers of power and you change the agenda that guides their policies.
Yeah, if you vote in enough progressive Dems then they can oust Schumer and Jeffries and replace them with people like Bernie and AOC. That’s how this entire system works and what it’s predicated on.
The reason that hasn’t happened yet is because progressives have as yet only been a minority within the party. There are signs that may change in the next few electoral cycles, but if you want to cry and break things like a petulant child because you don’t believe in incremental progress and can’t have everything you want right now, then don’t fucking complain when the broken system isn’t working the way that it should.
Incrementalism marches to the right, it always has. Liberals have claimed for decades they need more time, and everytime they are extended more they shift further to the right. Today’s Democrats are to the far right of 1980s Democrats
It’s okay, just keep not reading what I said and responding to points that I didn’t make. It’s fine, we don’t need to have a good faith discussion if you’re so intent on relying on strawman arguments.
And by the way:
That’s demonstrably false. Emancipation was incremental progress. Voting rights were incremental progress. The Civil Rights Movement was incremental progress. None of those things were immediately perfect solutions, but they all made steps towards a more just system, and they all paved the way for further progress. That’s the definition of incrementalism.
Unless you want to argue that each one fixed everything perfectly as soon as it was implemented? If that were the case, then why would the ones that followed have been necessary? Or are you saying that the progress they achieved was actually marching towards the right? Because that would be as ridiculous as claiming that they achieved no progress at all simply because it wasn’t perfect.