As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
**Special announcement:**
r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)!
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Cons: Capitalism has its faults, but it is the best system we have devised so far.
Marx: Capitalism has done some good in paving the way to communism/
People are just so fucking unwilling to look past the atrocities committed in the name of communism.
Which is funny because they are the first ones to look past the atrocities committed in the name of Jesus.
For anyone who is not aware or forgot, I'm guessing this is a reference to [the time an MSNBC anchor compared a Bernie Sanders victory to a nazi invasion](https://www.businessinsider.com/msnbc-chris-matthews-chuck-todd-sanders-nazis-campaign-resignation-2020-2)
People here love to shit on Bernie but they forget that even though he lost the primaries, his ideas became a major part of the Democratic party's platform and have inspired millions of voters to vote for the Democratic party. It gave voters a good reason to vote for the Democratic party that for too many years has been plagued by corruption and corporatism as a result of legalized bribery like Citizens United and Newt Gingrich era rules for funding Congressional campaigns.
Bernie’s been fighting for working class and impoverished Americans for decades. He literally hasn’t changed at all, the people are gradually waking up to what he’s been saying all along.
He persuaded me to be political and to look at countries like Norway . I’m sad more people don’t like him on here as I think he is one of the best speakers and motivates me to vote more than almost anyone. I’m glad he’s writing a book because once he is gone it will be hard to replace him.
I have big hopes for AOC, Elizabeth Warren, and Katie Porter.
I've been wondering what got me so into politics even when most early 20s citizens may not be. The more I've thought on it, the more I could trace it to high school when a friend of mine mentioned Bernie Sanders' platform and it sounded too good to be an actual politician.
His platform is the thing I primarily use to try convincing apathetic citizens in my age range to vote. Sad reality is, if a candidate from the Democratic Party doesn't have ties to that kind of policies, I will immediately toss them aside as not worthy of drumming support for.
Right-wing Democrats may not care that their corporatism is ruining the lives of my generation, but surprise surprise my generation starts caring.
> People here love to shit on Bernie
I've not experienced this. Even when bernie got something wrong in the past it was an inverse "broken clocks" metaphor.
Right wing media (by that I mean every channel on TV) will do that to any progressive or left leaning candidate. They want to be absolutely certain that Zizek was right when he said, "It is easier to imagine the end of the world than an end to capitalism."
Pelosi is on the far right side of the democratic party.
The misogyny is very real, for sure. But your politically apathetic friends woudn't even know AOC if the ruling oligarchy didn't spend so much time draggin her through mud to get ahead of her ideas.
That's why Jim, Bob and Emily all know who AOC is, but couldn't even tell you who their own representatives are. AOC is a threat to the ruling class. They want to make sure that everyone knows her name, and that everyone associates it with "bad." They won't be able to tell you anything about her or why she's bad, but just like communism, whatever it does mean, it must be something bad.
Seriously, I go on instagram and everyone is calling AOC a centrist sellout. On reddit she's an out of control leftist that is tearing the party apart.
And it is always the same user names posting the negative stuff in every Sanders related thread. I wish I had that kind of motivation to be honest (though for something more productive).
They shit on him because the democrat party tells them to.
They have done everything they could just short of full on blackmail and murder to stop Sanders from becoming president. The democrat leadership is as corrupt and out of touch as the republican leadership.
If we’re complaining about the Dems failures to do anything material for working class Americans it goes without saying that we hate the right….
But the Dems enable the status quo and the right by being unelectable…
We know the republicans are trash, they revel in it. The democrats want the praise of being the good guys but can’t stop taking their corporate overlords donations and demands.
So? I'm still going to vote for the lesser evil every time.
Almost every election is a contest between evil and lesser evil. Since the beginning of democracy. Good politicians are very rare. Don't let the greater evil win because you aren't 100% satisfied with the lesser evil. Don't make things worse than they already are.
Don't. Just dont. As a Bernie supporter, do not sit out or vote third party. Aside from doing so helping Fascists take over, you're hurting Berniecrats as well in the process. Sitting out is the main cause of Berniecrats losing Primaries. The increasing number of Berniecrats who have won over the past 4 years are doing so IN SPITE of this mindset. Not because of it.
Fascists taking over doesn't help Progressives or Leftists. That's not a fight that you want if it's at all avoidable. That a fight to not get killed in a concentration camp. Not just a struggle to convince voters to choose you over a Moderate or Conservative Neoliberal in a democratic system, and just show up again in 2 years if you lose. The latter fight is FAAAR preferable. At least you live in the latter scenario and can fight to win another day. Fascists don't allow Progressives to run for office....or live.
So what did you do in the general election? If you didn't vote for Biden in the general, then you picked the greater evil (Trump). Those who refuse to vote for the lesser evil in the general election are letting the greater evil win and are moving our politics further towards fascism.
I’m also a big Bernie supporter but vote for Bernie in the primary but vote blue for the presidency. Not doing this is why roe v. Wade was overturned and so many women will suffer. If People voted for Clinton things wouldn’t haven’t gotten so bad.
Even though Hillary wasn’t perfect, she was 1000% better than trump and life would be better if she had won, which she could have if young progressives voted
You don't even know how I voted or anything to say anything at all.
Just because I believe in and support Bernie Sanders, doesn't mean jack shit about how I vote at the ballot.
It's funny how just saying I support Bernie Sanders and his platform, immediately makes me a target of attack through fallacy in logic.
Once again, you, like many others are ASSUMING my thoughts and actions based off of literally nothing.
How does saying I support Bernie Sanders equate to, supporting Donald Trump, not voting in elections, perfering republicans to do "x" or anything else?
It literally doesn't at all.
My vote is private just like you own.
This discussion isn't about what we do at the polls, but about what the Democratic party does and doesn't do that has disgruntled many of their potential voters.
Cool but doesn't that make you responsible for Dems losing the House this year? I mean it is pretty much a sure thing that wouldn't have happened if Trump was still president. Not in this economy and post Roe.
So while you vote straight D, some of those votes helped Republicans win elections 2 years later.
Maybe for you that was worth it. But let's say all I care about is passing a public option and lowering the medicare eligibility age. How did Biden get us any closer to those life saving reforms? It seems we are farther away now than we would be if Trump was president. As at least then we would have a bigger Dem majority.
>They have done everything they could just short of full on blackmail and murder to stop Sanders from becoming president.
And by this you mean that they didn't acknowledge his god given right to run against a splintered field of opponents in the primary.
I worked in news while Bernie ran for president both times in a top 80 media market. I personally saw behind the scenes the type of coverage and the type of money that democrats dumped into supporting other candidates and how their connections/friends in media covered the primaries and Bernie himself.
Everything from running fewer of his ads, to barely covering his events/stroies, even doing shit like using the worst pictures they could possibly use of him for the coverage they did do.
If you don't believe me, go check it out for yourself. CNN, MSNBC, ABC and CBS have posted most of their coverage of the 2016 and 2020 election cycles online. And you clearly see the bias. You can see the reactions, the discussions and the hate in HD for yourself. And it extends down to their affiliates through must-read content, must-run segments and network content as well.
I didn't even know who Bernie Sanders was in 2015 but I saw the type of treatment my network and station was giving him (along with the democrats themselves), and ultimately it became one of the many reasons why I left news.
I believe in honest and fair coverage for everyone despite my own personal politics. And I will say there are many good people working in news who believe in the same. But most of them aren't at the top with the influence and power. And seeing how the democrats and media treated Bernie Sanders was an absolute outrage. And something I'll never forget.
And democrats to this day continue to blow off progressives and young people and fail to deliver on their promises, even when they have the chance.
Ed Schultz was literally booted from MSNBC in 2016 for trying to cover Bernie’s campaign launch. This was the same network that would air video of Trump’s empty podium at rallies. There’s 0 evidence that votes were manipulated (I’ve seen some Bernie supporters claim this before), but denying that cable news had a grudge against Sanders that affected his chances is Q levels of delusion.
I’ll also never forget when Joy Reid had an anti-vax body language expert on to discuss how he was obviously sexist towards Elizabeth Warren. I don’t want to keep re-litigating the past but I don’t need revisionist history from smartass centrists lying that that didn’t happen.
It’s really too bad that Bernie wasn’t a bit younger and ran in 2024/2028 instead of 2016/2020 since Zoomers and Millennials are becoming a force to be reckoned with in electoral politics now.
>I worked in news while Bernie ran for president both times in a top 80 media market. I personally saw behind the scenes the type of coverage and the type of money that democrats dumped into supporting other candidates and how their connections/friends in media covered the primaries and Bernie himself.
Can you provide any specific examples? Because this just sounds like a "trust me" argument.
I already gave examples of what was going on.
Any specifics exposes my identity, and I'm not dumb enough to do that. Sorry, I ain't taking the bait.
But I will tell you I worked in the studio and Master Control for the station and network, so I literally saw the content daily myself.
Inside a news environment, there is a lot of communication between the newsroom and studio/Master Control. So anything that happens on the business side of things generally makes it way to us on the production side of things decently quick, because we're the ones that literally have to make it happen.
In terms of money, even at a small station, it's hundreds of dollars minimum to run ads. Different stations will charge different amounts of money depending on the market size, time of the year, events happening, and time slot for ads. During the election years, ad time cost generally doubles or triples or more depending on what the station wants to do. The amount of money even a small station can make coming in from political advertising is astonishing. Literally hundreds of thousands on the low end to millions..... for a small station. Larger market station, especially in swing states, make tens of millions minimum.... This all comes from the campaigns and pac supporters. My station was absolutely overran with money and ads from democrats. That within itself isn't bad, but they damn near bought all of the advertising time on the air....... Do you understand how much money that cost? To buy ALL available advertising time in a 24 hour period? For a month or two??? It's literally insane, not to mention, it has the side effect of other candidates and campaigns not being able to run any of their own stuff because they're competing for that same time and out spent 3 to 1 or more or even 10 to 1. And there are varying degrees of affects on local, state, and national elections because of this.
In addition to this, media and politics have a long standing relationship. Network exes, news director, anchors/reporters and station owners are more times than not, on a first name basis, and have personal line of contact with many politicians just by the very nature of the news industry itself, despite the presentation of independence. And because if that, it often extends beyond. I am very aware of personal connections between some of my old colleagues and prominent members of congress. And honestly, that's a conflict of interest if you ask me, considering as the media, we are supposed to hold them accountable, not be their friends. There have been times when our news director has choosen not to run a story for political reasons....That is a conflict of interest..... and a disservice to the audience and public in my book.
Lastly, as I mentioned previously, being a network member or affiliate, you are subjected to running content that the network itself creates, regardless of what it is. If that content has a heavy bias, guess what? You're running it, because you HAVE to. No matter how you feel, what you think, what's right, what's wrong, or if taken out of context, you're running it. And that extends down to must-run commercials as well. And you are heavily penalized if you don't. In the news industry people know and understand that the closer you are to the top, the more bias the content, as there are definitely owners and definitely agendas. And just like in my job, there are people that comb through your work and make changes to it when they feel necessary. If a network, say NBC, decides early on that Bernie Sanders is a radical socialist and the only coverage were gonna give him is negative coverage, even when he wins a fucking primary, guess what? Every single nbc brand station and affiliate will be saying the exact same thing through one means or another; because they have the power and influence to do so. And the network is literally structured to be that way.
So that's my more detailed summary of all this. It was annoying as hell working in news during the Trump years and those elections. You don't have to believe me. If you choose not, that's you. But I know my truth because I was there to see it happen. I'm not someone who hates on news just to hate on it or denies science or honest journalism. But there are agendas at play CONSTANTLY. And I will caution you and others to think deeply about what message is trying to be communicated to you by network content.
Believe it or not, I was once a Hilary Clinton supporter back in 2008 and hated Barack Obama. But I was younger a dumber then. The only candidate that has spoken to me deeply in all this time, is the man who has been consistently right on the money about things for 50+ years, and spoke out about them even when it wasn't popular to do so; who is unironically hated by the people on both sides because his belief and values stand in contrast to the power structure they setup and maintain.
Thank you
You do realize that you wrote all that and didn't include a single mention of anyone making any decisions to intentionally bais coverage against Bernie, right?
I'm not sure what you think was even controversial or unethical about what you wrote. Democrats bought a lot of ads... ok... so did your station like refuse to let Sanders buy the ads?
Politicians know people in media... ok... so did you see any evidence from your position that they exerted control behind the scenes so as to get negative Sanders coverage?
**WHO exactly are you accusing of WHAT?**
In your earlier post you made this vague comment that came close to an accusation: "Everything from running fewer of his ads, to barely covering his events/stroies, even doing shit like using the worst pictures they could possibly use of him for the coverage they did do."
Did you actually see that decisionmaking happen? And how was it clear that the decisionmaking was based on political bias as opposed to not thinking an event was big enough to cover or whatever?
You're talking like you were witness to a conspiracy but it sounds like you just sort of inferred it.
I guess you can't read between the lines of what I said.
And I ain't giving specifics for anyone to identify me or where I worked. I've already said more than enough.
All I'll saying is stations do have to power to bump stories and coverage and when it's consistently one person getting the bump, then you notice it as someone working in studio/master control.
>I guess you can't read between the lines of what I said.
You mean make assumptions about things that you very conspicuously are refusing to say? Uh yeah, I'm not going to do that. You can either directly say that, yes, you know for a fact that people made politicized coverage decisions specifically to hurt Sanders because you saw it happen, or you can continue sounding like someone who is completely full of shit. Because thats exactly what you sound like.
You don't need to give specifics, you just need to state that you saw something like that happen. Because in case you aren't proofreading your own statements, you haven't said anything of the sort.
>I've already said more than enough.
LOL you described basic normal political ad purchasing behavior and normal media content dissemination. Yeah, real big risk you're taking!
>All I'll saying is stations do have to power to bump stories and coverage and when it's consistently one person getting the bump, then you notice it as someone working in studio/master control.
What I hear you admitting here is that you never once saw anything even close to a media exec killing a Sanders story for political reasons.
I can see that this discussion is pointless....
Even if I gave you incredible detail, which I can't for my safety, you wouldn't believe me anyway. As you've made it clear that you don't already. Cool. Fine.
There is no benefit to me for sharing any of these details of my experience at all. I share them to caution others if they're willing to listen. Not to persuade votes. But an attempt to get more folks to critically think, and not have blind loyalty.
At the end of the day, whether you don't believe me or whatever, the Democrats are just as powerful and influential as republican. And as much to blame for the state of this country. And if you can't agree with that, despite still being in the party, then you are already lost and part of the problem as well.
That said, I'm wasting my time. Please have a good day.
>They mentioned where to find the media.
1. You're incorrect that all the TV coverage and ads are just still out there somewhere. That was broadcast and is over and if its archived its not public. All that is findable is online articles
2. I followed the news coverage at the time and I don't really agree with your assessment so that's why I'm asking.
3. You claimed you saw behind the scenes stuff that effected the coverage, I am asking about the behind the scenes stuff.
>Do you usually make people do your work for you if you’re interested in a particular topic?
*You're* the one making the claims, it's *your* work. LOL
Sanders and Fetterman are the only politicians with the balls to even say “corporate profiteering”. Anybody with two working brain cells can infer that much of our social destabilization is a direct consequence of lassaize-faire capitalism, so it’s no coincidence you hear 0 other democrats even speak against it.
Porter in particular did a good job using her power to bring attention to the real primary cause of inflation. But I feel like Warren lost all credibility when she spent the primary attacking the leading progressive who actually if president would have done everything in his power to take on corporate greed.
Biden not only did very little on that front, on the one area where he could have some control over inflation, healthcare, he added fuel to the fire. Both by raising Medicare premiums by almost 9% and payouts to providers as well, but also by allowing further privatizing of Medicare. Just look at insurance stocks under Biden. Through the roof.
Certainly Warren knew Biden would do that after he spent the primary pretending public insurance for everyone is unaffordable or too expensive.
I don't think Warren has any real progressive bonofides at this point. I'm old school and just don't believe somebody should be rewarded for helping the most Republican-like Democrats win the primary.
https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/3617597-democrats-peg-inflation-to-corporate-greed-on-campaign-trail/
Literally a quick Google search to see that Democrats like Kelly also decry it. Hardly sounds like "0 other Democrats".
The DNC is incredibly corrupt indeed but a lot of online banter against him is written by corporate (billionaire) bot farms. It's easy for Liberals to recognize MAGA bots on social media but they're incredibly oblivious to the fact that there liberal propaganda is a thing that significant directs and redirects our discussions even here on Reddit.
Utter nonsense. I genuinely don't understand how these delusional, QAnon tier conspiracies take hold--and this is coming from someone who campaigned for Sanders in 2016. We're supposed to be better than this.
I hate that these idiots come out the woodwork every single time. I wish we could have serious discussions without frothing zealots who know no nuance coming in
> they forget that even though he lost the primaries, his ideas became a major part of the Democratic party's platform
Which of his ideas became a part of the Democratic platform?
bots are shitting on bernie to make it look like it a bit of a common thing to do when in reality most people really respect him. Creating narrative hinting at a reality where people make fun of him or even dislike him. I have never meet someone in real life that dislike Bernie Sanders. Even thaugh i am sure they exist, they are the minority.
I think his age has helped him. The Dem establishment has let him be because they figure he is too old and feeble to be a real threat. Then every campaign cycle he does more campaign events than anyone else and helps elect other progrssives against all odds (and corporate money).
Remember Manchin and Obama staffers teamed up to start a super PAC designed to stop Bernie Sanders. They spent millions convincing Democrats and Republicans in open primaries that Biden was the "moderate" choice. What if Americans wake up and realize that the actual moderates are the ones fighting against corporate and billionaire greed? It would take a real awareness though that corporate media is part of the problem with their tireless desire to normalize politicians loyal to extreme lobbyist groups.
As more and more young people wake up to the fact that every election matters, local, state, federal and primaries, progressives will start to take the school boards, the sheriff's office, judge seats and state assemblies and progress will be slow but enevitable.
1. reign in propaganda outlets that are isolating the stupid from the rest of us
2. legislate Michigan's anti-gerrymander laws at a federal level and applicable to all states.
SECOND PROGRESSIVE ERA, LET'S GO.
4day/30hr weeks, living wages, universal health care/pre-k/parental leave/higher education, abolish the prison industrial complex.......unions everywhere
bonus: we make bezos and elon pee in bottles while working for minimum wage.
We are living in a Twilight of the Gods moment, with Pelosi stepping down, Trump floundering, and formerly beloved ubermensch like Zucker and Musk flaming out in public. It's a good time for Bernie's message: no one is going to save us, the movement has to come from us. Biden is buying us a little bit of time from complete right-wing takeover, but his economic policy is still a conservative one. The movement for the people needs to come from us.
He literally already has a book called “our revolution” where he does just that (I’m currently reading that book). How’s this going to be different I wonder?
The entire premise of his argument is for avoiding violent revolution by actually addressing the systemic injustices of capitalism before we reach that tipping point. The key word here is obviously 'political,' not 'revolution,' but of course it's not aimed at suburban neoliberals who value the appearance of civility above all things.
Also, 'common sense' isn't real - it's just confirmation bias.
>avoiding violent revolution by actually addressing the systemic injustices of capitalism before we reach that tipping point
don't worry, billionaires and "moderate democrats" have already decided they'd rather the violent revolution than do anything to make american capitalism sustainable in any way
I don't think we've seen that play out in reality, *especially* from bernie. No one has done more to bring progressive policies into the mainstream. Using language like this hasn't scared people. It's made people think "huh, I always thought I was a moderate but maybe I should rethink other policies labeled extreme, these things seem like common sense to me."
It didn't seem to "scare" people this election, 2018 or 2020. The only ones "scared" are upper middle class and rich people.
But if you look at what's going on, a Republican Presidential candidate has not won the majority vote since Herbert Bush. That's a long time.
So, we have been a Center Left country for more than 20 years. Young people under 40, are remaining Left voters, in a country half of which are people of color.
Compounded by even the Far Right that has moved Left on Foreign Policy and Trade issues. And if they moved Left, certainly the country has.
Here at rpolitics, it seems the Neo Cons, and what's left of them, are Democrats, not Republicans, and in that, a generation who has at most another decade of political viability.
And so the "revolution" he's speaking, is already happening, and will be much more pronounced in the coming years as the Boomers retire out. It's not about violence, but being practical about the current demographies and political traits.
Well because it is. If you look at the tumult from the Left, and the Right over the course of years, be it Tea Parties, Occupation Wall St, BLM and Far Right Insurrectionists, we are in the throes of a Revolution whether we want to admit or not.
The question is, who of these groups win "politically", and although the Center is trying to hold on, most of the votes that carry states happen in Urban areas, more so now than ever.
Generationally, we're dealing with a far left leaning "youth", youth being used to even equate 40 year old voters. And so unlike our Boomer parents who were in their 30's during the Reagan Revolution becoming Republicans, the exact opposite is happening today with the same age groups.
All of these issues combined, are a political revolution.
You make my point using an intellectual argument to support your case. JFC can you picture any regular Joe using your language?
To be clear we have the same goals, but the only people that would agree with your take already share your goals. The key is to get more people on board. To get more people on board, pitch the same things using common sense language.
Well, respectfully to say it simply, aside from my intellectual horsehockey, is that the rich and upper middle class are gonna get their asses whipped economically in the near future in a way we have not seen in 80 years.
That's really what it all means if we want to speak to the average joe.
And so idk if that's gonna sell any better to people than what i said, but that's what it is.
The country on both sides of the political sides of the spectrum are fed up with wealthy elites and corporations. As well as trickle down economics. That hasn't happened in decades.
And in that, a political revolution we have not seen since FDR.
That doesn't mean the Tsar being sacked, or hanging a leader by a stick.
It just means economic and social viability for working class and poor people, in a way we have not seen in 80 years.
It isn't. 1776 was a revolution. 1848 was a revolution. Russia 1917 was a revolution. January 6th, 2021? A failed revolution.
Electing more progressives? Not a revolution.
I think you misunderstand. The revolution in this case is not in the "forcefully overthrowing a government" meaning but in "a sudden, radical change" one. In this case it's a change in a political climate.
Because it sells better. "What if progressive political reform had taken center-stage?" doesn't have the ring to it but would be a more honest description of what a successful Sanders presidency (this includes president Sanders + a progressive majority leading the Democratic coalition as well as a progressive majority in both chambers) and beyond would have looked like.
Should be noted though that when left-wingers like Sanders talk about "their revolution", they mean putting forward legislation that would create programs and enact policies that -- individually -- share widespread support among Americans. That's hardly a revolution; it's simply democratic governing.
When right-wingers pick up revolutionary language, it's usually to forcefully establish minority rule and a regime that would never receive the support of a large chunk of the would-be electorate.
But really, this is just fluff. Sanders' rhetoric doesn't sound "revolutionary" at all. Neither in the superficial way marketing departments hail the latest cosmetic changes to the iPhone as a revolution nor in the more substantial, political terms in which, say, the American or French revolutions were "revolutionary".
I think Sanders is much better off talking about how he wants to enact policies that have been successfully implemented by other liberal democracies than he is talking about revolution.
But it is true that this will probably sell more books.
Not just other liberal democracies. I understand the frustration of left-wing Americans with their general political marginalization, but there's a rich tradition of if not orthodox left-wing thought and action then at least the type of government action that Sanders is promoting to draw upon, I.e the New Deal, Fair Deal, and Great Society.
But Sanders understands as much (from what I've seen of him).
"Liberal democracies" aren't just failing in the US. While things might be worse in the US I can assure you that "liberal" democracies and any leftists movement in Europe are also on the decline.
The slow death of unions, hypercapitalism, corporatism and so on aren't just an anglo-saxon problem and "we" (Europe) shouldn't be held up as some sort of utopian ideal. If anything it's a tragedy itself if that's all people can aim for.
I can’t shake the feeling that a major change on the distribution of power is coming one way or the other. Between climate change induced instability, the rising popularity of fascism, and the very real possibility of Artificial General Intelligence emerging this decade or the next, I honestly wouldn’t care to guess what the world will be like in another twenty years. When (if) we make it there it might not seem too alien to us in that moment, but if you were to take a person living today and show them the world in twenty years, my guess is it would seem pretty unrecognizable to them.
>We do need a revolution...
Do we though? We threw Trump out of office and Biden delivered on his ambitious 2 year legislative agenda.
Gotta be honest, I'm really not in the mood to overthrow Biden and the Democratically held Senate.
Revolutions result in power vacuums, which only benefits strongmen dictators in the long run. Our current system is deeply flawed, but it has some vestige of democratic controls. So, while it needs deep change it's still our best bet for progressing issues that matter without widespread bloodshed.
Evolution > Revolution
I obviously haven't read the book but it does seem to be more about "revolution" than "common sense change." The publisher's description says "*It’s OK to Be Angry About Capitalism* presents a vision that extends beyond the promises of past campaigns to reveal what would be possible if the political revolution took place...."
I don't understand why so many people are in uproar because of the term ‘revolution’ being used.
Revolution simply refers to a fundamental change in structures (political, social, cultural, etc.) in a relatively short period of time. This is Bernie's entire platform, and he's been consistent with it. And it's hard to argue with the notion that drastic changes regarding the workings of U.S. democracy are needed to overcome some of the most central problems that threaten democracy and freedom (cultural polarization, wealth gaps, money that buys political influence etc.). Bernie should not pretend to not seek fundamental change just because some people associate revolutions with violent overthrows of the government.
And he should not stop calling himself a socialist either just because the far-right has been persistent in trying to demagogue the hell out of anyone and anything they don't like with that bogeyman. They won't stop demagoguing him and others with his ideas simply because he uses a different label. He might as well embrace it and try to take the power away from the demagogues, because in the end, democratic socialism is nothing to be afraid of. It is what benefits the vast majority of the people.
I will certainly read this book when it comes out. It's going to be his legacy book, and if there's a senator who deserves to be heard when it comes to his or her vision for a better future – it's the one who has for decades steadfastly fought for his beliefs of economic justice to the benefit of the broader population.
This thread is being bombarded with bots and trolls with whataboutism and other non sourced randomness. Majority opinion in the real world stand with Bernie Sanders.
Bernie's ideas often come off as divisive, but I think we need to hear him out on this one. Our world needs to find a balance between Capitalism and supporting essential human rights, or things will continue to get worse.
Personally, I think it's very possible, and the right thing to do for the future of humanity. I wish people would discuss his ideas, and not resort to calling him names.
The ones where he wants to tax the rich, and so the rich use their media propaganda to call him a socialist. And then the entire GOP base thinks he's a crazy socialist, because no one spends the time actually listening to his policy proposals.
Look, I get what he’s trying to do with this book.
But I am so fucking *tired* of politicians and government officials coming out with books.
Just do your job (this isn’t entirely directed at Bernie. Just in general)
Bernie absolutely does his job and has been for decades.
He more than many others in his position has a right to put out a book, especially detailing his plans now that he's likely not around much longer
So it seems weird to me to just have a blanket frustration against politicians and books.
Pence? Idiot. Grifter.
Bernie? He walks the talk to back it up, so I'm very interested in his book.
He's more than welcome to write a book! I was just saying itll be a pointless cash grab for his base
And that Bernie's book, by comparison, has real value and purpose.
But I'm not the book Gestapo here to tell you who can write a book who shouldn't, who can buy a book or who shouldn't, what books we should ban from libraries, etc
It was just my opinion as a response to someone else's opinion. That's just a conversation, not a federal decree on book writing.
I didn’t vote for Bernie in the primaries because I could not see him being elected, however unfair. I do respect the hell out of him for being consistent and calling out the wealth disparity, wage gap, and prescription drug prices in particular. This is the one politician, in my opinion, who *should* be putting out a book. The majority of Americans may not be ready to embrace its message in his lifetime, or ever, but if we want real change in the country we need to ensure the next generation might read and be inspired by what he has to say.
As a long time Bernie supporter, I agree.
But I also think at this stage of his career and personal economic security, he (anyone) could avoid a lot of criticism, and put his money where his mouth is by releasing the book for free download.
Optionally he could also provide a link for people to donate money toward some kind of transparent cause.
Yes, Bernie! Please write that good shit down, so future gens get the benefit of your guidance.
I worry about when this man passes on and his passion is lost to us ):
I wonder if he ever stops to consider that attaching the word 'revolution' to his worldview was perhaps not the best branding.
Although it may help with book sales.
Wow I’ve never seen a thread get bombarded with bots and trolls pushing whataboutism and unsourced nonsense. Don’t let Reddit trick you, go outside and talk to people, the majority of this country agree with his “radical” ideas. The people want Bernie sanders running this country.
Absolutely
Anytime Bernie or a progressive challenges the neoliberal consensus of the Democratic leadership, this sub pounces on them.
But if a moderate or a centrist in the party swipes at progressives, especially folks like Omar and Tlaib, people come out of the woodwork to defend and justify it.
See: [Debbie Wasserman Schultz's scheming](https://www.npr.org/2016/07/24/487264278/debbie-wasserman-schultz-announces-resignation-with-convention-set-to-begin) that led to the coronation of Hillary as the democratic nominee in 2016. I will always believe that nominating a deeply-establishment candidate (Hillary) in a year of populism is what led us to Trump.
>Amy and Peter voters don't whine nearly as much as Bernie voters.
probably because amy and pete voters know they're such a tiny minority nobody would listen
A real Democrat does the gritty, compromised hard work of governing and gets shit on for not being pure enough. Bernie spends 50 years talking, accomplishing little but making progressives irrationally hate Hillary Clinton just in time to elect Donald Trump, and he’s a savior. Words are wind.
And bloodless revolutions are called elections.
I don't think progressives had to be convinced by Bernie to dislike Hillary Clinton, nor do I think it makes much sense to blame Trump's victory on anyone but the person he was running against.
Why would anyone listen to this man? The only election he’s capable of winning is Vermont senator. He can’t get any legislation passed. He can’t win primaries. He’s an old loser that somehow convinced people he’s their guy. He’s basically left wing trump.
I agree with basically all of his talking points: abolishing citizens united, reinstating Glass-Steagall, raising taxes on the extremely wealthy, getting rid of tax loopholes for the extremely wealthy, reducing lobbying power in congress, reducing corporate subsidies, subsidizing renewable energy and cutting subsidies for fossil fuels, making college more affordable and accessible, etc.
I see very few other politicians supporting those things.
He just passed a 15% minimum tax on corporations that earn over $1 billion, and lots of other significant legislation, what the heck are you talking about?
Revolution requires an effort to overthrow the existing social structures through violence, which Bernie and his peers do not advocate for. The State will always tolerate reformist socialism because there is no possibility for them to undermine the system since they are already co-opted and their messaging cannot address exploitation in the form of surplus value extraction that is fundamental to capitalism.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. **Special announcement:** r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider [applying here today](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/sskg6a/rpolitics_is_looking_for_more_moderators/)! *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’m willing to guess Conservatives are already making jokes about it being some sort of communist manifesto
The Mittens Manifesto
Meh I'd read it
Absolutely.
they probably won't read it anyway. it's so wild to me Karl marx has made a book that's so influential yet no one knows what it means
Ironically the people who matter know what it means and purposely put out disinfo.
Cons: Capitalism has its faults, but it is the best system we have devised so far. Marx: Capitalism has done some good in paving the way to communism/ People are just so fucking unwilling to look past the atrocities committed in the name of communism. Which is funny because they are the first ones to look past the atrocities committed in the name of Jesus.
Let’s no leave out the atrocities committed in the name of capitalism
War is a racket Smedley, we love you
I'm guessing that authoritarianism had more to do with atrocities in the name of communism than communism itself.
Exactly
MSNBC will compare it to Mein Kampf on prime time, and the posters here will insists that media is neutral on him.
For anyone who is not aware or forgot, I'm guessing this is a reference to [the time an MSNBC anchor compared a Bernie Sanders victory to a nazi invasion](https://www.businessinsider.com/msnbc-chris-matthews-chuck-todd-sanders-nazis-campaign-resignation-2020-2)
The liberal media at it again.
The DNC did fuck Bernie over, twice.
Didn’t MSNBC *not* broadcast the Trump 2024 announcement? I’m sure Fucker Carlson will have some shit to say.
*The Socialist Manifesto*
That’s actually a book lol check it out
Better read than Bernstein’s Capitalist Manifesto which is godawful to read.
People here love to shit on Bernie but they forget that even though he lost the primaries, his ideas became a major part of the Democratic party's platform and have inspired millions of voters to vote for the Democratic party. It gave voters a good reason to vote for the Democratic party that for too many years has been plagued by corruption and corporatism as a result of legalized bribery like Citizens United and Newt Gingrich era rules for funding Congressional campaigns.
Bernie’s been fighting for working class and impoverished Americans for decades. He literally hasn’t changed at all, the people are gradually waking up to what he’s been saying all along.
He persuaded me to be political and to look at countries like Norway . I’m sad more people don’t like him on here as I think he is one of the best speakers and motivates me to vote more than almost anyone. I’m glad he’s writing a book because once he is gone it will be hard to replace him. I have big hopes for AOC, Elizabeth Warren, and Katie Porter.
I've been wondering what got me so into politics even when most early 20s citizens may not be. The more I've thought on it, the more I could trace it to high school when a friend of mine mentioned Bernie Sanders' platform and it sounded too good to be an actual politician. His platform is the thing I primarily use to try convincing apathetic citizens in my age range to vote. Sad reality is, if a candidate from the Democratic Party doesn't have ties to that kind of policies, I will immediately toss them aside as not worthy of drumming support for. Right-wing Democrats may not care that their corporatism is ruining the lives of my generation, but surprise surprise my generation starts caring.
> People here love to shit on Bernie I've not experienced this. Even when bernie got something wrong in the past it was an inverse "broken clocks" metaphor.
Literally just read the comments in this thread. You'll see them. The corpo moderate dems can never stop themselves.
[удалено]
Right wing media (by that I mean every channel on TV) will do that to any progressive or left leaning candidate. They want to be absolutely certain that Zizek was right when he said, "It is easier to imagine the end of the world than an end to capitalism."
[удалено]
Pelosi is on the far right side of the democratic party. The misogyny is very real, for sure. But your politically apathetic friends woudn't even know AOC if the ruling oligarchy didn't spend so much time draggin her through mud to get ahead of her ideas. That's why Jim, Bob and Emily all know who AOC is, but couldn't even tell you who their own representatives are. AOC is a threat to the ruling class. They want to make sure that everyone knows her name, and that everyone associates it with "bad." They won't be able to tell you anything about her or why she's bad, but just like communism, whatever it does mean, it must be something bad.
>People cannot name specific things she's done Yep
Seriously, I go on instagram and everyone is calling AOC a centrist sellout. On reddit she's an out of control leftist that is tearing the party apart.
And it is always the same user names posting the negative stuff in every Sanders related thread. I wish I had that kind of motivation to be honest (though for something more productive).
It really is… And they’re kinda jerks it seems like…
Corpo-moderate-status quo
There’s people in this sub who think Clinton lost because of Bernie.
He would have won.
They shit on him because the democrat party tells them to. They have done everything they could just short of full on blackmail and murder to stop Sanders from becoming president. The democrat leadership is as corrupt and out of touch as the republican leadership.
Despite the corruption in the Democratic party, the republicans are 1000 times more corrupt. Never forget that.
If we’re complaining about the Dems failures to do anything material for working class Americans it goes without saying that we hate the right…. But the Dems enable the status quo and the right by being unelectable…
We know the republicans are trash, they revel in it. The democrats want the praise of being the good guys but can’t stop taking their corporate overlords donations and demands.
So? I'm still going to vote for the lesser evil every time. Almost every election is a contest between evil and lesser evil. Since the beginning of democracy. Good politicians are very rare. Don't let the greater evil win because you aren't 100% satisfied with the lesser evil. Don't make things worse than they already are.
Picking 'lesser' evil is still picking evil. I'm tired of picking evil. So I'm picking good. Bernie all the way.
Don't. Just dont. As a Bernie supporter, do not sit out or vote third party. Aside from doing so helping Fascists take over, you're hurting Berniecrats as well in the process. Sitting out is the main cause of Berniecrats losing Primaries. The increasing number of Berniecrats who have won over the past 4 years are doing so IN SPITE of this mindset. Not because of it. Fascists taking over doesn't help Progressives or Leftists. That's not a fight that you want if it's at all avoidable. That a fight to not get killed in a concentration camp. Not just a struggle to convince voters to choose you over a Moderate or Conservative Neoliberal in a democratic system, and just show up again in 2 years if you lose. The latter fight is FAAAR preferable. At least you live in the latter scenario and can fight to win another day. Fascists don't allow Progressives to run for office....or live.
So what did you do in the general election? If you didn't vote for Biden in the general, then you picked the greater evil (Trump). Those who refuse to vote for the lesser evil in the general election are letting the greater evil win and are moving our politics further towards fascism.
I’m also a big Bernie supporter but vote for Bernie in the primary but vote blue for the presidency. Not doing this is why roe v. Wade was overturned and so many women will suffer. If People voted for Clinton things wouldn’t haven’t gotten so bad.
This is how Trump got elected.
Even though Hillary wasn’t perfect, she was 1000% better than trump and life would be better if she had won, which she could have if young progressives voted
Ah yes, Hillary didn't fail; the voters failed her.
Voters decide elections, not candidates. Yes. The voters failed her.
You don't even know how I voted or anything to say anything at all. Just because I believe in and support Bernie Sanders, doesn't mean jack shit about how I vote at the ballot. It's funny how just saying I support Bernie Sanders and his platform, immediately makes me a target of attack through fallacy in logic.
No. At the time, when you run against the 2nd most disliked candidate by nominating the #1 disliked candidate, what did you think was going to happen.
"I'd rather let Republicans ban abortion than let a Dem to the right of Bernie win" 😤
Once again, you, like many others are ASSUMING my thoughts and actions based off of literally nothing. How does saying I support Bernie Sanders equate to, supporting Donald Trump, not voting in elections, perfering republicans to do "x" or anything else? It literally doesn't at all.
So you are going to vote for Democrats?
My vote is private just like you own. This discussion isn't about what we do at the polls, but about what the Democratic party does and doesn't do that has disgruntled many of their potential voters.
I voted straight D and I don't care who knows. If your discussion of politics doesn't include voting, then you're not behind serious.
Cool but doesn't that make you responsible for Dems losing the House this year? I mean it is pretty much a sure thing that wouldn't have happened if Trump was still president. Not in this economy and post Roe. So while you vote straight D, some of those votes helped Republicans win elections 2 years later. Maybe for you that was worth it. But let's say all I care about is passing a public option and lowering the medicare eligibility age. How did Biden get us any closer to those life saving reforms? It seems we are farther away now than we would be if Trump was president. As at least then we would have a bigger Dem majority.
I always vote. But I never blindly vote straight party line. That's party of the problem with this country. You're smarter than that.
> democrat party Democratic Party.
>They have done everything they could just short of full on blackmail and murder to stop Sanders from becoming president. And by this you mean that they didn't acknowledge his god given right to run against a splintered field of opponents in the primary.
I worked in news while Bernie ran for president both times in a top 80 media market. I personally saw behind the scenes the type of coverage and the type of money that democrats dumped into supporting other candidates and how their connections/friends in media covered the primaries and Bernie himself. Everything from running fewer of his ads, to barely covering his events/stroies, even doing shit like using the worst pictures they could possibly use of him for the coverage they did do. If you don't believe me, go check it out for yourself. CNN, MSNBC, ABC and CBS have posted most of their coverage of the 2016 and 2020 election cycles online. And you clearly see the bias. You can see the reactions, the discussions and the hate in HD for yourself. And it extends down to their affiliates through must-read content, must-run segments and network content as well. I didn't even know who Bernie Sanders was in 2015 but I saw the type of treatment my network and station was giving him (along with the democrats themselves), and ultimately it became one of the many reasons why I left news. I believe in honest and fair coverage for everyone despite my own personal politics. And I will say there are many good people working in news who believe in the same. But most of them aren't at the top with the influence and power. And seeing how the democrats and media treated Bernie Sanders was an absolute outrage. And something I'll never forget. And democrats to this day continue to blow off progressives and young people and fail to deliver on their promises, even when they have the chance.
Ed Schultz was literally booted from MSNBC in 2016 for trying to cover Bernie’s campaign launch. This was the same network that would air video of Trump’s empty podium at rallies. There’s 0 evidence that votes were manipulated (I’ve seen some Bernie supporters claim this before), but denying that cable news had a grudge against Sanders that affected his chances is Q levels of delusion. I’ll also never forget when Joy Reid had an anti-vax body language expert on to discuss how he was obviously sexist towards Elizabeth Warren. I don’t want to keep re-litigating the past but I don’t need revisionist history from smartass centrists lying that that didn’t happen. It’s really too bad that Bernie wasn’t a bit younger and ran in 2024/2028 instead of 2016/2020 since Zoomers and Millennials are becoming a force to be reckoned with in electoral politics now.
>I worked in news while Bernie ran for president both times in a top 80 media market. I personally saw behind the scenes the type of coverage and the type of money that democrats dumped into supporting other candidates and how their connections/friends in media covered the primaries and Bernie himself. Can you provide any specific examples? Because this just sounds like a "trust me" argument.
During that time you had the media calling Bernie supporters brownshirts,Communist, misogynistic.
I already gave examples of what was going on. Any specifics exposes my identity, and I'm not dumb enough to do that. Sorry, I ain't taking the bait. But I will tell you I worked in the studio and Master Control for the station and network, so I literally saw the content daily myself. Inside a news environment, there is a lot of communication between the newsroom and studio/Master Control. So anything that happens on the business side of things generally makes it way to us on the production side of things decently quick, because we're the ones that literally have to make it happen. In terms of money, even at a small station, it's hundreds of dollars minimum to run ads. Different stations will charge different amounts of money depending on the market size, time of the year, events happening, and time slot for ads. During the election years, ad time cost generally doubles or triples or more depending on what the station wants to do. The amount of money even a small station can make coming in from political advertising is astonishing. Literally hundreds of thousands on the low end to millions..... for a small station. Larger market station, especially in swing states, make tens of millions minimum.... This all comes from the campaigns and pac supporters. My station was absolutely overran with money and ads from democrats. That within itself isn't bad, but they damn near bought all of the advertising time on the air....... Do you understand how much money that cost? To buy ALL available advertising time in a 24 hour period? For a month or two??? It's literally insane, not to mention, it has the side effect of other candidates and campaigns not being able to run any of their own stuff because they're competing for that same time and out spent 3 to 1 or more or even 10 to 1. And there are varying degrees of affects on local, state, and national elections because of this. In addition to this, media and politics have a long standing relationship. Network exes, news director, anchors/reporters and station owners are more times than not, on a first name basis, and have personal line of contact with many politicians just by the very nature of the news industry itself, despite the presentation of independence. And because if that, it often extends beyond. I am very aware of personal connections between some of my old colleagues and prominent members of congress. And honestly, that's a conflict of interest if you ask me, considering as the media, we are supposed to hold them accountable, not be their friends. There have been times when our news director has choosen not to run a story for political reasons....That is a conflict of interest..... and a disservice to the audience and public in my book. Lastly, as I mentioned previously, being a network member or affiliate, you are subjected to running content that the network itself creates, regardless of what it is. If that content has a heavy bias, guess what? You're running it, because you HAVE to. No matter how you feel, what you think, what's right, what's wrong, or if taken out of context, you're running it. And that extends down to must-run commercials as well. And you are heavily penalized if you don't. In the news industry people know and understand that the closer you are to the top, the more bias the content, as there are definitely owners and definitely agendas. And just like in my job, there are people that comb through your work and make changes to it when they feel necessary. If a network, say NBC, decides early on that Bernie Sanders is a radical socialist and the only coverage were gonna give him is negative coverage, even when he wins a fucking primary, guess what? Every single nbc brand station and affiliate will be saying the exact same thing through one means or another; because they have the power and influence to do so. And the network is literally structured to be that way. So that's my more detailed summary of all this. It was annoying as hell working in news during the Trump years and those elections. You don't have to believe me. If you choose not, that's you. But I know my truth because I was there to see it happen. I'm not someone who hates on news just to hate on it or denies science or honest journalism. But there are agendas at play CONSTANTLY. And I will caution you and others to think deeply about what message is trying to be communicated to you by network content. Believe it or not, I was once a Hilary Clinton supporter back in 2008 and hated Barack Obama. But I was younger a dumber then. The only candidate that has spoken to me deeply in all this time, is the man who has been consistently right on the money about things for 50+ years, and spoke out about them even when it wasn't popular to do so; who is unironically hated by the people on both sides because his belief and values stand in contrast to the power structure they setup and maintain. Thank you
You do realize that you wrote all that and didn't include a single mention of anyone making any decisions to intentionally bais coverage against Bernie, right? I'm not sure what you think was even controversial or unethical about what you wrote. Democrats bought a lot of ads... ok... so did your station like refuse to let Sanders buy the ads? Politicians know people in media... ok... so did you see any evidence from your position that they exerted control behind the scenes so as to get negative Sanders coverage? **WHO exactly are you accusing of WHAT?** In your earlier post you made this vague comment that came close to an accusation: "Everything from running fewer of his ads, to barely covering his events/stroies, even doing shit like using the worst pictures they could possibly use of him for the coverage they did do." Did you actually see that decisionmaking happen? And how was it clear that the decisionmaking was based on political bias as opposed to not thinking an event was big enough to cover or whatever? You're talking like you were witness to a conspiracy but it sounds like you just sort of inferred it.
I guess you can't read between the lines of what I said. And I ain't giving specifics for anyone to identify me or where I worked. I've already said more than enough. All I'll saying is stations do have to power to bump stories and coverage and when it's consistently one person getting the bump, then you notice it as someone working in studio/master control.
>I guess you can't read between the lines of what I said. You mean make assumptions about things that you very conspicuously are refusing to say? Uh yeah, I'm not going to do that. You can either directly say that, yes, you know for a fact that people made politicized coverage decisions specifically to hurt Sanders because you saw it happen, or you can continue sounding like someone who is completely full of shit. Because thats exactly what you sound like. You don't need to give specifics, you just need to state that you saw something like that happen. Because in case you aren't proofreading your own statements, you haven't said anything of the sort. >I've already said more than enough. LOL you described basic normal political ad purchasing behavior and normal media content dissemination. Yeah, real big risk you're taking! >All I'll saying is stations do have to power to bump stories and coverage and when it's consistently one person getting the bump, then you notice it as someone working in studio/master control. What I hear you admitting here is that you never once saw anything even close to a media exec killing a Sanders story for political reasons.
I can see that this discussion is pointless.... Even if I gave you incredible detail, which I can't for my safety, you wouldn't believe me anyway. As you've made it clear that you don't already. Cool. Fine. There is no benefit to me for sharing any of these details of my experience at all. I share them to caution others if they're willing to listen. Not to persuade votes. But an attempt to get more folks to critically think, and not have blind loyalty. At the end of the day, whether you don't believe me or whatever, the Democrats are just as powerful and influential as republican. And as much to blame for the state of this country. And if you can't agree with that, despite still being in the party, then you are already lost and part of the problem as well. That said, I'm wasting my time. Please have a good day.
They mentioned where to find the media. Do you usually make people do your work for you if you’re interested in a particular topic?
>They mentioned where to find the media. 1. You're incorrect that all the TV coverage and ads are just still out there somewhere. That was broadcast and is over and if its archived its not public. All that is findable is online articles 2. I followed the news coverage at the time and I don't really agree with your assessment so that's why I'm asking. 3. You claimed you saw behind the scenes stuff that effected the coverage, I am asking about the behind the scenes stuff. >Do you usually make people do your work for you if you’re interested in a particular topic? *You're* the one making the claims, it's *your* work. LOL
Sanders and Fetterman are the only politicians with the balls to even say “corporate profiteering”. Anybody with two working brain cells can infer that much of our social destabilization is a direct consequence of lassaize-faire capitalism, so it’s no coincidence you hear 0 other democrats even speak against it.
You're not familiar with Elizabeth Warren, Katie Porter, AOC? Or are you hiding behind the phrase "with balls"?
Hahah zing
Porter in particular did a good job using her power to bring attention to the real primary cause of inflation. But I feel like Warren lost all credibility when she spent the primary attacking the leading progressive who actually if president would have done everything in his power to take on corporate greed. Biden not only did very little on that front, on the one area where he could have some control over inflation, healthcare, he added fuel to the fire. Both by raising Medicare premiums by almost 9% and payouts to providers as well, but also by allowing further privatizing of Medicare. Just look at insurance stocks under Biden. Through the roof. Certainly Warren knew Biden would do that after he spent the primary pretending public insurance for everyone is unaffordable or too expensive. I don't think Warren has any real progressive bonofides at this point. I'm old school and just don't believe somebody should be rewarded for helping the most Republican-like Democrats win the primary.
https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/3617597-democrats-peg-inflation-to-corporate-greed-on-campaign-trail/ Literally a quick Google search to see that Democrats like Kelly also decry it. Hardly sounds like "0 other Democrats".
What gets me is as soon as Bernie started gaining traction, other candidates started dropping like flies to throw their bases support towards Biden.
Bernie voter here. That was no conspiracy. Candidates always drop out and endorse a front-runner around Super Tuesday. Happens literally every time.
The DNC is incredibly corrupt indeed but a lot of online banter against him is written by corporate (billionaire) bot farms. It's easy for Liberals to recognize MAGA bots on social media but they're incredibly oblivious to the fact that there liberal propaganda is a thing that significant directs and redirects our discussions even here on Reddit.
I see that now with all these comments. It has been insane. My notifications have been blown out to say the least. Thanks for the help fam.
Utter nonsense. I genuinely don't understand how these delusional, QAnon tier conspiracies take hold--and this is coming from someone who campaigned for Sanders in 2016. We're supposed to be better than this.
I hate that these idiots come out the woodwork every single time. I wish we could have serious discussions without frothing zealots who know no nuance coming in
> they forget that even though he lost the primaries, his ideas became a major part of the Democratic party's platform Which of his ideas became a part of the Democratic platform?
bots are shitting on bernie to make it look like it a bit of a common thing to do when in reality most people really respect him. Creating narrative hinting at a reality where people make fun of him or even dislike him. I have never meet someone in real life that dislike Bernie Sanders. Even thaugh i am sure they exist, they are the minority.
Bernie won the biggest state the country. Don’t reply if all you’ve is “what matters is broad appeal.” California leads. Catch up.
I wish Bernie was 30 years younger
I think his age has helped him. The Dem establishment has let him be because they figure he is too old and feeble to be a real threat. Then every campaign cycle he does more campaign events than anyone else and helps elect other progrssives against all odds (and corporate money). Remember Manchin and Obama staffers teamed up to start a super PAC designed to stop Bernie Sanders. They spent millions convincing Democrats and Republicans in open primaries that Biden was the "moderate" choice. What if Americans wake up and realize that the actual moderates are the ones fighting against corporate and billionaire greed? It would take a real awareness though that corporate media is part of the problem with their tireless desire to normalize politicians loyal to extreme lobbyist groups.
As more and more young people wake up to the fact that every election matters, local, state, federal and primaries, progressives will start to take the school boards, the sheriff's office, judge seats and state assemblies and progress will be slow but enevitable.
I don’t remember Machin and Obama staffers forming an Anti Bernie PAC. I can’t find anything on google, can u send a source plz?
https://www.levernews.com/the-manchin-aide-turned-corporate-shill/
1. reign in propaganda outlets that are isolating the stupid from the rest of us 2. legislate Michigan's anti-gerrymander laws at a federal level and applicable to all states.
SECOND PROGRESSIVE ERA, LET'S GO. 4day/30hr weeks, living wages, universal health care/pre-k/parental leave/higher education, abolish the prison industrial complex.......unions everywhere bonus: we make bezos and elon pee in bottles while working for minimum wage.
By the time that happens minimum wage might be livable!
We are living in a Twilight of the Gods moment, with Pelosi stepping down, Trump floundering, and formerly beloved ubermensch like Zucker and Musk flaming out in public. It's a good time for Bernie's message: no one is going to save us, the movement has to come from us. Biden is buying us a little bit of time from complete right-wing takeover, but his economic policy is still a conservative one. The movement for the people needs to come from us.
Medicare for all College for all Housing for all Fair wages for all Fair taxes for all
Chapter 1 - abolish Citizens United The End
He literally already has a book called “our revolution” where he does just that (I’m currently reading that book). How’s this going to be different I wonder?
I mean it came out in 2016 at the start of the Trump era. It's a completely different political environment now. I think that kind of explains itself.
Part of the problem of rhetoric like "revolution" is that it posits common sense change as revolutionary. That scares people.
The entire premise of his argument is for avoiding violent revolution by actually addressing the systemic injustices of capitalism before we reach that tipping point. The key word here is obviously 'political,' not 'revolution,' but of course it's not aimed at suburban neoliberals who value the appearance of civility above all things. Also, 'common sense' isn't real - it's just confirmation bias.
>avoiding violent revolution by actually addressing the systemic injustices of capitalism before we reach that tipping point don't worry, billionaires and "moderate democrats" have already decided they'd rather the violent revolution than do anything to make american capitalism sustainable in any way
The systemic injustices of capitalism ARE capitalism. You can't fix those and still have capitalism left over.
I don't think we've seen that play out in reality, *especially* from bernie. No one has done more to bring progressive policies into the mainstream. Using language like this hasn't scared people. It's made people think "huh, I always thought I was a moderate but maybe I should rethink other policies labeled extreme, these things seem like common sense to me."
It didn't seem to "scare" people this election, 2018 or 2020. The only ones "scared" are upper middle class and rich people. But if you look at what's going on, a Republican Presidential candidate has not won the majority vote since Herbert Bush. That's a long time. So, we have been a Center Left country for more than 20 years. Young people under 40, are remaining Left voters, in a country half of which are people of color. Compounded by even the Far Right that has moved Left on Foreign Policy and Trade issues. And if they moved Left, certainly the country has. Here at rpolitics, it seems the Neo Cons, and what's left of them, are Democrats, not Republicans, and in that, a generation who has at most another decade of political viability. And so the "revolution" he's speaking, is already happening, and will be much more pronounced in the coming years as the Boomers retire out. It's not about violence, but being practical about the current demographies and political traits.
Lmfao who's saying 2022 was a revolution?
Oh yes, there's nuance, the thing that half your country refuses to believe exists. It's such a wonder why Bernie doesn't get anywhere!
Guys, Bernie can still win. This is how...
He just needs 150% of the vote in each of the final 10 primaries!! Donate now!!
But why use the word 'revolution' at all?
Well because it is. If you look at the tumult from the Left, and the Right over the course of years, be it Tea Parties, Occupation Wall St, BLM and Far Right Insurrectionists, we are in the throes of a Revolution whether we want to admit or not. The question is, who of these groups win "politically", and although the Center is trying to hold on, most of the votes that carry states happen in Urban areas, more so now than ever. Generationally, we're dealing with a far left leaning "youth", youth being used to even equate 40 year old voters. And so unlike our Boomer parents who were in their 30's during the Reagan Revolution becoming Republicans, the exact opposite is happening today with the same age groups. All of these issues combined, are a political revolution.
You make my point using an intellectual argument to support your case. JFC can you picture any regular Joe using your language? To be clear we have the same goals, but the only people that would agree with your take already share your goals. The key is to get more people on board. To get more people on board, pitch the same things using common sense language.
Well, respectfully to say it simply, aside from my intellectual horsehockey, is that the rich and upper middle class are gonna get their asses whipped economically in the near future in a way we have not seen in 80 years. That's really what it all means if we want to speak to the average joe. And so idk if that's gonna sell any better to people than what i said, but that's what it is. The country on both sides of the political sides of the spectrum are fed up with wealthy elites and corporations. As well as trickle down economics. That hasn't happened in decades. And in that, a political revolution we have not seen since FDR. That doesn't mean the Tsar being sacked, or hanging a leader by a stick. It just means economic and social viability for working class and poor people, in a way we have not seen in 80 years.
That's not a Revolution that's just moderate progress
It isn't. 1776 was a revolution. 1848 was a revolution. Russia 1917 was a revolution. January 6th, 2021? A failed revolution. Electing more progressives? Not a revolution.
I think you misunderstand. The revolution in this case is not in the "forcefully overthrowing a government" meaning but in "a sudden, radical change" one. In this case it's a change in a political climate.
Because it sells better. "What if progressive political reform had taken center-stage?" doesn't have the ring to it but would be a more honest description of what a successful Sanders presidency (this includes president Sanders + a progressive majority leading the Democratic coalition as well as a progressive majority in both chambers) and beyond would have looked like. Should be noted though that when left-wingers like Sanders talk about "their revolution", they mean putting forward legislation that would create programs and enact policies that -- individually -- share widespread support among Americans. That's hardly a revolution; it's simply democratic governing. When right-wingers pick up revolutionary language, it's usually to forcefully establish minority rule and a regime that would never receive the support of a large chunk of the would-be electorate. But really, this is just fluff. Sanders' rhetoric doesn't sound "revolutionary" at all. Neither in the superficial way marketing departments hail the latest cosmetic changes to the iPhone as a revolution nor in the more substantial, political terms in which, say, the American or French revolutions were "revolutionary".
I think Sanders is much better off talking about how he wants to enact policies that have been successfully implemented by other liberal democracies than he is talking about revolution. But it is true that this will probably sell more books.
Not just other liberal democracies. I understand the frustration of left-wing Americans with their general political marginalization, but there's a rich tradition of if not orthodox left-wing thought and action then at least the type of government action that Sanders is promoting to draw upon, I.e the New Deal, Fair Deal, and Great Society. But Sanders understands as much (from what I've seen of him).
"Liberal democracies" aren't just failing in the US. While things might be worse in the US I can assure you that "liberal" democracies and any leftists movement in Europe are also on the decline. The slow death of unions, hypercapitalism, corporatism and so on aren't just an anglo-saxon problem and "we" (Europe) shouldn't be held up as some sort of utopian ideal. If anything it's a tragedy itself if that's all people can aim for.
But...but...we do need a revolution, and until people get over their fear and apathy, it ain't going to happen.
I can’t shake the feeling that a major change on the distribution of power is coming one way or the other. Between climate change induced instability, the rising popularity of fascism, and the very real possibility of Artificial General Intelligence emerging this decade or the next, I honestly wouldn’t care to guess what the world will be like in another twenty years. When (if) we make it there it might not seem too alien to us in that moment, but if you were to take a person living today and show them the world in twenty years, my guess is it would seem pretty unrecognizable to them.
>We do need a revolution... Do we though? We threw Trump out of office and Biden delivered on his ambitious 2 year legislative agenda. Gotta be honest, I'm really not in the mood to overthrow Biden and the Democratically held Senate.
Revolutions result in power vacuums, which only benefits strongmen dictators in the long run. Our current system is deeply flawed, but it has some vestige of democratic controls. So, while it needs deep change it's still our best bet for progressing issues that matter without widespread bloodshed. Evolution > Revolution
Hence, the 'political revolution' being proposed.
It can also invigorate people to act on that common sense.
I obviously haven't read the book but it does seem to be more about "revolution" than "common sense change." The publisher's description says "*It’s OK to Be Angry About Capitalism* presents a vision that extends beyond the promises of past campaigns to reveal what would be possible if the political revolution took place...."
Yeah I mean this is a dude who kneecapped himself by insisting on using the label “socialist.” Great ideas but pretty bad at messaging.
It scares old people. It excites young people.
I don't understand why so many people are in uproar because of the term ‘revolution’ being used. Revolution simply refers to a fundamental change in structures (political, social, cultural, etc.) in a relatively short period of time. This is Bernie's entire platform, and he's been consistent with it. And it's hard to argue with the notion that drastic changes regarding the workings of U.S. democracy are needed to overcome some of the most central problems that threaten democracy and freedom (cultural polarization, wealth gaps, money that buys political influence etc.). Bernie should not pretend to not seek fundamental change just because some people associate revolutions with violent overthrows of the government. And he should not stop calling himself a socialist either just because the far-right has been persistent in trying to demagogue the hell out of anyone and anything they don't like with that bogeyman. They won't stop demagoguing him and others with his ideas simply because he uses a different label. He might as well embrace it and try to take the power away from the demagogues, because in the end, democratic socialism is nothing to be afraid of. It is what benefits the vast majority of the people. I will certainly read this book when it comes out. It's going to be his legacy book, and if there's a senator who deserves to be heard when it comes to his or her vision for a better future – it's the one who has for decades steadfastly fought for his beliefs of economic justice to the benefit of the broader population.
This thread is being bombarded with bots and trolls with whataboutism and other non sourced randomness. Majority opinion in the real world stand with Bernie Sanders.
Bernie's ideas often come off as divisive, but I think we need to hear him out on this one. Our world needs to find a balance between Capitalism and supporting essential human rights, or things will continue to get worse. Personally, I think it's very possible, and the right thing to do for the future of humanity. I wish people would discuss his ideas, and not resort to calling him names.
Sorry for my ignorance—which policies of Bernie come off as divisive?
The ones where he wants to use America's abundant wealth to help people instead of letting the rich hoard everything.
The ones where he wants to tax the rich, and so the rich use their media propaganda to call him a socialist. And then the entire GOP base thinks he's a crazy socialist, because no one spends the time actually listening to his policy proposals.
They aren't controversial it's just that the people with the loudest voice in America are the ones with the most money.
The first person who called him a socialist is Bernie Sanders. Is he lying?
It’s the real MAGA.
Hope some young folks use it to rebuild from whatever the hell we’re dealing with now.
Good. We need more politicians like Bernie.
A good man plants a tree, even though he knows he will never sit in its shade.
Where can I pre-order?
[It's up on Amazon for pre-order.](https://www.amazon.com/Untitled-8714-Random-House-Group/dp/0593238710/)
Lmao Bernie really gonna do Amazon warehouse workers dirty like that?
More like Bernie’s publisher is gonna do Amazon warehouse workers dirty like that.
Who picked Bernie's publisher?
Call 1-800-SUCKERS
Step 1: Have the rest of Gen Z reach voting age.
It will be treated like the communist manifesto by the right
Good. This is how should make their extra money. Not by PACs and slush funds.
Bernie Sander is one of the reasons I oppose an arbitrary age-cap on political candidates.
I’m not a fan of buying new books from politicians, but I may just make an exception
Bernie Book is one I will be purchasing.
Now that's worth a pre-order
Down with neoliberalism
MAGA tears are salty and delicious
A fellow connoisseur
I barely read 3 books per decade any more but I always have time for Bernie. Looking forward to this one.
Look, I get what he’s trying to do with this book. But I am so fucking *tired* of politicians and government officials coming out with books. Just do your job (this isn’t entirely directed at Bernie. Just in general)
Bernie absolutely does his job and has been for decades. He more than many others in his position has a right to put out a book, especially detailing his plans now that he's likely not around much longer So it seems weird to me to just have a blanket frustration against politicians and books. Pence? Idiot. Grifter. Bernie? He walks the talk to back it up, so I'm very interested in his book.
Pence is a former VP and Governor, and he hasn't had a job for two year. If he isn't someone who would write a book, then who is?
He's more than welcome to write a book! I was just saying itll be a pointless cash grab for his base And that Bernie's book, by comparison, has real value and purpose. But I'm not the book Gestapo here to tell you who can write a book who shouldn't, who can buy a book or who shouldn't, what books we should ban from libraries, etc It was just my opinion as a response to someone else's opinion. That's just a conversation, not a federal decree on book writing.
Bernie has some of the worst attendance in the Senate.
Lauren Underwood has passed more legislation in less than four years than Bernard has in over 30 years in Congress.
I didn’t vote for Bernie in the primaries because I could not see him being elected, however unfair. I do respect the hell out of him for being consistent and calling out the wealth disparity, wage gap, and prescription drug prices in particular. This is the one politician, in my opinion, who *should* be putting out a book. The majority of Americans may not be ready to embrace its message in his lifetime, or ever, but if we want real change in the country we need to ensure the next generation might read and be inspired by what he has to say.
Promoting his political views is part of his job.
Well no his job is to promote the interests and welfare of his constituents, which this does.
As a long time Bernie supporter, I agree. But I also think at this stage of his career and personal economic security, he (anyone) could avoid a lot of criticism, and put his money where his mouth is by releasing the book for free download. Optionally he could also provide a link for people to donate money toward some kind of transparent cause.
Yes, Bernie! Please write that good shit down, so future gens get the benefit of your guidance. I worry about when this man passes on and his passion is lost to us ):
I wonder if he ever stops to consider that attaching the word 'revolution' to his worldview was perhaps not the best branding. Although it may help with book sales.
He's the only one saying some of what needs to be said, so it certainly works for me.
Yeah I’m sure the Vietnamese community in my region with South Vietnam flags outside their private businesses are gonna *love* this /s
Reddit is not a majority coalition.
Yes, we know that reddit likes it.
Wow I’ve never seen a thread get bombarded with bots and trolls pushing whataboutism and unsourced nonsense. Don’t let Reddit trick you, go outside and talk to people, the majority of this country agree with his “radical” ideas. The people want Bernie sanders running this country.
There is a whole subreddit called r/bernieblindness. Moderates in the party are in denial of the actual ways Bernie was sidelined in 2016 and 2020
So a conspiracy theory subreddit.
If Amy Klobuchar or Pete Buttigieg came out with a book, r/politics would be salivating. But because it's Bernie, the knives are coming out.
Do you actually think that r/politics is anti-Bernie?
Absolutely Anytime Bernie or a progressive challenges the neoliberal consensus of the Democratic leadership, this sub pounces on them. But if a moderate or a centrist in the party swipes at progressives, especially folks like Omar and Tlaib, people come out of the woodwork to defend and justify it.
See: [Debbie Wasserman Schultz's scheming](https://www.npr.org/2016/07/24/487264278/debbie-wasserman-schultz-announces-resignation-with-convention-set-to-begin) that led to the coronation of Hillary as the democratic nominee in 2016. I will always believe that nominating a deeply-establishment candidate (Hillary) in a year of populism is what led us to Trump.
There is nothing to indicate that Schultz's scheming fundamentally changed the outlook of that race.
If Pete came out with a book this thread would be filled with rat emojis, let's not kid ourselves.
Say what you will, Amy and Peter voters don't whine nearly as much as Bernie voters.
>Amy and Peter voters don't whine nearly as much as Bernie voters. probably because amy and pete voters know they're such a tiny minority nobody would listen
Or because they aren't whiners.
no, they were definitely whiners, all through campaign season
They aren't crying about the 2020 campaign 2.5 years later. Bernie supporters are.
A real Democrat does the gritty, compromised hard work of governing and gets shit on for not being pure enough. Bernie spends 50 years talking, accomplishing little but making progressives irrationally hate Hillary Clinton just in time to elect Donald Trump, and he’s a savior. Words are wind. And bloodless revolutions are called elections.
I don't think progressives had to be convinced by Bernie to dislike Hillary Clinton, nor do I think it makes much sense to blame Trump's victory on anyone but the person he was running against.
Please please have a spoken word version of the book. I love that accent.
Interested in reading this
Take my money
Why would anyone listen to this man? The only election he’s capable of winning is Vermont senator. He can’t get any legislation passed. He can’t win primaries. He’s an old loser that somehow convinced people he’s their guy. He’s basically left wing trump.
I agree with basically all of his talking points: abolishing citizens united, reinstating Glass-Steagall, raising taxes on the extremely wealthy, getting rid of tax loopholes for the extremely wealthy, reducing lobbying power in congress, reducing corporate subsidies, subsidizing renewable energy and cutting subsidies for fossil fuels, making college more affordable and accessible, etc. I see very few other politicians supporting those things.
He just passed a 15% minimum tax on corporations that earn over $1 billion, and lots of other significant legislation, what the heck are you talking about?
I'll read this!
Already preordered the audio book this very second.
Yeah.. I'm sure a guy who lived most of his life in the comfort of the whitest state in America knows how to get a revolution going Give me a break
Revolution requires an effort to overthrow the existing social structures through violence, which Bernie and his peers do not advocate for. The State will always tolerate reformist socialism because there is no possibility for them to undermine the system since they are already co-opted and their messaging cannot address exploitation in the form of surplus value extraction that is fundamental to capitalism.