this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2026
293 points (92.2% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
3139 readers
572 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc. This includes instance shaming.
Introduction to Socialism (external links)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
They literally did try; I just presented you with evidence that they tried: the Freedom to Vote Act. It had enough cosponsors to pass the House and the Senate; it died due to the filibuster.
So go ahead and tell me what your plan would've been; I'm listening, because you forgot to express one. And if it involves removing the filibuster, 1) that legislation is in the exact same territory as the Voting Rights Act (legally for what the SCOTUS is allowed to do to it; in terms of judicial precedent, it's far worse-off, because holy shit, we're talking about the fucking VRA here), and 2) I dare you to imagine what a 53–47 Senate, a 217–212 House, and Trump could do without the filibuster. I will tell you it's unfathomably worse than what's already happening, and I will also tell you that "well it totally wouldn't have happened with better voting rights!!" is just 1) credulously assuming it wouldn't have already been struck down and 2) not a solid assumption even if not.
Is your plan to delete the filibuster before absolutely flooding the zone with voting rights legislation in hopes they can't strike it all down and fuck voting rights precedent even worse? Good thinking, Mr. Brannigan; SCOTUS-bots have a pre-programmed judicial review limit, after all. (They do not.)
The filibuster is one of their rotating villains. They dont try to change the system because they benefit to much from it.
Without it they would have passed a anti voter bill that would guarantee they never lose this year.