this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2025
741 points (93.7% liked)
Memes
53168 readers
878 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes, they are not, they are socialdemocrats which are rightwing because they support capitalism.
So they don't pass your purity test, and "nobody should support them."
But according to right wing and right of center propaganda they're radical leftist, and "nobody should support them."
It's pretty neat that you and the right have the exact same messaging.
I mean, its not really a purity test. It's just kind of definitions. The political terms "right" and "left" have meant the same thing since the French Revolution. Democrats are not left wing. We can have a whole bunch of ancillary discussions about whether that means people should or shouldn't vote for them, which I'm not interested in having, but i struggle to see how one could argue in good faith that the Democrats are left wing. Its really not even clear that Ocasio-Cortez or Sanders are "left wing" since neither seems to oppose private property rights, nor do they advocate for the weakening or abolishment of capitalism - the traditional dividing line of left and right.
Wasn't the French revolution just abolishing feudalism and the monarchy?
I'm being less than 100% precise here. The line I'm drawing is that abolition of private property rights is co-terminus with abolition of capitalism.
"Ask them 'what's more important, human rights or property rights'. If they reply 'property rights are human rights, they're on the right".
e: I'm just going to add explicitly, since there's clearly some confusion looking at the other sister comments. It's not about monarchism or any of that. Its two things: Property rights and social hierarchies. If you want em gone, you're on the left. from that perspective you need not change the definition of left and right in 1799 and 1848, and all the same from Maréchal to Mélenchon.
Ok, this is making things more clear, although I get the impression I'd have to know way more about the Fr. Revolution, and maybe the following period in France to actually understand it. Was it really politically commonplace already in early 19th c. to demand abolishment of property?
Who's Maréchal?
Highly recommend the Revolutions podcast on this subject.
Under feudalism: Left is about abolishing feudalism and the monarchy. Right is about preserving them.
Under capitalism: Left is about abolishing capitalism and the bourgeoisie. Right is about preserving them.
leftism is defined by opposition to the status quo. the french monarchy was capitalist as well as the status quo at the time; we still have monarchies and capitalism is unquestionably the status quo.
no, it's not. That would make fascism left wing, it is not.
fascism is right wing and a big part of late stage capitalism.
You've just introduced a whole other definition of leftism. Also it seems to mean that no leftist society could exist in practice.
From what I can figure out, it was still in principle feudal but moving towards capitalism due to the growth of the bourgeois class. Is that correct?
opposition to the status quo is the definition of leftism, but anyone can be forgiven for not understanding this since westerners define it in the same terms as classical liberalism due to monarchies still (barely) being the status quo back then (and still existing to this day); back then, liberalism was "left" of that.
now-a-days neo-liberalism is the dominant hegemony and it's pro-capitalist; anything to the left of that is modern day leftism.
Yes, the current relations to capitalism actually were fixed in 1848, not 1789.
The split between the bourgeoise and the proletarian is exactly what happened in 1848 - they were united in the French Revolution, then as the bourg took power, they made sure to stop the revolutions.
I swear that even full trumpists are less obnoxious on the internet than you blue magas because while they try to choke me with the same capitalist nonesense, they are at least more honest and don't pretend to be on the left.
Yes, you certainly do seems to think that, thx for confirmation.
Sick burn.
Purity testing is good, you're just mad because you don't pass
no, they don't pass the definition of what left wing means
since when are red lines genocide & ethnic cleansing just simple purity tests?
Since when did AOC, Sanders, and Mamdani give the greenlight for genocide & ethnic cleansing?
i have to assume that this is genuine since i don't see anything funny about it.
bernie insists the isreali main talking point: isreal has a right to exist and co-opts leftward fervor by lending his support to the party he doesn't belong to.
aoc voted against marjorie taylor green's attempts to block the iron dome's re-inforcements several times as well a voted for the resolution for redefining antisemitism to isreali benefit; include speaking out against the genocide.
mamdani is not at the national level and cannot do anything about it.
Not to mention that MTG wanted that funding redirected to the fascist bullshit she supports at the U.S. border. It's interesting that Thomas Massie also voted in favor of this bill given he and MTG are part of the Thiel dark money "progressive" team along with hypocrites like Ro Kahnna, who pretend to support Palestine, yet hold investments in fucking Palantir.
that tweet from aoc makes it clear that she values the lives of isrealis over gazans since she ignores the facts that 1) these weapons are going to the idf who doesn't make a distinction between defensive and offensive where gazans are concerned and 2) the idf had re-appropriated weaponry from one use to the other.
also: nice deflection in ignoring her vote on the definition of antisemitism w a tweet showing a half truth.
Do you actually know what the iron dome is? Hint: it's not a weapon.
Coincidentally, given that you're ignoring everything else about the proposal redirecting funding, and especially the dark money that's also funding the person that created the proposal,, do you know who just happens to be in the process of building a competitor to the iron dome? And who also would be receiving that redirected money through the government contracts one of his companies has with U.S. immigration customs enforcement? The same company that is providing Israel with the AI being used to carry out genocide.
And yeah I do think it was a shitty thing for AOC to vote in favor of a definition that gives Israel too much protection, but it's more than a bit of a stretch to call that greenlighting genocide, especially given what you're criticizing her for not supporting.
Pointing out the truth behind her not voting to stop funding going into the iron dome, given that the funding would be directed back to Palantir isn't a deflection. It's just the reality of what's beneath the surface of the bullshit that you're apparently falling for.
the weapons that were earmarked for the iron dome were used against the gazans and the iranians. it doesn't matter what their stated purpose is like it doesn't matter if you give full or partial political cover for genociders like aoc is doing; you're still helping genociders.
The iron dome is a fucking dome that keeps weapons fired from outside of Israel from entering Israel.
It really doesn't matter how you try to rationalize it. The funding would have gone back into the company that has enabled genocide to happen.
You're supporting something that was meant to redirect money to Peter Thiel, but disguised as somehow being helpful for Palestine because it was taking money from the Israeli defense shield that Peter Thiel is in the process of copying.
It's a fucking scheme. More money for Thiel/Palantir means more money for the campaign contributions and/or the investments of the hypocrites in congress (MTG, Massie, Kahnna, probably many more) that do his bidding by peddling this bullshit. AOC may be guilty of indirectly helping Israel avoid deserved criticism, but every time you fall for this dumb shit you're being sold, you're directly helping Peter Theil continue to enable the fucking genocide to happen. And since he continues to be so successful, it's not stopping with Israel and Gaza. It's spreading around the fucking globe like a disease. Congratulations 👏
i agree that the money is either going back; one way or another; to either the military industrial complex or silicon valley and aoc is guilty of more than indirectly helping isreal avoid criticism.
also: it is indeed spreading throughout the world and people like aoc are helping to make it happen under some (hopefully misguided) attempts to help genociders & capitalists do it.
two things can be true at the same time.
Except that in this case, as a House representative, AOC was presented with 2 options. Neither option was to take away funding from the military industrial complex, which relies on technology developed by billionaires in silicon valley who invest in start ups and new technology that is then fed back into the complex.
Her options were to vote yes or no on a proposal by MGT to reroute funding from Israel for the iron dome (which the U.S. has been funding since it's creation in 2011) to U.S. border security, where it would then be given to Peter Thiel to invest and help develop more war tech. Somehow she's a villain for not voting to reroute the money from existing defense technology that literally just acts a shield for Israel, into Thiel's new technology developments.
That was what MGT was actually offering. That is what is being defended and used as propaganda, as if AOC supporting it would have meant fewer lives would be lost in the genocide. It wouldn't.
AOC did indeed fuck up with how she voted on the resolution about antisemitic language, specifically because it allows Israel to claim that comparisons of Israel to Nazis is antisemitic. I strongly disagree with her, and I don't know why she supported it, but I am not seeing how her fucking up in this case makes her guilty of anything other than indirectly helping Israel avoid criticism?.
aoc is guilty of more than that: she's parroting the same isreali talking point that isreal has a right to exist (like bernie is doing) and she voted to add fuel to the active gazan fire rather than the emerging but still unlit kindling that is theil's dragnet; democrats pride themselves on pride themselves on kicking critical and unaddressed cans down the road, but she couldn't bring herself to do that in this instance.
add this to her vote on the resolution redefining antisemitism and you can see a pattern starting to emerge if you care to look.
Why the fuck should I care!?