politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I made this viewer: https://tmpweb.net/kfat7V0lEcea/, after ranking your comments. I did it based on this csv if you want to modify (https://files.catbox.moe/cxhkk3.csv).
I used your comments to create the ranking. Let me know if you recommend any changes.
It seems, like successful resistance to fascism has less to do with how effective and organized the fascists are, and more to do with how unified the resistance to fascism is.
Where would you rank the US, currently on this scale?
That's... actually really incredible and I love it. I feel like it's a little wasted this far down in a comment chain, you should post it somewhere on the Fediverse!
I think I would swap Portugal and South Korea.
South Korean opposition unity fell apart during the presidential election (which luckily didn't screw them), but getting a bunch of otherwise ideologically unrelated parties to present consistent pressure on a military regime, and have the people turn out in huge numbers to support it, is a pretty good showing for opposition unity; and the military regime of SK showed weakness at a bad time (or a good one for those of us who prefer democracy; bad for them), whereas the Portuguese Estado Novo simply failed to react to gradually changing public opinion.
I think I'd also slightly lower India's opposition unity, in relation to USA (FDR), and increase the fascist self-sabotage of USA (FDR).
The Dems during FDR's administration showed significant backbone and party discipline (at least compared to what we normally see in the States, since we don't have a parliamentary system), and managed to get crossover support in some cases even from their own opposition, which itself never strongly aligned with the fascists (being terrified that fascism might be bad for business); while in India, the opposition parties united in message ("Dictatorship or democracy"), but all ran effectively separate campaigns. At least to my understanding, the history of India, modern or otherwise, is certainly not my strong point.
The fascist self-sabotage in the USA I'd increase because of the consistent failure of the fascists to organize in a coherent way. By the time they hit on "America First" (😬) as a good screen to pull in some useful dupes, they'd already long-lost their window of opportunity, and never even managed an independent presence in the legislature, at a time when even socialists managed a small presence in Congress. They also never had their necessary central figure or long-lasting party organization to make good their agitation, though if the Dem response had been less competent, God only knows what could have developed.
Also, arguably, depending on how one interprets the Business Plot, they literally tried to approach a fucking socialist disillusioned veteran to head a pro-business fascist regime, lmao. General Smedley Butler immediately sold the plotters out, because while he hated what the USA had done and was doing, that didn't mean he wanted it to get worse. That's some hefty self-sabotage on the fascists' part.
I definitely agree with Japan's opposition unity being at the very bottom. PM Osachi's party would flip entirely after his assassination and support the military regime, even though the military hadn't significantly increased its power in the wake of Osachi's death.
I think that's a fair assessment. Once the fascists reach a certain level of influence, they're like a blunt weapon - finesse helps, but even flailing around aimlessly can 'get the job done'.
Oh, Lord. Fuck, where would I put us?
Realistically speaking, our fascists are, astoundingly, even less competent than the Austrofascists, who could at least cobble together a cunning legal argument and use a crisis to its full potential. But I would like to think even as fucked as our opposition is, that we are in a better position than "Shrug and go home when the government is couped".
If I was trying to be hopeful, I suppose I'd say 2, 9. The current party is cartoonishly incompetent, even by the low standards of fascists, while as bad as the Dems are, I feel like we're only dealing with the Moderate-SocDem divide, rather than the Moderate-SocDem-Communist three-way chaos that Weimar Germany had - Dems still broadly feel they're on the same side, even if political junkies like us tense and give each other nervous glances.
If I was trying to prepare for shit to hit the fan, I'd say 3, 10. The problem is that institutions take time to degrade, which means all the incompetence in the world won't immediately piss away the very refined bureaucracy of the Federal government, which then is a tool in the hands of the fascists. And if we lack the three-way fight in the Dem Party, our 'Zentrum' is more influential, and like Zentrum, may prefer self-extermination to compromise with the progressive wing of the party.
I don't think anything could justify putting current US opposition above 8 (at 8 only if you feel very optimistic) or fascist self-sabotage above 4. We're on the fucking knife's edge.
... I know I said this already, but I really love that entire chart/idea. Seeing it has really brightened my night, it's fantastic