My point is that we need to have an organized political structure to get progressive people elected who will actually promote progressive policies. Saying “Burn Down the Dems” with literally no plan to put up opposition to Republicans is beyond short sighted strategically.
I appreciate the fervor, democratic leadership is a bunch of spinless cowards, but trying to tear down democrats without a competent actually progressive replacement political organization is handing power directly to Republicans to rule completely unopposed.
Given the reality of political parties in the US, I’d rather spinless corpses filling up space to slow Republicans down rather than letting Republicans take total control in the absence of any marginal opposition.
Unless you’re planning on running for office as a competently progressive candidate.
That makes some sense like an early blunderbluss kind of thing?
I don’t think they really had shotguns in the 15th century tho.
Sure tanks are def not good for the environment and EVs offer an easier method to getting to a distributed clean energy network, but lets just take a moment to appreciate the circumstance of a WW2 veteran destroying a modern day symbol of nazism and fascism.
Sure, let’s say they are controlled opposition. What do we do after we burn down the democratic party? What then? Because I do not like the prospect of what comes after a single party takes complete control.
There is a lot of talk about burning and destroying but nothing about what comes after and it’s the “What comes after” that has me most worried.