Bernie Sanders on Gaza and Genocide - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15306982
How is this going to get better folks? Any suggestions or possible solutions? Scenarios of getting worse or better? What is your opinion on what Sanders talks about?

#15307082
Sanders is an opportunistic pig when it comes to Palestine. He's funded the genocide - as well as war in Ukraine - but is now pretending to give a shit.

He and the squad, including AOC, Rashida, Omar etc. can all get in the sea. There is nothing progressive about them, unless you want to call them progressive imperialists. :D
#15307290
Tainari88 wrote:
How is this going to get better folks?

Any suggestions or possible solutions? Scenarios of getting worse or better?

What is your opinion on what Sanders talks about?



It's not going to get better. Netanyahu shows little interest in peace because he will get kicked to the curb the minute fighting is over.

America should freeze all aid to Israel. Actually, we should kill most of it, Israel is not some struggling country, they are a powerhouse. We don't give aid to England or France, it wouldn't make sense. Giving lots of aid to Israel also makes no sense, doubly so given the contempt with which the Israeli Right gives us.

That freeze won't happen. No politician is going to risk getting that much grief. That could change, if Israel kills enough, but don't expect it in the short term.

I like most of what Sanders says. His understanding of economics is quite limited, Congress has only one that does, Liz Warren. But because he was the only Lefty in Congress, I have a warm place in my heart for him.
#15307298
skinster wrote:Sanders is an opportunistic pig when it comes to Palestine. He's funded the genocide - as well as war in Ukraine - but is now pretending to give a shit.

He and the squad, including AOC, Rashida, Omar etc. can all get in the sea. There is nothing progressive about them, unless you want to call them progressive imperialists. :D


skinster, there are two types of politically involved people. The first kind are the ones who choose to work within a system that is very rotten and that limits your ability to change it severely.

The second type is revolutionary. Those who do not believe in any real reform for a system that is innately not salvageable at all. Those who are the radical Left and are in complete disagreement with any ability for the system to change enough to satisfy revolutionary actions that for the radical Left is absolutely essential.

So it makes sense that you have that point of view.

Neither of them ran for office as people who do not think the system can be worked in their favor.

The reality is that the US public rejects socialism and communism outright. NO. That is the answer they give. So the reformers are about as left as they are going to go.

How do you cope with that problem though? Trying to convince the majority of the haters of the Far left? Or avoiding talking about who is a progressive and who is not and then trying to focus on issue-based change?

When does the Far Left actually have an opening to get into power if the majority are Republican MAGAs and really incompetent moderate right liberal wishy washy people Skins?

Do you wish to comment on that?
#15307301
late wrote:It's not going to get better. Netanyahu shows little interest in peace because he will get kicked to the curb the minute fighting is over.

America should freeze all aid to Israel. Actually, we should kill most of it, Israel is not a struggling country, they are a powerhouse. We don't give aid to England or France, it wouldn't make sense. Giving lots of aid to Israel also makes no sense, doubly so given the contempt with which the Israeli Right gives us.

That freeze won't happen. No politician is going to risk getting that much grief. That could change, if Israel kills enough, but don't expect it in the short term.

I like most of what Sanders says. His understanding of economics is quite limited, Congress has only one that does, Liz Warren. But because he was the only Lefty in Congress, I have a warm place in my heart for him.


Liz Warren is a liberal and believes in capitalism. She is a senator. Sanders is a Senator in Vermont. Bernie Sanders is not a congressman. AOC is for the 14th district of New York for part of Queens and the Bronx. She is a congresswoman and Sanders is a senator. Both are self described Democratic socialists. How many of those are there in the US Congress and Senate? Lol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrati ... of_America

Basically, it has more or less 3 congresspeople in the US Congress. And in the US Senate full of extremely old men with money, it has?

One guy;

Who is the socialist senator in the United States?
Bernard Sanders (born September 8, 1941) is an American politician and activist who is the senior United States senator from Vermont.


Meanwhile @skinster is very much part of a vocal group criticizing the DSA in the USA for their lack of leadership on the Gaza Palestine situation.

The issue that the entryists have is that they want to have control of a large group that does not share a vision with their ideas of how change needs to be manifested.

It leads to these issues one finds in here:

https://www.thenation.com/article/activ ... za-israel/

Read that entire article carefully.

Again, the future for me is about cooperation between small and large groups on the Left. Why? Because it has proven to be a successful formula for success on breaking the stranglehold that the two big parties have on American US-based political parties and power.

In Mexico, a lot of small Leftist organizations decided to put their bickering aside and concentrate on getting rid of the neolibs on the Right and the liberals and conservatives in the two big parties that had an ironclad hold on political power in Mexico for over 60 years or more. The way out of that monopoly on power was not allowing differences in Leftist political thoughts to break them up and make them easy targets to dominate by the big powerful parties used to not doing a damn thing for the working class.

That is why entryists are not going to get far in political life in many nations. The key to success is to keep your eyes on the prize and work with the ones who are humanist and humane and leave the bickering about purism to the ones who want to never get anything done over time. You will be stuck in fighting forever. Because the ones whom you disagree with are as much your enemies as some super bad neoliberal Republican dictators.

For me, that is a tragedy.

Talking about being scientific and objective in politics Late, it is very important to understand that what makes a nation's political life weak and eventually vulnerable to destruction is a lack of cooperation from the very inside of that political platform. The political parties that stay the course and cooperate with each other for a greater goal? Win the democratic voting blocs and wind up getting legit power not based on extreme situations. If the extreme situation presents itself then I would say the Communists and the Socialists who are Scientific are going to be an alternative. But how long does that take in societies that have tiny percentages of Communists or active socialists?

I do not mind losing elections. That is normal for me. What I will never do is kick every other Leftist group in the face, because they do not agree with every fucking thing I believe. That is shooting yourself in the foot. Literally. Do not wait for the neoliberal capitalists who are the ruling class with billions to spend on influencing the least educated in the USA or in other countries to go along with agendas against their own class interests. Do the work for them, by killing anything that does not go with a complete agreement agenda.

Complete agreement will never happen in this world. Too many people with too many variables for that to even be a realistic goal in politics or in life.

Do the Charrettes and work on what is doable. Pragmatic politics. I am a humanist. An Erich Fromm socialist. A Marxist in many ways. And an internationalist. That is what I think is the most effective road to progress in human societies.

I am open to changing that if I am convinced that some other way is more realistic over time. Killing people in conflicts is not that hard to do. Destruction is fairly easy to plan and execute. Preserving life, and working constantly to replace bad habits, bad plans, and selfish elitism with true community and true security for all people who work and who depend on their fellow human beings for sustenance is HARD WORK. ANd is far more difficult to do.

Plus, you never will win the moral ground justifying taking people's lives. But getting rid of the ones on the power seat that do harm through a legitimate changing of organizational superiority and superiority of thought and results? Is the right way to win. Right thought, right action and right attitudes. For me put humans and society first. Not profits. That is just true. No matter how you cut it.
#15307302
Tainari88 wrote:Sanders is a Senator in Vermont. Bernie Sanders is not a congressman.

Sanders is a senator from Vermont and therefore is a Congress person.
#15307303
Rich wrote:Sanders is a senator from Vermont and therefore is a Congress person.


It could be confusing Rich. People looking for Congressman Sanders. Lol.

I have to go somewhere now. I hope you comment on the article from The Nation. A lot of people in small niche political parties fall for the bickering among themselves. it weakens many political goals.

Keep pointing out the obvious. 8)
#15307310
Tainari88 wrote:
Liz Warren is a liberal and believes in capitalism. She is a senator. Sanders is a Senator in Vermont. Bernie Sanders is not a congressman. AOC is for the 14th district of New York for part of Queens and the Bronx. She is a congresswoman and Sanders is a senator. Both are self described Democratic socialists. How many of those are there in the US Congress and Senate? Lol.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrati ... of_America

Basically, it has more or less 3 congresspeople in the US Congress. And in the US Senate full of extremely old men with money, it has?

One guy;



Meanwhile @skinster is very much part of a vocal group criticizing the DSA in the USA for their lack of leadership on the Gaza Palestine situation.

The issue that the entryists have is that they want to have control of a large group that does not share a vision with their ideas of how change needs to be manifested.

It leads to these issues one finds in here:

https://www.thenation.com/article/activ ... za-israel/

Read that entire article carefully.

Again, the future for me is about cooperation between small and large groups on the Left. Why? Because it has proven to be a successful formula for success on breaking the stranglehold that the two big parties have on American US-based political parties and power.

In Mexico, a lot of small Leftist organizations decided to put their bickering aside and concentrate on getting rid of the neolibs on the Right and the liberals and conservatives in the two big parties that had an ironclad hold on political power in Mexico for over 60 years or more. The way out of that monopoly on power was not allowing differences in Leftist political thoughts to break them up and make them easy targets to dominate by the big powerful parties used to not doing a damn thing for the working class.

That is why entryists are not going to get far in political life in many nations. The key to success is to keep your eyes on the prize and work with the ones who are humanist and humane and leave the bickering about purism to the ones who want to never get anything done over time. You will be stuck in fighting forever. Because the ones whom you disagree with are as much your enemies as some super bad neoliberal Republican dictators.

For me, that is a tragedy.

Talking about being scientific and objective in politics Late, it is very important to understand that what makes a nation's political life weak and eventually vulnerable to destruction is a lack of cooperation from the very inside of that political platform. The political parties that stay the course and cooperate with each other for a greater goal? Win the democratic voting blocs and wind up getting legit power not based on extreme situations. If the extreme situation presents itself then I would say the Communists and the Socialists who are Scientific are going to be an alternative. But how long does that take in societies that have tiny percentages of Communists or active socialists?

I do not mind losing elections. That is normal for me. What I will never do is kick every other Leftist group in the face, because they do not agree with every fucking thing I believe. That is shooting yourself in the foot. Literally. Do not wait for the neoliberal capitalists who are the ruling class with billions to spend on influencing the least educated in the USA or in other countries to go along with agendas against their own class interests. Do the work for them, by killing anything that does not go with a complete agreement agenda.

Complete agreement will never happen in this world. Too many people with too many variables for that to even be a realistic goal in politics or in life.

Do the Charrettes and work on what is doable. Pragmatic politics. I am a humanist. An Erich Fromm socialist. A Marxist in many ways. And an internationalist. That is what I think is the most effective road to progress in human societies.

I am open to changing that if I am convinced that some other way is more realistic over time. Killing people in conflicts is not that hard to do. Destruction is fairly easy to plan and execute. Preserving life, and working constantly to replace bad habits, bad plans, and selfish elitism with true community and true security for all people who work and who depend on their fellow human beings for sustenance is HARD WORK. ANd is far more difficult to do.

Plus, you never will win the moral ground justifying taking people's lives. But getting rid of the ones on the power seat that do harm through a legitimate changing of organizational superiority and superiority of thought and results? Is the right way to win. Right thought, right action and right attitudes. For me put humans and society first. Not profits. That is just true. No matter how you cut it.



Bernie is in the United States Congress.

I'd like to see more Progressive reform. The design of Congress is such that it's easy to slow things down to a crawl. The 2 parties used to craft compromises to run the country, but Republicans have become radicals.

You want the Dems and the Left to sit around the campfire and sing songs. Sounds great, if you could just do something about those violent barbarians we have...
#15307329
I think a lot of leftist miss that there have been many incremental gains. Those gains will continue. Incremental reform is happening. You guys really think that "uncommitted" primary that happen in Michigan would have ever happened 5, 10, 15, 20 years ago? Do you really think that 5, 10, 15, 20 years ago, the president would be putting pressure on Israel like it is now? The knee jerk response to that is that the US is not putting anywhere near the pressure they should be. Sure, that is true, but in the past there would have be 0 pressure. That is, things are slowly changing. Would AoC have a seat in the house 10, 20, 30 years ago? YOU think the 10, 20, 30 years ago the president would have been able to forgive billions in student loans like has been done recently?

Yes, it might not be fast/strong enough for the far left, but incremental gains have been had in numerous areas.

The very fact that MAGA wants to burn it all down because they know they are losing to the arrow of time is evidence that the left will win in the long run. Or maybe not win, but have a significant seat at the table through which they can influence for more gains.

If movements that push left never existed, and it's all doom and gloom from the capitalist right... I'd be a slave today....oh wait, I am a slave to capitalism... Maybe I'm wrong then. :lol:
#15307813
Tainari88 wrote:skinster, there are two types of politically involved people. The first kind are the ones who choose to work within a system that is very rotten and that limits your ability to change it severely.

The second type is revolutionary. Those who do not believe in any real reform for a system that is innately not salvageable at all. Those who are the radical Left and are in complete disagreement with any ability for the system to change enough to satisfy revolutionary actions that for the radical Left is absolutely essential.

So it makes sense that you have that point of view.

Neither of them ran for office as people who do not think the system can be worked in their favor.

The reality is that the US public rejects socialism and communism outright. NO. That is the answer they give. So the reformers are about as left as they are going to go.

How do you cope with that problem though? Trying to convince the majority of the haters of the Far left? Or avoiding talking about who is a progressive and who is not and then trying to focus on issue-based change?

When does the Far Left actually have an opening to get into power if the majority are Republican MAGAs and really incompetent moderate right liberal wishy washy people Skins?

Do you wish to comment on that?


Bernie Sanders is an imperialist who has supported a number of U.S. wars and supports Zionism too. And when he had a chance of winning, capitulated to those further to the right of him so he could buy himself some more houses. There is nothing "far left" about his position and anyone who thinks so has been living in the U.S. for too long. The U.S. only has two rightwing parties on offer (so does Britain).
#15307816
skinster wrote:The U.S. only has two rightwing parties on offer (so does Britain).

Uh no they are left and right by definition. There is no absolute scale against which parties are measured, if we did than as Gladstone was on the left we'd have to call pretty much all parties in the world left wing. Even the US Republican party is insanely left wing compared to Gladstone. This is why we're able to talk about Bukharin moving from the left of the Bolshevik party to the right. it would be both tiresome and silly to have talk about Bukharin shifting from one left wing of the Bolshevik party to the other left wing of the Bolshevik party.
#15307818
Rich wrote:Uh no they are left and right by definition.


Focus on how they vote rather than the bullshit they say about themselves, and things become clearer.

Otherwise, the above words are just meaningless these days. Calling Hillary Clinton leftwing because she's in The Democratic Party is straight up retard territory, but okay... :lol:

When you are done with your revisionist history ab[…]

What if the attacks were a combination of "c[…]

Very dishonest to replace violent Israeli hooliga[…]

Kamala Harris was vile. Utterly vile! https://www[…]