I did not know that, I just knew he liked French prostitutes.

Franklin would have, for sure, but I’m pretty sure the rest of them would have just kept raping their own slaves.

OK. Weird it took five comments on the potential of Democrats adopting Democratic Socialism for you to realize you don’t like Democratic Socialism, but I’m glad we got there in the end, I guess.

What makes you think the party elites give a shit what they think?

As I said, I think they’ll be out on their ass. Schumer will not get another term in leadership. Jefferies might, since he kept the House together on shutdowns, but his polling is still underwater and his days are numbered. The rank and file will go where the wind blows. We’ve already seen this when normie-centrists started dumping AIPAC money because of their base. I’m sure leadership will fight it until they’re ousted, and donor class will pivot to Republicans, but the average Dem politician would rather adopt a Democratic Socialist platform than lose their seat.

One anomalous Mamdani cannot reasonably justify hope in electoral reform.

Platner is also polling ahead or Mills despite the whole, “having a Nazi tattoo,” thing. Kat Abughazaleh is in a dead heat with Biss despite Biss having the establishment backing. Richie Torres is getting a DSA primary challenge after he had to drop his bid for governor against Hochul, and Hochul herself had to pivot to supporting Mamdani (she saw how the wind was blowing). There’s also Donavan McKinney primarying Shri Thanedar in Michigan, but I’m not following that one closely enough to say much about it. The point is, it’s not just Mamdani, there are several strong DSA or DSA-aligned challengers that are doing well.

Capital will do all it can to extinguish Socialism as it always does. This system was made by and for capitalists and cannot be used as the sole means of establishing a socialist system.

OK, well, the entire philosophy of Democratic Socialism is blending public ownership with heavily regulated private businesses using the current system of democratic institutions. If you think that Democratic Socialism is impossible, fair enough, you’re entitled your opinion and I’m not really interested in debating political theory. But even if you’re right, and Democratic Socialism will be a failure, I don’t think that means that the Democrats won’t adopt it.

Polling shows capitalism is on a downswing while socialism is on an upswing, especially within the Democratic party. Socialism is losing its status as a boogeyman. Beyond that, Mamdani’s Democratic Socialist platform is broadly popular across the country, and even as voters are voting heavily against Republicans in special elections, the democrats are still at historically low favorability levels.

Again, when I say Democratic Socialism will be the norm, I’m not saying that the majority of Democrats will identify as Democratic Socialists. I’m saying thst the majority of Democrats will adopt the policies of the Democratic Socialists or be primaried by candidates that do (and, again, they’ll probably frame it in the context of the New Deal rather than socialism). But the NYC mayoral election has made it clear that the corporate Democrats can no longer control the narrative, and I think it’s just the beginning.

There’s a reckoning coming for Democrats as well. Their poll number are still rock bottom in their own base. Primaries are coming for Torres and Jefferies, and it’s basically assumed Schumer won’t have a Minority (or, dare to dream, Majority) position in the next Congress. Despite the entire Democratic establishment lining up against him, Mamdani won. I think, with a little luck, Democratic Socialism will be the norm by '28 (though they’ll probably call it, “Getting back to our New Deal roots,” or some shit).

Based on the reports of torture and abuse out of, “Alligator Alcatraz,” (God I fucking hate having to use that stupid fucking name), we are certainly heading there. They described torture techniques similar to CECOT, including denial of medical treatment. We don’t know what’s happening inside ICE detention facilities, but an alarming number of detainees are dying. We just kidnapped a sovereign head of state, and Trump is actively talking about doing the same to other nations.

Things don’t start at the end. There were six years between Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor and the invasion of Poland. It was five years between the opening of the first concentration camps and the mass interment of Jews, and another three years before they opened the gas chambers in Auschitz. If anything, 2025 has shown that this administration is moving faster than the Nazis, and the midterms will probably be our last chance to purge these people (including the Democrats who refuse to fight them) from our government before they kill what’s left of our democracy.

Alright, I’m prettty sure the only reason you’re so bitchy about this is because my second reading of the meme is what you actually believe, and you’re pissy that someone called you our for defending propaganda. Block me if you want, it’s really more of a mute button anyway. Enjoy being media literate.

There is no dichotomy…

This is just making fun of liberals in the US who comment on lemmy threads about RT being unreliable and not much else. The implication is really that the western media is equally unreliable.

This is the false dichotomy: RT and western media. You’ve even stopped distinguishing between western corporate media and western media in this comment, because you boiled it down to this false binary. What about Common Dreams? ProPublica? Democracy Now? Those aren’t western media?

If the point here is, “Liberals think CNN/MSNBC/NYT isn’t biased because its not state media,” fine, but with no context, this just as easily reads, “RT is fine because corporate news is also biased.” That’s why this is sitting at 59% upvotes.

All that’s present is a false dichotomy between state propaganda and corporate propaganda, and the implication that people who choose corporate propaganda are idiots. This reads as apologia for consuming state propaganda, framed as media literacy. If it’s not, it needs more context.

I guess media literacy is when you think those are the only two options.

Also worth pointing out that, while America may be 249 years old, no one would consider it an empire for the majority of that time. Its debatable, but I would argue we didn’t really reach an empirical level of power until the late 40s, when we started taking over what was left of the British Empire’s influence over the middle-eas5.

Sees desperate people getting coerced by the military-industrial complex into signing their lives away for the promise of an education and a slim chance to escape the cycle of poverty.

“Fucking idiots.”

Edit: Attacking the people being fed into the meat grinder of the military-industrial complex instead of the military-industrial complex itself is just boot-licking with extra steps.

I’ll be honest, I find that guy super annoying, but I appreciate you sharing it with me. It definitely makes me feel validated that someone else felt the same way

Yeah, it wasn’t even that the first one was bad, it’s just that all the things they mentioned in passing, like the New Founding Fathers and the exemptions for Level 10 Government Officials, were building a world that sounded super interesting. Then we got saddle with some boring rich family for 90 minutes. I only got around to seeing the first sequel, but it delivered on all the stuff I wanted to see after I heard that first announcement.

The original Purge. I thought all the background stuff and setting were super interesting, but the film itself was a generic home invasion movie. The sequel expanded on all the stuff I was interested in, though.

Whelp, since I’ve already addressed those points, I think we’re finally, really done here. Took a long time, but we finally got there! You can go ahead and have the last word if it will make you feel less wrong about everything.

Jesus fucking Christ. U.S. population in 1970 was 200,000,000 million, 280,000,000 in 2000, that’s 1.4 times higher. Compare that to the prison populations I already gave you, and you’ll see there 6 times higher by those same years, meaning the prison population grew way faster. I figured this out and wrote this in the time it took me to shit, maybe you could start looking this shit up yourself before you waste my time, especially since some of the sources you cited covered it.

Holy shit dude, the page has the total number of people incarcerated by year. If you can’t find it, I can’t help you, maybe take a tutorial on how the internet works. Then I took that total and used the percentages you gave me to calculate the total number of incarcerated black people. By doing that, I showed that, despite your claim that, “the crime bill did not increase the number of Blacks incarcerate,” even when the number of black people as a percentage of the prison population dropped between 1990 and 2000, the total number of incarcerated balck men went up because the prison population went up. 50% of 10 marbles is less than 20% of 100 marbles, despite being a higher percentage. And, no, despite the one sentence you took out of context about the drop in the prison population (which I’ve referenced 5 fuckint times now), this article backs up literally every fucking thing I said:

In the early 2000s, the U.S. was at its highest rate of imprisonment in history,[65] with young Black men experiencing the highest levels of incarceration. One out of every 15 people imprisoned across the world is a Black American incarcerated in the United States.

Black men and women are imprisoned at higher rates compared to all other age groups, with the highest rate being Black men aged 25 to 39. In 2001, almost 17% of Black men had previously been imprisoned in comparison to 2.6% of White men. By the end of 2002, of the two million inmates of the U.S. incarceration system, Black men surpassed the number of White men (586,700 to 436,800 respectively of inmates with sentences more than one year). Becky Petit and Carmen Gutierrez performed a study, published on October 29, 2018, on the incarceration rate of young African Americans, noting that 48.9% of men arrested by age 23 (born 1980–1984), were African American, while 37.9% were white.

After the passage of Reagan’s Anti-Drug Abuse Act in 1986, incarceration for non-violent offenses dramatically increased. The Act imposed the same five-year mandatory sentence on those with convictions involving crack as on those possessing 100 times as much powder cocaine.

The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 may have had a minor effect on mass incarceration.

Prison populations have been skyrocketing since the Reagan era. Clinton’s actions actually made the problem worse. The subsequent actions under Obama and other Democrats didn’t bring us back to anything like the pre-Reagan era and, at best, led to a slight reduction of the prison population and a slight reduction in how over-represented black Americans are in our prison system. Can you please go find someone else to be wrong at now?

Your numbers aren’t in the Wikipedia page you linked.

You gave me percentages. I took the total numbers from Wikipedia and did basic math. Took less than five minutes, dude. Anyway, nothing in the rest of this comment that I haven’t already addressed, so I guess we’re done here. Good luck.