“Democracy sustains capitalism. Capitalism thrives in a democracy. And, right now, we are dealing with, as I called him at my speech on the Ellipse, a tyrant,” she said, referencing her rally last year on the White House Ellipse in Washington. “We used to compare the strength of our democracy to communist dictators. That’s what we’re dealing with right now in Donald Trump. And these titans of industry are not speaking up,”
How the hell is Trump a communist? What is she smoking damn.
The support for capitalism over all else is expected, neoliberals do little else, but this level of delusion? Worrying.
Americans use the word communism as pejorative without having even slightest idea what it actually means. In this case she is speaking language that majority of Americans will understand
Propaganda against socialism and communism still going strong in the usa
Never went away, never will.
The country is founded on personal gain, it’s the foundation that it was bloodily built on from the very beginning. It would undermine everything that our current beneficiaries of this legacy stand for to even remotely embrace socialism.
The idea was to pump “rugged individualism” until there were no communities left, and then everyone who managed to shave off the most cash can fuck off to other countries or their own yachts in the ocean.
Trump is exhibiting classic dictator behaviors. Dictatorships are not exclusively right or left. History is full of dictators who use “communism” or fascism as a base.
This is where people conflate and confuse things like the FL Cubans who didn’t like Kamala because “she’s a socialist/Communist and I came from a country with a bad leader like that!”
They can’t distinguish a ruling style from the underlying governing structure.
A dictator is a dictator is a dictator.
And you can look at dictatorial regimes across the spectrum and it’s the authoritarianism and the dictator that is the common thread.
Democracy sustains capitalism. Capitalism thrives in a democracy
Exactly what a neoliberal would say.
hilarious to hear Americans use terms like Socialist, Communist, Fascist even at the levels of supposedly highly educated and clearly they have no idea what they are talking about.
Fascist
weeeeelllllll… If you’re in a place where you could throw a rock and hit one, maybe? /s BTW
She still doesn’t get it. Capitalism inevitably leads to fascism. It’s a core feature.
Capitalism leads to corporate monopolies leads to fascism.
Unregulated capitalism CAN lead to fascism.
It doesn’t have to.
Just like communism all around the world has similarly basically always led to fascism and dictatorship, but it doesn’t have to.
Humans are always the problem. Plans don’t meet humans well.
Just like communism all around the world has similarly basically always led to fascism and dictatorshipv
It hasn’t “led” to anything; Marxist-Leninism is explicitly authoritarian. That said, it’s not fascism, that is not what that word means.
Unregulated capitalism CAN lead to fascism.
We’re on our second run of capitalism leading to fascism across the Western world in the exact same way along the exact same fault lines.
Plans don’t meet humans well.
An economic system isn’t a plan; it’s the context within which economic activity (including said plans) take place.
And capitalism has killed millions more than the other ideologies too, even more than theocracies, all because people can’t afford food and medicine
No I don’t think your AND should be added to what I’m saying. You can say that elsewhere as it’s own standalone. Ty.
Harris is certainly well educated enough to know that Trump is not a communist; presumably these dipshit comments are for right-wingers, because she’s trying to appeal to them again.
Goddamned neoliberals
They literally exist just to kill leftism in the united states now. No other benefits offered
A fascist dictator, not a communist dictator.
She a little confused but she got the spirit
He’s a fascist dictator, not a communist one. And when the ‘titans of industry’ care more about their bottom line than democratic principles, that’s a sign to rally against them, not frame one’s argument with an echo of McCarthyism.
Harris continues to demonstrate that she is not only was too incompetent for the job, but also 1/3 of the reason we have a fascist administration. The other 2/3 belong to Biden and the DNC for the curious. I don’t think she’s too uneducated to know the difference between communism and fascism, i belive she’s intentionally conflating the two because at the end of the day, she’s still a right wing pig.
So you don’t blame the actual fascists in your mathematics?
I dont think we’re trying to constructively critisize or reform the nazi party currently
Do you blame water for being wet, or a dog for licking its balls? Fasc gonna fasc, I’ll reserve my criticism for the folks I expected to actively work against it.
The other side is also reserving their criticism for those people, so the net result is that the only people who aren’t receiving hate are the fascists.
spoken like a true tankie
Not everyone who points out the Democrats lost the last election are tankies…
They annoy me to, but also shut the fuck up if this is your only thought. Even if they were a tankie, which I don’t think they are because the criticized them for reasonable things we all saw, you should actually point out their errors so reasonable people see your comment and don’t trust them instead.
It’s smart messaging
Trump is Statist, which is something loathed by both conservatives and libertarians
I can understand what she was trying to do; pull the libertarians and the conservative small state crowd to the Democrats, but it’s a dumb message and I doubt current DNC voters want anything to do with them. This is why they lost so many votes and will continue to lose; they need to attract those who abstain from voting and stop trying to please potential undecided Republicans once and for all.
Trump’s actions mirror the modus operandi of most dictators, whether from the left or right. The way he appointed an anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist as health secretary is reminiscent of Stalin promoting Lysenko’s ideas against all the scientific evidence independently produced by his peers.
LMAO
Conservatives don’t care about small government. They just uaw “small government” as a dog whistle to attack racial minorities. New Deal-era and post-WW2 GI Bill policies were quite popular in the South, as they were written to exclude black people from their benefits. It was only with the Civil Rights Act and the Great Society movements, when black people started qualifying for poverty assistance just like white people, that conservatives suddenly started caring about small government.
Conservatives don’t care about small government.
I see this often from (presumably) liberals.
I came from a conservative family and held conservative / libertarian beliefs most of my life. These people really, really do want small government. Saying that they don’t makes it impossible to understand their motives – and we really do have to understand where people are coming from.
To complain that their political leaders sell out those ideals for the sake of buying votes is fair, but only if you admit that same set of perverse incentives is not unique to any party.
These people really, really do want small government.
If they do, then none of their actions support this desire.
There’s a reason why the venn diagram between libertarians, conservatives, and maga is practically a circle.
Except calling him a statest is misleading. He will gladly undermine the state until it is subservient to the party. That’s the purges.
deleted by creator
Nah this is USSR style government at its core. Hes running all the classic dictator playbooks but a lot of this was ripped from USSR
He has taken some very communist steps. The government has taken stake in Nvidia and Intel, as well as received voting shares in Nippon Steel. His government has literally started seizing the means of production…
Those aren’t even under the illusion of the workers owning the means of production, though.
It’s fascism, utilizing the pre-existing Christian fundamentalism of American conservatism. The fact it includes kleptocratic state capitalism doesn’t change the fascism, or its means of attaining power.
To be honest, turning the cross, in the following decades, into a forbidden symbol, because of the christofacist evil that’s happening in the US right now, would be a boon
Yeah it’s similar to Putin’s Russia or the Uns’ North Korea, both of which are fascist regimes dressed up as other types of government.
It’s government control which MAGAS equate with “commie”
Ya gotta meet people where they are
Yeah, we’re not talking about Lennon. We’re talking about Stalin.
I am the walrus.
Coo coo cachooooooo. I wanted to correct it, but I’m lazy and thanks for this
Complete misunderstanding of what the term even means. Like I said in another comment, it’s incorrect, antiquated boomer speak.
Jeepers, did you ever consider the fact that the Nazis have a better understanding of communication than you do? Do you understand about messaging and target audience? Do you think you’re the target audience for this statement? Do you think Kamal Harris is speaking to your personal understanding of what communism is? Or do you think she is speaking to 50 years of US propaganda? And the description that would be readily recognized by most republican voters? Do you think everything is about you?
So she’s still out there pandering to right wing voters? No wonder she lost.
I mean how’s your voting block doing? The country is what it is, convincing people on the wrong side, to do the right thing, is politics at its core???
She has to start losing 2028 at some point
/s
So good communication is lying to people instead of trying to achieve higher understanding? Just keep dumbing down discourse so long as it gets you some short-term gain?
Wow, with thought like that it’s no wonder Americans voted in fascism. You’re supposed to be on the “good” side? I see why Democrats are more than happy to smash leftists teeth in alongside their fascist counterparts. 'm sure you’ll get there when chips are down.
Let me critique this critique because the critique is not hard enough, and it also hurts my feelings more than the fascist stealing my government.
I mean she’s doing more than you are doing to oppose your enemies currently. Seriously have any of you armchair communist done anything? Are you guys still in fighting over labels? Like the fastest have pretty much taken full control and you are picking apart Kamala Harris‘s press briefing. And you’re saying, I am a fucking sympathizer.
Communism is the people taking control of production right? Not the fascist dictator.
This is a great question! You’re basically correct, but there are a few additional things. As far as the relationship between workers/consumers and the means of production is that of social ownership. Rather than an individual (or individuals) privately owning the means of production and purchasing labor from workers, the workers, consumers, and society as a whole collectively own and operate the means of production.
Additionally, the economic system is not a market system. Instead, investments, production, and allocation of capital goods (resources/products which are used either as ingredients for another product or as machinery/tools to produce another product) are planned, and not left up to “market forces”.
There are some aspects which are debated among communist philosophers. One major aspect is whether the economic planning would/should be centrally or decentrally done. The USSR had a primarily centrally planned economy. Others (myself included) advocate for a decentrally planned system.
Some things, which are usually stated, as being part of communism, are that society is moneyless, stateless, and classless. Starting with moneyless, if goods are exchanged on a market, an intermediate good is usually used specifically for exchange purposes (currency/money). If goods are not exchanged on a market, money is less necessary, so it is expected to be phased out.
Many philosophers say that the state’s purpose is to “ease” tensions between classes, and enforce economic policies. If there are no classes, and goods and services are “produced based on ability, and distributed based on need”, the primary purposes of the state no longer exist, so it would likely “whither away”. Anarchists generally argue for an immediate dissolution of the state.
The keen eyed, among you readers, might wonder how the planning could be done without a state, especially if the planning is central. I would be interested in the answer to that, myself. There are a few books talking about a post-capitalist system. I recommend No Bosses and Inventing the Future.
Hope this helps!
Yes, very well described. Thanks
That’s what’s called “crony capitalism”, in this case. Communism is something completely different.
Some would say he’s a commie fascist tankie dictator.
Yeah, uneducated people might say something like that.
Education is the opiate of the masses.
If only education was actually that addictive. Maybe we wouldn’t have so many dumb fucks voting for these dipshits.
hes sewing chaos that means hes actually a anarchist
deleted by creator
Well. That tells me all I need to hear. The DNC had decided to lose. Again.
Good luck. You’re gonna need it.
Misleading, editorialized title. Any worthwhile journalist wouldn’t quote somebody on words they didn’t literally say.
bad journalism for sure… however, you can infer the meaning here. i don’t think she’d separate ‘tyrant’ and ‘communist’ for distinction. still, hate how this shit passes as acceptable writing.
She did literally say that
She literally didn’t.
We used to compare the strength of our democracy to communist dictators. That’s what we’re dealing with right now in Donald Trump.
Can it be presumed it’s what she meant? Arguably. But presumptions are not quotes, and it’s not acceptable to attribute a quote to someone that didn’t say the words you are claiming they did.
That’s what we’re dealing with right now in Donald Trump.
What could this quote be referring to if not the prior sentence
Your inference on what she meant doesn’t change what she literally said.
It seems like you don’t remember what regular journalism used to be, because it was absolutely proper journalism to splice together pieces of sentences that make a shorter version for a title, as long as it was clear that the original really did mean that - which is the case here. The only issue here is the quotes, it would typically be “we’re dealing with (…) a communist dictator” or “we’re dealing with” “a communist dictator.” Your nitpick that the exact sentence wasn’t sliced up this exact way is misplaced, you’re not advocating for precise quotes, you’re just advocating for plausible deniability, like someone’s going to say “I didn’t say that, you don’t have a soundbite of me saying Trump is a communist dictator.” That’s just legalese, and that’s denying the meaning of the job, because actual journalism isn’t supposed to be a parrot job, this is exactly what it should be. It is, in fact, what she literally said.
Nope. Quotes don’t work like that either. You don’t get to just piecemeal the words in whatever order you want and claim “They literally said that!”.
Actual journalism deals with and communicates facts without distortion. Sometimes that’s a “parrot job”, and many times that includes personal insight, but it can never compromise on accuracy in reporting what actually happened. That’s lazy, unprofessional, and a threat to the medium as a whole. Similarly, you insisting falsehood is “fact” doesn’t make it so. It just erodes any credibility or merit your words carry, weakening your future statements that much more. You discredit yourself and everyone else that shares your stance.
And, again, nothing I’ve said has anything to do with what she meant. I’m not saying your claims of her intent are wrong. This has nothing to do with “deniability” or “legalese”, and trying to frame my point with some sort of counter-agenda is entirely unfitting.
For what an actually credible title could look like -
Harris Likens Trump to “communist dictators”
Accurate, and even shorter. Took me all of 2 seconds. Whoever wrote the title of the article is a hack that’s not worth the effort being put in to defend here.
What you’re asking for is state propaganda, that’s where it goes, that’s where it is right now. It teaches politicians to spin longer phrases that clearly sound like promises and denouncing bad things so they can then deny everything the next day, because “that’s not what I said.” And on the other hand, it punishes those who make a short, blunt comment and then get hounded about the exact word they use, not allowing for any explanation - or any mistake. That’s how you get nations refusing to call something a genocide, and Nazis pretending to be upset at getting called Nazis, that’s how you get any left winger denigrated because they used a word you decided was not right, while denying the meaning of a word that a right winger said. You erase the importance of meaning by focusing on the importance of an exact quote while denying an interpretation. It teaches the media that asking questions and making editorial interpretations is forbidden because only the exact phrase from the press release is permitted, making it easier to manipulate the message being put out, because copy-pasting is easier than interpreting, and it reduces variations that expose the gaps and underline the problems.
You yourself right now are denying that this is really what she said because that’s not her exact words, leaving an opening to deny the entire comment - because that’s how it goes, not necessarily from you, but from anyone who comes after that. Hell, you’re already dismissing whoever wrote this as a hack because you don’t like that they didn’t use an exact quote, even though the meaning is absolutely right and you know it. Even your suggestion will be met with “but what was the exact quote” from people who will promptly ignore everything you say that’s longer than one sentence, and what you thought was more correct than this title will be deemed not correct enough. Like it or not, this is historically how journalism did things right, this absolutely was how quotes worked, until Fox News had to argue in court that only an idiot would believe they were news, and then nothing came out of it except Fox getting more power. This is how people keep moving toward more autoritarianism, that is what they have been doing, and that is what is happening now. Diversity in journalism is a good thing, and what you are defending only pushes toward uniformity.
We’re dealing with a fucking menace of a president. That’s the important thing to focus on, goddammit!
This is the akin to the pedantic gymnastic arguments that people keep using trying to protect themselves from accepting Kirk’s fascist bullshit. He literally said a bunch of heinous fascistic shit, and people will argue “context”. You’re arguing pedantics for no good goddamned reason.
Her first sentence involves the second, and vice versa. They are not exclusive of each other. They are two clauses of a singular thought. Stop. FFS
For someone so against meaningless arguments, you are quite insistent on continuing the argument about things I’m not talking about. For the fourth time now - it doesn’t matter what she meant. Quotes in journalism (especially in headlines) are for verbatim statements, not paraphrased inferences.
MAGA Communists continue to be vindicated
I mean so close, I do understand what she’s trying to get across with things like Intel, yet absolutely dumb messaging.
Kamala going back to american basics: all communist = bad --> all bad = communist.
Yeah, completely overloaded and missed used term at this point that doesn’t reflect the realities of anything in today’s world outside of antiquated boomer speak.
She needed to grow a spine and say fascist.
Half this country was exposed to 30+ years of Cold War Propaganda; it’s a very powerful force to draw upon, especially when they are under the spell of the current propaganda. It’s useful to try to get one propaganda to overwhelm the other propaganda inside their brains. It’s like saying something about Palestine to your generation. Or about communism lmao. Over rides the thinking side of your brain even decades later. It’s just emotionally charged and full of false imagery that you perceive as an individual. But the fact remains is he very much running a Stalin like government. Calling him a commie and pointing to the 30 years of commie propaganda is useful politically. Ironically, it upsets, your keyboard communists.too which is magical.
They aren’t real people. When you compare election results to the popular political opinions on lemmy it becomes obvious there are bots in this echo chamber.
I mean they are real people. In the real world they are everywhere. Morons in echo chambers. A small town with a national radio outlet can become an echo chamber…. People seem to like it in there. Solace for those who can’t afford homes I guess
Even when attacking Trump, Democrats can’t resist taking swipes at leftists…
It’s too easy lmao look at these comments. I’m so disappointed in all of you commies I thought you had more fight in ya! Poor you! Utopia delayed!
As much as I dislike it, this is the right messaging.
Anyone with half a brain will say “… This isn’t communism” but only the tankies who vote for Putin will really care.
But all the children of immigrants who fled horrifically evil “communist” regimes? The people who side eye the college kids wearing dictators on their chests? THIS speaks to them.
And… things are looking a lot like a 20th century “communist” dictatorship. So…
THIS speaks to them.
Or it’ll make them laugh. Probably will make them laugh. If this rhetoric worked it would’ve stopped Hitler.
If it worked… it would have stopped Trump and Republicans.
I mean… It has been a go to for the republicans any time a Democrat looks even slightly left.
Conflate functional government with socialism with communism and remind people of the horrifying bogeymen.
Why would this speak to them? They didn’t grow up under communism. All they know is that their parents say it’s bad, but they don’t actually know why it’s bad. Chances are they don’t really care that Trump is likened to a communist because they don’t understand the implied meaning behind the word. It’s the same with calling Trump a fascist. The average American doesn’t care because they don’t know anything about fascism beyond “it’s a bad thing”. It’s just a bad word which makes it the equivalent of calling Trump an asshole.
Speaks to me: commies hated free speech, they hated free markets, they had ample corruption, cronyism, and were full of contradictions and human rights violations. The USA government spent 50 years and billions of dollars on propaganda that disparaged everything trumps America is doing. Time to call upon it before the boomers die
commies hated free speech, they hated free markets, they had ample corruption, cronyism, and were full of contradictions and human rights violations.
That sounds like America these past few years.
Yes that’s the point in Kamala calling trump a commie: and yes our decaying empire went through the same stages the USSR did 30 years later with help from Putin: and YES. None of this is actually communism or capitalism it’s just stealing from people.
You are not interpreting this correctly, and neither is TheHill / Independent / whatever.
Think about it step by step.
- Some time ago, America was hardcore opposed to the USSR and the Communist bloc. Americans like her grew up hearing comparisons with Communist dictators and how they did X, Y, and Z. The bogeyman many people grew up with was a communist dictator who hated free speech, co-opted the state and therefore personally controlled industry, cracked down on artistic expression…
- That’s what we’re dealing with now. Not from the perspective of a McCarthy Boogeyman; Kamala isn’t saying he’s a communist. But from the adult perspective where we’re supposed to care about free speech, a private industry, liberal art… Trump is the thing people grew up hearing about.
Tldr; Kamala didn’t say this. This never happened. Watch the interview and think about what she means. Journalism strikes again~
Edit: Here’s a simpler example: “We went years hearing from the right about demonic liberals abusing kids. Well Trump is that—that’s what we’re dealing with now.”
That isn’t saying Trump is a demonic liberal. It means “the thing everyone hated is here in a different form”
Maybe she needs to be more careful about her words then.
“We used to compare the strength of our democracy to communist dictators. That’s what we’re dealing with right now in Donald Trump. And these titans of industry are not speaking up,”
