chat

8619 readers

148 users here now

Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.

As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.

Thank you and happy chatting!

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

SexUnderSocialism@hexbear.net

Sulvy@hexbear.net

oscardejarjayes@hexbear.net

Wakmrow@hexbear.net

LeninWeave@hexbear.net

abc@hexbear.net

So what are the factions of capital that the democrat and republican parties represent? (hexbear.net)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by CaliforniaSpectre@hexbear.net to c/chat@hexbear.net

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm listening to Hell of Presidents again and it's always incredibly refreshing to hear such a materialist framing for the early days of the US. Like understanding why the goal of not forming parties immediately failed because of conflicts between different factions of capital (e.g. southern slavers vs. northern bankers).

But then what do Republicans and Democrats represent today? I understand they are historical holdovers from over a century ago, so they have have metastasized into a whole lot more than just representing one or two factions of capital, but there must be some materialist divide between them? Or maybe during the neoliberal turn it was recognized by capital to set aside differences and ultimately control both to give the working class even less power than they already had. But now it seems like the tech fascists are trying to coalesce into the Republicans, and I guess that's what the Republicans are atm, just a more openly fascistic bourgeois party than the democrats?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 10 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

They don't really represent factions of capital anymore because they aren't really two distinct parties. The duopoly is just professional wrestling. It's why there's always party realignment. No faction of the bourgeoisie goes all-in on any party. They either hedge their bets, constantly flip-flop, or just pick a party that offers minor perks at best with the understanding that the duopoly upholds US imperialism anyways. Some factions straight up don't care. For example, the MIC does not care who is nominally in charge since the defense budget never goes down and they'll get their massive trillion dollar checks anyways. They don't even care that much about any difference in any geopolitical "vision" offered by the parties since the grift will happen one way or another.

It's like how Democrats are ostentatiously the less pro-police party, but the police departments with the largest funding are all in blue areas while the police in red areas are comparatively underfunded. Which party is really pro-police? To ask and attempt to answer the question is to fall for the duopoly kabuki theatre.

[–] BigTuffAl@lemmy.zip 5 points 21 hours ago

☝️ this is it exactly