The perspective you're foregrounding here is that of a Harris campaign operative whose sole purpose is getting her elected, consequences be damned. It's a tone and perspective a lot of the more centrist posters in here take because they are philosophically illiterate and lack the moral or historical education needed to understand politics as anything other the horse race. If you actually read their posts, the only moral appeal they make take the form of rudimentary utilitarianism or perfunctory scolding.
I fully understand the political campaign logic behind a black woman running for President feeling like she should pivot to the right to avoid the trap of historical connotations of otherness (blackness, womanhood) being deemed radical to power within the annals of history. It's the most obvious analysis one could take to this issue. But it does not absolve her of the ramifications of her actions. She's not smol bean black auntie, she's the Vice-President running for the most powerful office in the country. The logic that it's excusable for her to do this Republican Rehabilitation tour of normalizing toxic ideology because if she doesn't she won't get to win is only convincing to people whose allegiance is to Kamala Harris' individual career aspirations over the wellbeing of the country. Hence, the parasocial spectacle of 21st century politics. I mean, surely after the Obama Administration we're not still falling for the bait-and-switch of black faces in high places neoliberalism. The most important thing isn't for Kamala Harris to be elected, it's for good things to happen. I've been willing to support Kamala because I believe those two concepts are aligned. But if they come into conflict, as they have been with increasing measure, then my allegiance is to the people not the candidate, and she should face intense scrutiny and criticism.
This would be a relevant retort if I was saying "Kamala sucks, so vote for Trump". But I am not. So it is not.
Responding to fascism by promoting fascism lite is a losing proposition. It's just easing up on the accelerator instead of slamming the brakes.
Cool, same.
Cool, agreed.
Evidently I hate Republicanism more than you do. My entire life I have watched these fukks promote the most dangerous, harmful, antisocial policies that have immiserated hundreds of millions of people. They are irredeemable and should be eradicated from public life. But you and others are free to disagree.
This is a misreading of both HL and politics in general.
The reason HL descends to TLR levels with the insults is because there are a contingent of posters who are unwilling or unable to engage or respond to serious debate on the issues. When they encounter a post that criticizes their position, instead of trying to counter the post with good faith, intellectual debate, they drag the discourse into the mud and get off on zero-calorie shytposting. They take their cues from the useless, superficial bickering we see on the 24/7 news networks, mirroring the state of our political discourse. They think they're auditioning to be Bakari Sellers.
The reason for political gridlock is the long-standing chickens of structural inequality coming home to roost, in addition to the collapsing of the domestic consensus of white male supremacy. It's easy to find points of agreement when both parties agree that people of color are inferior or that gays are a moral abomination or that women belong in the kitchen. It's harder to find points of agreement with someone who fundamentally believes you and your family deserve to live in poverty and indignity.
