Should we create a new political party in the US, specifically for shitting on the rich?
Let's face it, the dems don't care about the commoners, the republicans are actually pure evil, everyone was happy when that shitstain CEO got shot.
Maybe we should build on this momentum we have to drive actual change at the political level.
my first act as president in 2029 would be to issue a full and unconditional pardon of the billionaire killer.
edit:
well alrighty then, followup question, does anyone want to join my newly formed political party? I'm going to start working on drafting our mission statement, or manifesto or whatever it should be called.
Further Edit:
I set up a lemmy community for us to post shit about it. If you want to join, that's our official, unofficial space.
https://lemmy.world/c/newpoliticalparty
Need to fix the broken FPTP voting system first. Otherwise any left leaning political party will just take votes away from the dems and hand the election to the republicans.
And Republicans know this by the way, any left leaning fringe party will get financial donations from the Republican Party,
I don't think we're going to gain any traction until we override Citizens United and make bribing public officials illegal again. That would allow us to take back the legislative process and begin passing bills that the super rich are not going to like.
Any white collar crime done for the sole benefit of enriching one or siphoning money away from citizens or workers.
Regulatory capture, pyramid schemes, political bribery, hidden tax havens, environmental distruction, writing bills like citizens united, cutting social services, forming monopolies, competition buyouts, blatant conflicts of interest, etc.
We have hate crimes, when something is done out of hatred for a people it is given the harshest penalty because it hurts an entire group.
The thing is, greed crimes ruin the lives of thousands and millions, possibly everyone, and in my opinion should be capital offenses.
We need an investigative oversight committee that stop all functions of a person or company while looking into accusations. If found guilty, a company is dismantled, an individual is executed, their will is ignored and all assets are liquidated and used to remedy the situation that was created.
If found not guilty, you're closely monitored by the greed crime committee for an agreed period. If you are accused of three sepparate greed crimes and different times, even if found not guilty, you should be considered a bad faith potential, and exiled or removed from any position of power.
Until we have a voting system where 3rd parties are viable (for example. Ranked Choice Voting, Star Voting, Approval Voting, etc.), we absolutely do not benefit in any way for the existence of more parties.
Whether intentional or not, America today is a two-party system by design. If you want more choices beyond the Democrats and Republicans, you need to help us enact voting system reforms which are necessary to allow 3rd parties to exist legitimately. We aren't joking when we say that voting 3rd party is throwing your vote away; it very much is.
Create a single-issue party for something like free healthcare, with your sole goal to be to drain votes from Democrats. Gain enough traction, and that party will welcome you into the fold with open arms, and will actually fucking listen to your issue as their primary platform.
Wouldn't it be better to join a party that already has shitting on the rich as part of its mission? I mean the two big parties don't have that, but some of the small ones do AFAIK.
It makes it so third parties only hurt their closest friend and lose to their least favorite party. Taking that energy into the democratic party itself is probably the best bet. Not good, but best.
In ranked choice, yes a new party would probably be best.
No, because "caring about commoners" and "shitting on the rich" are not actually the same objective. People are happy about it because it feels good to get revenge or for people who treat others unfairly to be punished, but sating popular bloodthirst isn't necessarily aligned with actually making society a better place. "Kill the bad people and the problems will be fixed" is historically very much a famous last words kind of sentiment.
Don't see why shitting on rich cunts needs to be political, they are a problem and they should get what they fucking deserve Joker style, simple as that.
But if we're making new parties anyway, one of the primary mandates should absolutely be about completely and utterly ruining the lives of anyone that makes an unnecessary amount of money or hurts others for personal gain.
We don't need a party devoted to shitting on any specific other group. We need one that is devoted to building up regular, every day people instead of the already obscenely wealthy. Like, actually devoted to that and not simply giving lip service to it while working against it (like Conservatives tend to do), or doing as little as they can to get "good guy points" while still sucking a big, fat corporate dick (like the Democrats tend to do).
Right now we don't have a left wing party in the US. We have a right wing party, and a right wing fascist party. As much as members of the fascist party love to shit on the Democrats for being leftists, most of them aren't actually leftist.
We need electoral reform that implements a system where more than two parties becomes viable. Imagine splitting left-leaning voters even more than they are now. It’s guaranteed wins for Republicans.
First Past the Post must be done away with and there should instead be a coalition of voters that refuse to support ANY candidate that doesn’t make it their primary campaign policy. Once that’s done, smaller parties will organically be created and incorporated into the system.
Support organizations listed here, specifically FairVote.
No. Socialists of the past have never won any political victories by saying "rich bad," the victory comes from presenting alternative solutions like public ownership and central planning. What you are describing is adventurism, not a genuine revolutionary movement.
Don't Start With President! Running for president as a party that doesn't have any senators or governors is a massive waste of money on an ego trip that normally hurts the side that people voting for them support.
Start with safe democratic states, like New York and California. Run for safe democratic mayor-ships and house seats. Once you get a couple of wins, momentum, and a bench of candidates: then try for governor or senator. Once you get more than 3 of them THEN you choose the most popular among the group and run them for president.
Could look into the working families party. I like their policies, and they're building power from the ground up in local elections rather than trying to run a presidential candidate.
Well I think the real question should be, why isn't the democratic party being sued for preventing other political parties from presenting themselves....
The issue is that with a two party system it permits bit sides to take its population for granted..... No real competition
I think it would take a massive, earth-shaking event for any other major party to be formed in the US. I understand that ballot access in most states is an extremely high barrier that blocks anyone except the major parties. Of course, the two major parties made sure to make it that way.
Since criminals can be president now, I think Joe Exotic should be president. Make America exotic again!
People don't want to empower the workers and take away money and power from billionaires. Bernie Sanders already tried this but it's not how America works and what Americans want.
With the current system, every new party will take away votes from the party it's closest to. This ensures more voting percentage for the opponents. So when you create a socialist party, most of the votes you will get will be from democrats who won't vote for the democratic party, so it's easier for the Republicans to win. You just helped the opposite side.
Maybe when you create a party close to the Republicans you can steal their voters so the democrats have a higher chance of winning. Maybe do the same within the democrats to scatter their votes in a way so Bernie will get the majority.
We should not. This idea of starting a new party to do something has been exhaustively understood for a long time. All it is capable of doing is hurting the major party your new party is closest to. Best explained here.
It is exciting to create something new you have total control over, and that excitement can help you get off the ground and feel like you’re going somewhere, but this is an illusion, an eventually that momentum slams into a wall as you realize you’ve only shifted de facto political reality in the United States in the opposite direction you wanted to (again: because all third parties can do is steal votes from their most closely aligned major party).
Bernie Sanders has had this figured out for a long time. He shits on the rich morning and night. He’s also a grownup and knows that his only viable course is to try to shift one of the major parties themselves. He thinks he has better odds with the Democrats, and he’s probably right, though maybe “less bad odds” is a better characterization.
Entering into a major party is not fun and exciting and you don’t have a lot of control and quick momentum. But it is the only way. Small progress, long game. A flash in the pan 3rd party will only burn you.
Maybe move to Vermont and join the Vermont Progressive Party (or any already existing political party) instead.
Theres not really a "shitting on the rich" movement, like there no real socialist movement in the US that has enough support. The best you can hope for is Social Democracy / Progressivism. And thats probably gonna remain local within a city or state, but never gonna make it into the national level.
The other option is: Join the Democrats and try to teardown the status quo from the inside.
Basically try to get a bunch of supporters to infiltrate the Democratic party like how the magats took over the republican party.
Get your supporters to elect progressives into the democratic national committee. Hijack the party platform. Implement progressive agenda.
I personally like the idea of a real third party. But I think focusing on eat the rich won't have enough draw, and will push potential supporters away. I think the focus should be more on government FOR the people. It's similar, but wider in scope. Trump is doing america first... how about people first as the focal point.