Socialism

2973 readers

40 users here now

Beehaw's community for socialists, communists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian leftists (this means anti-capitalists) of all stripes. A place for all leftist and labor news and discussion, as long as you're nice about it.

Non-socialists are welcome to come to learn, though it's hard to get to in-depth discussions if the community is constantly fighting over the basics. We ask that non-socialists please be respectful and try not to turn this into a "left vs right" debate forum by asking leading questions or by trying to draw others into a fight.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

OneRedFox@beehaw.org

How to explain to libs in crisis that the US Constitution is antidemocratic (piefed.social)

submitted 1 day ago by the_abecedarian@piefed.social to c/socialism@beehaw.org

90 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Part of what I see with 50501/Hands Off protests is that they have a theme of "defending the Constitution" from Trump. This is really a somewhat conservative position and doesn't have much historical rigor to it.

Prof. Aziz Rana of Boston College Law School is having a moment on Jacobin Radio right now. His basic thesis is that the Constitutional order is so deeply antidemocratic that the left argued with itself and the liberals over whether to focus efforts on challenging it in the early 20th Century. In the broad sweep of history since then, Americans have come to view the Constitution as a sacred text, but in fact, that order is part of what gives the Republicans and the far right their advantages despite losing the popular vote.

The shorter interview: https://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Radio.html#S250424 (April 24, 2025)
The 4-part long interview: https://thedigradio.com/archive/ (see the Aziz Rana episodes starting in April 2025) - Part 4 isn't up yet.

So why should we venerate the Constitution, when it holds us back from real, direct democracy? I think part of what our liberal friends and family hold onto is a trust in the Constitution and the framers. They weren't geniuses, they were landowners worried about kings taking their property. Use these interviews, or Prof. Rana's book, to handle those arguments.

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

[–] manxu@piefed.social 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I guess you have never heard of Mahmud Khalil then, or any of the other students arrested simply for speaking out about Palestine.

Nothing prevents an astroturfed movement from attracting real life supporters. I saw the genuine anger and upset at the protests. The problem is that it was all very convenient for Trump and his people. They were absolutely delighted at the self-inflicted vote suppression.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I guess you have never heard of Mahmud Khalil then, or any of the other students arrested simply for speaking out about Palestine.

That's not a Palestinian problem; that's an American civil rights problem. It has absolutely zero impact on conditions in Palestine.

The problem is that it was all very convenient for Trump and his people. They were absolutely delighted at the self-inflicted vote suppression.

Not everything you dislike is astroturfing.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

It has absolutely zero impact on conditions in Palestine.

Impacting the policies of the United States is probably the single biggest thing on the planet that someone can do to help Palestine. A mass movement to spread awareness and force discussion of the issue is, I am sad to say, probably the best out of all the slimmest chances of being able to effect that.

It will not be very effective, because of awful problems in the US government, but I literally cannot think of anything at all that any person could do that has any better chance of helping the Palestinians than effectively organizing protests in the US that are as big as you can make them. The only other thing that I can even think of is a massive paramilitary attack on Israel, and I think that would be much more likely than not to backfire and be the end of Palestine.

Oh, also, not letting Trump get in office would have been a big thing, but we sure fucked that up, and God help them now.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Impacting the policies of the United States is probably the single biggest thing on the planet that someone can do to help Palestine.

True enough, but that was always a long-term goal. There wasn't a snowball's chance in hell of US policy towards Palestine meaningfully changing this decade no matter which party won the election.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not going to have a conversation with you where I explain why, as bad as Biden and every other president has been, Trump is a meaningful change. I've talked about it already twice today and it is too grim. Look in my history if you want to see.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah fair enough, but that's also not what I was trying to say. America's Palestine policy wasn't going to improve during the next eight years even with Democrats in charge. Even if you think Trump is somehow worse, we should be able to agree on that.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 1 points 13 hours ago

I mean, we'll never know now. And yes, Trump is worse.