Tootfinder

Opt-in global Mastodon full text search. Join the index!

“Overwhelmingly, the reason people care is the belief that the Democrats [winning] control of the House of Representatives next year is the only possible meaningful impediment to Donald Trump’s implementation of his authoritarian agenda,”
said David Welch with the Democratic central committee of Butte county, where Chico is located.
Denney, who chairs the Democratic Action Club of Chico,
has been traveling to the far reaches of the district in north-eastern California to ta…

@hikingdude@mastodon.social
2025-09-29 19:07:00

✅ Wrote to two of our ministers to vote against chat control.
More to come the next days.
Imagine a world where some non-democratic party gets more and more votes. Parties who want to "clean" the country. Which tool would be more worthy than having access to private conversations.
please vote for our freedom
please vote agains chatcontrol
Just drop them an email! It's just an email! Not even 5 minutes of your time.

@hex@kolektiva.social
2025-10-30 10:05:59

The fracturing of the Dutch far-right, after Wilder's reminded everyone that bigots are bad at compromise, is definitely a relief. Dutch folks I've talked to definitely see D66 as progressive, <strike>so there's no question this is a hard turn to the left (even if it's not a total flip to the far-left)</strike> a lot of folks don't agree. I'm going to let the comments speak rather than editorialize myself..
While this is a useful example of how a democracy can be far more resilient to fascism than the US, that is, perhaps, not the most interesting thing about Dutch politics. The most interesting thing is something Dutch folks take for granted and never think of as such: there are two "governments."
The election was for the Tweede Kamer. This is a house of representatives. The Dutch use proportional representation, so people can (more or less) vote for the parties they actually want. Parties <strike>rarely</strike> never actually get a ruling majority, so they have to form coalition governments. This forces compromise, which is something Wilders was extremely bad at. He was actually responsible for collapsing the coalition his party put together, which triggered this election... and a massive loss of seats for his party.
Dutch folks do still vote strategically, since a larger party has an easier time building the governing coalition and the PM tends to come from the largest party. This will likely be D66, which is really good for the EU. D66 has a pretty radical plan to solve the housing crisis, and it will be really interesting to see if they can pull it off. But that's not the government I want to talk about right now.
In the Netherlands, failure to control water can destroy entire towns. A good chunk of the country is below sea level. Both floods and land reclamation have been critical parts of Dutch history. So in the 1200's or so, the Dutch realized that some things are too important to mix with normal politics.
You see, if there's an incompetent government that isn't able to actually *do* anything (see Dick Schoof and the PVV/VVD/NSC/BBB coalition) you don't want your dikes to collapse and poulders to flood. So the Dutch created a parallel "government" that exists only to manage water: waterschap or heemraadschap (roughly "Water Board" in English). These are regional bureaucracies that exist only to manage water. They exist completely outside the thing we usually talk about as a "government" but they have some of the same properties as a government. They can, for example, levy taxes. The central government contributes funds to them, but lacks authority over them. Water boards are democratically elected and can operate more-or-less independent of the central government.
Controlling water is a common problem, so water boards were created to fulfill the role of commons management. Meanwhile, so many other things in politics run into the very same "Tragedy of the Commons" problems. The right wing solution to commons management is to let corporations ruin everything. The left-state solution is to move everything into the government so it can be undermined and destroyed by the right. The Dutch solution to this specific problem has been to move commons management out of the domain of the central government into something else.
And when I say "government" here, I'm speaking more to the liberal definition of the term than to an anarchist definition. A democratically controlled authority that facilitates resource management lacks the capacity for coercive violence that anarchists define as "government." (Though I assume they might leverage police or something if folks refuse to pay their taxes, but I can't imagine anyone choosing not to.)
As the US federal government destroys the social fabric of the US, as Trump guts programs critical to people's survival, it might be worth thinking about this model. These authorities weren't created by any central authority, they evolved from the people. Nothing stops Americans from building similar institutions that are both democratic and outside of the authority of a government that could choose to defund and abolish them... nothing but the realization that yes, you actually can.
#USPol #NLPol

@kurtsh@mastodon.social
2025-08-19 17:29:32

“The working class abandoned the Democratic Party, primarily because the Democratic Party abandoned the working class.”
✅ Control of the Senate Could Be Decided in Maine. This Oyster Farmer Is Vying to Unseat Susan Collins. – Mother Jones
motherjones.com/politics/20…

Something has definitely changed in Democratic rhetoric just in the last couple of weeks.
Officials are now suggesting that ICE agents are committing crimes and should be held accountable
— which is very different from simply objecting to a policy shift.
It’s fair to say this is a result not only of the street-level thuggery that has been so apparent,
but the mounting evidence that top Trump officials feel unconstrainedby the law, judges, or any established authorit…

@hex@kolektiva.social
2025-10-29 12:06:26

Not everyone agrees...
youtube.com/shorts/gcO8dHeKjU0
But I think this assessment may overestimate the competence of the administration (they won't just crash things because their heads are just that full of shit), and may underestimate the ability of the administration (or really, the heritage foundation or other fash planners) to just make some shit up work around any limitation. The use of private donations on the ballroom and to fund military ops is a pretty clear test of that.
No matter what, the government will be shut down. All the things you care about will either be eliminated right now, or slowly over time. That's been happening since the 70's, and even faster since the 90's, so it shouldn't be surprising that it's happening now.
That's the scenario to prepare for, and you should prepare for it even if democrats somehow get control of the government again. Much of the public sector has been privatized and destroyed under democratic administrations.

@tiotasram@kolektiva.social
2025-08-11 13:26:07

How the US democracy is designed to avoid representation
Right now in the US, a system which proclaims to give each citizen representation, my interests are not represented very well by most of my so-called representatives at any level of government. This is true for a majority of Americans across the political spectrum, and it happens by design. The "founding fathers" were explicit about wanting a system of government that would appear Democratic but which would keep power in the hands of rich white landowners, and they successfully designed exactly that. But how does disenfranchisement work in this system?
First, a two-party system locked in by first-post-the-post winner-takes-all elections immediately destroys representation for everyone who didn't vote for the winner, including those who didn't vote or weren't eligible to vote. Single-day non-holiday elections and prisoner disenfranchisement go a long way towards ensuring working-class people get no say, but much larger is the winner-takes all system. In fact, even people who vote for the winning candidate don't get effective representation if they're really just voting against the opponent as the greater of two evils. In a 51/49 election with 50% turnout, you've immediately ensured that ~75% of eligible voters don't get represented, and with lesser-of-two-evils voting, you create an even wider gap to wedge corporate interests into. Politicians need money to saturate their lesser-of-two-evils message far more than they need to convince any individual voter to support their policies. It's even okay if they get caught lying, cheating, or worse (cough Epstein cough) as long as the other side is also doing those things and you can freeze out new parties.
Second, by design the Senate ensures uneven representation, allowing control of the least-populous half of states to control or at least shut down the legislative process. A rough count suggests 284.6 million live in the 25 most-populous states, while only 54.8 million live in the rest. Currently, counting states with divided representation as two half-states with half as much population, 157.8 million people are represented by 53 Republican sensors, while 180.5 million people get only 45 seats of Democratic representation. This isn't an anti-Democrat bias, it's a bias towards less-populous states, whose residents get more than their share it political power.
I haven't even talked about gerrymandering yet, or family/faith-based "party loyalty," etc. Overall, the effect is that the number of people whose elected representatives meaningfully represent their interests on any given issue is vanishingly small (like, 10% of people tops), unless you happen to be rich enough to purchase lobbying power or direct access.
If we look at polls, we can see how lack of representation lets congress & the president enact many policies that go against what a majority of the population wants. Things like abortion restrictions, the current ICE raids, and Medicare cuts are deeply unpopular, but they benefit the political class and those who can buy access. These are possible because the system ensures at every step of the way that ordinary people do NOT get the one thing the system promises them: representation in the halls of power.
Okay, but is this a feature of all democracies, inherent in the nature of a majority-decides system? Not exactly...
1/2
#uspol #democracy

@midtsveen@social.linux.pizza
2025-10-12 14:32:13

I believe the dismantling of capitalism and the state must come through direct action and self-organization by the working class, united in democratic, federated, and recallable unions. Power must grow from the bottom, from the workplaces and communities of ordinary people, instead of being handed to parties or leaders who claim to act on our behalf. Emancipation will only be achieved when workers collectively take control of production, end exploitation, and organize society through free co…

@markhburton@mstdn.social
2025-09-07 12:18:22

"It has long been understood that the capitalist class has numerous means of functioning as a ruling class via the state, even in the case of a liberal democratic order. On the one hand, this takes the form of fairly direct investiture in the political apparatus through various mechanisms, such as economic and political control of political party machines and the direct occupation by capitalists and their representatives of key posts in the political command structure."

𝟱 (𝗧𝗲𝘅𝗮𝘀) 𝟭 (𝗠𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗶) 𝟭 (𝗡𝗲𝘄 𝗛𝗮𝗺𝗽𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗿𝗲) 𝟯 (𝗢𝗵𝗶𝗼) 𝟱 (𝗙𝗹𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗱𝗮) 𝟭 (𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗮) = 𝟭𝟲 𝗡𝗲𝘄 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘁𝘀
That's on top of the 3 seat majority Republicans have in the House of Representatives.
If we don't fight back, Democrats will need to win a minimum of 19 new red-to-blue congressional districts to take back control of the House.
 
And that's even if every last vulnerable Democratic incumbent wins.
 
That's why we need …