Activist says trans people can’t trust Democrats to protect them anymore

www.independent.co.uk Activist says trans people can’t trust Democrats to protect them anymore

In the face of ‘eradication’, one trans activist is preparing to fight – and she’s sick of silence and neglect from her supposed allies. Raquel Willis tells Io Dodds why Republican bathroom bans are everybody’s problem

In the face of ‘eradication’, one trans activist is preparing to fight – and she’s sick of silence and neglect from her supposed allies. Raquel Willis tells Io Dodds why Republican bathroom bans are everybody’s problem

You're viewing a single thread.

131 comments

Democrats were pretty cool about protecting trans people. But thanks to non-voters and $hill Stein voters (along with tens of millions of “low information” Trumpledorks), Trump has all three branches of government at his disposal.
- Considering Democrats are now complaining that their protection of trans people cost them the election, I wouldn't say they were all that cool to begin with. They use trans people as a political tool and then toss them aside the second it becomes inconvenient for them to support trans rights. Just look at how the Democrats have "defended" their newest trans colleague.
  
  Specific people in the Democratic Party have made those complaints. The party has not. Your comment is no different than stereotyping a group for the actions of individuals.
  
  Has the party as a whole done anything to say otherwise? Silence is a different kind of choice.
  
  You’re claiming the Democratic Party hasn’t supported the trans community?
  
  When the leading candidate avoids the issue, gives less representation to trans people than the preceding candidates, and says "states rights" in response to growing repression of trans people when pushed to say something in an interview, I think its fair to say the Dem leadership has abandoned us. Individual dems are better, but the leadership clearly doesn't care.
  
  If you want to turn on the Democratic Party you’ll get a stronger GOP. Your move.
  
  The GOP just swept the nation. All three branches of government. Both houses. Seems to me supporting the Democratic Party made the GOP stronger already. Maybe we need a new party.
  
  You think democrats didn’t get enough votes because they had too much support? That doesn’t make sense.
  3rd party is guaranteed to fail with first past the post. But it sounds like you’re arguing in bad faith in favor of the GOP. So maybe that’s what you want.
  
  I'm saying that you're wasting your time supporting a party that's incompetent. Don't support a third party. Destroy the Democratic Party. Below it the fuck up. Let the Democratic party die a brutal death. Start our own party.
  
  Do I really need to post the CGP Grey video again for the 12th time? I don't think I do. You all know the one.
  
  That’s the same as saying give the GOP all the power.
  
  And here we go again, gaslighting people that they should lick the boots of the party elites as they kick them, because they kick them a bit less than the other party. This thinking has brought Trump not once, but twice now.
  I would have thought after the second Trump win the "lesser evil hurr-durr" strategy would be reconsidered. US Liberals only use marginalized groups when they are deemed "useful" the moment they are not, they are abandoned. US Liberalism is white supremacy with colored-hair and a piercing and an arts degree instead of a business degree. But it is still white supremacy through and through.
  And as the marginalized groups grew tired of this, they are now fiercely attacked, often in openly racist ways by the same people who claimed to want to prevent Trump for his racism and bigotry.
  
  You’re shitting on the only alternative to Trump. While claiming that rallying around the only alternative to Trump is what got Trump elected. All while claiming both sides are the same. Nothing you’re saying is based in reality.
  You’re hitting all the bad faith talking points lock and step.
  I would have thought after the second Trump win the "lesser evil hurr-durr" strategy would be reconsidered.
  Democrats didn’t campaign on “lesser evil” this is a narrative being pushed on lemmy a lot but in reality it doesn’t hold true. Democrats campaigned on fighting climate change, taxing the wealthy, marijuana legalization, student debt relief, healthcare revisions, addressing income inequality, workers rights. And that’s just off the top of my head.
  You’re criticizing “US liberalism” in a way that implies you’re a leftists. Which is an ideology that hold little to no political positions in the US and voters went far right this election cycle. So you clearly don’t know what it takes to win elections.
  And as the marginalized groups grew tired of this, they are now fiercely attacked, often in openly racist ways by the same people who claimed to want to prevent Trump for his racism and bigotry.
  You speak on behalf of all marginalized groups now? That’s pretty convenient for your narrative.
  
  I'm saying they're willing to throw them under the bus as soon as it gets difficult. Being silent while a few members do so explicitly isn't being an ally.
  
  Infighting works to the GOPs advantage. If the DNC starts attacking the few members they have in office they will switch to the GOP. Giving the people who want to eradicate the trans community more power.
  
  What difference does it make if they lose so hard anyway that they are politically impotent?
  
  The difference is: to win you need as many people voting against the GOP as possible.
  
  Since there won't be a major election for another two years, now seems like a perfect time to criticize the hell out of Democrats.
  
  Those criticisms don’t disappear at election time. They get used as ammo by bad faith actors to convince voters to not vote/vote 3rd party/vote GOP.
  Giving the GOP more power
  
  I see we’ve learned nothing from the election. “I’m less shit than my opponent” is not a winning play.
  Instead why don’t we ask why over a third of the electorate doesn’t bother voting? For either side.
  
  I see we’ve learned nothing from the election. “I’m less shit than my opponent” is not a winning play.
  What does this have to do with inflation aka the reason democrats lost?
  Saying you need more votes than just the trans community and their allies to beat the GOP is not saying “I’m less shit than my opponent”.
  Instead why don’t we ask why over a third of the electorate doesn’t bother voting? For either side.
  I did, they said they don’t care about politics.
  
  They really haven't. They tend to take a neutral stance at best, rather than positively affirming trans rights. This was one of the things that killed them in the election. Despite being a decade in to the recent Republican war on trans people, Democrats have never bothered to develop a set of coherent talking points that they can defend trans rights around. When was the last time you heard a centrist Democrat say, "trans women are women, trans men are men. Their healthcare is medically necessary and life-saving. Trans women belong in women's restrooms and trans men in men's. Republicans are currently guilty of attempting a genocide."
  That's the kind of talking points they should be using, a full-throated defense of trans rights that can directly stand up against Republican hate mongering. Instead, if they respond at all, they respond in a pathetic mincing way that tries to "both sides" the issue. Instead of vocally coming down firmly on the side of trans rights, they'll say things like, "these are complex issues...." or "these issues are a distraction..." You would never see a Democrat say that antisemitism is "a distraction" or that defending abortion rights "are a complex issue."
  With some notable exceptions, Democrats have completely failed to actually have strong support for trans rights. Republicans are anti-trans and pro-trans genocide. Democrats are neutral. And this really hurt them in the election. Republicans supported full trans elimination. And Democrats could only respond with non-committal mealy-mouthed mumbling about the complexity of the issue. Voters saw that they really didn't stand for anything. Kamala didn't really believe in anything when it comes to trans rights, and the voters punished her for it. Voters want people who actually believe in something, not an empty suit that is just following polls and focus groups.
  
  The fact of the matter is the majority of America doesn’t treat trans people properly. So to win elections they need the support of people that don’t treat trans people properly.
  I hope that support for the trans community will continue to improve over time. But democrats need votes from more than just the trans community and allies to take power back from the GOP.
  
  The Democrats are a coalition party. They need to be able to stand up for all of the members of that coalition. Do you know why Republicans chose to attack trans people? Because it is a wedge issue they can use to cleave off a portion of Democratic votes. If Democrats throw trans people under the bus and sit idly by to genocide, then they will lose the votes of trans people and their friends, relatives, and allies.
  When has appeasing genocide ever worked for an opposition party? The problem Democrats have is that they're embarrassed to be Democrats and try to run as Republican-lite. Then they look up surprised when people vote for the real deal or simply stay home out of disgust. The biggest appeal of Democrats among the electorate is that they're willing to stand up for marginalized groups. And if one group gets thrown under the bus, every other group knows that they can also be thrown under the bus in the future if the political winds shift. Trans people are on the chopping block now, but after we're exterminated, what other group will the Democrats willingly sacrifice? All Republicans have to do is run another demonization campaign against another group, and Democrats will again fold like a house of cards.
  If Republicans can get Democrats to fruitlessly piss away 5-10% of their core electorate in a doomed attempt to appeal to moderate Republicans, then that is a strategy that Republicans can use again and again to cleave piece after piece off of the Democratic coalition.
  Republicans chose trans people as a wedge. They gambled that, when push came to shove, Democrats would be too chicken shit to actually live up to their stated values and truly defend the rights of people that they're always promising to defend. Democrats proved Republicans right, and that cost them the election. They were defeated by their own cowardice.
  
  The problem democrats have is they are trying to support minority groups like the trans community that are not popular with the majority of voters. So they have to strike a balance between supporting the trans community without losing voters that don’t support the trans community. Because they needs those voters to win.
  The GOP knows this and that is why they made the trans community a big part of their campaign. It creates infighting in the Democratic Party which helps the GOP win.
  A popular way of doing this these days is to create accounts on social media or forums to inflame conversation and cause that infighting that helps the GOP win.
  
  They didn't lose votes for supporting trans rights, because they didn't actually support trans rights. Republicans pretended they did, but they didn't actually support trans rights. Currently Democrats are suffering the negative side of supporting trans rights, but without the positives that come with actually sticking up for marginalized groups in a meaningful way.
  
  Na, the Democratic Party supports trans rights. The GOP used it against them and you are too.
  
  So to win elections they need the support of people that don’t treat trans people properly.
  They don't though, because they're never going to get that voter either way.
  
  Why would you assume this? There are already voters of all types voting for both parties.
- What did they get in return?
  It's politics, they got something, what was it?
  It doesn't say? Huh. I wonder why.
  
  They got to fund the military.
- The problem with democrats is that they always hold progressive action overhead like a carrot. "Vote for us, we'll establish trans rights/universal healthcare/codify roe v wade!".
  Then they don't do it because they want to use it as a fundraising and election platform next go around. If they just did things when they had power people would be more willing to vote for them.
  And yes, I know that there are Republicans and independents blocking progressive action. But that doesn't excuse the DNC from doing what I described above as well as constantly shitting on popular progressive candidates.
- Not really, like their supposed protection of black people their protection of trans people is contingent on how the minority behaves.
  That's not support, that's blackmail.
  
  Username checks out
  Not really, like their supposed protection of black people their protection of trans people is contingent on how the minority behaves.
  "Behaves"?? You mean votes? Yeah it is contingent on how people vote. See gestures to everything
  
  No, behaves. Liberal darling Tim walz called the national guard on the Floyd protests long before any semblance of violence happened.
  If any minority protests a Democrat, they go back to their kkk roots faster than you can say southern strategy.
  
  What the governor called out the National Guard to protect bystanders and property? In case things went south fast?
  Fascists, obviously. Well now I'm glad we lost. Whoever won will surely be much better for that.
  Speaking of - since they lost, why the long face? Shouldn't we be celebrating? Hooray the sucky Democrats lost! They're the worst! Down with the Democrats! Yaaaayyyy
  
  Hey, thanks for proving my point, you're the type of person I was talking about.
  I mean, yes massa, sorry massa, I won't be voting for my interests any more massa, you get my votes now massa.
  
  Sometimes opinions like this get downvoted and I wonder if Lemmy is really as progressive as we claim it to be.
- It's crazy to see a party with a 3:1 fundraising advantage lose in a landslide and then blame the distant fourth place vote getter for the defeat.
  Nobody seems to want to talk about how Democrats endorsed a genocide and how that may have shifted their popularity.
- Were they, because they were a heck of a lot more anti-trans campaign ads from Democrats then some of y'all want to admit.

131 comments