Hacker News Reader

It feels like a fever dream here, too. Even if MAGA is removed from power in 2-4 years, our credibility in the world is destroyed for a generation.

There is so much hopelessness from my friends. What can we do? We're kind of waiting for some national movement to take hold, but where are the Democrats? Where are the calls for a national day to strike and protest? Why are we treating this like normal politics?

> There is so much hopelessness from my friends.

That's how a dictatorship works.

People need to be hopeless and don't trust politics anymore and give up.

Don't. They will make your life a bit more miserable every week untill you have to wait weeks in line to feed your kids ( => communism)

Second this, apathy is one of pillars of Putin's regime over in Russia. If you don't oppose it in any capacity, you effectively support it. This is what Navalny meant with his "Final fight of good versus neutrality". Don't repeat our mistake, stay involved in politics and fight for your future.

It only takes 3,5 % of people to overthrow a dictator

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35...

https://cup.columbia.edu/book/why-civil-resistance-works/978...

Trump cutting the military and changing sides + reducing pensions for people should be enough by rough calculations ( 1 million active and 3,5 million active in 1968 ) is more than 3,5%.

I don't know how the mood currently is in the US though, but I would think most people find it insane.

> but where are the Democrats?

Voted out of power.

They should be organizing in person meetings, having weekly fireside chats, calling for strikes and protests, something concrete that shows the country what they're doing and helping us the people participate, even if performatively at first. Protest and in person meetings are a morale boost.

Tbf I need to follow AOC and Sanders on social media and stay more in tune.

The majority of the US is fine with what's happening. The sooner you accept that, the easier it is to let go.

I can't tell if you're a nihilist or a Trumpian, but "letting go" is not how long-term battles are won.

There's little point fighting for something that no longer exists. Unfortunately, this is America now.

The winds of politics change. People can, and will be, convinced as reality smacks them. It takes longer than expected but reality can never be perpetually denied by everyone.

The key for now is for Democrats to avoid the blame of the obvious problems coming up. Democrats cannot afford to be blamed by the upcoming Government Debt, Funding, Tax changes or possible shutdown.

Protests run the risk of drawing attention back to the Democrats and rallying MAGA to a shared enemy. I don't think that works. It seems like a reasonable political strategy to see how far Trump's team is willing to wreck the economy on their own.

The goal is to have MAGA split. We all know they have a different set of ideologies and are only unified in their hate of liberals.

As the debt balloons due to tax cuts, as Ukraine falls due to Trump's clearance, as TechBros cozy up to China and as wealth transfers to Bitcoin in the largest display of corruption of recent years, people will notice that MAGAs biggest enemies are fellow MAGAs.

Why was there ever a second election? Why not just do it once after the revolution and accept the reality you got? In fact why have the revolution to begin with, why not accept the reality of life under British rule?

> In fact why have the revolution to begin with, why not accept the reality of life under British rule?

that 9% tax on foreign imports of tea?

but today's King has imposed taxes of 25% on foreign imports, but no-one's chucking cars into boston harbour

the US King is also far, far more powerful than George III ever was, as the 1688 Bill of Rights ended absolute monarchy in Great Britain

imagine the horror of the alternate history: the 13 colonies might have ended up like Canada,: slavery banned in 1834, dominion status leading to peaceful independence with workers rights, universal healthcare, mandatory vacations and no daily school shootings

The opinion of the Democrats is well known. It's not an awareness problem. Its a people didn't come out to vote problem.

The truth is that the American people voted for this. Until the American people are convinced that these policies are bad, no amount of meetings or protests will help.

Keep the eye on the prize: winning the 2026 midterm election and 2028 Presidential election. What's the best way to convince today's Americans that the policies Trump is pushing will harm the country?

> The opinion of the Democrats is well known. It's not an awareness problem.

> Until the American people are convinced that these policies are bad, no amount of meetings or protests will help

You've got that second part a bit backwards still. Until the American people are convinced that the policies of the Democrats (or another party) are themselves good, no amount of meetings or protests will help.

For sure, part of that is the negative Republican media machine making its followers think that Democratic reforms they personally rely on (eg "Obamacare") are something different than what they know. But a large part is also that Democratic platform, messaging, and follow-through just doesn't inspire.

I'll admit that's a tough nut to crack - things have gotten so far gone it's either sweeping plans that replace self-determinism with government grants ("socialism" if you're willing to steelman that rallying cry), fundamental but abstract things the average voter won't see the point of, or mild reforms that just temporarily increase breathing room while the underlying extractive dynamic catches up.

> But a large part is also that Democratic platform, messaging, and follow-through just doesn't inspire.

That's a media problem.

The bulk of media is squarely on the Republican side right now. A degree of convincing needs to be done to move media heads (Zuckerberg, Bezos maybe???) towards supporting and inspiring other stories.

Republicans have a media strategy. Its Macho man and bluster, bullying even. Democrats don't have one. But Democrats don't have powerful unified media heads like the Republicans who can spew out a consistent message.

Your problem is a structural crisis. You would need a reform of your voting system to effect a stabilization of the political system, o.e. abolish fptp and gerrymandering. I don't see that happen. So you are fucked.

I agree, except I can't admit the last part.

We need a system that allows a freer market of political parties. With two entrenched private organizations that are impossible to unseat, an extremist takeover of one is like taking over the country... Which is what has happened. Imagine a system where rational Republicans could have formed a breakaway conservative party and had a chance at success without being a spoiler.

And I think the new voting system has to have preference built in. I know approval voting is simple to explain and calculate, but I want to maximize the "expression of voter preference" as much as possible while keeping the process simple. Ranked choice has some issues but it is conceptually simple and eliminates the spoiler effect. And it's already in use in parts of the US.

"Ranked Choice" (ballot) needs to be retconned to the decision process of Ranked Pairs rather than Instant Runoff Voting.

It feels like pushing for this (and for effective government structures in general) at the state level is the main backstop we have.

Unless there happens to be some helicopter pilot that ends up taking his oath to defend the United States seriously, or some other exceptional event or sea change that stops the neofascists in their tracks, it seems a foregone conclusion that the federal government will have been thoroughly destroyed in two years.

Agreed on all fronts. The election reform needs to start at local and state level to get people used to the idea, and because it would be easier to do in the first place.

Ranked pairs seem like it would be cumbersome for "the average voter" to fill out on voting day if the number of candidates exceeds about four. And other methods like Schulze which do simple ranking but complicated math on the calculation are too math-y for "the average voter".

I'm open to ideas but I think in this country we need simple simple simple, while getting rid of the spoiler effect.

---

EDIT: Since I have been throttled by the "You're posting too fast, thanks" passive aggressive message, I'll respond here.

I thought ranked pair method involved actually going through each pair and doing a 1v1 vote for every combination. If it is the same "input" as RCV, meaning a single list of preference, then I'm really interested.

Ranked Pairs calculation uses a Ranked Choice ballot. And I'd say Ranked Choice ballots should be designed such that people accustomed to plurality (and even multiple plurality - "pick any N") can fill in that kind of preference and have it appropriately interpreted.

It's not only about breakaway people. An appropriate political systems promotes centralism and punishes extremism - but FPTP combined with your loose candidate selection process does the opposite. There is a large body of studies discussing optimal forms of democracy for newly established ones. The guidebook essentially recommends doing the exact opposite of what are you doing.

Being "easy" to calculate is a substantial benefit. It allows for distributed calculation, audible and independently verifiable elections.

Systems that require centralized counting to calculate a winner are much easier to rig and much harder to trust.

> We're kind of waiting for some national movement to take hold, but where are the Democrats?

If you are waiting for a national movement, its not going to happen.

If you want it to happen, you have to get out and make it.

The major political parties are big tent electoral coalitions, actual movements come from other places (whether existing organized groups or new emerging networks) and then gain the strnegth to be adopted by one or the other party, they don't usually come from the party leadership or committees, which are not structured around creating or nurturing broad social movements.

why would you think just for a generation?

this damage is permanent

you are shortly to be surpassed by the chinese economically, militarily, technologically, and I suspect soon culturally too

you could have kept up the charade of being the sole superpower for another 20-30 years with the support of the rest of the western world

but now you've flushed us down the toilet, you've lost

forever

I say "for a generation" for two reasons. One, I'm an optimist and I want my country to not be a failure forever - and I am differentiating our foreign damage from the domestic damage which is more repairable in the short term.

Two, nothing is forever in the world, and countries can come back from pariah status. The US is still a military and economic powerhouse, it spans the oceans, it's the breadbasket of much of the world.

I think it will take some kind of electoral/structural reform for us to be taken seriously again.

The same people the led us here are not going to lead us out of it. If you care, do something. You be what you are looking for.

If a certain someone was indeed a KGB asset - would they behave any different than they are now?

I think you mean either SVR or FSB; the KGB hasn't existed for quite a while.

> A big chunk of Europe military spending was going to the USA. F35 sold like hot bread.

But there are no 5th Gen alternatives in NATO. If Russia could scale Su-57 or Su-75 then not having 5th Gen fighters would be a very bad idea.

the US now wants to sell F-35s to india, at which point india will grant the russians access to them

this renders the f-35 useless

if this happens there is zero chance the US exports jets to European customers again

Why? You don’t need another fighter to take out a fighter.

Frankly, I think something like the Gripen is much more suited for the modern battlefield.

The best spin I could put on it is that it's a deliberate negotiating tactic - that Trump feels that, by threatening everything, he gets a more favorable deal from people who just want the chaos to stop.

Even if true, there are two problems with this approach. First, it may work well in New York real estate, but it is less clear that it works well in international diplomacy. Not every country wants their immediate future to be at risk from whatever flavor of hardball the president is currently employing; some want to insulate themselves from that risk as much as possible.

The second, related problem is that international relations are not a zero-sum game. America has gained more from an international order that is orderly and rules-following than it would from exploiting everyone else as hard as possible.

Stop overstating it as "KGB asset conspiracy talk", and it won't feel so unreasonable.

Trump repeatedly acts against the straightforward interests of the United States. Russia is well known for running propaganda campaigns to divide countries and install autocrats. It's foolish denial to think there isn't some kind of client relationship between Trump and Russia (and therefore China as well, Russia's senior partner in going up against US hegemony).

Silly

The point is to make America prosperous, which will happen with businesses investing in the US, wages going up, cost going down, buracracy cut.

What does Europe have now? Can’t compete with China Definitely can’t compete with US.

The age of the 60 days vacation is over for Europe, when ur peers are competing with 0 holidays (Chinas 996)

Tell me realistically, how is Europe getting out of this?

Where do you tend to get your news/analysis?