Summary
Arab Americans who supported Trump in battleground states like Michigan express concerns over his key appointments, particularly pro-Israel figures like Mike Huckabee, Marco Rubio, and Elise Stefanik, who oppose a two-state solution and back Israel’s actions in Gaza.
While some voters hoped Trump would prioritize peace in the Middle East, his picks have fueled unease about his administration’s direction.
Outreach leaders like Massad Boulos, who engaged Arab American communities during Trump’s campaign, have yet to secure roles, leaving some supporters questioning their expectations of Trump’s policies.
Oh I didn’t say we should do nothing.
What I am saying is, is that we are past the threshold of a good future, for all but the hyper wealthy.
Yes, we can do things to make it a less bad future for the masses, but there is no realistic plan where everyone, all 340ish million Americans, all 8 billionish humans, get to be free.
Telling everyone authoritarianism is bad is not an effective strategy.
Evidence: It’s what leftists and liberals have been doing for 8 years and it resulted in the greatest Republican sweep since Reagan.
You have to actually do things, things which have a realistic chance of working.
If your plan is to hope really hard, the lesson our hypothetical ancestors will learn is: Hopium cheerleading is an exhausting, virtue signalling waste of time that accomplishes nothing when it is not paired with actual, actionable plans.
Have you got any of those?
For one thing, this is what fiction is for!
If you’re like me, you probably know some people that fit in that neo-liberal democrat space: nice people, but definitely the kind MLK talked about as being an obstacle to progress. A lot of the time, they’re also the people that “aren’t into politics,” because they have straight white privilege, and these issues usually don’t affect them directly.
One of the reasons the right has been so successful since Roe v Wade is because they get organized. They meet, they talk, they plan, they take small local action. And, of course, these are the kinds of things that leftists talk about. We need to organize, we need to work together, we need to stop in-fighting, etc. But we don’t have the natural advantage the right does.
Third places. They’re built for the privileged and wealthy, and they fight to keep them that way. See campaigns against libraries. It’s way harder for a Jew, an Arab, and a gay man to walk into a bar and sit down for a discussion than it is for a bunch of old white ladies to talk about their Saturday plans at a church potluck. Spaces for left-leaning political discussion don’t really exist. Except in the realm of fiction.
Star Trek is, of course, a very well known example of progressive fiction. I, personally, am a big Trekkie. Here on Lemmy, there have been memes about the Bell Riots (a two part episode from DS9, involving the crew time traveling to September 2024). We were making those jokes because those episodes, especially today, are very topical. AND THAT WORKS!
I’ve had great conversations about those episodes with my centrist parents, as well as several acquaintances: conversations that deal with real topics, like homelessness, civic duty, and citizen action.
The right builds their fortress on a foundation of anti-intellectualism because shutting down other conversations is their most powerful weapon, and they’ve employed it to devastating effect. The atmosphere in our country has been curated to be hostile to political speech and philosophy. Just think of how much ridicule one would receive for recommending something like a salon to a group of friends, rather than something like a boardgame night (this is also affected by lack of free time, so support your unions!). It’s for the same reason they sow division between minorities.
But fiction doesn’t have this weakness! Have your friends over to watch some Star Trek, or lend out your copy of Men at Arms, and get Sir Terry Pratchett’s Sam Vimes “Boots” Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness into the hands of an impressionable youth. AND THEN DISCUSS WHAT IT MEANS! Do some literary analysis. Talk about the realities that informed the art. Empathize with Jadzia as the cultural norms of her society demand she end her relationship with her former lover, simply because she’s also a woman now. Then, suddenly you have your own group for leftist political discourse.
That’s where it gets truly tough, but as was stated above, this is going to have to be a long term effort. This is a first step. It’s up to us all to take one, and then the next, and then the next, just like those monsters that set out to repeal Roe v Wade 40 years ago, and only succeeded now.
So your plan is to write subversive fiction, and have third places where people will talk about theories.
Uh ok neat, we are doing that here, virtually, and people have been doing this on the internet for two or three decades.
(Insert Einstein’s definition of insanity here)
So again, what’s the actionable, definable, realistic plan?
…
I’m currently getting my ass downvoted into oblivion in another thread for saying that software developers unwilling to sacrifice their livelihoods or lower their quality of life, and who instead continue to write software that directly promotes corporate profit seeking and spreads fascist propoganda are part of the problem, that they bare some degree of moral responsibility for societal degredation.
“Someone else will just do the job.”
To me it looks like a great many people have a vast, in depth understanding of all of the things that are broken with society, but we are already past the threshold where all of these people who understand the problems…
… well, they’re unwilling or materially unable to…
… you know, do anything about it.
tl:dr;
we are already neofeudal serfs.
discussing theory is great, but if it doesn’t lead to any actual, implementable plans for change, nothing will change.
Which, I think, should be enough proof that this method doesn’t work. Physical community ties are important. Look at red state medical gofundmes. That’s basically socialized medicine (though the worst possible version of it lol), but they support it because they know the people they’re supporting. Leftist policies consistently poll well across the board, but conservatives get elected anyway, because when these people go to church, their pastor tells them to vote for Trump. Or their family. Or their buddies from work. The people they interact with regularly, because those are the people that can use social normalcy to enforce their morals. You can’t do that online.
We talk about making life uncomfortable for fascists because that kind of constant discomfort is what eventually gets people to self-reflect. You can’t have a community hostile to Nazis, without first building up connections between people to enforce that hostility. That’s why I put so much focus on just talking to your friends about a TV show. It’s basically a Trojan horse. A way to start expanding the leftist community to people that haven’t learned to debate, and don’t know how to engage with media critically. Teach them.