Fair point. I wanted to call out how voters asking for better candidates is not voter apathy. Not that people who are apathetic to democracy don’t need to be challenged.

I’m talking about this bill in particular:

https://calmatters.org/politics/2025/10/school-antisemitism-bill-signed/

Then later he gets asked about the AIPAC money he receives and he responds “well that’s interesting you ask that” as if the question itself is antisemitic. https://youtu.be/SB-C6QeNyHw

listen to him talk about the students that have been protesting the genocide, he casts it as antisemitic.

It’s strange to me that we’re agitating for voters to change and not our leaders. It’s fewer people you have to convince.

If she wins the primary then all bets are off. That would mean she ran enough of a good campaign that big money didn’t matter.

The trans issue shows he’s not up for the challenge. If he can’t stay on message and has to spread disinformation to win then he is only going to sweep MAGA under the rug instead of addressing their lies head on.

Everyone responding “at least he isn’t as bad as that other corporate Democrat” is just sad.

Lots of unresolved daddy issues resulting in “pick-me” men.

Now that you mention it… It’s kind of weird they haven’t “transvestigated” her for turning on Trump.

If there’s a Ranked Choice initiative/group in your area please volunteer. This will give us the most bang for your time to get away from this duopoly. I say if because some states have banned RCV. That’s how scared they are.

Wasn’t trying to argue we should abolish public education but that we can’t rely on reforming education to fix our political system. It flows the other way. Which means we also need to find ways to cultivate independent thought outside of traditional education. This comes in many forms, mutual aide, potlucks, new art, community workshops, etc but the through line is you are offering people more independence to be well.

My “source” on education being a tool of Hegemony is Micheal Foucault, not exactly a right-wing propagandist. The right has a tendency to take arguments from others and twist them to accomplish the opposite.

It’s funny because I have the same tired feeling of dragging unimaginative people to a better future. But the good news is if you aren’t against us then you are for us. There’s room at the table for you.

It is silly to think we can’t learn lessons on how Mamdani won because he hasn’t exercised the office yet. This isn’t about how you did that right thing and voted against fascism that one time. This is about winning power, and if that is too idealist for you then I don’t know what else to say other than I’ll see you on the campaign trail.

Sounds like something the CEO of Nestle would say.

Education doesn’t make people act independently, often to the contrary.

Historically, the goal of education was to have a productive labor force. And even if our education system was to teach independence, it cannot deliver the ability, that comes from economic and social liberation.

My point is that we haven’t had good candidates as evidence by their losing. When we actually do have a good candidate that wins we are suddenly the idealists that aren’t practical, as if winning power (in spite of both political establishments) is something other than an act of pragmatism.

I think that downplays how good of a candidate Mamdani was and how differently he ran his campaign. It also blinds us to new lessons.

As long as we’re paying attention to those who can imagine a different future, then we’re at the same table.

I think we overemphasize education and should talk more about people’s ability to act and think independently.