"Progressives should not make the same mistake that Ernst Thälmann made in 1932. The leader of the German Communist Party, Thälmann saw mainstream liberals as his enemies, and so the center and left never joined forces against the Nazis. Thälmann famously said that ‘some Nazi trees must not be allowed to overshadow a forest’ of social democrats, whom he sneeringly called ‘social fascists.’

After Adolf Hitler gained power in 1933, Thälmann was arrested. He was shot on Hitler’s orders in Buchenwald concentration camp in 1944."

  • rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Do not forget that in '32 the SPD backed Hindenburg… who then nominated Hitler as chancellor.

    Thälmann was foolish, but even if he didn’t run, Hitler would still get into power. If the far right is strong enough, mere electoralism will not stop them. Fighting them must happen on the street level.

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Progressives should not make the same mistake that Ernst Thälmann made in 1932

    The mistake Ernst Thälmann made was not throwing his support behind checks notes Paul von Hindenburg, the man who ordered the police massacre of the Spartacus League?

    After Adolf Hitler gained power in 1933, Thälmann was arrested.

    Who elevated Adolf Hitler to the Chancellorship in 1933?

    • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      The mistake Ernst Thälmann made was not throwing his support behind checks notes Paul von Hindenburg, the man who ordered the police massacre of the Spartacus League?

      Um…no? Von Hindenburg was the conservative. They’d have thrown their support behind the centrist, Wilhelm Marx, who lost by about 3%, thanks (in part) to the 6.3% Thälmann took. The rest of the blame lay with the BVP when they protested against the Social Democrats by siding with von Hindenburg.

      Who elevated Adolf Hitler to the Chancellorship in 1933?

      Von Hindenburg, with the help of the governing coalition formed by the Nazis and DNVP, all of whom were conservative.

      What point are you trying to make?

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        They’d have thrown their support behind the centrist, Wilhelm Marx, who lost by about 3%

        The Catholic Centre Party was in open - often violent - conflict with the largely atheist-leaning German Communists. The German Catholics were terrified of a repeat of the Spanish Civil War, where Spaniards were revolting against a religious dictatorship and burning down churches.

        Von Hindenburg, with the help of the governing coalition formed by the Nazis and DNVP

        Wilhelm was aligned with the DNVP as far back as 1923. He was the one who pushed through the Enabling Act of 1923, which the Nazis would ruthlessly exploit a decade later, with their help. And he continued to govern in coalition with the DNVP through 1928, when he was dismissed from the Chancellory by…

        Von Hindenburg, with the help of the governing coalition formed by the Nazis and DNVP

        So, to answer your question

        What point are you trying to make?

        My point is that blaming Ernest Thälmann for his minority party position in the German government through 1933 when it would make much more sense to finger Alfred Hugenberg and his DNVP, which abandoned Wilhelm in '28 and aligned with

        Von Hindenburg, with the help of the governing coalition formed by the Nazis

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        What point are you trying to make?

        Muddying the waters. That’s the point these shills are trying to make.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s not old Junkers like von Hindenburg that they’d ally with. It’s other slightly different leftist factions and a few centrists.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The centrists were aligned with Hindenburg. Friekorps were just as avid commie-bashers as any National Socialist.

        The main problem Ernst had was affiliating himself with the Russian Revolution and advocating for more of the same in Germany. That made him an enemy of nationalists during a period in which “International Jewery” was the boogie man under everyone’s bed.

        The idea that he could just strike up common cause with people who wanted him dead is absurd.

  • grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Blaming progressives for not aligning with centrists instead of blaming centrists for siding with Nazis to lock out progressives is a weird take.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      That’s historical revisionism. They would have easily created a coalition government to oppose Hitler, but without the support of the communist party, the conservative block ultimately held onto control, and Hitler was appointed chancellor by Hindenburg.

      You’re disingenuously conflating the conservatives that ceded power to the Nazi party (that had only taken about 30% of the vote) with the center left that reached out to the communists in an attempt to stop them. A decision by the head of the communist party that directly led to the murder of millions of people, including himself.

      We are talking about a parliamentary system. The communists could have formed a coalition government that had a majority, but they refused. Without their support, no party won a majority or were able to form a majority coalition government, and the Nazis were able to take control from the conservatives in power (or more accurately, they gave it to them freely).

      I’m not a historian, so someone correct me if I’m wrong.

      • Saint_La_Croix_Crosse@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        No, at no point did the Centre try to form a coalition with the KPD, but were turned down. In the Weimar system, it is the Chancellor that is in charge of forming coalitions, so even if the KPD, SPD, and Centre had enough seats to form a majority (which they didn’t), they couldn’t just form a coalition. This is why Franz Von Papen was appointed by Hindenburg, since he was expected to be able to convince the Centre party and Nazis to form a coalition with the conservatives and monarchists. And why when that failed and there was a failure to form a ruling coalition that Hindenburg appointed Hitler as chancellor to create a Nazi lead coalition.

      • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Different user, but still have an idea.

        Take over the DNC with actual leftists that will implement better voting systems, starting at the lower levels with grassroots campaigns, and slowly work our way up.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        We need the presidency first. We need a majority in both houses first. We need a supermajority in the senate first. We need a 2/3 majority in the senate first. We need to completely overhaul the voting system first.

        There’s always something we need to do first. It’s right there on the timetable. Timetable subject to change. Offer void in red states.

        • GlobalCompatriot@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Are we talking about the same Democrats that sued to keep ranked choice boating off the DC ballot this year? or the Democrats that chose to keep ranked choice voting that had already been passed by voters off the Alexandria VA ballot?

          • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            I interpreted it as “vote only for those democrats who support voting reform,” but it could also be sarcasm.

    • NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I’m pretty sure if all Nazi voters instead voted SDP, Hitler wouldn’t have risen to power. The only reason the Nazi Party had any appeal whatsoever is because fractured voting meant chaotic governments, weak and ineffective chancellors, and leaving the president with no choice but to issue emergency decrees just to keep the state apparatus in semi-functional condition.

      The one way, the only way, given the composition of the Reichstag, that the Nazis could have been kept out of power is if the Communists were willing to swallow their pride and work with the Centre Party, moderate right-wing parties, and SPD to keep Hitler out of the Chancery. Instead, look what happened. Hitler was appointed Chancellor and purged the Reichstag of opposition. The Enabling Act wasn’t passed because everyone wanted Hitler to have those powers. It was because you either voted with the chancellor or the SS would gun you down on the way back home.

      That’s the problem with today’s so-called socialists. An absolutely myopic stance that what isn’t perfect might as well be the worst thing on the planet.

  • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Republicans are not going to suddenly stop being evil, so what’s the solution? Just endlessly comprise and never accomplish anything? Fuck that. I refuse to be held hostage. If Democrats want leftist votes then they have to deliver leftist policies. Otherwise they’re just as responsible

    • Suavevillain@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      That is what Liberals are perfectly fine with. An infinite state of groveling with people in power and never doing anything else. They are hostile to protesters too and ignore bad actions by Dems. Everything turns into but Trump is worse.

    • someguy3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Every time they run on a left policy, they lose. Every time they enact left legislation, they lose. And you wonder why they don’t run a big left platform? Frankly they do left things in spite of it always costing them.

      What the left needs to do is actually show up.

    • MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m voting FOR Harris in the same way I was previously voting FOR Biden. Biden/Harris & Harris/Walz support policies that most closely match those policies I support.

      If Trump died tomorrow I still wouldn’t support Vance or any other Republican because they support policies that I am strongly opposed to.

      I would like to have more options, but realistically those are my choices.

      I don’t have to agree with Harris/Walz on 100% if issues. I’m allowed to criticize them. But at the end of the day I’m voting FOR something and not just against the worst possible choice.

      • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Given that she has the same stance on Gaza / Palestine as Biden, I vote against the orange bad rather than for her.

      • Maeve@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I hope you never suffer an illness or injury that suddenly thrusts you into the group of working poor, living out of the car, couch surfing or sleeping rough.

        • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          American mercenary healthcare is the primary reason I abandoned my green card efforts. It just wasn’t worth the risk that a car accident could render me homeless.

          • Maeve@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            The average American tax payer individuals who make less than a certain amount get nothing in return. If we got services instead of global war, I believe very few would have an issue with taxes.

      • GlobalCompatriot@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        There currently is no middle class. There’s people that think they are still middle class, but they are struggling just as much as they poor.

  • index@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Don’t fall for the third party trick, keep voting for the red and blue party and go back to work so a bunch of billionares and politician can keep feasting

  • N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    The only way a third party would be viable in the US is if it grew organically from small, local races that aren’t captured by large donors. A dedicated group of volunteers knocking on doors and spreading a message can have a real effect in those races. Get a few candidates in office and start doing some good, and a party can grow around it. Draw up a blueprint for how you did it, and spread it around to other towns and cities, making allies with other local groups as they spring up.

    Is that easy to do? Of course not, but that would be a viable path for the formation of a functioning third party.

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    We desperately need more real third-party participation in politics, but voting for third parties in presidential elections doesn’t make that happen—the US voting system isn’t a business that adapts its products to meet consumer demand.

    • someguy3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      in presidential elections

      Or in House of Representative, or Senate. The real power is in Congress.

      • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Local elections is where most of the current people in power got started. Anyone voting for third party in the presidential race missed the boat.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Vote progressives into local offices so they can get experience to work in state offices so they can get experience to work in Congress so they can get experience to be a good presidential candidate. Also to fill offices at every level with progressives.

    • Smoogs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      in ranked voting there is still the possibility that a fear of a deeper evil driving straight to a bipartisan situation again.

      You still have all the same campaigns exacerbating fears with just a different look to the ballot. Ppl could easily fall into the trap of picking their top 1-2 choices based on who they don’t want in power after glued to the screen watching all the drama.

      Rcv just seems like the new ev where someone oversells that it fixes all things but hides the cons that we’re all pretty much in the same spot we started.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    These posts are always missing the point. Voters will vote third party. Your moral claims won’t change that, but your candidate’s policies could. Also, most of us don’t live in swing states. Don’t pretend our vote matters when it never did.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Voters will but they can’t do so under the delusion that a) they are making any sort of change or b) that they aren’t hurting the actually viable candidate closest to them.

      The winner of the election in every state will be the Democrat or the Republican, full stop. You can choose to help or harm the one closest to your opinion.

      • LotrOrc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        This is the type of delusion that eventually leads to fascism any way

        “Hey don’t try to change anything because obviously only one of two people can win”

        “Hey you have to change things from the inside of the party, you can’t just have a third party even though every half decent western government has multiple parties”

        “If you don’t want to vote for a genocidal enabler of capitalism and class separation paid for by the same people who pay for trump/hitler, then you’re voting for trump/Hitler”

        “You have to bring the super nuts authoritarian fascists into the group, and exclude the actual left wing people who are screaming for basic decency and rights for everyone”

        “Oh no how on earth did the crazy right wingers take over the entire country who could have seen this coming? It’s totally not the fault of a governmental party that can’t sort their shit out and take on policies that a majority of it’s constituents want, but instead keeps sliding as far to the right as possible every time they have to move”