Bernie’s movement was truly a huge waste. Imagine turning that million strong movement into something else. I’m starting to think that his role was to absorb all that energy and dissipate them into the wind to protect the capitalist class.

This would never happen because the US political system is domestic counterinsurgency. Sanders would've never even walked the halls of the capitol if he didn't serve a counterinsurgency role. People need to move beyond "both parties serve the bourgeoisie" or "the parties represent different factions of the bourgeoisie" and actually analyze the political parties for what they really are: a form of domestic counterinsurgency designed to defend the state from any potential insurgent (ie revolutionary) action. The George Floyd uprising was the real eye-opener that I think not enough people have a good grasp of.

Federation is another form of domestic counterinsurgency. Don't you think it's strange how states with large POC populations like Hawaii and California have draconian gun laws while states with white supermajorities like Wyoming have incredibly law gun laws? People too immersed within US politics will try to explain the various party platforms while if you understand the US political system as domestic counterinsurgency, then it makes complete sense. You want the portion of the domestic population that have the most potential to wage insurgent warfare to be disarmed while the portion of the domestic population that have the most potential to be deputized on behalf of the state to be armed. And to put the cherry on top, the police in those blue states (LAPD, NYPD) are super vicious as well, a very strange observation if you take strict gun laws at face value but not strange at all if you see it for what it really is. It doesn't matter if white Hawaiians are getting screwed or if Asian Idahoans get a pass because we're talking aggregates, not individuals. The antics of the parties are just kabuki theater to distract you from what's really going on. This is not a perfect explanation (the South has lax gun laws despite having a large Black population although those states have other means of oppressing Black people), but there are other examples I could go over.

I knew people wouldn't protest over Roe v Wade because federation means states will have inconsistent laws, including abortion laws, so an entire potential movement is completely sunk by "just move to a state where abortion is legal lmao." You can't build a mass movement with "poor women living in red states who can't move to blue states." And I see the same exact playbook with trans rights. There will be states like Massachusetts that have decent laws while the rest of the US becomes genocidal towards trans people. What people see sanctuary states I see state-sized concentration camps. From a counterinsurgency point of view, you want the more misbehaving portion of your population to be cramped into ghettos where they can be more successfully surveilled and controlled. That's literally the function of a concentration camp. Their ideal goal would be for every single demographic that has the potential to be insurgents to be cramped into a single state that can be isolated and brought to its knees through resource denial. I don't think it's a coincidence "Commiefornia" is a thing, a state that has huge issues over where to get water also being a so-called Mecca for progressives. How very convenient that the state that will be smashed by climate change is also where all the progressives are directed to head towards. How doubly convenient that the states that will be relatively okay with climate change are crawling with white supremacist militias.