Very radical. Very cool.
Ocasio Cortez, sometimes referred to as AOC, was asked in an interview with the National Review if she sees President Maduro as legitimate, for which she replied, "I defer to caucus leadership on how we navigate this."
That's it. That's the entire quote.
To sum up:
- Right-wing rag asks obvious trap question
- AOC, who has zero control over the matter, gives generic non-answer
Have we been reduced to rustling our jimmies over this?
EDIT: Wait, there's actually more:
Back in March AOC was quoted as saying that she was "very concerned about U.S. interventionism in Venezuela, and I oppose it, especially when we talk about a figure like U.S. Special Envoy Elliott Abrams here. I think it’s – he's pled guilty to several crimes related to Iran-Contra.”
She went on to add that, “I am generally opposed to U.S. interventionism as a principle, but particularly under this administration and under his leadership I think it’s a profound mistake.”
What's the issue here again?
There are numerous issues with AOC on foreign policy and especially this. but lets start with the first:
-
Lack of solidarity with left administrations in South America. This has been a cancer growing in the so called "soft left" since Bernies 2016 run. Socialism is good, but not socialism in VZ, or any other south american country we want "socialism like in Sweden or Denmark". This is a weak argument that knee caps the left in the US. If you have a belief that socialism is a good thing to work towards you must counter every imperialist framing and lie about it.
-
Deferring to caucus leadership on VZ, caucus leadership is Pelosi, who wants a fucking war with every non-compliant country, it shows again that AOC is no longer the progressive force that wants to uproot the rot inside the party but is now playing ball.
-
Her silence on Bolivia and meeting with pro coup advocates, while black balling her own constituents: https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/02/14/ocasio-cortez-to-constituents-on-bolivian-coup-drop-dead/
-
Her silence on Syria she's one of the 435 most powerfull people in the US, wielding a military might unsurpassed in human history and she has nothing to say, on the most obvious illegal war in the last administration.
-
Her virtue signalling on the whole "military recruiting on twitch", while this is a nice gesture this does not challenge anyone in power directly and doesn't even attempt to fix the issue of the US poverty draft. She even framed her opposition on this point in the nicest way possible, something like "its unbecoming of the us military to recruit in this way and undermines their stature", instead of framing the real issue: "the us has a poverty draft, and this is just one of many ways it perpetuates endless war".
Politics is not a fan club, you are supposed to hold your representatives accountable, not defend them. 2016 and 2018 gave us a new generation of politicians claiming to be progressive, but so far they have delivered absolutely nothing. They are silent as the war machine rages on, as the methods and means of imperialism are turned on the american people, afraid to step out of line with party leadership.
With friends like these, who needs enemies.
Talk about misdirected hostility... not only is a lot of this just incorrect, we should be banding together to oust the fuckers in the Dem caucus who voted against cutting the pentagon budget.
You mean the 10% cut that was clearly for show and everyone knew would fail? Yeah sorry but thats not the real fight in anyway, thats called political theater.
Letting pretend progressives get away with imperialism ensures no action on any of these issues or anything else you might want for the foreseeable future.
Struggle sessions aren't fun, just dunk on centrists with the rest of us and we'll have that power in no time.
If voting worked, they would've taken it away from you. centrist are easy, breadtube can do that, you want a real left agenda in the US?
Then be prepared to fight for it, cause capital is not going to let you vote that in.
They take voting away from people all the time though - there's been massive disenfranchisement campaigns both from the conservatives towards minorities and from liberals towards the socdems
Well, I guess once you don't have the ability to vote, the only method of expression left is the ammo box
You can't even unite various factions on a leftist internet forum, better stick to the ballot box amigo.
Well, seems like they united us in disagreement with you, so I'd say they're doing better than you are!
man, cutting the pentagon budget sure gets me hot and bothered while there's a movement on the streets that's demanding abolition, a debt crisis rages that's going to leave about half the country homeless and starving, and the planet continues to warm, threatening to bake us all to death.
-
Have we been reduced to rustling our jimmies over this?
How can I feel sufficiently betrayed and disillusioned if I don't reject one of the most promising left wing politicians in office?
Again:
Back in March AOC was quoted as saying that she was "very concerned about U.S. interventionism in Venezuela, and I oppose it, especially when we talk about a figure like U.S. Special Envoy Elliott Abrams here. I think it’s – he’s pled guilty to several crimes related to Iran-Contra.”
She went on to add that, “I am generally opposed to U.S. interventionism as a principle, but particularly under this administration and under his leadership I think it’s a profound mistake.”
You're taking what's essentially a "no comment" response to the National Review over that. Why? No clue.
The National Review isn't even a relevant magazine lol. Why is that the hangup?
You fucking with me right now? I already covered this in a comment you replied to.
It's a right-wing rag. Coming from a right-wing rag, "bUt VuVuZelA???/" is obviously a bad-faith question. Her answer was a one-line brush off, because why the fuck would you seriously engage with that question from that outlet?
Besides, she's already on record with a more detailed statement on U.S. intervention in Venezuela, which is also quoted in the article you linked. Why are you ignoring that in favor of attacking someone on the left? What do you hope to accomplish here?
Sorry, now that I've read this quote she's been defiled. I can't even jack it to her feet pics anymore. 100% cancelled, which I will definitely still remember two weeks from now, just like I remember when Ilhan Omar was cancelled over... you know, the thing.
This is definitely a rational and mature way of handling things. Setting reasonable expectations and understanding that politicians, like all humans, aren't perfect is for chumps.
Revisionist history, there was a full year where CTH was AOC tweet screenshots.
This twisted fuckin country is gonna pull another Iraq/Vietnam level event and these maggots are gonna pretend they didn't lay the groundworks for it to happen, fuck the nat-sec radlibs, fuck the "anachro"-interventionists and fuck any libscum who holds any water for the empire
Reminder that social democrats are a betrayal of left wing values.
Maybe that was the most tactful way to dogwhistle that the dems suck.
I mean, she should be saying openly how and why the democrats suck, but therein lies the problem with reforming the democrats, a strategy that continues to have a 100% failure rate.
She governs in the Democratic Party, which is the second-most-enthusiastic capitalist party in history. If she doesn’t break explicitly with the party line on class issues, which she can’t really do while maintaining a career as a Dem politician, she winds up literally advancing the politics of the enemy class in the name of “democratic socialism.”
And all this while the Democratic Party moves to the right on signature progressive issues like healthcare, and openly sabotages campaigns and elections to avoid giving basic reforms to working people.
It’s not about whether AOC is good or bad based on this or that take, it’s about the failed, still failing, and arguably counterproductive strategy of advancing working class polItics in the Democratic Party.
i get why you post like this, but it's really weird to see news items posted out of date.
social democracy at home, death and destruction abroad, basic succdem
Somebody who I agree with 90% of the time had a bad take, pack it up... revolution is cancelled.
I'm a Dem Soc, so I don't see the problem. As far as Pols go she's most definitely in the "good" category. The only way somebody will be 100% good in your mind would be if you were to take office yourself.... and even then you'll probably end up hating yourself.
You sound like you're too invested in
100130 year old theory to realize the world has changed in that time.You actually think that shit is going to happen given our current conditions? You're way more optimistic than me.
Lenin wrote that he thought he wouldn’t live to see the revolution, and it happened a day later.
The soviets thought they had it in the bag, until 1991 happened.
Imagine thinking attempting to gradually reform the democratic party in any way constitutes a revolution.
Don't get me wrong I wish electoralism was not a dead end and complete time sink cos it would be a fuck of a lot easier than the alternatives but i just dont see it.
