• Tinidril@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    Speaking of purity tests, has Schumer endorsed Mamdani yet? Nah, I didn’t think so.

    The phrase “purity test” itself is divisive rhetoric from establishment Democrats meant to smear progressives. There is no need for purity tests on the left. Find a Democrat who doesn’t support free college? They won’t support M4A, or cutting off Israel, or ending oil subsidies, or nationalizing infrastructure, or defunding the police, or protecting trans rights without exception. We don’t need to shit on Democrats for falling a little bit short on an issue or two. It’s a target rich environment for absolute corporate tools. We can save purity tests for later.

    • lengau@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Schumer’s refusal to support Mamdani is based on Mamdani “failing” a purity test from Schumer.

      • Tinidril@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Yeah, that was kind of my point, but kind of not too. Everything I said about the differences between progressives and the establishment holds true in both directions. There is no “purity test”. We are entirely different animals, and Schumer recognizes it. The one thing we have in common is an enemy. We can work with that, but let’s do it honestly and cut the “purity test” bullshit.

        And, just for background, the term “purity test” was specifically developed and focus tested out of establishment consultancies for the express purpose of undermining progressives. The fact that it gets rolled out every time discussion of “unity” comes up is engineered irony.

        https://fair.org/home/purity-tests-how-corporate-media-describe-progressives-standing-up-for-principles/