418
America Needs a Mass Movement—Now | Without one, America may sink into autocracy for decades.
(www.theatlantic.com)
this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2025
418 points (98.4% liked)
politics
29166 readers
2151 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I ageee. But at the same time. This is where democracy plays in. Even though I believe trump stole the 2024 election (3 million + purged votes). He won the PV and EC. The American people elected him to lead, as did they with electing republicans to a majority in congress.
THEY CHOSE THIS! Overthrowing the president goes against the will of the people. However, that’s where Congress is supposed to uplhold the constitution, which they aren’t by allowing this pedo to do whatever he wants.
Also, overthrowing the government of the Philippines is a lot easier than the US. Unless we all agree to just tank the economy by not working.
https://generalstrikeus.com/
Tank the economy. The alternative is not better.
I’m down, but we have to be a collective to work, no backing out.
We no longer live in communities, rather we live in "markets."
With so many people living paycheck to paycheck, we need a significant shift in our culture and a real sense of community. Cooperation rather than competition.
"Rugged individualism" has really become "every man for themselves."
That's the point of the website
I'm committed. I've already rehearsed what I would say to my manager/HR and fully accept that it may end my employment with them. But as somebody who's financially secure, I feel it's my duty to make that sacrifice should it come to it.
Well, the president failed. So… where are all the calls for impeachment this time? Funny how that’s not happening yet every past president for decades had to deal with the other side threatening that.
He was impeached 2, 3? Times?
It doesn't force him out and it isn't very helpful.
This year?
My bad I forgot that this time it will do something because reasons.
You’re completely missing the point
What's the point then dude?
After how many sternly worded letters do you expect Nazis to throw in the towel?
Pre Trump, presidents feared impeachment and the media treated it almost like they were being sentenced to death. Even though you still need 2/3 of the senate for removal after impeachment.
Nixon literally resigned in shame over JUST an impeachment, granted, the GOP was much more bipartisan back then and might have voted for removal now.
Today, the GOP are just complete cucks to MAGA and Trump knows they’ll save him.
The Republicans have no shame left
So impeachment isn't a viable strategy to oust them
Which sucks, because Watergate looks like child’s play compared to the numerous crimes and scandals our CONVICTED FELON President has done.
What do you suggest to be done. My only realistic suggestion is to win the midterms, the house specifically, the 2026 map favors the GOP. Block EVERYTHING from trump, even if it’s good, lame duck him, take the heat when the media attacks the Dems, and don’t cave until trump shows evidence of the Epstein Files and evidence that the 2028 election will be fair, no more purged votes. And even then, just lie to em and still not pass shit.
That’s pretty crazy though, the soldiers still gotta get paid.
Trump dosent fear impeachment and Dems don’t have the votes to remove him anyways.
How did Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Stalin leave power?
That's probably what's going to do Trump in
The point is that he hasn’t been impeached this time…. Why? I find it odd. If all you have to say is random nonsense and ventriloquism, just move on.
What happens to him when he gets impeached this time?
Please describe to me the cause and effect you are expecting to take place that results in meaningful change.
You’re still missing the point 🤦♂️
You can't articulate a fucking point
Your egocentric interpretation prevents you from understanding basic sentences because you do not have the ability to stop putting words in other people’s mouths.
If it’s not my responsibility to write a sentence down on your level. Perhaps toss it into an LLM.
You still haven’t said how another impeachment would change anything.
My original comment was not a call to impeach him, it was questioning why this term—after this entire shit show—have no impeachment efforts been made, when previous presidents have been impeached for far less.
I’ll have a conversation about that, but not about “why bother?” Because that’s a different conversation and one I’m not interested in.
Because republicans control the house. And the media is currently coddling trump. Unless some rogue republicans get onboard, there’s really no point in attempting to impeach him again. Until Dems can gain a majority.
Yes, but that never stopped previous presidents from being impeachment attempts.
Yeah, but like I just said. There’s no point in even doing it without a majority. All 3 past impeached presidents had a majority in Congress favoring the opposition party.
Every minority party impeachment attempt has failed, quickly. Just like MTG on Biden’s 1st week as president, it went nowhere and was performative. Dems simply DONT HAVE THE VOTES TO IMPEACH TRUMP!
You don’t have to have the votes to try. The point is the statement.
I think the topic might be flying above most people’s heads.
Democracy isn’t just about what (a short) majority of the voters have decided, it’s also about checks and balances, and protection of the individual, especially those from minority groups… and a lot more. There is nothing democratic about Trump’s rule and the fact that 52 or 53 or whatever percent of those citizens who went to actually cast a ballot voted for this doesn’t change that fact
Edit: Also, a general strike is not going to « tank the economy »
It wasn’t even a majority. 49%.
A just system doesn’t appoint a king this way.
How would a general strike be neutral or positive for the economy?
General strikes have to involve a meaningful percentage of the working population and are only supposed to end when the demands are met. The people on strike stop working, reduce spending as much as possible and stop paying tax.
It's hard to imagine a scenario where that wouldn't affect it massively in a negative way, so I'm genuinely curious as to what you think would happen in that scenario
Edit: I'm not sure I understand why this has been met with downvotes and no comment? I don't see how I'm saying anything false here
Unless it's a misunderstanding that I'm saying people should not do a general strike, which couldn't be more wrong. Tbf I think Americans should have started one long before this point.
Hurting the economy in a sustained manner is the mechanism through which general strikes are an effective tool of the working class
I think people don't understand that a general strike is an ongoing shutdown. They think it's like going on a march one Sunday afternoon.
Also, a general strike while hurting the billionaires, would also hurt the people and more so democrat supporting urban areas - to the point where many people would have no food. The billionaires could wait it out (they won't starve), and the fascist federal forces would come down hard on the eventual riots.
Billionaires will not starve no, however you’d be naive to think that billionaires are content as long as they don’t starve.
Billionnaires need to be getting richer at an ever increasing pace to actually be content. That’s how you become a billionaire in the first place.
Billionaires don’t want serious damage to the economy as that’s not going to help them getting richer, quite the contrary. Just like strikers will give in when continuing means that they will starve, billionaire will give in before their profits and assets take a serious hit (or will do what it take to get the people in charge to give in)
Hey sorry for the belated reply. Please note that I didn’t downvote you.
I suppose first we have to clear up the meaning of ´tanking’ the economy, for me it means long term damage that takes time to recover, if recoverable in the first place. Of course, a general strike will not be a net positive in itself.
However, let’s not forget that, if met, the demands of the strikers, could potentially be beneficial to the economy. (They could also be detrimental of course). But we have to consider the overall effect, and that is a lot more complex than just considering « oh no people are not going to be working for days or weeks ».
I’m not sure you believe that leaving the Trump admin free rein is actually beneficial to the economy…
Besides the thing about striking is that people don’t get paid, so companies might not be making money, but their losses won’t be so great, especially in a high income country such as the us where salaries are not dirt cheap. Most of the remaining expenses would be : rent, loans if applicable and any materials or product that has to be consumed in a given time frame, and goes bad unused because of the strike. The latter is the only real loss to the economy, as it is literally wasting stuff. Loans can be renegotiated and rent can be spread out. Not that this can’t have adverse effects… of course people are going to loose money - that’s kind of the whole point. Profits will probably take a hit (ohno, extremely rich people are going to enrich themselves slightly less for a while, what a terrible thing !!)
If ever a company goes under because of a strike, this leaves room for a new one to take its place (or an existing company to expand), especially in an economy as flexible as the US. So it might be bad in the short term for some people, but failures such as these can be recovered from quickly.
But anyways, the thing is with strikes is that the people in charge ALWAYS give in before serious damage is done. Nobody is going to leave their company go bankrupt because workers are striking, just like nobody is going to strike until they starve to death (hunger strikes set aside which are a whole different thing and not what we are discussing).
Of course a nationwide strike is a different business, but if it goes on to a point where many companies are going to go under, it means that many important people are loosing money. They will put pressure to resolve the crisis and will do so before irreversible damage is done because it is in their fucking interest to do so and most of these people care about money first.
Anyways, they have been many strikes, general or not, throughout the world and throughout history, I challenge you to find one example where these have caused irreversible damage to the economy.
The fact is they damage from strikes is extremely short term and is always recovered from quickly, because only fanatics would have it otherwise. They might be a lot of fanatics at the head of the US atm, but they need the support of a lot of people who will always favor their profits and business over everything else.
I'll take one "tank the economy" please.