|
Choose your fighter: - In a two-party system, not voting for the lesser of two evils in a general election is de-facto enabling the greater of two evils. This has bad consequences now and may have very bad consequences later (the cessation of voting altogether). - In a two-party system, voting for the lesser of two evils enables them to remain merely "lesser" and not in fact reformist or revolutionary in any real sense. This has less bad consequences now, but may have very bad consequences in the future (inability to distinguish evils in any meaningful way). - Jeb!
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
This is meant to be humorous. I don't believe its possible, with the information that we actually have (or will ever have) about social trends, to predict which of these outcomes is worse.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 18:31
|
|
|
Has accelerationism worked anywhere, ever? I can think of a few places where it failed spectacularly right off the top of my head. The most famous of course being the slogan, "After Hitler - Us!"
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 18:43
|
|
|
If it's an oligarchy that happens to also give some people the right to vote, but the actions of the state are not correlated at all with the policy preferences of the electorate, then I think there's a good case to be made that participating at all, just legitimizes the oligarchy. You'll never topple the oligarchy that way because the system is expressly designed to ensure that never happens. It's a sham democracy. The actions of the US government are not correlated with the policy preferences of the US electorate, by the by.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
I don't think accelerationism works from any perspective. Politically, you're giving all the power to people who are going to make sure you have none. Ethically, you're causing a lot of harm in the interim that didn't need to occur (usually to the minorities who are targeted by far-right systems first). From a revolutionary perspective, if you don't look like you're fighting for the people and their needs now, you're never going to be able to convince them to follow your ideas in the future. The thing is... you don't have to be an accelerationist. Usually bad political and economic systems have no breaks and few mechanisms to fight their own internal inertia and reverse course (otherwise they wouldn't be 'bad'). This applies to all systems, whether they're feudalistic, late-stage capitalist or ossified command-economy 'socialist'. You just need to make sure you can offer a better alternative while these systems collapse under their own weight. I don't believe that by trying to make the best of a bad situation (bad electoral politics), you're always inherently propagating that bad situation... so long as you're also offering a better and more coherent alternative.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:If it's an oligarchy that happens to also give some people the right to vote, but the actions of the state are not correlated at all with the policy preferences of the electorate, then I think there's a good case to be made that participating at all, just legitimizes the oligarchy. You'll never topple the oligarchy that way because the system is expressly designed to ensure that never happens. It's a sham democracy. They don't correlate one-to-one... but they correlate in some contexts and on some issues (usually social justice issues, not economic justice issues). Its possible to see voting as harm-reduction, if nothing else. I also don't see a process of "legitimacy" as being meaningful anymore. The far right would be pretty happy to rule with just 20-30% of the actual vote... which they already basically have due to gerrymandering. The turnout for elections is pretty poor. Its not as if people will "wake up" if suddenly the turnout for elections is even more depressed than it normally is. Finally, the idea that better things come after the sham is destroyed and the "wool ripped from the eyes of the people" or whatever, is pretty questionable. The far right is far better equipped to make use of social collapse, chaos and "anarchy" than the left... at this moment in time. Its fine to advocate for alternative/parallel power structures (and this is a thing that was traditionally done through unions), but right now the only levers of power exist through the vote. Its going to be impossible to organize from inside the concentration camp, after all.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:Has accelerationism worked anywhere, ever? I can think of a few places where it failed spectacularly right off the top of my head. The most famous of course being the slogan, "After Hitler - Us!" Entrenched political systems are loving hard to break. I've been involved in local/state Democratic politics since Lamont's senate campaign in 2006, and I will happily say that at a local level it's just an absolutely worthless endeavor. Working within the system almost always means that your efforts end up being funneled towards lesser evil candidates, no matter how much you work towards alternatives. And given the relatively dysfunctional nature of the US political system, what this means in practice in a steady march rightward. The only way you break this is by cutting off support, and that may cost you elections. That isn't accelerationism, no matter how badly some people on the internet want to claim that it is. The goal isn't to make bad things happen, it's to stop allowing bad candidates with harmful policies to win elections. Establishment candidates are literally holding vulnerable constituents hostage and screeching "if you don't vote for me a Republican will win!" And they're loving right. And that's just going to have to happen a few times because there's no other way.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 05:08
|
|
|
How do you square that with the fact that the Democratic Party has been moving left for the past 20 years or so? Everything I've seen during my lifetime suggest that electoral success creates room for movement to the left. I mean right now Biden is leading the pack after we lost to the right wing. Isn't that the exact opposite of what you think should happen?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 07:06
|
|
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:Choose your fighter: Voting for the lesser of two evils in the general elections while at the same time engaging in primaries and party elections and helping to grow and support candidates that are NOT the lesser of two evils is the real answer.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 11:44
|
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:Voting for the lesser of two evils in the general elections while at the same time engaging in primaries and party elections and helping to grow and support candidates that are NOT the lesser of two evils is the real answer. Ah yes, the middle-of-the-road position. How wise.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 12:53
|
|
|
If you're trying to guilt trip individual voters, you've already lost.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 13:06
|
|
|
If you have spread the concept voting is bad to a rival voting demographic you've already won.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 13:17
|
|
|
im trying to imagine being so brain broke that i can’t distinguish between a government of white nationalists and a government that implements some, but not all, of the policies i like e: https://twitter.com/dril/status/473265809079693312 QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 13:32 on May 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 13:19
|
|
|
The rich-owned mass media will make sure that people keep electing the parties that work for the rich, so the only thing that will work is changing public perspective by circumventing the mass media somehow Look at the UK, we have a really good option in Labour (with its flaws and all) but people just have this terrible perception of Corbyn and the party and they don't even know why
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 13:23
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:im trying to imagine being so brain broke that i can’t distinguish between a government of white nationalists and a government that implements some, but not all, of the policies i like the government of white nationalists or the government that desperately appeases white nationalists at the expense of the people who voted for them
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 13:33
|
|
|
Pochoclo posted:The rich-owned mass media will make sure that people keep electing the parties that work for the rich, so the only thing that will work is changing public perspective by circumventing the mass media somehow Maybe the issue is democracy, as in the ability for the populace to honestly chose a honest change the way things are done, died a long time ago and now it’s down the choosing the timing of when fascism finally takes the full reins. It is like having terminal radiation.sickness and choosing to jump out or a windows or not, you’re already dead.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 13:48
|
|
|
When good people use their efforts to prop up a bad system all day accomplish in the end it's slowing the rate at which the water is boiling. The present Democratic party leadership is only enabling fascism, and supporting them only guarantees that minorities start being jammed into the ovens in 2023 instead of 2021. All this nonsense about it being better to prop up an evil system rather than scrap the system and start afresh is much easier to believe in when you're not in one of the demographics/income brackets directly threatened by the ovens. Now mind you the entire Democratic party isn't crap, my criticisms have always been leveled very specifically at the present leadership. McConnell, Schumer, and the rest need to be thrown out on their rear end (and made public example of) if America is to have any hope of resisting fascism. If we let the current Democratic party leadership direct the resistance then America Falls to Fascism guaranteed 100% of the time. Prester Jane fucked around with this message at 13:52 on May 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 13:48
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:When good people use their efforts to prop up a bad system all day accomplish in the end it's slowing the rate at which the water is boiling. so who do you vote for? You voting republican every election or you staying home while telling yourself you are a hero and the republicans will take notice of your heroic inaction and recant?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 13:50
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:so who do you vote for? You voting republican every election or you staying home while telling yourself you are a hero and the republicans will take notice of your heroic inaction and recant? Why in the gently caress do you think I give a single flying gently caress about what the Republicans do/say? I'm not trying to get the Republicans to recant, I'm trying to a form an effective resistance bloc. You let incompetent leaders and inadequate systems fail- because until they fail you can't replace them with something better. Kicking the can down the road only leads to a worse disaster. Guaranteed.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 13:54
|
|
|
Unless you think your glorious revolution is going to start and finish before November 2020 there is literally no advantage to having republican senators. Voting takes nothing from you and does not stop anything else you are doing.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:08
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:the government of white nationalists or the government that desperately appeases white nationalists at the expense of the people who voted for them maybe we have different lived experiences, but in my home state one party just signed legislation banning abortion at eight weeks and limiting people's access to healthcare while the other party spent weeks trying to stop that from passing and is supporting lawsuits to prevent its implementation. im not saying the one is perfect and all its members are noble, but i can pretty easily distinguish between which one is good and which one is bad. and i am happy to vote for one over the other Prester Jane posted:Why in the gently caress do you think I give a single flying gently caress about what the Republicans do/say? I'm not trying to get the Republicans to recant, I'm trying to a form an effective resistance bloc. this pro strat is working out real well for leftists in russia, poland, hungary, and israel QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 14:16 on May 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:maybe we have different lived experiences, but in my home state one party just signed legislation banning abortion at eight weeks and limiting people's access to healthcare while the other party spent weeks trying to stop that from passing and is supporting lawsuits to prevent its implementation. The problem with the party is its national leadership, and although there are plenty of borked State parties, there are also plenty of good ones. The entire Democratic party doesn't need to be scrapped, the current leadership does.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:15
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:How do you square that with the fact that the Democratic Party has been moving left for the past 20 years or so? Everything I've seen during my lifetime suggest that electoral success creates room for movement to the left. I mean right now Biden is leading the pack after we lost to the right wing. Isn't that the exact opposite of what you think should happen? Noted left-winger... Joe "Cool Trump" Biden?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:17
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:maybe we have different lived experiences, but in my home state one party just signed legislation banning abortion at eight weeks and limiting people's access to healthcare while the other party spent weeks trying to stop that from passing and is supporting lawsuits to prevent its implementation. Yes, but imagine how woke you could tell your friends you are by refusing to vote against the anti-abortion ones on the grounds that doing so will send a message.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:17
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:The problem with the party is its national leadership, and although there are plenty of borked State parties, there are also plenty of good ones. The entire Democratic party doesn't need to be scrapped, the current leadership does. maybe i'm misguided but the way to resolve this in my mind would be to use internal party systems like primaries and leadership elections to promote change, not to burn down the entire apparatus when its the only thing capable of acting as a brake pedal on the worst excesses of the other party QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 14:23 on May 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:20
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:maybe i'm misguided but the way to resolve this in my mind would be to use internal party systems like primaries and leadership elections to promote change, not to burn down the entire apparatus when its the only thing capable of acting as a brake pedal on the worst excesses of the other party Yeah that's been tried- and the present Democratic Leadership has demonstrated that they will not hesitate to ruthlessly crush internal challenges to their power. You're telling people to devote themselves to playing in a rigged game,). My lived experience is that playing in a rigged game is for chumps (no matter how talented you are).
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:30
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:How do you square that with the fact that the Democratic Party has been moving left for the past 20 years or so? Everything I've seen during my lifetime suggest that electoral success creates room for movement to the left. I mean right now Biden is leading the pack after we lost to the right wing. Isn't that the exact opposite of what you think should happen? You mean the out-of-touche douchebag who walked straight off the set of Mad Men/is proud of talking down to the younger generation about how their problems boil down to just not wanting to work hard? That is your evidence of the party moving left?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:33
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:Yeah that's been tried- and the present Democratic Leadership has demonstrated that they will not hesitate to ruthlessly crush internal challenges to their power. You're telling people to devote themselves to playing in a rigged game,). My lived experience is that playing in a rigged game is for chumps (no matter how talented you are). Again, in alabama right now, would you vote for? Is your answer republicans? Is your answer anything but the people running against republicans? Literally no one is going to praise you as a hero for refusing to vote. Literally no one is going to care about your stupid not voting protest. The women losing their right to bodily autonomy will care that you wouldn't vote to support them and would not care one single bit about any speech you have that you simply need to wait more years until alabama suddenly runs true leftist candidates then they can get your precious hard to acquire bespoke endorsement vote.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:42
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:Yeah that's been tried- and the present Democratic Leadership has demonstrated that they will not hesitate to ruthlessly crush internal challenges to their power. You're telling people to devote themselves to playing in a rigged game,). My lived experience is that playing in a rigged game is for chumps (no matter how talented you are). is this the same leadership that crushed opposition for hillary in 2008 and crowley in 2018? also: Owlofcreamcheese posted:Again, in alabama right now, would you vote for? Is your answer republicans? Is your answer anything but the people running against republicans?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:46
|
|
Bel Shazar posted:Voting for the lesser of two evils in the general elections while at the same time engaging in primaries and party elections and helping to grow and support candidates that are NOT the lesser of two evils is the real answer. Pretty much. Vote for the best given option in every election you can vote in (general or primary), whether that person is just a "lesser of two evils" and spend the time outside of elections providing other means of support to causes and candidates/potential candidates you agree with.
|
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:51
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:
This way of thinking is so antithetical to my own way of thinking that I just don't know how to respond. I have no interest in getting attention or praise are being lauded as a hero or abytging like that. I am thinkly strictly in terms of what works or it doesn't work. Supporting bad leadership doesn't work. quote:The women losing their right to bodily autonomy will care that you wouldn't vote to support them and would not care one single bit about any speech you have that you simply need to wait more years until alabama suddenly runs true leftist candidates then they can get your precious hard to acquire bespoke endorsement vote. The Democratic Party is more than happy to take rights away from those women in Alabama if they see it as furthering their own power: Daily Beast posted:The day after Alabama lawmakers passed a law to ban nearly all abortions in the state, House Democrats confronted some tricky optics: a Chicago Business report revealed that the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee was scheduled to headline a June fundraiser for the most staunchly pro-life Democrat left in Congress. Please keep lecturing me on how supporting the current Democratic leadership is the only way to protect the rights of women in Alabama. Because that's a totally logical logical position that does not at all conflict with observable reality. Snark aside- your position of blindly supporting the present Democratic leadership is what guarantees that minorities will lose rights. Prester Jane fucked around with this message at 15:04 on May 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 14:54
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:Snark aside- your position of blindly supporting the present Democratic leadership is what guarantees that minorities will lose rights. And at what point is your plan going to start getting results. What exactly IS your plan? If your plan is some other thing other than voting how does voting against republicans harm your plan? While we wait for that plan to finally be fully cooked and save us? What downside is there to voting against republicans in the time before your (whatever it is) completes and saves us?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 15:05
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:You mean the out-of-touche douchebag who walked straight off the set of Mad Men/is proud of talking down to the younger generation about how their problems boil down to just not wanting to work hard? That is your evidence of the party moving left? This, for loving real. Seeing mother loving Biden as a left candidate and not the same goddamn rightward lurch by Dems in response to the Republicans turning into Nazis in all but name is willful stupidity.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 15:10
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:And at what point is your plan going to start getting results. What exactly IS your plan? What's your plan for addressing the DCCC actively working to take rights away from women? Or wait I already know what it is: "Vote blue no matter who!"
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 15:12
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:What's your plan for addressing the DCCC actively working to take rights away from women? Or wait I already know what it is: "Vote blue no matter who!" My plan is to vote trump till Nancy polosi comes to my house saying she changed her life. Is that doing it right? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:My plan is to vote trump till Nancy polosi comes to my house saying she changed her life. Is that doing it right? How about trying a serious answer. What is your solution for addressing the fact that the DCCC is actively working to take rights away from women?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 15:20
|
|
Prester Jane posted:How about trying a serious answer. What is your solution for addressing the fact that the DCCC is actively working to take rights away from women? What's your plan? What roadmap do you see happening that starts with "not voting" and ends with "leftist causes" achieved?
|
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 15:24
|
|
|
Prester Jane posted:How about trying a serious answer. What is your solution for addressing the fact that the DCCC is actively working to take rights away from women? Not sure what plan I could have that would prevent me from voting against republicans. Not sure any plan where voting republican helps me unless I myself was a republican.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 15:26
|
|
|
Zerilan posted:What's your plan? What roadmap do you see happening that starts with "not voting" and ends with "leftist causes" achieved? Until leadership figures understand that their power is conditional upon them supporting their constituents- there can be no reform. You see how radicalized the right-wing has gotten and how much control a small fringe wields over the GOP? Their power comes from the fact that their leaders understand that their support is entirely conditional upon the base's agenda being implemented by their elected representatives. We could, (and must) do the same. Hate on the idiocy of the conservative base all you like- the fact remains that they have a far deeper understanding of how power dynamics function in the real world than the left does at present.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 07:39 |
|
Prester Jane posted:You see how radicalized the right-wing has gotten and how much control a small fringe wields over the GOP? Their power comes from the fact that their leaders understand that their support is entirely conditional upon the base's agenda being implemented by their elected representatives. We could, (and must) do the same. That power was created by voting for their fringe right candidates in primaries while also showing up at every general election to vote against the Democrat. They have power because they have high turnout as voters, the exact opposite of what you're proposing.
|
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2019 15:33
|
|