|
What we need to do is operate as if we're already in a totalitarian hard right dictatorship. What did the Spaniards do under Franco? What do Leftists do in Saudi Arabia?
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 1, 2024 20:23 |
|
|
Lose, mostly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 17:01
|
|
|
Power flows from the people, from the bottom to the top. The upper classes are able to direct the country as they like only because they bribed the people into apathy by temporarily sharing a larger portion of capitalism's spoils, and then taking advantage of that inattentiveness to ruthlessly smash every last piece of social interaction, community togetherness, and non-corporate organizing in the country. Ultimately, there's way too much focus on electoralism and not enough focus on having a movement. Not just a political movement, but a human movement. Support organizations dedicated to helping people around us, regardless of race and religion and gender identification and sexual orientation. It's not about charismatic leaders or protest methods or anything else. It's about getting ordinary people to focus on helping and supporting each other, building an intersectional and cross-demographic community movement that recognizes that no matter who we are, almost all of us are in the same boat as workers and consumers being squeezed dry by capitalism. Solidarity is the key aspect from which all other leftist politics flow, so objectives and methods will come together pretty naturally after a while. The only important catch is that it'll have to be ready to resist when the upper classes start showing up to try to co-opt it. Corporate representatives will turn up offering big bribes for the community aid funds, and high-flying lawyers and investment bankers will show up and start talking about how much more efficiently they could administer the community's shared resources if we put them in charge. Those are the carrots the upper classes offer to neuter and destroy community organizations, labor groups, and advocacy centers. And once the community solidarity has been disrupted due to large parts of it being bought up with those carrots, that leaves plenty of openings and weaknesses for the sticks to come in and beat the utter poo poo out of whoever's left.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 17:33
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:What we need to do is operate as if we're already in a totalitarian hard right dictatorship. What did the Spaniards do under Franco? What do Leftists do in Saudi Arabia? Keep their heads down and their mouths shut so they don't get killed. Not exactly a winning strategy. Regimes like that collapse because they rot from the inside, not because of long-term opposition movements.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 17:41
|
|
|
Bucky Fullminster posted:This is a pretty important point. The Overton Window isn't exactly two dimensional, but there have been changes which matter. Which make these losses all the much harder to understand. Don't get too wrapped up in national politics. It's important, but so much power to affect people's lives rests with state and local governments (including control of elections). Progressive politics will grow from the bottom up, the same way conservatives built their recent revolution. Not just local electoralism, but lasting local advocacy and intervention organizations make up the legs of the stool on which progress rests. Edit: Direct action is also a leg. PerniciousKnid fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Dec 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Ultimately, there's way too much focus on electoralism and not enough focus on having a movement. Force shits upon reason’s back. Power is only achieved via election and therefore electoralism, and power strangles movements in their cribs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 18:06
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:Force shits upon reason’s back. Power is only achieved via election and therefore electoralism, and power strangles movements in their cribs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:The goal of getting rid of the wealthy isn't so much a matter of "getting rid of bad people" as it is needing to eliminate a class of people. Historically the goal for the left was not to abolish a specific class but rather to abolish the 'mode of production', understood as a social totality that encompassed both political economy and culture. This goal has become so difficult to envision that people now retreat into talking about eliminating the 1% when in reality it was the social relations of production that were supposed to be the problem. You can quite easily imagine a middle class populism that calls for restrictions on the 1% while simultaneously intensifying capitalist exploitation of the bottom 50-80%. Middle class professionals benefit from cheap labour and a liberal approach to trade and immigration but they struggle with the rising prices of education and housing. There are ways to articulate that political position that don't include improving the lives of the cheap labourers the middle class relies on. A sort of 'middle American radicalism' that conceives of itself as under assault by both the underclass and the 1% would hardly be an unprecedented development in American politics. To merely call for the elimination of the extremely rich is not an inherently leftist or progressive position.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
There is no conceivable path forward for social democracy in western countries. The brand of "win-win" capitalism simply won't work in a world where increasingly the most important economies are not ones run by europeans or european settlers. Less surplus for western capitalists means less for the workers, the rich certainly aren't going to be the ones taking the beating when it comes to increasing irrelevance. Main Paineframe posted:Ultimately, there's way too much focus on electoralism and not enough focus on having a movement. Not just a political movement, but a human movement. Support organizations dedicated to helping people around us, regardless of race and religion and gender identification and sexual orientation. It's not about charismatic leaders or protest methods or anything else. It's about getting ordinary people to focus on helping and supporting each other, building an intersectional and cross-demographic community movement that recognizes that no matter who we are, almost all of us are in the same boat as workers and consumers being squeezed dry by capitalism. Solidarity is the key aspect from which all other leftist politics flow, so objectives and methods will come together pretty naturally after a while. These are all excellent points, which is why nonprofits and the billionaire foundation industrial complex have spent tens of billions since the 1960s coopting and building elaborate heatsinks to channel dissent into unproductive outlets.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 03:07
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:Literally the only way the US doesn't end up a permafucked corporate dystopia is if the streets run red with the blood of the capitalists, at this point. DC Murderverse posted:i'm really starting to appreciate the "Violent Revolution" option more and more as time goes on. i don't think we need a lot of violence. just a health insurance exec here, a billionaire hedge fund owner there, really put the fear of god into some people. Goons might not believe it, but the path forward begins with getting rid of LARPers like this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 03:20
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Historically the goal for the left was not to abolish a specific class but rather to abolish the 'mode of production', understood as a social totality that encompassed both political economy and culture. This goal has become so difficult to envision that people now retreat into talking about eliminating the 1% when in reality it was the social relations of production that were supposed to be the problem. I think that the only way to reliably prevent extreme wealth concentration without it inevitably reverting is to achieve the sort of genuine change you're alluding to here, so you're basically saying the same thing I am. The sort of "upper-middle class exploiting the bottom 50%" thing you describe would probably inevitably lead towards higher wealth concentration, since that's just the natural result of letting people profit off of ownership of assets and the means of production. Basically, currently existing rich people are broken beyond being fixable, but you also need to create a society where no one can ever become rich again, and that would require ending capitalism. Horizon Burning posted:Goons might not believe it, but the path forward begins with getting rid of LARPers like this. I disagree; it's obviously genuinely bothering a lot of the ruling class to see people talking about guillotines and poo poo on twitter. There's an actual useful effect to openly expressing such hatred. And it's also ultimately morally correct venting, which I think is fine. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 03:37 on Dec 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 03:34
|
|
|
Horizon Burning posted:Goons might not believe it, but the path forward begins with getting rid of LARPers like this. it's really weird, but for some reason whenever I've been at organizing meetings for protests or counter demonstrations the dorks from "the new northwestern john brown gun club of [local region]" or whatever their most recent splinter is calling themselves wanna talk about OpSec and being willing to 'defend themselves with violence if they have to," don't really bring anything else to the table, and rarely show up in a helpful way to the actual event, oh but they'll help make the parody website or FB group to make fun of the nazis
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 03:43
|
|
|
The threat of consequences needs to be there for left wing ideas to be taken seriously. Nobody gets anyone to give up something valuable without leverage, so the first thing the left needs to do while rebuilding is to acquire some. Specifically, it needs to be able to credibly threaten pain to the people in charge. That means having people who are dedicated enough to do unpleasant things, like manning a picket line when you’re low on money. That’s your core, and it doesn’t really exist at scale right now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 04:49
|
|
|
I'm sick with the flu but I got out of bed and grabbed my laptop because I wanted to write a long form reply to this post. First, thanks for making it. I'm glad there's a thread dedicated to talking about this. The vision is a representative from each nation, each continent banding around a universal set of ideals*. A truly global movement, built upon positive leadership by these individuals and supported by the works of the movement. The point is to create a transnational body that targets local elections. There is a website, a hub that allows people from their locations to discuss with one another, organize local events and give kudos to people who are doing good works (verifiable by other users). So for example, if I am a politician and support the ideals of this movement, I can make a profile on this website. My incentive is that it gives me free exposure and I can get votes from this group. As a voter, I am incentivized to support candidates that I want to accomplish the objectives that I want while being directly connected to those candidates. Unlike traditional social networks, a large volume of users is not needed. This is because the platform functions well as a read-only system, where candidates can get free publicity by being part of the platform. Another item that I thought of is that people could Kickstart candidate's campaigns globally; opening up crowdfunding from anyone who uses the site. This way, the agenda can be furthered no matter the country. *Conservation of all life, equality before the law, accountability for one's actions. IMO. I've done a lot of thinking and I want to share a concept I've been cooking for awhile. I've talked to a lot of friends and gotten a lot of feedback but this is still very WIP. Some of this is even just coming up as I wrote it. What do you guys think? Personally, I think it's the best chance for direct action, because it focuses on the core wins: getting progressives into power.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 04:54
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I disagree; it's obviously genuinely bothering a lot of the ruling class to see people talking about guillotines and poo poo on twitter. Do you have a single fact to back that up? Like, how many failed elections is it going to take? They're so bothered they've won big victories in the US, UK, and Australia - with the latter they themselves thought was 'unwinnable!'
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 05:45
|
|
|
Horizon Burning posted:Do you have a single fact to back that up? Like, how many failed elections is it going to take? They're so bothered they've won big victories in the US, UK, and Australia - with the latter they themselves thought was 'unwinnable!' I don't know, I really do think there's a large chunk of elites who really are offended when they're not worshiped for their success. Look at the meltdowns Musk has if he's not glowingly worshiped as "tony stark irl" and there are others like Buffet who realizes they can't steal everything because they realize if folks get restless or there's shutdowns the billionaires' scores go down. You do always have the reptiles like the Kochs, or Thiel that really just want to exist quietly in the background, but others are like the right-wingers who aren't happy controlling all the levers of power, they need to be loved too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 05:58
|
|
|
Horizon Burning posted:Do you have a single fact to back that up? Like, how many failed elections is it going to take? They're so bothered they've won big victories in the US, UK, and Australia - with the latter they themselves thought was 'unwinnable!' Well, think of it this way - making wealthy people upset is inherently a positive thing, so the burden is on others to prove that it's somehow causing problems. And it seems to be common sense that angry voices contribute to a general sense of unrest that makes the ruling class feel less secure, even if it's impossible to really quantify the impact this has. In the case of this primary, for example, we have anecdotal evidence that the internet basically broke the brains of the younger staff for campaigns like Kamala Harris's, and Twitter specifically seems to have a pretty big impact on political media people. But really, the most important thing is that there's definitely no harm to it (and I'm kind of skeptical about the politics of anyone on the "left" who gets upset about angry language being directed towards the rich). Edit: And in the US specifically the left is unquestionably far stronger than at any point in decades. Granted, that's not saying much, but it at least exists now as something outside of the fringes. Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 09:43 on Dec 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 09:40
|
|
|
Horizon Burning posted:Do you have a single fact to back that up? Like, how many failed elections is it going to take? They're so bothered they've won big victories in the US, UK, and Australia - with the latter they themselves thought was 'unwinnable!' The capitalists have enough combined control over the electoral process and the media to ensure that they retain control of the state. This is true in Britain, and it will be more true in Britain - or England, anyway, from the way things are shaping up - in 2024. It remains to be seen what happens in the US later this year but I wouldn't get your hopes up. It is unlikely that electoral politics is going to save us, because capitalists who have at their command wealth and power unequaled in all of human history have seen to it that it can't. It may well be the case that no matter who you run, no matter how finely you craft your electoral strategy, and no matter how much your policy platform will help people, you will lose, because the capitalists want you to lose. And that's it. If capitalists control the game board literally the only options you have are to play their game and continue to lose, or flip the board and come at them directly. Take a look at this graph:  Now also bear in mind that Britain actually has some loving laws that mandate press neutrality during an election. They were ignored with impunity. America has no such laws to even ignore so how do you think that will go? (I do think, that the American press somehow manages to be less poo poo than the British press, but we'll see.) Now you go ahead and tell me not only how, but why the rest of us ought to fight on such uneven ground? Be specific. Why should the left feel obligated to fight these battles, battles which are not just necessary from a social and economic justice standpoint, but indeed from the standpoint of saving human civilization, on ground wholly owned and controlled by the people they're fighting? The people who want to see the entire human race save for themselves in chains and who will irreversibly degrade this planet's ability to sustain life in order to achieve that goal? The people you complain are "LARPing" are actually building up the nerve to engage in open rebellion. They are testing the waters and finding out how many there are who think like them. And as they do that they are, bit by bit, radicalizing other people who in turn do the same. Maybe you should join them instead of armchair quarterbacking the fight for our survival.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 10:18
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:The threat of consequences needs to be there for left wing ideas to be taken seriously. Nobody gets anyone to give up something valuable without leverage, so the first thing the left needs to do while rebuilding is to acquire some. The key here, as stated earlier, is that "the people in charge" means not just the million/billionaire elite, but also their comfortable middle class sycophants. They need to be made to understand that if they don't start voluntarily making sacrifices to help the underclasses, then they will be forced to endure much worse at the hands of the hungry and diseased mob they tried to ignore and quietly genocide when times were "good".
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 12:27
|
|
|
People will only resort to measures that could result in their own deaths when their lives are no longer worth living. We arn't there...yet. Who among us can truly survive in such times I wonder?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 12:37
|
|
|
Since everyone ignored my post I guess I'll just add this; Rebellion without purpose is anarchy in drag.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 13:09
|
|
|
UnknownTarget posted:Since everyone ignored my post I guess I'll just add this; "I'll make the wiki"
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 14:42
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:"I'll make the wiki" I don't get it. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:The people you complain are "LARPing" are actually building up the nerve to engage in open rebellion. No, Goon, they're not. If you think the people on this forum are "building up the nerve to engage in open rebellion" (lmao) then you are sadly, sadly deluded.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 14:57
|
|
|
UnknownTarget posted:I don't get it. Not to be entirely dismissive but it seems like a low-effort sidestep of the actual work that needs to be done. Like a classic Goon Project wiki, we can act like we're contributing by making some high-level peripheral project to connect progressive campaigns while [someone else] does all the difficult, boring, ungratifying graft of building those progressive campaigns in the first place. It's also a bit of a technocratic solution (skills wallets!) to what are likely more basic, fundamental obstacles (capital and the media, boomer deathgrip, electoral corruption). That's probably why people skipped it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 15:27
|
|
|
Horizon Burning posted:No, Goon, they're not. If you think the people on this forum are "building up the nerve to engage in open rebellion" (lmao) then you are sadly, sadly deluded. I hate that this is a thing to be laughed at...but maybe it's for the best.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 15:36
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I think that the only way to reliably prevent extreme wealth concentration without it inevitably reverting is to achieve the sort of genuine change you're alluding to here, so you're basically saying the same thing I am. The sort of "upper-middle class exploiting the bottom 50%" thing you describe would probably inevitably lead towards higher wealth concentration, since that's just the natural result of letting people profit off of ownership of assets and the means of production. The problem is that no one seems to be able to actually articulate a plausible and compelling vision of how we could overcome the current 'mode of production'. In the absence of that unifying vision the left has decomposed into various competing interest groups and factions. The scale of the problem just seems too immense and there aren't any obvious models to emulate or strategies to attempt. Besides, the merger of 'the left' with various counter cultural groups and with students and academics over the last 50 years has produced a situation where many of the left's largest contemporary constituencies are extremely mistrustful of mass action and popular politics so even if a leftist mass movement somehow looked possible I think a lot of current leftist thought leaders and activists would probably be very uncomfortable with it. The majority current left just isn't oriented toward achieving tangible results in the real world and the reality of actually wielding any kind of power or influence would probably make them squeamish. Due to a mixture of adaptations by the right and also to some extent thanks to its own success the contemporary left, such as it is, faces really severe structural barriers that nobody has actually figured out a way to overcome. It's really not a great sign that contemporary leftist theories are so incapable of addressing the current situation that young radicals are scrambling around for ideologies from 100 years ago like Leninism because contemporary social democracy, left liberalism and anarchism (but I repeat myself, har har) are so visibly inadequate. A healthy and functional political movement should be able to generate its own analysis of the situation and its own tactics rather than rely on reproducing the symbols and forms of a literal century ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 15:40
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:The threat of consequences needs to be there for left wing ideas to be taken seriously. Nobody gets anyone to give up something valuable without leverage, so the first thing the left needs to do while rebuilding is to acquire some. This is why community solidarity is so important. Historically, leftist agitation doesn't rise by people getting so mad that they decide they don't need to eat anymore. It rises by communities sharing their resources and building up reserves that can be used to support the people taking action, creating support structures that can help blunt the economic impact of being temporarily cut off by capital. UnknownTarget posted:Another item that I thought of is that people could Kickstart candidate's campaigns globally; opening up crowdfunding from anyone who uses the site. This way, the agenda can be furthered no matter the country. Aside from being wildly utopian and having no real incentive for anyone at all to participate, your idea would also blatantly violate campaign finance laws in a number of countries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
Violent revolution is pure fantasy. It has never happened in any system where existing democratic mechanisms are perceived as legitimate. Sure, yes, a lot of people know and moan about the various ways the game is rigged, but in the end you can trust that nothing overrides the actual number of votes in the ballot box. As long as that's true, you can a) keep believing that you'll be able to beat the odds and convince more people next time, and b) look at the empirical proof that you're clearly outnumbered and can't really go "we represent the masses against tyranny". The one time a western parliamentary democracy got close to a leftist revolution was France in '68, and it's very illustrative that De Gaulle was able to defuse it by calling an election - and then win that election. In the end, capital controlling the media doesn't just mean they successfully attack socialist parties, first and foremost they successfully attack socialist ideas, and it works regardless of whether we contest elections or not. Anti-electoralism just allows you the comfort of a like-minded bubble in which you never confront the fact that right-wing values - hierarchy, nationalism and greed - are simply more popular than cooperation and equality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 18:30
|
|
|
Guildencrantz posted:In the end, capital controlling the media doesn't just mean they successfully attack socialist parties, first and foremost they successfully attack socialist ideas, and it works regardless of whether we contest elections or not. Anti-electoralism just allows you the comfort of a like-minded bubble in which you never confront the fact that right-wing values - hierarchy, nationalism and greed - are simply more popular than cooperation and equality. The west got rich on those values and western social democracy mostly concerns itself with redistribution of plunder from the global south rather than solidarity with the oppressed peoples. "Cooperation and equality" were a fluke of the system reeling from WWII and the soviet union exporting revolution left and right.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 18:37
|
|
|
Democracy, at least in FPTP countries, is dead and people don't realise it
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
Horizon Burning posted:No, Goon, they're not. If you think the people on this forum are "building up the nerve to engage in open rebellion" (lmao) then you are sadly, sadly deluded.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:Not to be entirely dismissive but it seems like a low-effort sidestep of the actual work that needs to be done. Like a classic Goon Project wiki, we can act like we're contributing by making some high-level peripheral project to connect progressive campaigns while [someone else] does all the difficult, boring, ungratifying graft of building those progressive campaigns in the first place. It's also a bit of a technocratic solution (skills wallets!) to what are likely more basic, fundamental obstacles (capital and the media, boomer deathgrip, electoral corruption). That's probably why people skipped it. No, tbh I was just looking for feedback. I'm going to agree and disagree with some of what you said but don't take it as my position being intractable. So the first part, let's be real; if you want to do anything with people on the Internet it has to be something peripheral, because otherwise you're doing actual stuff on the ground. The notion that I'm even implying this website would be the target for this is understandable given the context but not my goal; I don't know any of you and I've had enough failed projects with people I do know. Let alone having it spontaneously form out of the void of a bunch of folks probably more interested in talking about action than doing it (I could go to more local elections myself!). The idea of this website is that it supports the people doing that ungratifying work of building the campaign and doing the work, with cash and with free marketing. Now you can communicate directly with people, discuss what you're doing, etc. The "Skills wallets" isn't at all what I meant nor said (didn't even use the word). What I meant was that it was more like a report card - if a candidate says they did something, then it gives a list of their accomplishments; like helping to pick up litter or sponsoring legislation. Something in an easy to read and centralized place. Now I'm all for solutions but no actionable ones have been presented thus far. It's just debates about how valid people are for talking about violent revolution. No one has proposed anything, except for me. Feel free to tear my idea down but present something to better it or otherwise lead us on a different path. Otherwise we're just eating ourselves for the pleasure of boredom. Main Paineframe posted:
I listed the incentives, please refute them. As for the finance laws, you're right, take it out or only accept donations from local communities. UnknownTarget fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Dec 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 20:42
|
|
|
the thing about the "LARPers" not doing anything is, if someone's leftist activism is primarily through groups like John Brown Gun Club etc, they're probably significantly better at killing people than they are at any more standard form of activism. if they're not "LARPing," they're going to be causing active shooter events, and I can't reasonably fault them for not wanting to open that particular Pandora's box until we're completely out of other options. e: just to be absolutely clear, what I am trying to get across is that if these people are sitting on their asses and just looking vaguely threatening, that's probably preferable to open civil war in the United States. WeedlordGoku69 fucked around with this message at 03:10 on Dec 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 23:31
|
|
|
Horizon Burning posted:No, Goon, they're not. If you think the people on this forum are "building up the nerve to engage in open rebellion" (lmao) then you are sadly, sadly deluded. Oh look, another fishmech rereg. Guildencrantz posted:Violent revolution is pure fantasy. It has never happened in any system where existing democratic mechanisms are perceived as legitimate. An increasing number of people don’t view those democratic mechanisms as legitimate though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 00:06
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:So do you think that building up that nerve is just a thing people don't do, or do you think it looks different when they do it? And, in the latter case, what do you think it looks like? Just in case anyone isn't clear on this, anyone who looks like they're building up the nerve to personally engage in open violent rebellion is probably getting banned. This is a comedy shitposting forum, not a terrorism incubator. Please don't say anything that might excite the nice, friendly FBI agents reading this site.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:38
|
|
|
Prophetic expectation grounded in our particular origins.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
Besides, you want to talk about useless? A bunch of people from different geographic areas (heck, different continents) talking about how much they're totally going to fight back, just like, when stuff gets bad enough. This is just mental masturbation. It's the same thing the right wing does when they talk about getting together with their militia buddies to go shoot some libs as soon as they "try to take Trump outta office!". IMO these threads are fine if all you want to do is jerk off to some fantasy riot but if you actually want to do something then talk about what you're doing locally or can do locally and how that can be amplified by getting support from outside your local area. Otherwise continue to 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 05:37
|
|
|
To be clear, I'm not advocating for violent rebellion, I'm just wondering academically about how it's all going to play out.MSDOS KAPITAL posted:If capitalists control the game board literally the only options you have are to play their game and continue to lose, or flip the board and come at them directly. Well.. Please go ahead and tell us how, this fight would work on such uneven ground? Be specific. Like, what does it look like in your mind. ACADEMICALLY of course. UnknownTarget posted:I'm sick with the flu but I got out of bed and grabbed my laptop because I wanted to write a long form reply to this post. First hey, my pleasure, glad it's appreciated. A website like that sounds like it'd be a good start. I'm not sure what help a global profile would be to a local candidate though. But an easily accessible database of organising tactics and branding templates etc might help? Would have to be careful about local campaign finance laws, as has been stated though. To be honest, I haven't heard the term 'electoralism' in my whole life as much as I've heard it in the last few days, so I'm not really that familiar with it. For the people saying it's not the way forward, I guess my question is, what does that look like? General strikes? Funnily enough, outside of these forums, I think the only real mention I've heard of general strikes is from Kanye West, in the middle of a long interview with.. maybe Fast Company... when talking about athletes making political points. It's one thing to take a knee, but would they be willing to miss a game or a paycheck? How else are we going to stop the apparatus? Anyway, if not strikes, what does a non-electoral approach look like pragmatically? This is why I asked about extinction rebellion style disruption. I know they have succeeded in physically stopping (some of) Australia's coal exports for up to a few days for example, by shutting down coal lines. And of course they livestream the whole thing, calmly sitting up there talking about the whole issue while politely declining the cops' requests to come down. To me, it seems like Justice Democrats are the closest to the right tracks at the moment, at least in the US. They've identified a good approach and it's already reaped huge rewards. Getting someone like AOC in, even just to make a few tweets about things like election day being a public holiday, is hugely valuable. Let alone the work she does on the floor, and the fire she spits back. Even if she's one in a million, that means there's 200 of her in America alone. We don't seem to have anyone of her calibre in Australia (nor do we have a primary system like that). But rather than that being a problem of sexism in the electorate, it feels more like a problem of good women not wanting to join any of the parties to rise up the ranks like that. So it's hard to find anyone on any ballots. So do we need to make a career in politics more appealing to kick arse people? Or are people rejecting that because it plays into 'electoralism'? It does feel like that is the first branch of our flow chart - Electoralism or Not Electoralism, and I'm still not sure what the latter looks like.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 05:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 1, 2024 20:23 |
|
|
I'm not feeling much in the way of 'hope' here. So then what?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 07:23
|
|