Some take for a socialist to have really…
I wouldn’t assume they are one.
davel
joined 2 years ago
Half correct. Withholding votes won’t get their attention - we’ve seen that play out again and again. Democrats would rather lose than change. If you want their attention and real change, you’ll need to do things other than vote.
If neither withholding nor not withholding will get their attention, then you’re making an even stronger case against voting’s worth than I am.
Please let the previous election go. It’s over. Nobody here is advocating for or against what’s already in the rear view mirror. And anyway, what we said on Lemmy last year had fuck-all effect on the election. Let’s “optimistically” say we affected 1,000 votes. Trump didn’t win by a hair’s breadth. What we said didn’t materially matter w/r/t/ the election. And that’s not even what we’re trying to do. We’re trying to agitate & educate people to think beyond/outside of the election cycle, and to break people out of myopic electoralism.
Listing his OnlyFans isn’t even in his top ten cringeist moments.
Take genocide for example, which seems to be the theme of the thread: we didn’t get the choice of no genocide, our only options were more vs less. Those are shitty options, but if we have that wiggle room, it’s worth voting for less in order to prevent more. Damage mitigation. Still genocide, still shitty options, but tangibly distinct options.
Whether it would have been a “lesser” genocide is unfalsifiable. We’ll never really know. But I don’t have the faith in it that you have. I’m not sure what a more competent genocidal administration would have done.
Consider what many US Palestinians did: threaten to withhold their votes if Harris didn’t say there was at least some daylight between herself and Biden regarding Gazans. And she wouldn’t even do that much.
But that’s how you use the vote, if you use it at all. You use it as leverage. If the Democrats know you’ll “vote Blue no matter who” or “vote Blue no matter what,” then they’ll ignore you altogether, because you’re already in their pocket. You’ve made yourself irrelevant.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
No, he’s not. Despite that, there sure are a lot of folks here who were eager to hand him the keys of the country, and continue to to defend their choice.
Trump already has the keys. That ship has sailed. If he has a third term it will be through extralegal measures, not the ballot box.
I don’t care whether you vote, and I’m not telling anyone whether or not to vote. But I am pointing out how little power it gives us for the amount of time, money, and energy people are putting into it. The juice ain’t worth that much squeeze. We’re never going to vote ourselves out of wage slavery.
No, we’re calling for the overthrow of our oppressors. We’re calling for seizing the means of production. We’re calling for real and permanent liberation from the bourgeoisie.
He’s not our man. Previously:
It’s not wrong to say regulatory capture is a problem, it just doesn’t go far enough. The US government was never not captured by the bourgeoisie, because the US was born of a bourgeois revolution[1]. The wealthy, white, male, land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers constructed a bourgeois state with “checks and balances” against the “tyranny of the majority”. It was never meant to represent the majority—the working class—and it never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (at least those not disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote. BBC: [Princeton & Northwestern] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy
The game is rigged. The election cycle’s pomp and circumstance is to divert your energy and attention from the fact that it’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.
Fine, Bogart the whole /thread.
😂