this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
373 points (77.1% liked)

Memes

45406 readers
672 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Is there a red line for you in the sand, or would you vote for Hitler if 101% Hitler was running? When do you abandon hope in the Democrats, if being genocidal Imperialists doing nothing to help marginalized groups, and are running to the right of Trump in 2016 with respect to immigration, doesn't?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That's a non-sequitur, because that's not what's happening by any means. But thanks for ceding the point that you're okay feeling morally superior by doing something that'll get more people killed.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So either there's no red line, or genocide doesn't matter if it's against Muslims for you.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes yes, we all see the rhetorical trap you're trying to deploy. It's not exactly subtle.

Meanwhile in the real world, in most of the US there is no realistic alternative to the red/blue dichotomy, and so while we're actually building that alternative we have to choose between those two. At the national level and in most (possibly all) senate/house races, that's the reality of the situation. You either work with the coalition you think is less evil and try to convince them to be even less evil, or you admit that you're okay with the more evil option if it gives you a feeling of moral superiority.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Meanwhile in the real world, in most of the US there is no realistic alternative to the red/blue dichotomy, and so while we're actually building that alternative we have to choose between those two.

You aren't building the alternative, you're arguing against building the alternative. You support the status quo.

You either work with the coalition you think is less evil and try to convince them to be even less evil, or you admit that you're okay with the more evil option if it gives you a feeling of moral superiority

Correct, you're doing the latter while I'm doing the former. Trying to work with Socialists and build a good party is better than sitting on your hands and giving the genocidal imperialists the keys forever.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

"Building an alternative" doesn't happen in the ballot box. It happens everywhere else.

It happens by getting a better voting system rather than FPTP, for which I'm doing actual, active advocacy. (Are you?)

It happens by working at a grassroots level to get people with better opinions elected, all the way down to local judges, city council members and library boards, where I, once again, am active. (Are you?)

It happens by getting involved in politics at a local level and building a movement. I'm doing that. (Are you?) It doesn't happen by throwing a tantrum in the voting booth.

The fascists know this. The fascists use this to their advantage. And the fascists would absolutely love for there to be 10 competing leftist parties acting as a spoiler effect for liberals. Because as bad as liberals are, fascists are worse.

Throwing out a "no u" when I point out how the things you are doing are paving the way for fascists is not a good argument unless your goal is to actually get fascists into power. And I will choose liberalism over fascism, because that's the harm reduction path to leftism, whereas letting the fascists win is the harm maximisation path.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

getting a better voting system rather than FPTP

i just want to pass by to point out that not-fptp is implemented on many places without the big results the proponents of this solution say it to be.

the same goes for mandatory voting. we have the same issues with electoralism.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

FPTP is only one problem with the system. But it's still a problem pretty much everywhere that has it. There are many other things that make it particularly worse in the US, but that doesn't make it not a problem with it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

the main problem we should be striving to fix to actually end this madness is the undue influence of capital in our 'democracies' due to capitalism.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

"Building an alternative" doesn't happen in the ballot box. It happens everywhere else.

Mostly correct, actually, it's just important to highlight how unimportant the ballot box is.

It happens by getting a better voting system rather than FPTP, for which I'm doing actual, active advocacy. (Are you?)

No, because that's silly, and won't fix anything. Only revolution can.

It happens by working at a grassroots level to get people with better opinions elected, all the way down to local judges, city council members and library boards, where I, once again, am active. (Are you?)

Ah, the old "out of sight, out of mind" approach! Certainly won't be sufficient.

It happens by getting involved in politics at a local level and building a movement. I'm doing that. (Are you?) It doesn't happen by throwing a tantrum in the voting booth.

Yep, I am checking out my local chapters of FRSO and PSL and am going to sign on with one of them. They are DemCent, so I can't join both.

The fascists know this. The fascists use this to their advantage. And the fascists would absolutely love for there to be 10 competing leftist parties acting as a spoiler effect for liberals. Because as bad as liberals are, fascists are worse.

Fascism is Capitalism in decay, you can't separate liberalism over time from fascism. Fascism isn't an idea, but a defensive response to leftism.

Throwing out a "no u" when I point out how the things you are doing are paving the way for fascists is not a good argument unless your goal is to actually get fascists into power. And I will choose liberalism over fascism, because that's the harm reduction path to leftism, whereas letting the fascists win is the harm maximisation path.

You say this while saying you help perpetuate liberalism, paving the way for fascism, lmao

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's a lot of text to say "Yes, I want the fascist to win."

Making things worse isn't going to accelerate the revolution. It's going to make things worse and kill the most vulnerable in our society - the ones who would most benefit from a revolution. If you truly want a socialist revolution, you need to have enough people on your side. And having those people be dead is counterproductive.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's a lot of text to say "Yes, I want the fascist to win."

In other words, you can't actually respond to my points so you'll misrepresent them. Typical liberalism.

Making things worse isn't going to accelerate the revolution.

Never said it would, that's why I am trying to do what I can before liberals speedrun America into fascism.

It's going to make things worse and kill the most vulnerable in our society - the ones who would most benefit from a revolution. If you truly want a socialist revolution, you need to have enough people on your side. And having those people be dead is counterproductive.

Yep, the Dems and Reps both are killing marginalized people, both domestically and abroad, so we have to abandon them and cease support for their genocide and imperialism

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're talking in circles and fundamentally missing the point that neither voting third-party nor not voting isn't going to make things better. It's only going to make things worse.

The ballot box is for harm reduction, and equivocating the level of evil of two candidates only ever helps the more evil option.

If you want to make your first actual point, feel free to do so. If you want to keep repeating the very talking points that got us the situation that allowed for this genocide in the first place, don't bother.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You're talking in circles and fundamentally missing the point that neither voting third-party nor not voting isn't going to make things better. It's only going to make things worse.

Things are getting worse if either the Dems or Reps win, Third Party is the only chance electorally.

The ballot box is for harm reduction, and equivocating the level of evil of two candidates only ever helps the more evil option.

Pretending equal evils are different based on vibes alone isn't harm reduction, it's harm acceleration.

If you want to make your first actual point, feel free to do so. If you want to keep repeating the very talking points that got us the situation that allowed for this genocide in the first place, don't bother.

If you want to make your first actual point, feel free to do so. If you want to keep repeating the very talking points that got us the situation that allowed for this genocide in the first place, don't bother.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In the above comment, we see the following:

  • Repetition of the same debunked talking points
  • Equivocation of the two major parties (which, as I've already mentioned, only helps the more evil of the two)
  • "no u"

It really insults the intelligence of those reading to think that they won't see through this.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)
  • Repetition of the same debunked talking points

Which of my points have you "debunked?" Lol

  • Equivocation of the two major parties (which, as I've already mentioned, only helps the more evil of the two)

You've been whitewashing genocide and fascism, without meaningfully backing yourself up.

  • "no u"

You insulted me directly, while leaving yourself wide open. You started directly insulting because you had no points other than claiming that genocide isn't that bad if the Dems do it.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Which of my points have you “debunked?” Lol

I haven't had to, as all you've done so far is repeat already-debunked, faux-leftist points that enable fascists.

You’ve been whitewashing genocide and fascism, without meaningfully backing yourself up.

Ahh, more accusations. Genocide is bad. Fascism is bad. Thus my question: why are you advocating for actions that will lead to more genocide and fascism?

You started directly insulting because you had no points other than claiming that genocide isn’t that bad if the Dems do it.

Lying about what I've said in a written forum isn't effective. Once again, and in larger font:

Genocide is always bad, and more genocide is worse.

So why are you advocating for actions that fall in the "more genocide" camp?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

I haven't had to, as all you've done so far is repeat already-debunked, faux-leftist points that enable fascists.

In other words, you can't, so you call them "faux-leftist."

Ahh, more accusations. Genocide is bad. Fascism is bad. Thus my question: why are you advocating for actions that will lead to more genocide and fascism?

How would my actions lead to more genocide and fascism? Where do you think they come from?

Lying about what I've said in a written forum isn't effective. Once again, and in larger font:

Genocide is always bad, and more genocide is worse.

So why are you advocating for actions that fall in the "more genocide" camp?

Explain where the genocide is coming from, and how what I am advocating for leads to "more genocide." You keep repeating baseless assertions.