this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
11 points (55.1% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7239 readers
583 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago (2 children)

On the ballot in 19 states totalling 220 electoral college votes.

Who wants to tell them you need 270 to win?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballot_access_in_the_2024_United_States_presidential_election

[–] Grebes 19 points 1 month ago (10 children)

In case others need to hear this, please don’t vote third party. Even to start a revolution or whatever. It’s an incredibly privileged position to be able to endanger LGBTQ, immigrants, and women’s rights because you want to send a message. Vote Dem and back ranked choice or you may get the revolution the other way.

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

Don't vote for genociders. It is an incredibly privileged position to vote for someone genociding an entire people as if it is just a normal election year.

And don't kid yourself on what Dems will do. They don't actually fight for any of that particularly hard because they know you will vote for them anyways, even I'd they commit genocide. In fact, the thing to do if you care about others' welfare is to demonstrate that you are not an automatic lever pull, that you require real concessions. Otherwise you are just a cheerleader for their entire program indefinitely, and that includes genocide.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I was hyped about Walz for* a few whole days, and the day after Harris picked him, i got the bright idea to check his past statements on Israel. When I searched, I learned within 15 minutes that not only was he AIPAC supported, but also that he strongly and vocally supported Israel until Harris needed to pick a veep candidate, and got quiet. That's when I noped. This is nothing new, he just couldn't suppress his support any more.

Psychological suppression is like pushing an inflated beach ball under water: you can push it down to a certain degree, and then it bursts back to the surface, splashing water everywhere in proximity (water representing feelings).

[–] zarkanian 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Most of the people voting for alternative parties are themselves LGBTQ, immigrants, and women.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I just don't understand why we can't start the exact same revolution these people want during the primaries. It would make much more sense to win over/capture the party and then push that platform in the general. You get real power to get actual shit done without risking fascism by letting the GOP win due to the spoiler effect.

If someone can make the "revolution is necessary" argument, that should be a perfectly acceptable plan. I think they just want complete collapse so they can try and rebuild, which is complete psychopathic nonsense.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I just don't understand why we can't start the exact same revolution these people want during the primaries.

Are you suggesting a revolution is done within the bounds of the electoral system?

It would make much more sense to win over/capture the party and then push that platform in the general

  1. You can't "capture" or "win over" parties like that, the electoral system is a filter.

  2. You can't change a party's platform in the general with some grand prayer or anything, they will do what they need to to satisfy their donors.

You get real power to get actual shit done

No, you don't.

If someone can make the "revolution is necessary" argument, that should be a perfectly acceptable plan. I think they just want complete collapse so they can try and rebuild, which is complete psychopathic nonsense.

You're right, that is nonsense, please read leftist theory and talk to actual leftists. Nobody wants to rebuild from collapse.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (9 children)

I just don't understand why we can't start the exact same revolution these people want during the primaries.

Revolution does not follow the electoral cycle. PSL is constantly doing work. This is just a vehicle for reaching those who do not understand politics beyond electoralism and to raise the correct position that both capitalist parties create and maintain our oppression.

There is not going to be a revolutionary movement that begins work during a primary and then has completed the revolution at its end. Revolutionary work requires building organizations over years and decades.

It would make much more sense to win over/capture the party and then push that platform in the general.

The party will never allow that lmao. Every attempt to work within the most viable party for this, the Democrats, has resulted in them changing their own rules. Just see how it worked out for the members of the DSA who took over in Nevada.

You get real power to get actual shit done without risking fascism by letting the GOP win due to the spoiler effect.

Biden and Harris are just as fascistic as Trump. They are nationalists committing genocide scapegoating immigrants and people overseas and pumping huge sums of money into cops' funds in response to uprisings over racial policing and racial oppression. They are just polite about it and use the right euphemisms.

Their policies are, in fact, the main driver of an ascendant right. Their policies degrade conditions and the response to them and fail to address the scapegoating that marginalization provides.

If someone can make the "revolution is necessary" argument, that should be a perfectly acceptable plan.

Of course it is necessary. You think the capitalists will just let you vote them out of power?

I think they just want complete collapse so they can try and rebuild, which is complete psychopathic nonsense.

Please do less bullshit guessing and actually learn about this topic.

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

They are just polite about it and use the right euphemisms.

Yes. That my cognitive dissonance was so loud I could clearly see the evermore rightward march of the Democratic party, be horrified by ever-shifting rhetoric and policy but failed to recognize it until one of our brothers here pointed out to me in direct yet civil terms, i was embarrassed. Not ashamed, because I think shame wouldn't have allowed me to admit to myself, let alone others, that this is exactly correct.

No matter our nationality, political ideals, deep, honest, fearless introspection is necessary.

Sometimes I feel the fear of Uncertainty stinging clear And I, I can't help but ask myself How much I let the fear take the wheel and steer It's driven me before, and it seems to have a vague Haunting mass appeal But lately I'm beginning to find that I Should be the one behind the wheel

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

Yes, it's horrifying what a small change in perspective - a new angle of criticism, for example - can reveal about our world. There's no need to feel embarrassment, we are all embedded in a milieu of PR campaigns and a handful of political memes recycled indefinitely and it is so pervasive that it is not something that poli sci professors usually escape, either. Usually it's the exact opposite. They repeat and entrench lines of thought handed down to them without ever critically engaging with it. Universities across the West teach collective action problems as if they are laws and not constantly openly contradicted by example or that politucs is a one-dimensional axis from liberal to conservative. The latter truly reveals how little they have questioned or learned and opens up its own interesting questions about how academia functions. But anyways, point is, even the people nominally tasked with becoming experts on these sorts of things don't just automatically recognize this predominant myopia.

Recognizing such pervasive false perspectives and tropes tends to require a cold splash of reality that contradicts the narrative or extensive reading to discover new thought patterns. Or like in your case, talking to someone that has already done so. All we can do is be open to the constructive self-criticism like you make note of and to do our best to be personally morally consistent and empathetic.

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

Thank you for your generous and insightful reply. I'm definitely not a political scientist, and I guess the embarrassment was for myself, realizing on the one hand that our policies are terrible, and on the other, that hope lies with the Democratic party.

While I don't salivate at the idea of war, and especially civil war, I can not fear it; dread and fear not always being the same thing or of the same source. I'll do what is necessary, while also acknowledging that my opponents are decent, but misguided and just as heavily brainwashed people. I just hope when it comes to that, fascism won't prevail, whether that happens in whatever years I have left, or follows the generations behind me.

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

Nothing inherently good about being a political scientist! They are wrong or naive so often it is ridiculous. I think it is just an interesting example of how the people paid to think about such topics are still embedded in propaganda milieu and spectacle. You can very much become far more educated and insightful than one, it just takes healthy criticism and reading.

While I don't salivate at the idea of war, and especially civil war, I can not fear it; dread and fear not always being the same thing or of the same source.

I dread and fear all war but also understand that the violence comes for us regardless, we just get to choose how to organize, become resilient, and strategically protect ourselves while also engaging in meaningful action. The ruling class will never let us vote them out. We may succeed at voting out their preferred sects of the political class, and thus agitate and build against them, but they will bring violence in response - violence that, per the dominant thought patterns, won't be called violence. It will be joblessness, deprivation, essential services shut down. Capital strikes, etc. And such crises can then be leveraged to restore their preferred sects. Civil war is not likely to spring up early, but as a downstream outcome of repeated struggles like this, of preventing eventual popular will. We will also probably lose at least one round, assuming we cannot organize quickly enough. What that kind of thing looks like can be real horror, which is why we must organize. We need our losses to look like 1905 Russia not 1965 Indonesia. We should also be realistic in that these kinds if fights will happen earlier and more successfully in the third world and one of our duties is to support them, particularly as our governments and media apparatuses will be leading the charge to demonize them.

I'll do what is necessary, while also acknowledging that my opponents are decent, but misguided and just as heavily brainwashed people.

Some will be decent and misguided. Others will be misguided but not at all decent, having cruelty and racism and a desire for domination deeply embedded in their psyche. It will be virtually impossible to sympathize when they do overy violence to us. They already do "civilly", like with cops that harass and murder, particularly against black and brown people. Or like ICE. Or the soldiers that dehumanize the people in a country they invaded. Historically, those most targeted by them will rightfully want justice.

I just hope when it comes to that, fascism won't prevail, whether that happens in whatever years I have left, or follows the generations behind me.

On the bright side, the world is rebuilding structures and relationships that can rein in empire. And in the US, the nascent left is relearning all of the old lessons of the last 300 years. The opposing forces are escalating and organizations are building, which is better than the unipolar malaise of the prior 40 years.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

I dread and fear all war but also understand that the violence comes for us regardless, we just get to choose how to organize, become resilient, and strategically protect ourselves while also engaging in meaningful action. The ruling class will never let us vote them out. We may succeed at voting out their preferred sects of the political class, and thus agitate and build against them, but they will bring violence in response - violence that, per the dominant thought patterns, won’t be called violence. It will be joblessness, deprivation, essential services shut down. Capital strikes, etc. And such crises can then be leveraged to restore their preferred sects.

Interestingly, I view this as violence, too. But that's because maybe 25 years ago, a philosophical Taoist introduced me to the idea that some construction techniques are violence to nature, some aren't, so having that understanding naturally led to understanding certain control techniques, inside intimate family or larger social structures, as violence, and that's a whole other controversial topic.

With regard to fear, I only meant it's coming so it's kind of pointless to fear it. Most people have fears whether homelessness, hunger, or the horrors of war; and most of us will feel the fear and do what needs doing, anyway. I'd entirely avoid it, were it not necessary.

Civil war is not likely to spring up early, but as a downstream outcome of repeated struggles like this, of preventing eventual popular will.

I believe that for at least some of the J6ers, this was the motivating factor.

We will also probably lose at least one round, assuming we cannot organize quickly enough. What that kind of thing looks like can be real horror, which is why we must organize. We need our losses to look like 1905 Russia not 1965 Indonesia....And in the US, the nascent left is relearning all of the old lessons of the last 300 years. The opposing forces are escalating and organizations are building, which is better than the unipolar malaise of the prior 40 years.

I'm looking at aligning with an organization, and volunteering, now; I wish there were more who are. It would be preferable, I'm just not confident most of my fellow compatriots will see it coming (USA, which is why I included that bit out of order in the quote). And most (not all) will take up arms for our oppressors, if the current on- and offline discourse is indicative of that future event, but I'm in the Bible Belt, so there's that consideration.

We should also be realistic in that these kinds if fights will happen earlier and more successfully in the third world and one of our duties is to support them, particularly as our governments and media apparatuses will be leading the charge to demonize them.

We do what we can, and a few listen. I'm still so proud of Bolivian indigenous people for having fought and won, against military grade weapons with common gardening tools, their water rights back from Bechtel! What a noble example to have been set for us.

Some will be decent and misguided. Others will be misguided but not at all decent, having cruelty and racism and a desire for domination deeply embedded in their psyche. It will be virtually impossible to sympathize when they do overy violence to us.

Tbh, and perhaps it's a reflection of my character, it's virtually impossible for me to sympathize in the moment a decent human is doing overt violence to me. Survival instinct is powerful, and sympathy and empathy are usually before and after, during is entirely different.

My apologies for the disjointed reply. I left off this reply to consider it more broadly. Distractions began immediately when I began typing this, and it's a deep topic that could perhaps be better discussed over food and beverages, or at least in person. Or perhaps it's just an uneasy topic, knowing that for all considerations we foresee, there are many we can't. I do very much appreciate your encouragement and well-considered reply.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (7 children)

the dems are treating immigrants just as badly and deporting even more, they did nothing to protects womens rights to abortions or to protect lgbtq people and they are actively supporting a FUCKING GENOCIDE in case u forgot. They dont deserve a single fucking vote. If they lose and i doubt they will maybe it will teach them not to be genocidal at the very least.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Do you think they are running because they expect to win? Are you familiar at all with the Marxist view of Electoralism?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (26 children)

They aren't going to end capitalism if they don't win.

The best they can hope to do is take votes away from Harris ensuring a Trump win, which is 180° the opposite of their message.

load more comments (26 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (3 children)

This is just a picture.

Quick search...

Here are the main points form their program:

END CAPITALISM BEFORE IT ENDS US

  1. Seize the Biggest 100 Corporations, Create A New Economy for the People
  2. Overthrow the Dictatorship of the Rich -- Build a Democracy That Serves the Working Class
  3. End the Rule of Money and Lock Up the Corrupt Elite
  4. End All U.S. Aid to Apartheid Israel. End the Genocide and Free Palestine
  5. Cut the Military Budget by 90% -- Peace, Not War with China & Russia!
  6. End the War on Black America!
  7. Defend Women's Rights, Full Equality for LGBTQ People
  8. Save the Planet from Capitalism^[[1] https://votesocialist2024.com/our-program]
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Where's the article?

load more comments
view more: next ›