chapotraphouse

13548 readers

1 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Ask the Kamala voters in your life (hexbear.net)

submitted 4 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

2 comments fedilink hide all child comments

How many dead Palestinian kids will it take for you to change your vote?

top 2 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

You guys really don't get that your voting system only leads to two parties. As soon as one of those parties splits up, the other one will literally always win, that's just a mathematical reality.

It is true that both of these two parties are terrible. However, D is slightly less terrible as R. If you stop voting for D and go for X which is theoretically objectively better, R will always win. So a vote for X is effectively a vote for R.

Yes, if suddenly all D voters would move to X, then X would win. But this is simply not realistic. The only realistic way for change is for the slightly better party of the two to always win, which would make R die out. Then a farther left party will emerge, that might even want to change to ranked choice voting. If not, the whole spiel has to be repeated until D dies out because of never winning.

This is incredibly slow, but slow is how our society changes. Even the French revolution didn't just suddenly happen, hundreds of years of starting to understand how terrible monarchy was and building the knowledge of alternate systems among the general populace was required. The real change is people gaining more knowledge, gaining a better understanding of reality, themselves.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

You guys really don't get that your voting system only leads to two parties.

Goddammit I wish you brick headed libs would have some fucking humility. "URGH DONT YOU GUYS REALISE [the most common thing we all get spit into our faces all the time] HURH BET YA DIDNT THINK OF THAT HUH?"
Consider the following: you dont know what the fuck you're talking about. Consider the fact that we, just like you, have also heard these talking points as they get served to our head and ass every election season. Unlike you we possess critical thinking skills above that of a parrot, a memory that is better than that of a goldfish, and are slightly more curious than an adolescent ape. This leads to us doing slightly more than reading the headline of the most up voted thing on Reddit for the day, and grants us just a tiny bit deeper understanding of the system and the many flaws with it. Also fuck your mother for giving birth to an idiot like you.

As soon as one of those parties splits up, the other one will literally always win, that's just a mathematical reality.

I love presenting my own half-assed analysis based on an uncountable number of assumptions as "mathematical reality" i-love-not-thinking

You've been doing this rhetoric for over half a century and all it has brought you is genocide, climate change denial (doing fuck all is the same as denying it), deportations en masse and a fascist police state.

and it was already a clichéd argument back then.

That's the real issue this time," he said. "Beating Nixon. It's hard to even guess how much damage those bastards will do if they get in for another four years."

The argument was familiar, I had even made it myself, here and there, but I was beginning to sense something very depressing about it. How many more of these goddamn elections are we going to have to write off as lame, but "regrettably necessary" holding actions? And how many more of these stinking double-downer sideshows will we have to go through before we can get ourselves straight enough to put together some kind of national election that will give me and the at least 20 million people I tend to agree with a chance to vote for something, instead of always being faced with that old familiar choice between the lesser of two evils?

Now with another one of these big bogus showdowns looming down on us, I can already pick up the stench of another bummer. I understand, along with a lot of other people, that the big thing this year is Beating Nixon. But that was also the big thing, as I recall, twelve years ago in 1960 – and as far as I can tell, we've gone from bad to worse to rotten since then, and the outlook is for more of the same.

—Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72

You really don't get it, but constantly voting for the "lesser evil" doesn't do anything other than make it more evil.

This is incredibly slow, but slow is how our society changes. Even the French revolution didn't just suddenly happen.

So first of all you show you do understand that people plan further than just the current election, yet you fail to comprehend the concept as it applies to the US. "UOHHHH PSL WOULDNT WIN SO WHY VOTE FOR THEM? THESE THINGS TAKE TIME DONCHA KNOW GUYS" yeah why work towards incrementally making another party popular when you can make it clear to those in charge that they can away with genocide instead.

Secondly: Tell me you know nothing about the french revolution without telling me. It did come very suddenly, that's one of the main things about it dumbfuck. It wasn't the result of centuries of agitation, it was the very present result of the conditions at that moment in France, not decades or centuries of work. The politics themselves developed along with the revolution, people didn't even conceive of killing the king until... Well until after it happened.
You think people in medieval times thought the king was good? The nobles would host tournaments on random plots of land, typically containing one or more villages that they'd just fuck up. Just ride thru and pillage and completely destroy. People would get their winter depots ransacked by the nobles as they passed thru with a small army. They were practically slaves for most of the time and essentially slaves the rest of the time. You think these people didn't fucking hate the monarchy? You think it took centuries of enlightened dickheads like you to go around and dare ask wild questions like "hey have you considered not giving three quarters of your grain to your liege lord? Have you considered the fact that your liege lord shouldn't be allowed to just put you in the pillock because he's bored?"
You should be ashamed for thinking the world functions as you think it does.

The real change is people gaining more knowledge, gaining a better understanding of reality, themselves.

Incredible take to have come from someone as dumb as you. Pull your head out of the toilet and read a book please. I dunno, start with settlers. I'd tell you to read some Lenin but we both know that would just lead to the immediate regurgitation of more trite drivel from you as we once again have to pretend like you have any novel insights.
In conclusion: Just say you don't give a shit about genocide. Just say you're supportive of genocide as long as you feel safe. Just admit you don't give a fuck about brown people, instead of having us got thru this whole charade. At least the republicans have the decency not to pretend to care. Finally .fuck whoever donated the sperm that assisted in the creation of you.

Edit: Either the anti-genocide bloc has enough sway to make one of the candidates change position or we don't matter enough and thus it doesn't matter wether we vote or not. The circular "you have to vote for her or she loses! No you aren't enough to make demands!" Is as asinine as it is obvious - Well obvious to anyone who is capable of even the most miniscule piece of investigation about the ideology they're mired in every day.

Double edit: Just realised you never answered the question. How many?