136
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by millie@beehaw.org to c/chat@beehaw.org

I want to draw attention to the elephant in the room.

Leading up to the election, and perhaps even more prominently now, we've been seeing droves of people on the internet displaying a series of traits in common.

  • Claiming to be leftists
  • Dedicating most of their posting to dismantling any power possessed by the left
  • Encouraging leftists not to vote or to vote for third party candidates
  • Highlighting issues with the Democratic party as being disqualifying while ignoring the objectively worse positions held by the Republican party
  • Attacking anyone who promotes defending leftist political power by claiming they are centrists and that the attacker is "to the left of them"
  • Using US foreign policy as a moral cudgel to disempower any attempt at legitimate engagement with the US political system
  • Seemingly doing nothing to actually mount resistance against authoritarianism

When you look at an aerial view of these behaviors in conjunction with one another, what they're accomplishing is pretty plain to see, in my opinion. It's a way of utilizing the moral scrupulousness of the left to cut our teeth out politically. We get so caught up in giving these arguments the benefit of the doubt and of making sure people who claim to be leftists have a platform that we're missing ideological parasites in our midst.

This is not a good-faith discourse. This is not friendly disagreement. This is, largely, not even internal disagreement. It is infiltration, and it's extremely effective.

Before attacking this argument as lacking proof, just do a little thought experiment with me. If there is a vector that allows authoritarians to dismantle all progress made by the left, to demotivate us and to detract from our ability to form coalitions and build solidarity, do you really think they wouldn't take advantage of it?

By refusing to ever question those who do nothing with their time in our spaces but try to drive a wedge between us, to take away our power and make us feel helpless and hopeless, we're giving them exactly that vector. I am telling you, they are using it.

We need to stop letting them. We need to see it for what it is, get the word out, and remember, as the political left, how to use the tools that we have to change society. It starts with us between one another. It starts with what we do in the spaces that we inhabit. They know this, and it's why they're targeting us here.

Stop being an easy target. Stop feeding the cuckoo.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] LukeZaz@beehaw.org 11 points 1 day ago

I had more I wanted to say on this topic when I first read it, but at the time I also had more energy. Had I not had other obligations, I would've written out my more detailed thoughts then. As it is, however, I'll have to settle for the (relative) shortform, as I find this thread exhausting from the outset and the sheer quantity of incredibly angry back-and-forth here has only made it worse.

To suffice the ideas of mine that I still remember, then:

  • I have a feeling that while you may not consider me specifically to be a "cuckoo," that this post was still partially aimed at people like myself, since I've spent a fair chunk of time arguing to the immense faults of the Democrat Party, some of which was in discussion with you.
  • If the above is true, I feel dehumanized and find this topic incredibly depressing.
  • Regardless of the above, I find jumping to assumptions of bad faith on the part of those with whom you disagree on this topic understandable, but needlessly conspiratorial.

But to end my comment, I'd like to point out an area on which you and I can find common ground: Your point of "Seemingly doing nothing to actually mount resistance against authoritarianism" suggests you feel that the people arguing against voting / the Democrat Party are doing a poor job of offering alternative solutions. On this, I agree. Solutions for that scenario are hard to come by and often complicated, and where people do have things to suggest a portion of them are very flawed; voting Green, not voting, and the occasional implicit suggestion for violence, etc. All of those have huge problems that I know I don't need to explain to you.

For that, all I can say is that I agree that leftists can do better and should. I've seen the good suggestions before. Things like mutual aid, education, organizing, joining events — all of these are very useful things that are significantly more important than one vote in a broken electoral system. Unfortunately, as you've noticed, frustrated and angry people tend to be bad at mentioning these things.

I only ask that you consider that these people are frustrated, angry, and restless, rather than actively fake.

[-] void_turtle 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

None of this shit matters anymore jfc. There won't be real elections in 2026. Stop drinking Democrat collaborator diarrhea and start preparing for mass street level resistance. In case it somehow isn't glaringly obvious, when the mass protest encampments shut down cities the Democrats will be the ones telling people to go home and vote instead. And when Trump nationalizes the national guard and sends them in to break up the encampments at rifle point the Democrats will wring their hands and put out a milquetoast statement about how they support peaceful protest but that disruption can't be tolerated. Were none of you alive yet in 2020? Did none of you get guns pointed at you by national guard sent in by Democratic governors?

The Democrats are sitting in congress making word-shaped noises that gesture at displeasure with the ongoing fascist coup. A Republican Nazi could walk around congress putting them down with a cattle gun and the remaining ones would smile tightly and put out a statement about how "this is a serious violation of democratic norms" and then vote in favor of the next Trump nominee. These people are collaborators. They will do nothing to stop the fascist coup because they don't want to.

[-] segabased@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

It's a psyop

They appeal to leftists by saying electoralism won't bring revolution, which is true... But then say don't vote.

Makes no sense to me. Use any lever you have. You can advocate revolution and pull the lever for lesser evil. It reduces the concept to black and white thinking while appealing to people's sense of self righteousness and laziness.

The same tactics and arguments are deployed on maga, only they're encouraged to vote

[-] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 days ago

Great points! Now that the election is over, let's focus on revamping the Dem party instead of huffing copium by blaming 3rd party leftists for not being conservative enough to vote for a rightwing party!

[-] andybytes@programming.dev 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's like making banana bread. Everybody has their own recipe, but it's still banana bread. The Trump administration is the continuation of the Biden administration. And America is an imperialist empire that rapes and pillages the world. We are also heading to a precipice, where we will be fooled into fighting another world war, war because of course blame it on the Muslims. Fascist are the useful idiots of empire, and sometimes fascists don't realize their fascist. Neo-liberalism is a right-wing ideology, and that's what we've been dealing with when it comes to the Democrats. Because they all take money from foreign powers, and they do not work on our behalf. They also use the intelligence department to divide this nation. since education has been under fire for so long, that most of the people in America don't understand World War II or the world that they live in today. Russia defeated the Nazis, America came in to take the credit as they were also funding the Nazis, similar to what is happening in Ukraine today. But what is different is that communism is dead and what we have now is global capitalism. With our own capitalist class that fights amongst themselves for their interest while at the same time understanding their place in the hierarchy and keeping us all down and stupid. China is a capitalist country. Russia is a capitalist country. Liberals or the Democratic Party will try to rebrand themselves in order to keep voter engagement because that's all it is. It's a suggestion. It's a temperature. But what I've seen is that voter turnout keeps getting smaller and smaller because people are starting to catch on .....things will just get worse, I can guarantee. But you'll just turn a blind eye, because you're playing Tribalist Games. Red Team vs the Blue Team. It's all the same, it's still the same game. You should Google the imperialist Boomerang. What goes around comes around. What they do overseas will come back to you and me. I would think with the Snowden and Julian Assange leaks that would have woken up a lot of America, but America is.. That.They're literate, or they lack reading comprehension and the ability to pay attention. As somebody who is liberal arts educated, I really do think that America is one of the most servile nations in the world. Because we've been fat and happy, eating the spoils, well relative crumbs, but spoils of our imperialist wars. Unfortunately, I live in this country and I am struggling. I really want out. I do not identify with this culture and everyone around me seems crazy. And they lack the patience to listen. All I ask for you to do is listen. I plant seeds. Eventually, if you get enough of those, you have a garden of reality. We really do lack critical thinking skills. And then the sofist, Uno card, is something that just drives me mad. Either way, if I live or die, justice will be served, and Yankee gets what they deserve. Justice is coming, either by the nations of the world sick of your shit, or by your own hands. I mean, haven't you figured it out yet? The whole good cop versus bad cop thing. You are the most gullible nation in the world. America is similar to North Korea. America is like North Korea with Disneyland. You're in a theme park that you can't afford and you can't get out. It's a small world after all.

[-] SloppilyFloss@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago

From Fascism and Big Business by Daniel Guerrin

From Gramsci's Prison Notebooks

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I suppose it must make the world a lot simpler if you assume the US Democratic and Republican parties represent the full range of beliefs that exist in the world, and anyone who doesn't neatly fit into those categories is simply lying.

[-] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 1 points 19 hours ago

Lmao here you are again, I've seen you before. You are usually quiet honest about not believing in democracy and defending the USSR etc. Having fun spreading discord here, tankie troll?

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

I'm not "spreading discord" nor "trolling." I have no interest in disguising my beliefs.

Yes, I will defend the USSR. I will also "defend" just about any nation, if the claims being made about it are false, because my priority is the truth. For many people, the truth doesn't matter so much as they feel this need to demonstrate that they're part of an in-group or to communicate that they themselves aren't going to revolt, and so they allow all kinds of lies spread and propagate them themselves. Because to counteract blatant misinformation about a country is to defend it.

As for democracy, I don't believe in bourgeois "democracy" where the winner is decided by who has the most money and virtually every important decision is taken out of the sphere of public influence. I do not believe in a "democracy" where the people have to choose which face will be the one to commit genocide. That's not really democracy though, is it?

I embrace the label "tankie," mostly because it is thrown around so wantonly that it's meaningless, and loses any punch it might have otherwise have. In practice, if you have a single positive thing to say about any self-described socialist state in history, for example, "Cuba's literacy program was good," then someone's gonna call you a tankie.

Personally, I love that, because it turns it into this broad, all-inclusive term for any serious leftist, and papers over some differences. It's kinda like the word "queer." Whether you're an Anarchist or a Marxist or whatever else, if the liberals are calling you "tankie" you're probably a comrade, and if you're throwing around the term yourself you're probably a liberal. You Ain't Done Nothing If You Ain't Been Called A ~~Red~~ Tankie

[-] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 2 points 10 hours ago

Again, nothing socialist about you, authoritarian.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Socialism is when you ask nicely for the bourgeoisie to pretty please give up their wealth and stop exploiting people and the nicer you ask the more socialistier it is.

[-] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Classic. Assuming I'm against a socialist revolution despite me never having made this claim.

Edit: To be clear I am very much in favor of socialist revolutions. Unlike a certain someone else I am however not in favor of military dictatorships which pretend to be socialist,

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?

Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don't know what they're talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction.

Fredrick Engles, famous non-socialist

[-] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 2 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

How irrelevant. I'm talking about the end result of the revolution. You want to establish dictatorship. I want to establish worker democracy. I am a socialist. You are an authoritarian.

Edit: Never understood why tankies are so obsessed with quoting old dead authoritarians as if that somehow changes the present in some way. I don't let auths redefine my words. Also how about quoting the anarchists they are so fond of murdering instead.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists.

I must correct my previous statement.

Socialism is when you violently overthrow the bourgeoisie, then immediately allow yourself to be overthrown by a fascist counter-revolution in which everyone on the left is exterminated, because you're too afraid of your own shadow to stop them.

Tell me, what are your thoughts on Mohammad Mossadegh of Iran? A progressive leader who came to power through a peaceful, popular movement against British colonialism, nationalized the oil industry and reclaimed it's profits for the benefit of the common people, and then, as the CIA began infiltrating the country, refused to implement any "authoritarian" measures, leading to his overthrow? Leading to the installation of the shah who hunted down and exterminated any and all leftists in the country with his secret police? Leading to generations of Iranians living their entire lives under far-right governments, with no end in sight?

There's a reason why existing socialist governments are willing to employ authoritarian methods, it's called "survivorship bias," as in, all the movements that were too averse to such methods were subverted and exterminated.

Honestly, I find your position less coherent and less respectable than outright liberalism. If you're serious about revolution, then you have to be prepared for what that entails and you have to understand the life-or-death stakes. If you blow it, not only will everyone involved be killed, but the example will live on and the next opportunity might not arise for another 100 years or more. You are playing with powerful forces, and failure is not an option. It's necessary to adapt to the situation and use whatever methods are most effective, whether those methods are "authoritarian" or not.

What you want to do is to try to fight the vastly superior foe of capitalism, but before you even start, you want to put on a blindfold and tie one hand behind your back. You want to win in the "right" way, the way that makes you feel good. You're trying to play games, but the other side does not fuck around.

Of course, I assume you don't have thoughts on Mossadegh because I assume you haven't actually studied historical examples to inform your views, nor actual theory. My views are not something I was born with or that were just naturally appealing to me, it's only after studying such things and seriously considering them that I arrived here. In a world where leaders like Mossadegh didn't get overthrown, I wouldn't hold the views I do, unfortunately, that's not the world we live in. I'd rather survive, win, and deliver on material improvements, rather than be an aspiring martyr.

[-] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Like imagine spending all this effort to try to escape oppression by... implementing more oppression.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

In practice, it's the opposite. You want to spend all the effort of revolution just to end up with more oppression because you get overthrown by CIA-backed fascists.

[-] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

You assume quite a lot and then start jabbering on about dictatorships. You're no better than fascists

Edit: why do you keep assuming I am against revolutions. Tankies are extremely disingenuous

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

So, as I assumed, no answer to the Mossadegh problem.

Nowhere in that comment did I assume that you're against revolutions. You're in favor of them, as you said. A bit too in favor of them, tbh. You seem to think revolutions are trivial matters, that if the gains of a revolution are lost, you can simply do it again. If you're not prepared to commit to whatever's necessary to win and secure those gains, you're probably better off not doing it at all.

Nothing I've said is remotely disingenuous. You've just decided you hate me because of memes and meme ideologies. If you're attempting to demonstrate the importance of theory through this silly display of ignorance and infighting, you're doing a good job of it.

People become "tankies" because they take these questions seriously and study them. You can't understand it because you don't, and haven't. Your ideology (whatever it is) wasn't chosen because of a rigorous study of history and theory, but because it looks nice. It's fun to denounce people as authoritarians, makes you feel good, whatever. But you don't actually have reason or evidence to back up your position, you're not interested in engaging with such historical or theoretical questions at all. None of you are, really. It's all just memes and yet you have this bizarre, misplaced confidence, that because your catchphrases sound nice it means your ideology works.

[-] thief_of_names@beehaw.org 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Perhaps they should study all the anarchists your ideology has murdered, or all the revolutions it has ruined. Most of the regimes you support are the result of military coups of actual revolutions. Why support that? Why support the genocides or the oppression of workers? You don't support socialism, even if you call it that. How great that your ideology is successful. Still doesn't make it socialism.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Most of the regimes you support are the result of military coups of actual revolutions.

Really? Which ones, specifically? I'm not aware of any like that.

Why support the genocides or the oppression of workers?

I don't.

Still doesn’t make it socialism.

If you want to write off the whole history of socialist theory as well as every revolution that called itself socialist as having nothing to do with socialism, then I might suggest that you're the one who should find another name for whatever it is you believe. Marx and Engles were socialists. Lenin was a socialist. Ho Chi Minh was a socialist. Fidel Castro and Che Guevara were socialists. They identified as such, acknowledged each other as such (when possible chronologically), and are widely seen as such. But I guess you personally are the ultimate authority on who is and isn't a socialist, and I just need to DM you whenever I have any questions about that.

Who exactly is a socialist in your mind, anyway? Any actual human being you can name, aside from yourself?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Thevenin@beehaw.org 11 points 2 days ago

Voluntarily disenfranchising yourself is complying in advance.

A broken tool still has its uses. A bent screwdriver can still be a prybar. A rusty sword can still kill, so don't ask people to drop it before have something better. It is possible to explore and acknowledge the failures and limitations of a system -- and to reduce overreliance on it -- without abdicating all influence over it.

The Democratic Party is a disappointment. They follow popular (polled) opinion rather than sticking to principles, and that makes them vulnerable to Overton shifts. As public opinion towards trans people has been poisoned by the Jugendverderber libel, Democrats have largely thrown trans people under the bus instead of fighting back. Likewise, Democrats stick closely to corporate interests because money is power. These issues may never be fixable.

The solution to this is not to capitulate and discard what political influence we still hold.

The first half of the solution is to primary the hell out of Democrats. A left-wing caucus within the party could easily tilt things in our favor, just like the Freedom Caucus tilted the RNC in the opposite direction once before. Bernie Sanders (link) and David Hogg (link) are now spearheading multiple campaigns to do exactly that. Even if you have no faith in your ability to change the norms of the party, just think how much impact your resistance could have if you held an office, even a low one, even for just a week. Do you have any idea how much trouble a county clerk can make?

The second half of the solution is to build solidarity-based power structures outside government to reduce overreliance on a broken system. Economic desperation, social isolation, and cultural "other"-ing make people easy to exploit and oppress regardless of the type of government, so attack those problems directly. Unions, mutual aid networks, churches, you know the drill. Put in the legwork to find them in your area or your profession.

Embrace nuance. Embrace diversity -- even political diversity. Political beliefs are not sacred, but the lives under those political systems are. Don't try to reduce the vast complexity of politics to 120 characters. Don't treat the ongoing wellbeing of human beings flippantly. If you think the problem is the existence of a state, then say so, but make your case for why making the state worse makes conditions for its subjects better. If you think voting third-party will teach the Democrats a lesson and drag them leftwards, then make your case and acknowledge the risks of what happens if you're wrong.

Don't just ridicule every positive effort you see. Doomer trolls (or cuckoos, if we're going with that) are pithy, but reductive, and their criticism is never constructive.

[-] millie@beehaw.org 7 points 2 days ago

This all day.

I think one if the big things that people miss is that while it may be the most prominent fights in the headlines, there are countless little fights going on all the time and they have a huge impact. They don't make national news or sometimes even local news, but they still matter. It's easy to dismiss them, but they still move the overton window and they still have a substantial impact on the day to day lives of people across the country. Every union steward in some small retail chain standing up to management makes an impact. Every judge who stands up for the rights of marginalized people makes an impact. Every city councilor who votes to fund programs for people in need. Every volunteer who shows up day after day to soup kitchens and food banks. Everybody who stops to give a few bucks to a person on the street. Everyone who sees someone struggling and takes the time to try to lift them up. Every advocate who spends their time helping people who are trying to find a way out of horrible situations.

The less visible stuff is much more wide-spread and makes a huge difference, maybe even more of a difference in many cases, than the big visible stuff.

It honestly drives me up a wall when people who seem like they never go out and connect with the real world around them spend so much time ranting about how everyone's screwed and nobody's doing anything about it. All they have to do is look outside or step outside themselves and lend someone, anyone a hand.

[-] Thevenin@beehaw.org 5 points 2 days ago

All they have to do is look outside or step outside themselves and lend someone, anyone a hand.

Touch grass, if you will.

I remember years ago watching a video -- I desperately wish I could remember the channel -- where the author shared his experience with depression and the early days of 4chan anime forums. He found it easier to browse forums about anime than to go out and actually watch them. Then the negativity piled in. That anime you like? "It's shit." Any hint of optimism or passion was an opportunity to get a rise out of someone or smugly ridicule them. The only unassailable belief was to doubt everything. The only winning move was not to care.

I've been thinking about that video a lot recently.

Online activism has led to a handful of noteworthy victories. But the ease of online activism has also made people (myself included) rely too much on it, and get disillusioned by it, as if we've forgotten that online activism is pointless unless it leads to real-world resistance.

I don't believe doomer trolls are right-wing plants (though I acknowledge it's a potential avenue of attack in the future). I don't think they usually have ulterior accelerationist motives (though I have spoken with a few). I think for the most part, they're just people who've given up, or otherwise mistaken cynicism for maturity, and seeing anyone else expressing optimism or trying to organize real-world resistance just pisses them off.

[-] LukeZaz@beehaw.org 2 points 1 day ago

I don’t believe doomer trolls are right-wing plants (though I acknowledge it’s a potential avenue of attack in the future). I don’t think they usually have ulterior accelerationist motives (though I have spoken with a few). I think for the most part, they’re just people who’ve given up, or otherwise mistaken cynicism for maturity, and seeing anyone else expressing optimism or trying to organize real-world resistance just pisses them off.

This is the attitude I want to see. Believing people are psy-ops, or bots, or being evil on purpose — none of that is necessary and almost all of it is conspiratorial thinking. It's the kind of thing the right thrives on, and it's gross.

But this? Saying there are people who have real issues and real grief, and that it's driving them to bad but genuinely held beliefs? That's sympathetic, it's understanding, and above all else it does not divide us. This is what we need more of.

[-] Wahots@pawb.social 10 points 2 days ago

Encouraging leftists not to vote or to vote for third party candidates

Highlighting issues with the Democratic party as being disqualifying while ignoring the objectively worse positions held by the Republican party

These two things drive me fucking crazy, and you are absolutely spot on with all of this. Obviously, the Democrats aren't perfect. But the argument that X makes them complicit in Y issue is a null point when the alternative is unbridled, unchecked fascism.

WHATEVER POINT YOU WERE TRYING TO MAKE, IT WILL NOT BE SOLVED BY ELECTING FASCISTS. It doesn't matter if it's corruption, wars, homophobia, trade, the economy, taxes, it could even be people shitting in litter boxes.

Whatever it is, having the entire country taken down to the studs is not going to help your issue, in fact, it's probably going to make your problem significantly worse. The economy? Look up the tariff war that caused the great depression. Homophobia? Read up on the lavender scare and how it tanked our astronomy and weapons research, notably ICBM research. Wars? Need I say anything more? We've had insane wars due to Republican war hawks for decades. Whoever you were trying to protect, they are 100% B O N E D now. And now we are sending innocent people off to literal concentration camps, so don't give me any of that "the Dems don't respect human rights" crap. It's beyond the pale now and all this was warned of in advance by those morons who published P2025 before the election. And yet, people still fell for it. It's absolutely infuriating that we are gonna have to dig the country (and the economy) out of a massive pit once again, if it's even possible at this point. We will be extremely lucky to prize it back out of the hands of dictators before they run it into the ground like they did with Venezuela.

[-] kittenroar@beehaw.org 31 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Let's just get a few facts out of the way:

  • Genocide is the worst crime humanity is capable of
  • The US has a direct hand in multiple genocides
  • Record levels of homelessness in the richest nation on earth is unacceptable
  • Death from preventable illnesses in the richest nation on earth is unacceptable
  • Highest infant mortality in the western world in the richest nation on earth is unacceptable
  • Democrats are not interested in changing the status quo
  • Republicans want a return to chattel slavery
  • Neither party is willing to help us, nor will they ever allow us to vote third party by adding ranked choice or anything like that
  • Therefore, our best bet to break the cycle is to collectively vote for, say, the green party

You think leftists are unrealistic for being disgusted with Democrats? The genocide was live streamed to the world. Did you not see any of it? Did it not move you?

By the way, the Democratic party is not left-wing. It is right-wing. Please educate yourself.

Also, are we hopeless? Fuck no. Boycotts have been making progress. Noncompliance has accomplished a lot. Unionizing, if you can swing it, can accomplish a lot. Meshtastic can offer resiliant communications if Trump declares a national emergency. Democrats want you to panic. Leftists want you to organize.

[-] segabased@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

I was with you but then you said vote green?

If you're going to vote, vote against the Republican party. If you want change from status quo, the ballot box isn't where it will happen

[-] kittenroar@beehaw.org 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In my case, I'm in a deep blue state. Otherwise I would grit my teeth and vote for the "lesser" evil. But we really do need a new party.

[-] jarfil@beehaw.org 2 points 3 hours ago

The current US voting system does not allow for a 3rd party to have a chance. If you want a new party, then you either need to replace one of the main two, or change the electoral rules.

From the outside, it doesn't seem like either option is likely to happen peacefully, so things will likely need to get way much worse before they get any better.

[-] kittenroar@beehaw.org 1 points 3 hours ago

Oh, I know. But imagine, if you will, if enough people collectively decided to vote 3rd party. It's a minority of Americans who even vote at all. If a third party received the majority of votes, they would have to be put in office -- hypothetically at least.

[-] jarfil@beehaw.org 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

if enough people collectively decided to vote 3rd party.

Then it would either become the 1st/2nd party, or disappear into oblivion. If itvciukd became part of Congress, where it could look for alliances be... but based on current sentiment, it seems unlikely.

[-] Commiunism@beehaw.org 17 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I'm not an american (but anti-electoral nonetheless), and I do get the critique and think it is perfectly valid if one views things through liberal framework - vote for the lesser evil, minimize suffering, not voting is letting the bad candidate on getting the upper hand, etc.

However, this isn't an objective position but an ideological one, as it operates within lesser-evilism, coalitionism within capitalist institutions and having a definition of "the left" that generalizes them to essentially having to be "pro-democracy somewhat progressive liberals", and any deviation makes them into a troll or a right winger or something like that.

What is important to realize is that most leftists aren't liberals - in fact, many leftists, particularly Marxists, view elections as:

  • A way to legitimize the class rule that leads into passivity among the working class who are being ruled over, essentially recognizing that this "tool that we are given" is just an illusion and leads to neutralization of worker power,

  • Enabling of 'capitalist-tribalism' in the form of "which capitalist manager do you support" which is seen in US through party loyalty and basically disarming the working class from realizing their own interests.

Essentially, their goal isn't to just "vote for the lesser evil" or "achieve the maximum good through the means we're given" but to abolish the system entirely, and electorialism/voting is counter-productive in that regard due to legitimizing effect that it has that I mentioned previously. This does go against the "liberal left" and their goals, and being on the same political wing does not automatically mean there's an alliance or shared goals, nor does it mean that two positions aren't going to have antagonistic goals.

Besides, why blame the left for the electoral failure who abstained from voting? Why not blame MAGA for voting in an enemy that goes against your interests (as in, people who have actually voted)?

EDIT: Reading some of the comments over here, and what the fuck. Automatically labeling people as bots or trolls for daring to commit the crime of 'wrongthink' is definitely dehumanizing and the most toxic I've seen beehaw be. It's fine to disagree, it's fine to choose not to engage, but making a post calling a certain somewhat niche political position out, having people such as myself try and explain that this position is more complicated, then going full on "nah I'm right, you're wrong, everyone who disagrees is now blocked and also not human or Russian/Chinese agents" is genuinely loser behavior to put it bluntly, especially on a "Chat" community where discussion is expected.

[-] segabased@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I agree with the concept that electoral politics will not bring us the change we want but disagree with the notion that it isn't beneficial to vote for lesser evil.

We exist in both paradigms. The worse evil does directly impact our lives, this isn't debatable especially with Trump, so it makes sense to vote for lesser evil. Leftists are correct the lesser evil voting does not change the status quo (ratchet theory) but I view it as incorrect for leftists to moralize the act of voting to the point that if you vote you are not a leftist

It's a tool and revolution is easier when you aren't under threat of being sent to a concentration camp. These are issues of tactics not virtue

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] djsaskdja@reddthat.com 25 points 3 days ago

This post is beyond delusional. It’s like the meme about everything I don’t like is woke. The liberal version basically being everything I don’t like is a Russian/MAGA bot. Is it really that hard to believe that left leaning people don’t agree with the Democratic Party platform? You’re deeper in your bubble than you realize my friend.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2025
136 points (100.0% liked)

Chat

7574 readers
35 users here now

Relaxed section for discussion and debate that doesn't fit anywhere else. Whether it's advice, how your week is going, a link that's at the back of your mind, or something like that, it can likely go here.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS