465
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
465 points (98.9% liked)
politics
18904 readers
3203 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
What actions would you propose? Be specific.
I think we should be working to organize the anti-genocide caucus of Democrats away from the Party and form a revolutionary party that can challenge the two right-wing parties for power. I think we can do this within the unions too, the rank and file are much more radical on this issue than the leadership. There's a huge political movement right under our feet.
Ah, so just divide the Democrats up to destroy their power. Typical.
I know I'm not going to convince you, so this is for everyone else reading this thread. Because of our shitty electoral college and FPTP system, calls for third parties on the left translate into more political power for the right. Here's how it works...
Let's say you have two main political parties, the Snuggling Puppies party and the Kicking Puppies party. The Snugglers usually win, because the Kickers are violent weirdos.
Then the Kickers get the bright idea of helping out fringe parties that also love puppies, like one called the Worshipping Puppies party, which takes their love of puppies to the extreme. They secretly fund and promote these other parties, and it's very effective. In the next election, it's so effective that the Kickers win.
Wait, what? How? It's simple. With the people who love puppies dividing their votes between multiple candidates who love puppies, the Kickers get a plurality.
Let's keep it simple and say the Kickers clandestinely supported three parties that are ideologically opposed to them, meaning people who love puppies divided their votes up four ways. Each of the puppy-loving parties gets 19.5% of the vote, for a pro-puppy total of 78%! But the Kickers didn't divide up their vote, so with a 22% plurality, the winner is... The party that everyone else hates!
It's a classic divide and conquer strategy. It only works when astroturfers manage to convince ~~people on the left~~ puppy lovers to divide themselves up, rather than consolidate to fight back against ~~the right~~ people who hate puppies.
Cute story.
My goal is to destroy and replace the Democratic Party. If there can only be two parties then let's build a revolutionary party and replace the useless liberal party.
True story. If you dispute it, you dispute math. It's literally how FPTP voting works.
Your goal is a permanent Republican majority. Might as well start openly rooting for Trump.
None of that is incompatible or inconsistent with a Harris victory. If this is your expressed goal and desired outcome, it is MUCH easier to do under Harris than under Trump where any action you take is more or less guaranteed to be met with responses from any number of empowered supremacist groups.
Also, I only EVER hear these revolutionary ideas and pushes during the last 6 months before an election when people proudly virtue signal about their intent not to vote for the Democrat. Just like with third parties, where is all of this political will and activity during the off-years when there's time to actually BUILD a grassroots movement?
I'm with you. Our choices suck. The time to start doing something about that is November 6th, after the election is won and a backslide has been prevented. Build out a movement and come back in 2024 with a platform, a base, and a candidate.
Under a Democratic president everyone just stays home and hopes things get better. It was only under Trump that we had the largest protest movement in US history.
And this is despite the fact that police killings have only gotten worse under Biden. I need to be clear, I am not an accelerationist. Conditions get worse no matter who the president is, but it's only when liberals are out of power that they can be convinced towards revolutionary goals.
organize locally for direct action
Define "direct action." I asked for specificity. Don't dance around what you mean, say it clearly.
That is only one of the actions. Voting is harm reduction, and done in tandem with other actions.
Harm reduction is doing a genocide.
And yet, letting Trump be president is doing that genocide faster and harsher, stripping women, minorities, and LGBT people of rights, AND MORE!
If you've been paying attention to the daily horrors coming out of Gaza, they're already on track to total extermination.
The only hope for Gaza is if the US/Israel is defeated. Who do you think is more likely to fuck this up and cause a US/Israel loss?
It's called revolutionary defeatism.
It's called Accelerationism, and it tends to work out exceptionally poorly for vulnerable groups, and it also has a significant chance to fail.
So, your goal to fight genocide with more genocide seems to have a fatal flaw.
No, accelerationism is just making things worse and hoping that causes revolution.
That's stupid.
Revolutionary defeatism is about building international solidarity towards making the empire lose its engagements. Whenever the US loses, the world wins. They must lose or they are going to kill everyone in Gaza.
If Democrats are that bad, then why can't the international solidarity be built against them? Why must you advocate for the sacrifices of women, minorities, and LGBT people? Because the people of Gaza aren't going to be saved by Republicans, that's for fucking sure.