[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago

As I mentioned upchain, multiple groups can be at fault, and chronologically the buck ended with the voters. The voters failed to hold their noses and work with the lesser of two evils, so now we're stuck with the greater one until that orange fatass croaks and we have to deal with the post-collapse chaos.

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

If you aren’t actually trying to change anyone’s mind with that point, then why are you making it?

Honestly I often wonder that my self. Well, I know the answer in this particular instance of me, in this thread. I saw something I had an opinion on, so I shared it. The ensuing "argument" is basically more of the same, with the added bonus of being a sort of emotional pressure release valve.

But in general, why do we (as human beings) bother with the verbal arguments and rhetorical sparring? People changing their minds on something is rare, so logically speaking it's a waste of time. Some sort of emotional fulfillment? Vain hope? Because the alternative is violence and we're supposed to be better than that? I certainly don't know.

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Now what are you going to do to convince those for whom genocide was a bridge too far?

[...]how do you expect to change their minds?

I'm not. Because, generally speaking, people don't really change their minds. They just look to confirm their own biases. Its the big reason republicans have such strong support despite being the worst party by every metric except hate. It's also the reason Harris was never going to back down on her support for Israel. Well that and AIPAC, with them around even I wouldn't wholly denounce Israel no matter how much I'd like to. Besides if genocide is "a bridge too far," then why, pray tell, do they support more genocide?

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Hooh boy that''s a lotta text, but I think I more or less get what you're getting at, so I'm going to have to try real hard not to breach the civility rules here.

I get that the Gaza genocide is terrible, I get the feeling of powerlessness over it, I really do, I'm feeling it right now, I also get wanting to do something about it, but in regards to this particular election, there was nothing that could be done, especially not by the time Biden dropped. The options in this election were simple: More genocide, or less genocide. There wasn't a no genocide option, unfortunately. If there was, I have full confidence that option would've won. But there wasn't. Harris was never going to change her stance. So: More genocide or less. If one didn't vote? More genocide. If one voted third party? More genocide. If, god forbid, one voted for trump? Believe it or not, more genocide. The only way to get less genocide was to vote for Harris. After that is a long and hard road: Running progressive local and eventually state candidates, organizing community awareness events, protests, etc. all with the express purpose of redirecting democrats to the left.

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Your blaming the wrong group.

Multiple groups can be at fault. (As a mostly unrelated aside, if I were to blame a single entity, it would be Rutherford B. Hayes). And TBH, Leftists who failed to hold their nose are probably the least to blame, they're just the last ones in the line of responsibility. Ultimately Harris bears the most responsibility (at least recently) for her failure of a campaign.

You might consider why that is.

Care to enlighten me? I've never been the brightest tool in the shed, so from where I'm sitting it's a pretty easy case of less genocide vs. more genocide.

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

There's rarely, if ever, a legal basis for an interim government. Just like there's no provision in the constitution for replacing it, this is basically how it's done. And honestly I'd rather Biden keep the reigns for a little while at least. Harris is the obvious choice there, but she's a too right wing for my tastes.

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

I guess you're probably right, but honestly I'm not sure I can put my faith in a group that can't even hold their nose over an elementary application of the trolley problem.

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yeah leftists really aren't going to help here. There will never be a leftist revolution in the US. Hell I doubt there'll ever be a serious leftist political movement at all. The only remaining hope I have is that the democrats will decide that preventing Trump is more important than high-roadism. But even that is an exceedingly slim hope.

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Too late to prevent now.

Wow, someone more cynical than I am.

Democrats refusing to give power now will forever destroy Democracy.

That's historically not true. Many interim governments do dissolve successfully after fulfilling their purpose. I'd expect such an interim government to last a decade, two tops while the constitution and judiciary is unfucked.

We have likely lost not only the electoral college vote this time around, but even the Popular Vote. It’s a blowout. There’s no excuses on a Democracy perspective.

As I said upchain, democracy really isn't at the top of my priority list right now. Preventing 3-4 additional genocides is.

I expect that most Republicans, despite voting for Trump stupidly, also care about Democracy.

Yeah no. The median republican voter only cares about furthering their hate, and seeing the people hey don't like hurt. Remember "He's hurting the wrong people!"?

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Sure and while they play around, those genocides I mentioned will still happen. And when their regime collapses, the chaos will kill even more people. This must be prevented.

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

This is a pretty naive take. The remaining dregs that passed for democracy here were extinguished a few hours ago. There's nothing even resembling a democracy left here. The only elections we'll have now will be show elections, if even that. Therefore, definitionally, we can no longer save democracy through democracy.

But if I'm being honest saving democracy in the US isn't really all that high up on my list of priorities at this point. We're facing down an exacerbated Gaza genocide, another in Ukraine, then Moldova, and domestically, the genocide LGBT people in general, and trans women in particular. Not to mention the inevitable murder of Trump's political opponents and journalists critical of his regime. We're pretty firmly into the "any means necessary" zone.

E: minor word choice change to reduce repetition.

E2: Fix typos and spelling errors

[-] fcSolar@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I mean, there's also hope, however slim, that Biden and Harris say "Fuck no, Trump will not be president again" and exercise some raw power to keep Trump out, or for Harris to engage in the same kind of legal fuckery Trump did. But, of course, Democrats are spineless by nature so neither of those things going to happen in all likelyhood.

E: forgot a space

view more: next ›

fcSolar

joined 1 year ago