vote for vote so you can vote

  • emizeko [they/them]
    ·
    1 month ago

    it does matter who wins, but they won't let anyone win who matters

    • CarbonScored [any]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Event as a then leftist, I used to be skeptical of this rhetoric until I saw every single establishment come out the woodwork to smear Jeremy Cromblin for being the minorest of threats to bourgeois power.

      Major newspapers with front page news 100% seriously accusing him of being a soviet sleeper agent, the head of the armed forces (who is legally obliged to be impartial) went on the BBC news to specifically criticise Corbyn and talk about how he'll let everyone die to nukes, the notorious BBC moment of portraying him outside the Kremlin in a Ushanka like he's V fucking Lenin himself, not a single major media outlet accurately reported on how the antisemitism report entirely cleared Corbyn, or how the chief UK rabbi fueling the smears is literally a childhood friend of bojo .

      I dunno, I could go on forever with examples - But that year I truly lost all hope in electoralism, and truly appreciated the bourgeois hold on fucking everything. I saw the machine come out in full force and it was scary. bear-despair

      • emizeko [they/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        similar experience here with Bernie, if a youtuber has made a ten part, sixty-two hour series on all the ratfucking and the establishment shredding its own institutions to stop him at all costs I'd watch it

      • ta00000 [none/use name]
        ·
        1 month ago

        https://www.ajiunit.com/investigation/the-labour-files/

        It's pretty impressive how much they got away with.

        • CarbonScored [any]
          ·
          1 month ago

          Interesting! I may give these a watch / listen. Not that I'm not already largely aware of the shit, but good to know more details.

    • Beaver [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      As a youth, I remember media talking heads using the term managed democracy being used to describe the various "regimes" that had free elections, but which in no sense did citizens democratically determine the direction of the country's government. It didn't take much introspection to apply that logic to the USA, but apparently introspection is a rare trait.

      As Nyerere said, the United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them. We get to have free elections where the only thing we decide is to what degree of depravity the government will treat marginalized people.

      • iridaniotter [she/her, they/them]
        ·
        1 month ago

        Reverse polisci is just too good. The American two-party regime is a managed democracy that exhibits fragmented authoritarianism via rule by law due to its federalist structure.

      • RyanGosling [none/use name]
        ·
        1 month ago

        As Nyerere said, the United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.

        I thought Mark Twain said that. Or did I fall for a Facebook quote meme

        • Beaver [he/him]
          ·
          30 days ago

          It's attributed to Julius Nyerere, but is possibly apocryphal.