Leftists who don’t like Biden don’t want to see him in office again, so they don’t want to vote for him, or they want to withhold their vote until he changes course. Seems simple enough.
But that’s not how politics works.
So announcing that you'll vote for him no matter what he does will make him change course? Is that how politics works?
Never, in the history of this country, has there been a president who hasn’t engaged in what the left would regard as unforgivable crimes. This is the nature of presidents, and politicians in general. If you, like me, are on the far left, you should never fully trust or have faith in any elected official.
But when I look at the Biden administration, I see a group of people who can be bullied in a leftist direction on some policy priorities.
Can anyone today truly argue that the world wasn’t drastically changed by Gore’s loss in 2000? Even if you don’t accept the argument that Nader’s candidacy is what lost Gore the election, how can you argue that the world wouldn’t have been at least a little better if all of those Nader votes had gone to Gore and put the Dems over the top?
Democrats have held the presidency 50% of the time since 2000.
It's amazing how refusing to endorse Genocide Joe is breaking so many liberal brains.
If you have read ANY theory on electoralism, you will understand why this entire essay is a pile of stupidity. Lenin's thoughts on electoralism (from my understanding) were that it should be earnestly engaged in to show people the futility of it as a vehicle for meaningful change in a capitalist society.
This is some idiot that thinks voting for Bernie in a primary makes them a raging communist.
jesus fucking christ
I wonder how much of an impact conservatives calling them commies for decades has had on their perception of where they actually are lol
These days when I meet someone and they say they're a 'leftist' without specifying anything else, I just immediately assume they're a very confused liberal.
To be fair, in America, voting for Biden makes you a socialist. And when you get too much Biden? Well, that's Bernie obviously- communism.
But in seriousness, as far as electoralism goes, I absolutely agree with that sentiment that socialists, etc. should engage with the system and do so to the fullest amount reasonable. Support liberals you disagree with who promise positive changes- the worst case outcome is they don't do the changes, they make things worse, then you get to say "Hey, I've been saying all along X wasn't gonna do anything. You see? They just made it worse!" In theory it will build "trust" if leaders on the left back candidates but always remain critical of them in a fair way, on the candidate's own terms.
Now the last sentence I wrote is important for my own mental health especially during the most magical time of every four years... right now. Presidential election season.
If you're far left, socialist, whatever, you are de facto left of every single candidate and elected official. You're further left than probably a solid 95% of the US population. Maybe even, who knows, maybe you're the top 1% full blown "I would literally give material aid to China and spy for Xi right now!" Although I don't suggest admitting that part... anywhere at any time. And more importantly you have an ideological backbone for your analysis and statements. Most liberals, most USAians, have absolutely no ideology. It's effectively team sports- nothing unique in that observation. "Trump is mean, so I vote not mean guy." "My wages are dogshit, I can't buy a house, and the TV told me Mexicans are doing this! I'm voting Trump." That's like... almost every voter. You can see all the interviews online (not the propaganda edited ones, I mean just normal focus groups and stuff) or simply chat for 5 minutes with anyone who cares enough to vote and it'll quickly be "Mexicans! Rapists! Crime! My wages!" or "Trump is an asshole and a fascist." Maybe you get people slightly more engaged who have more detailed critical views, but it's always gonna circle the cesspool of liberalism.
I wrote that unnecessarily long paragraph because I can't help myself, for one, once that addy hits, it's done. You fuckers are getting books. But also because I see people constantly having incredibly outside of reality expectations for politicians, and specific ones often get targeted. Partly because they ask for it; they did choose to be politicians and live public lives. Partly because maybe people think they're doing "accountability" (you aren't) by telling AOC she's a shill for not doing something she probably never really said she'd do anyway. I know people like AOC put off this aura, purposely, of "I will always be on the good side!" And my main issue is: why are you, hypothetical leftist person engaging in electoralism while also knowing the realities of how power operates, believing the hype? I think people really really need to be told like repeatedly, perhaps with the aid of physical blunt objects, AOC is not going to save you. She's hardly even your ally. She's in a group of the most left leaning elected US officials, she's closest to your ideology (in theory), but she disagrees with you on so many fundamental things and we can start with the basic one of she isn't an anti-capitalist. She's not going to become a leader of the proletarian and overthrow the evil US empire in a bloody coup. It won't happen! Even if it is entertaining to imagine. Her job is to show that even the best candidates, the best politicians, will never change things. They can't! And they also, most likely (I can't read minds), don't want to! Not in the ways you/we would like. She is confined by capitalism. She cannot leave that box. Maybe she really believes in capitalism, maybe she's chosen this strategy because it's necessary in order to be elected, it doesn't matter because she never promised anyone to argue against capitalism. Hey, that's your job! That is where the left is supposed to offer the fair criticism on the politician's terms. "Hey, you passed that IRA bill. You said it helps end climate change, but that seems like bullshit. Please explain." You support them, let them tie their own noose, let them hang themselves and then say "hey, that didn't work. Maybe it can never work within the confines politicians and the broader media apparatus are telling us is unquestionable? Maybe we have to question it?"
I don't know if my point is clear in that rambling, but basically you can't engage in electoralism, a system you know is doomed to never fix real problems, then get incredibly mad at the elected officials for basically doing what they said they'd do (or part of it). I mean, you can, but that's misdirecting the criticism from the system of capitalism, which is the problem, to the individual politicians and their individual reforms within capitalism, which can never solve the problem because they are just part of the problem. It's a subtle thing, and maybe it's especially bad in the US because we're all individually-minded slugs.
I think I get annoyed by people acting like she's really really gonna change things, or even that she can, on one hand and on the other hand you got the most black-pilled motherfuckers on earth, for many valid reasons!, just going on endlessly about how evil she is. Yeah dawg, she's a goddamn US elected official. You should already know that from the start. It's quite literally impossible for her to not be a force for evil ultimately to whatever degree. She works within the power system of the US empire. Like come on. She's doing her job though by proving the left correct that reforms aren't enough and actual full change cannot emerge from within the system. Instead of yelling at her all the time (and yeah she deserves it sometimes, but people lose sight of the goals) instead just use her as the proof that she is. Praise her when she does the right thing, but remain fair otherwise and don't hyperfocus on the human, the individual, but rather the fact that who she is doesn't matter. Because it doesn't. Just like criticism of capitalism shouldn't be based on the perceived (and of course real) evils of capitalists themselves, but rather the system that they benefit from and perpetuate, you have to take a systemic view of elected officials too. The irony is most liberals will critique Marx (incorrectly) by saying "oh, he just thinks capitalists are mean people who do mean things because they enjoy it to get rich." No, his criticism is that the system of capitalism is neutral on morals. The individual motivations of capitalists are irrelevant. Some may care about workers more, some might care about responsibility to their communities and nations, but it doesn't matter because the funnel of capitalism will crush them all in the end and force even the capitalists (kinda ironic) into submitting to the worst excesses of the system in order to maintain their class position. So you must take this view of politicians who oversee the government of the empire.