This is just my opinion, but by running on a socialist platform, winning fairly, then getting the rules changed so you can't win is an excellent way to show how unfair and undemocratic our society is. Watching Bernie Sanders summon up a massive amount of popular support only the get fucking shafted repeatedly by the establishment is what brought me to this website, for fuck's sake
Literally a strategy that Lenin recommended. You gotta meet people where they are and, unfortunately, most people still view politics entirely through the lens of elections.
Okay it's not exactly revolutionary theory but we have to start libs off somewhere. This proves a good counter argument to liberals who won't stop yelling at you just to :vote:
phase 2 is when it would actually be possible to build the radical organizations people talk about because the political anxieties that were satiated by the illusion of democracy have no outlet.
The problem that needs to be solved here is that, in this late stage of capitalism, history basically doesn't exist. Even in real time, the cultural superstructure hammers relentlessly whatever story the ruling class has decided to go with to justify the events they can control, and they seem pretty good at glossing over what, to us, is blatant contradiction and falsity. Most libs believe Pete won the Iowa Caucus......
we need to use every tactic available.
Seems like the best approach, honestly
Yeah this would honestly be better than just stonewalling legislation, which a normal and boring thing. Literally removing the mayor?
Most people will think that's not even possible, like it's an absurdity. "Doesn't there have to be a mayor??"
Sure it radicalizes, but in the sense that the unviability of electoralism breaks people. We don't have an answer for "what now?" besides run again or cozy up with the dems and become their lapdog. Just showing people how undemocratic things are is not enough, especially if they keep being funneled back into electoral orgs
I feel like something needs to be cleaned up in regards to electoralism. The problem with the DSA or other group's efforts isn't that they interact with the rigged political system, it's that the underlying analysis behind a lot of those efforts doesn't go beyond incrementalism. The republic isn't viewed as a protective shell that needs to be cracked so you get things like Biden telling the activist to fuck off and then some activist themselves trying to kill the story to preserve the illusion of their own influence.
That specifically is where things kept falling apart in regards to the squad and the Bernie campaigns. Bernie's failure as a leftist wasn't that he didn't win rigged elections and pass his reforms, it's that he wouldn't get in front his millions of supporters to calmly explain to them that Biden has no intention of letting the kids out of the cages, relieving student debt, or passing single payer. Our version of the republic is a mirrored shell and the progressives polished it so the versions of themselves people saw in it looked a little less distorted and grotesque.
That's core thing of it. The analysis of these electoral systems as fraudulent is exactly why they must be engaged with and attacked. It's where someone like Evo Morales can eventually score real victories and we don't.
Wonderfully said. I don't care that Bernie lost, I care that he knows Biden is a war criminal and didn't just flat out say it for everyone to hear. Instead he couched it with "Joe is my friend" and excuses and outs for the rapist war criminal. You cannot build your movement upon the elites keeping everyone else oppressed, and then refuse to hold those elites accountable when push comes to shove. Biden instantly spat in his face, and the solution is not to praise him or toe his genocidal line towards Cuba, it is to stop playing games and be honest with your supporters. Because people are not dumb, they know not to trust the dems and that's why they liked Bernie that's why they thought AOC was on their side. But when they went up there and told us rabble to bow and that concentration camps are not concentrations camps anymore cause they are blue and not red; any faith is destroyed.
Hostility is our weapon, and no fucking change through elections will ever be worth losing that weapon
People always talk about how starting a movement needs to start at the local level. This usually tells me that they have no experience with local elections beyond police-approved protests and knocking on doors. Local elections are some of the most cutthroat and corrupt. You'll have entire towns and cities under the establishments thumb in a pretty blatant way. Vote them out? Good luck. They'll threaten you and manipulate local media to make you look like the spawn of Satan.
And yet the DSA has shown it can win at the local level. It's not a walk in the park, but it's possible.
Good point. Local elections aren't impossible, but they're one hell of a battle. My comment was more directed at those who say it so casually, as if it's that easy to do.
It's super bad in small rural towns. Where I live two families control about 70% of elected offices; sheriff, mayor, judges, school board ect.
Sounds like where I live. It's weird. The townsfolk are like pod people that all know each other and all have some version of Tweety bird flipping the bird or Marvin the martian smoking a joint tattooed on them.
Posting a screenshot of a tweet without posting a link to the tweet is haram
nine-member Council
Setting up a Soviet but for corrupt reactionary boomers.
The report is due in 90 days, about two weeks before the November mayoral election, in which [current mayor Byron] Brown is waging a write-in campaign after losing the Democratic primary to political upstart India Walton. Any change that eliminates the office of mayor would have to come via a citywide ballot referendum, which would be all but impossible to get on the ballot by November.
This doesn't look very cut and dry. This hasn't been put on a ballot, and it'd have to pass a citywide referendum. If India Walton can win the general election for mayor, she could probably win that referendum, too.
Also worth noting is that the article barely mentions Walton and portrays this mostly as a pissing match between the council and the current mayor (a 16-year incumbent). If Walton wins a clear victory, I doubt this will go anywhere. It's probably (1) a middle finger to the current mayor, and (2) a contingency for if the mayoral election winds up with the winner skating by with 35% of the vote or something.
Yeah, I noticed all that too, but just didn't have the energy to point it out. You are right, tho.
Events like this are exactly why socialists should be running for office. It exposes the fraud of electoralism and radicalizes the supporters of that candidate.
Yeah guys I'm sure the wealthy and powerful will definitely allow us to vote for socialism if we can get 51% of people to go along with it.
(fr though, this kind of stunt is what got me to identify more with being a "communist" than a "socialist" in my own head, even though the distinction between them is a bit arbitrary. We will never be allowed to simply vote in socialism, ever.)
This would take a referendum to pass, so yeah, 51% would stop it.
The referendum wont be allowed to pass, if it even gets to happen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_B5KkxetQU
The referendum in question would eliminate the position of mayor. It's not on the ballot, and it hasn't even been proposed yet.
There's far too much eagerness to read into this tweet what people already believe, regardless of the facts of the situation.
And yet socdems will still say "Democrats are one of the good guys. We shouldn't say they are the same as Republicans."
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna1470
We can find actions taken than the GOP would not have taken. Action which will unquestionably help people.
But like I said, y'all can say what you want.
Accepting the democrats as saviors
I'm not doing this, but feel free to say it to whoever is!
yeah directly blocking the will of the people is pretty authoritarian.
