At 1:27 he unironically says that in a vote between Mussolini and Hitler, the best thing to do is vote Mussolini because he's the lesser evil. A lot of mentions about how "the math is simple". Does the canned "you're immature for refusing to vote for a candidate that doesn't align with 100% of your views", but throws in a shitty little analogy about refusing to buy a car at a dealership just because it didn't have leather seats to strawman enemies of genocide.
Even smugger energy than 
In a Hindenburg vs Hitler election, the correct position is to vote Thälmann.
- Show
honestly, how far are we from libs sincerely chanting sHitler was socialist!
I swear that if Kamala wins, the same people who are now saying it's bad to condition your vote to putting an end to genocide, will be complaining about anti-genocide protestors because "Republicans have elected Evil Candidate Mk.2 and we need strong democrat support to push back against it, it's not the moment to complain, only 4 years until the most important elections of our lifetime".
Seriously, either way the elections go, I can't wait for libs to be pikachu faced when republicans elect an equally bad candidate
"the math is simple"
it is simple. A lesser-evil vote is a relative vote with no connection to specific policy demands, and therefore the two parties can good-cop-bad-cop their way to any conceivable position, even literally committing a genocide in front of our fucking faces, as long as the democrats are slightly to the left.
It sucks that I can't use arguments based on following their logic to an absurd conclusion because all the conclusions that used to be absurd are now just openly and explicitly stated.
Candidate A wants to nuke the world to exterminate all human life. Candidate B also wants to nuke the world, but wants to take a small group of elites and a bunch of beautiful women into a mineshaft where they can survive and repopulate, Dr. Strangelove style. I genuinely believe they'd straight up be like, "You have a moral responsibility to vote for Candidate B." If you could establish a single difference between Kodos and Kang from that Simpsons bit, they would unironically insist on voting for one over the other. Brains rotted to the core.
The thing is, we aren't going to get through to libs by appealing to normal human empathy or morals. I know they like to pretend to care, but they don't actually. Similar to the far-right, the most important thing to them is winning and they will be as ignorant and pedantic as they can be until they're threatened, and then they'll use the same tools any fash would to get rid of anything that would threaten the status quo.
Instead of playing their game by wasting energy debating in circles, we should be organising and amassing power in any way we can. Do not ever negotiate with genociders and always expect them to try and undermine your efforts at every step.
the most important thing to them is winning
I doubt even this, it more seems like the really important thing is to be correct, be on the right side and feel good, no matter the cost. It's practically solipsism.
I don't mean winning elections, I mean the ruling class winning their right to continue imperialism and the exploitation of the working class and global south. They get that through either conservative or neoliberal political bodies.
Hell, the only reason they pretend to hate Trump so much is
- To maintain the illusion of democracy.
- Because he causes civil unrest on both sides. More protests, stuff like Jan 6. Etc.
Yeah but the libs lose too in that case, just less than their victims.
Do liberals (and by that I mean the ones with political power such as donors, corporate and politicians) really lose anything? They have the same financial power either way. Their ability to do unhindered capitalism and manipulate policy doesn't change. It's purely aesthetics for the most part as far as they're concerned.
So now we are talking about not just ordinary libs but capitalists? They too will feel it as the capitalism decay. Capitalists aren't the perfectly aware and pragmatic actors they like to think they are, they are closer to solipisists too.
Having two real choices is reality. It sucks, but the denial is absurd. Also the hyperbole of "Hitler vs Mussolini" makes me lmao. Only one candidate has literally said the military should be used against leftists. That truly is Hitler shit.
Only one candidate has literally said the military should be used against leftists.
The other has a running mate that called the national guard on BLM protesters.
when and where did that happen? anything i find about BLM and the national guard happened under Trump.
To add on top of Frank's testimony, here's a source that opposes the claim that he was too soft on the protesters by citing all the lengths he went to make sure they were sufficiently punished: https://www.factcheck.org/2024/08/how-walz-responded-to-riots-in-minnesota-after-the-death-of-george-floyd/
point taken. i guess the difference being Walz was actually responding to something and Trump is just making vague threats.
only one candidate is actively aiding a genocide and said actually we're going to keep doing it
"Bbbut trunp will genocide harder"
[Citation needed] and one could simply vote for neither genocide supporting candidate
i guess the difference being Walz was actually responding to something
so trump threatening fascism is somehow worse than actually doing fascism
Tim "we must preemptively strike Iran" Walz, the candidate for harm reduction
Believe it or not genociding a population is also Hitler shit.
participating in elections is like participating in capitalism, there is no ethical version of it so good luck with that. if you don't live in a swing state then you can do whatever cause our electoral system blows.
And if you live in a swing state your vote actually counts, so make it count by voting third party. The Harris campaign has made a deliberate choice to lean into support for genocide. If she wins despite that, there is no coming back. Every subsequent president will only get worse because the American people will have granted the political establishment permission to literally do anything they want on their behalf.
And if you live in a swing state you have a moral obligation to vote against genocide (third party, or write in "Free Palestine" for President).
A vote for the Democrats is a vote for genocide.
participating in elections is like participating in capitalism, there is no ethical version of it
Wow so i guess don't vote then??
No, it's not reality because as a voter it's not your job to decide the winner of the election — that is out of your hands entirely — it's your job to signal support for a candidate and their platform, and that message will be received regardless of who wins. Honestly, 'tactical voting', and the emotional blackmail that goes along with it, is such undemocratic, narcissistic bullshit.
There being only two possible winners does not mean there are only two choices for who to vote for. Trump will not end election terms if he wins, but if the Democrats win thanks to the unconditional support of leftists, it will only accelerate the rightward lurch of the Dems. The only way to bring the Dems left is with a left opposition to them, which can only be done if you reject the alarmist view in which Trump winning again makes him Fuhrer for life (he'll be lucky to live out his whole term, tbh). If you are a leftist, it should be your primary concern as far as the election goes to prevent the Dems from having genocide as a viable platform.
There being only two possible winners does not mean there are only two choices for who to vote for.
No, that is the reality. And voting for a third party or not voting will not change the policies of either capitalist party. There is no path in which the left wins through voting or not voting.
It does matter. No more than 15 years from today there will be millions of climate refugees coming to the US because of ecosystem collapse causing widespread famine and war. If the entire political establishment of the United States learns that you can win an election while committing the gravest crimes against humanity since the Vietnam war, and still get everyone's support, those refugees will literally be shot and gassed like Auschwitz. There is no other hope for them. The Republicans will always call for another Holocaust, and if you give the Democrats permission to be genocidal maniacs in 2024, they sure as hell aren't gonna grow a spine by 2036 so they'll just go along with it. If by that point in time American politicians aren't afraid of conscientious people who are willing to put their money where their mouth is, we're all done for.
And I know that the obvious objection is that it's naïve to think the Dems care enough about winning to change their agenda away from the interests of empire to match what the public wants. But the truth is, they're scared. If liberal democracy loses legitimacy, it's a quick way into a death spiral for empire. It is in the long term interests of empire to listen to the working classes of the imperial core when they make serious demands. And ignoring your power to make such a serious demand, in the face of a genocide that is being broadcast to the eyes of the whole world, is leaving power on the table.
If nothing else, agitating about how hopeless both major parties have made the situation is a good opportunity to get people to organize outside of the mainstream political system and build dual power. People have never been more alienated, and more aware of systemic failures than now. To surrender to liberals browbeating you over "Trump is literally Hitler" is not only leaving power on the table for the reasons I stated before, it's leaving the alienated but not yet politicized masses without an answer. What kind of communist doesn't take any opportunity to shout the answer in those people's ears?
