Smash that vote button. Support this channel: https://www.patreon.com/contrapoints ✿Donate: https://paypal.me/contrapoints ✿Instagram: https://www.instagram....
something for you libs who still believe in electoralism
My issue isn't whether people should vote or not, but that the entire discussion around voting in the presidential race is inherently counter productive. Even if you consider the "harm reduction" arguments, we could be vastly more effective at reducing harm by focusing on other tactics outside of electoral politics, such as union organizing, tenant organizing, protests, boycotts, strikes, and generally building dual power. Even just a focus on local elections would do a lot more to protect ordinary people and improve their lives vs focusing on national race that will lead to harm either way.
The presidential race is a colossal waste of energy and potential, and that includes spending time supporting non-viable alternatives like PSL or Green Party, as good as their platforms may be. None of it will accomplish anything substantial, so why not shift our focus to areas we can actually make a difference in?
I'm glad you posted this because this was actually something I was thinking about a little more after I typed the above. I still stand by my statement that voting at all will change much of anything on a national scale, of course, but I do agree with you (and PSL) that running a campaign can at least be useful for building a broader movement. PSL does do a lot of good at the local level, and I suppose any public boost for them would assist in those efforts.
The Green Party, on the other hand, has never really shown a willingness to build a true grassroots movement, so I can't say the same about them, though I do think they have decent candidates and a good platform.
My issue isn't whether people should vote or not, but that the entire discussion around voting in the presidential race is inherently counter productive. Even if you consider the "harm reduction" arguments, we could be vastly more effective at reducing harm by focusing on other tactics outside of electoral politics, such as union organizing, tenant organizing, protests, boycotts, strikes, and generally building dual power. Even just a focus on local elections would do a lot more to protect ordinary people and improve their lives vs focusing on national race that will lead to harm either way.
The presidential race is a colossal waste of energy and potential, and that includes spending time supporting non-viable alternatives like PSL or Green Party, as good as their platforms may be. None of it will accomplish anything substantial, so why not shift our focus to areas we can actually make a difference in?
deleted by creator
I'm glad you posted this because this was actually something I was thinking about a little more after I typed the above. I still stand by my statement that voting at all will change much of anything on a national scale, of course, but I do agree with you (and PSL) that running a campaign can at least be useful for building a broader movement. PSL does do a lot of good at the local level, and I suppose any public boost for them would assist in those efforts.
The Green Party, on the other hand, has never really shown a willingness to build a true grassroots movement, so I can't say the same about them, though I do think they have decent candidates and a good platform.