If people don't realize now that their elected officials don't care about them with a measly $600 check after months of nothing, how is a failed vote on m4a going to radicalize anyone?
I'm legitimately asking, I tried on r*ddit and just got yelled at. Just seems like it is pointless to put so much effort into something like a lost vote for something that probably won't do anything to radicalize normies. No one (that isn't already radicalized to some degree) cares that Joe is president and said he'd veto it, so how is this different?
Liberals will just run saying they believe in healthcare as a right while not supporting m4a in primaries to trick people just like ossof is doing in ga now
Who says that paltry $600 check isn't going to radicalize anyone? It will and personally I wouldn't use reddit as a means to gauge the attitudes of the populace, it's an astro-turfed and censored website, it doesn't represent anyone we should care about
People are getting radicalizing out there comrade, and we need to push for any potential scenario that intensifies the contradictions, and forcing the vote on M4A is one of them
Yeah definitely didn't go out there to get reactions to the take, just happened upon a thread.
I guess my biggest question with this is how do you parley this vote into a vehicle for radicalization? Wouldn't the media not cover the vote as much as they can and then give cover to those who do come under fire? Americans notoriously have a short attention span, so hoping this sticks until primary season seems optimistic.
I'm not saying the vote happening would be bad, more than it seems like a lot of energy expended within a corporate controlled system for very little gain. Open to having my mind changed.
I'm already listening to and reading a lot, not a ton of time to listen to an hour of discussion on this. If it can't be answered succinctly then I am just going to assume there isn't a good answer
how do you parley this vote into a vehicle for radicalization? Wouldn’t the media not cover the vote as much as they can and then give cover to those who do come under fire?
You want a simple answer to a question this large?
I'm assuming you have the correct answer? Please share. The media won't cover any progressive action positively.
Why would I be asking the question from the position of I think this is pointless if I saw a route to radicalization of others for it lol. Everyone rabid about doing this is saying
Step 1: Force the vote
Step 2: Count who doesn't vote for it
Step 3: ????
Step 4: Revolution
I have yet to see how the "ammunition" of someone voting no will do anything to improve material conditions
Step 2: Turn the fight for M4A during a pandemic into a progressive event a la Occupy and the Bernie campaign.
Step 3: Coordinate with pro-M4A organizations, unions, and media to force the issue into public consciousness for the months leading up to the vote.
Step 4: ???
Withholding their vote for Pelosi is the most power the "socialists" in office will have for a long time. A fight for M4A would breathe life into mass movements which are struggling to respond to the current pandemic.
These politicians are supposedly of these mass movements, so it seems worthwhile to push them for the next month to withhold their vote. It is an experiment to see how much they actually respond to pressure.
If people don't realize now that their elected officials don't care about them with a measly $600 check after months of nothing, how is a failed vote on m4a going to radicalize anyone?
I'm legitimately asking, I tried on r*ddit and just got yelled at. Just seems like it is pointless to put so much effort into something like a lost vote for something that probably won't do anything to radicalize normies. No one (that isn't already radicalized to some degree) cares that Joe is president and said he'd veto it, so how is this different?
Liberals will just run saying they believe in healthcare as a right while not supporting m4a in primaries to trick people just like ossof is doing in ga now
Who says that paltry $600 check isn't going to radicalize anyone? It will and personally I wouldn't use reddit as a means to gauge the attitudes of the populace, it's an astro-turfed and censored website, it doesn't represent anyone we should care about
People are getting radicalizing out there comrade, and we need to push for any potential scenario that intensifies the contradictions, and forcing the vote on M4A is one of them
Yeah definitely didn't go out there to get reactions to the take, just happened upon a thread.
I guess my biggest question with this is how do you parley this vote into a vehicle for radicalization? Wouldn't the media not cover the vote as much as they can and then give cover to those who do come under fire? Americans notoriously have a short attention span, so hoping this sticks until primary season seems optimistic.
I'm not saying the vote happening would be bad, more than it seems like a lot of energy expended within a corporate controlled system for very little gain. Open to having my mind changed.
The new bad faith podcast talks about all of your questions.
I'm already listening to and reading a lot, not a ton of time to listen to an hour of discussion on this. If it can't be answered succinctly then I am just going to assume there isn't a good answer
They answer the exact questions you ask. It's up for pirating on /r/leftpodcasts.
You want a simple answer to a question this large?
I'm assuming you have the correct answer? Please share. The media won't cover any progressive action positively.
Why would I be asking the question from the position of I think this is pointless if I saw a route to radicalization of others for it lol. Everyone rabid about doing this is saying
Step 1: Force the vote
Step 2: Count who doesn't vote for it
Step 3: ????
Step 4: Revolution
I have yet to see how the "ammunition" of someone voting no will do anything to improve material conditions
Step 1: Force the vote
Step 2: Turn the fight for M4A during a pandemic into a progressive event a la Occupy and the Bernie campaign.
Step 3: Coordinate with pro-M4A organizations, unions, and media to force the issue into public consciousness for the months leading up to the vote.
Step 4: ???
Withholding their vote for Pelosi is the most power the "socialists" in office will have for a long time. A fight for M4A would breathe life into mass movements which are struggling to respond to the current pandemic.
These politicians are supposedly of these mass movements, so it seems worthwhile to push them for the next month to withhold their vote. It is an experiment to see how much they actually respond to pressure.
I appreciate the answer, I'm not sure whether I think this will result in anything, but I at least understand why people think it is worthwhile.