Former democratic party activists are organizing Muslims and Arab-Americans in Swing states to vote against Biden with the demand that he support a ceasefire in Gaza.
I'll allow them a little bit of electoralism this time.
Former democratic party activists are organizing Muslims and Arab-Americans in Swing states to vote against Biden with the demand that he support a ceasefire in Gaza.
I'll allow them a little bit of electoralism this time.
That's relatively straightforward. Elections are a distraction, they redirect energy into a form the political order can digest without changing. The more you invest in them the less you are putting into alternatives that are more useful. Vote, if you want, it might do marginal good in an infinitesimal scale, but agonizing over voting is playing into a system that exists to funnel all your energy into itself.
I guess this is where I'm lost. They mail me ballots, I fill them out and mail them back. It's almost the least I can do. If every person opposed to fascism did the same, I believe fascism's encroachment would be slowed.
I don't know what you mean. Democrats keep winning by the numbers. Fascism is still encroaching. It's been encroaching my entire life, and Republicans have won the popular vote once in that time. People do vote. And this still happens.
I'm not telling you not to, I keep saying it's fine to do if you feel like it. So is watching a movie or getting a snack at 3 in the morning. You do you. But don't act like it's fixing anything. It clearly isn't. That's why you get to keep doing it.
I'm not sure I understand your point. The way the popular vote influences the result is a travesty. But that doesn't mean that voting (or not) in a way that encourages anti-suffrage is better. There's no way things will improve by walking away - that just hands control to fascism faster.
By that same token, if it doesn't do anything then why are some states working to expand voting and ease-of-voting versus some that are trying to restrict it in various ways? There's a clear party divide on this topic in the US and one side is more fascist than the other.
Oh I see, yes I should clarify. Democrats keep literally winning elections, in addition to sometimes not winning them. Regardless of the result fascism gets no further away.
Let's not forget Obama, drone striking American citizens and their children without trial or warrant. Or all the money and weapons he gave the Saudis and Israelis to continue the project of violent extermination they were both embarked on. Or the way he aggressively pursued whistleblowers like Manning and Assange who tried to warn the public about the things the government was doing. Nobody forced him to do those things, he did them voluntarily.
Let's not forget that he rode into power in control of the entire government, both houses of congress, the Court and the executive, and did nothing to enshrine any protection against the reactionaries that he ostensibly dislikes. Why didn't they codify abortion protections into law? Or take steps to secure voting rights, if those are so important? Why did they piss away their control of, again, ALL of the government? For what, Obamacare?
Why is Joe building the wall for Trump, overturning regulations that protect sacred indigenous sites and wildlife to do so? Why the fuck are the cages still there? Why are we flying Venezuelans back to a country that our country's policies have turned into a humanitarian disaster?
I cannot reiterate enough how much it's totally fine if you feel like voting for these people. Do it, if you want, you'll contribute in an imperceptible way to the total vote count at the end, and that might be satisfying for you or, as I've acknowledged a few times, it might even mean some marginal benefit happens sometimes. I mean, not literally, your vote still doesn't matter, whether you did or not would not have made the difference. But sometimes an okay thing might happen.
I think it's fine to do that. I think if you want things to change you should look at historically what sorts of things actually had to happen to defeat reactionaries. It's basically never voting.
(Well I wrote out a whole thing but then the lemmy web UI disappeared it somehow 🤦 ... I'll try to rewrite some variation of it)
I understand and agree with your assessment of the dems, but to me this is exactly why the "lesser evil" argument sways me. Republicans would be doing all the same things, and worse - e.g., "don't say gay" bills and other anti-lgbtq policies, rolling back abortion access, etc. Are dems wrong for not protecting those things when they had the chance? Yes -- But Reps are the ones actually doing it.
From my casual bystander reading of hexbear/lemmygrad content over the past few months, "totally fine if you feel like voting" was not a part of my understanding of the anti-electoralism sentiment I've read. My impression was more "that's dumb, you're dumb, anyone who votes is dumb" and no one with a conscience should vote. Which, to me, seems like simply handing over the keys to drive us off a cliff.
Anyway, thanks for taking the time to write everything you have, and trying to help me understand. Cheers
That should be true. Its totally sound reasoning. Except the system in the US is designed to frustrate popular will and facilitate minority rule. Individuals simply voting their conscious will never solve anything within this system.
Liberal democracy and the spectacle of the election, is a perfect vehicle for the rise of fascism, but it actively hinders what is needed to stop it
Even if it's designed to "frustrate popular will", isn't not voting frustrating that will even further? That just seems to be playing into their hands.
To me, the question is accentuated further when considering those people who willingly give up their suffrage which many others fought and died for. And further with the sentiment of "If voting didn't do anything, they wouldn't try to stop certain people from doing it".
I can't shake any of that when the barrier is so low and the stakes can (occasionally) be so high.
No. And that's not even what I'm saying. I'm saying individuals voting individually is pointless. Voting can only really matter as a collective action as part of an organized group or movement. In short, exactly what the people in the article are doing. Organizing to withhold votes in key districts unless demands are met is far more powerful and a better expression of democracy then what you're talking about.
This is just lib shit. You're not really engaging with what any of us are bringing up, especially if you think these silly clichés are worth mentioning. I'm sorry for being harsh, but i feel the need to be direct here
No one is saying its hard to vote or cares if you or anyone does it. The larger point people here are making is that the spectacle of electoral politics and the illusion that individuals can engage in this low effort behavior and actually effect any meaningful change is a distraction that steals energy form organization and movement building which is the only way to effect change, and the only way that any political action, even electoralism, can accomplish anything.
Certainly last night with my first few rounds of comments, it was hard(er) to do so since I was a little drunk which is what got me posting in the first place. I don't mean that as an excuse, just by way of explanation.
I want to engage and I am trying to understand your (and others') perspective on this topic. I acknowledge that I am not as educated on the general topic and certainly not on the specific aspects that you and others have raised. I apologize for making my lack of education other people's problem -- though I am thankful everyone has been patient and generous with their time.
Despite my intoxication, I knew what I was getting into. And I appreciate your honesty and taking the time to try to help me understand.
Thanks for emphasizing this point, which I did not grasp at all yesterday. After continuing the discussion today and reading what you and other have written, I feel have a better handle on it and understand this point of view better.
Totally fair, that makes a lot of sense. Yeah i wanted to be direct but i don't really want to be harsh, since i think you're asking genuine questions.
I'd also say like others have, that it's fine if you vote. Some of us vote, and under certain circumstances some who generally don't would, especially locally.
But we're mostly communists here, so we reject capitalism and liberal democracy, and through historical example know that you can't use liberal democracy to stop the oppression of the ruling class that controls liberal democracy. They won't let their power be voted away, so that's why we have the general attitude we do toward voting especially in national elections in the US.
Anyway, thanks for asking genuine questions. We can be a rough bunch, but we don't have a problem explaining ourselves to people who genuinely want to understand. No one is born a communist and we were all ignorant of the things we know now at one time.
You should be embarassed to have written this. Withholding votes is only a strategy when you are able to vote. A person with no access to food cannot go on a hunger strike.
Also, the saying that you are butchering was originally "If voting could change anything, they'd make it illegal".
Yes, I understand that - for the most part I am trying to understand the general consensus around here that "voting is silly lib behavior", so we as I understand it we are inherently talking about people who are able to vote, and the general recommendation that they should withhold their vote. If you want to include people who are not allowed to vote in a certain jurisdiction, I feel like that is a different conversation that I might not be equipped for (not to say I am feeling very equpped for this whole convo in the first place ;p ). But I'm happy to hear your thoughts regardless.
Yes, I'm aware of that as well, others have riffed on it (or butchered, sure) to suit themselves and I was aiming for one of those variants I've heard in the past. Since it's a pithy aphorism, I don't find one particularly more true than another, nor that any should necessarily be taken literally. (I did say the "sentiment of" and I don't mind sticking with it)
Cheers
While you will get different responses, generally the consensus is "Voting for dems as well as worry about voting on a personal level is silly lib behavior" Voting for a third party and being involved in some organized effort to extract concessions are both fine.
I see, thanks. That was not a distinction I was aware of; it really did seem to me like third parties are also generally eschewed by this community.
Well, the community has open contempt for the Libertarians and the Greens, and which third party is best is a matter of conflict, but we have many supporters of the PSL and other socialist parties that do run for office (and I do indeed vote for them, personally).
As we all know, power comes from the barrel of a vote.