Late Stage Capitalism

hideshow 25 child comments

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 16 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Being able to vote democrats in gave you two parties to play against each other.

*Two parties to be played by. The existence of two parties allows the ruling class to launder their neoliberalism and/or fascism through a "legitimate" political process. If there was only one party people would actually take to the streets.

You need to use all your cunning and what little power you have to best negotiate the one you live in.

And maybe there's a way to do that better than carrying water for the "lesser evil" that ends up losing to fascists anyway? The model you're proposing has decisively failed anyway; might as well try something else.

hideshow 8 child comments

parent

[–] ClassStruggle@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

Liberal lesser evil gave us incremental fascism

parent

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 8 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Refusing to vote for the imperfect candidate over the literal fascist gave us fascism.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

imperfect candidate

I have to correct this: ~~imperfect candidate~~ genocider who also outright ignored that you're being robbed of your labor and you are no longer paid enough to buy food. And for added fun, the candidate doesn't have a working brain anymore.

Imperfect indeed. I wonder just how badly Democrats have to fail before you'd change your behavior.

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] ClassStruggle@lemmy.ml 1 point 4 months ago

Democrats are not imperfect candidates, they are the blue shade of fascism doing what fascists do to hold into power.

parent

[–] mrbutterscotch@feddit.org 5 points 4 months ago

How's that trying something else going for ya?

parent

[+] PaintedSnail@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago

[deleted]

parent

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Don't call them non voters. They made a choice and their vote is being counted by the analysts. They're neutral voters.

At the Democrat strategy meetings where they run the numbers and decide on the party platform, these people are considered part of the "apolitical" demographic. The Democrats are stupid and will move the party platform rightwards to try and appeal to them. Principles don't fix stupid.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] TheIvoryTower@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago (1 child)

To be fair, I live in a country where you can vote for a 3rd or 4th or 5th party and your vote still counts, because that's how democracy should work.

In the US, I would probably be considered one of my 'non-voters'.

parent

[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

In the US you would be considered a nuisance by the politicians of both established parties for feebly trying to disrupt their plan to usher in fascism under the guise of free choice. We're not going to be able to work the sides against each other, because that's like trying to call out from the audience of a play to try to influence how the story ends. Their actions are designed to influence us, not the other way around. The only way voting helps in the US is to buy time to coordinate the revolution while Democrats are still playing the role of the idiot.

parent

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

We’re not going to be able to work the sides against each other, because that’s like trying to call out from the audience of a play to try to influence how the story ends

True, but you can influence the ending of a play by going backstage and putting on a costume. In America they call that a "primary" and it's how Zohran Mamdani became the mayor.

parent

[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

True, but just because you put on a costume and go backstage that doesn't mean you'll get a lead role in the play, or even a role at all. I do vote in my primaries, and I'm very hopeful of Mamdani, especially with help from AOC and Bernie, but I can't help but feel like I'm being tricked into pacificity; I picture a scenario were a few outspoken antagonists are allowed a place on the stage only to give the like-minded audience hope, but are never given a plot-relevant role.

parent

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

I think it's a big mistake to equate hope with inaction. Hope should spur you to act more. Don't listen to these doomers who want you to do nothing.

parent

[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

When I say "hope" I mean "hope that things will resolve themselves without me having to do anything," which is what nearly every left-leaning person I know in real life is hoping. It certainly doesn't spur very many people to act more. They see Mamdani as "the world is healing," which just means "great, I don't need to change my behavior at all!"

parent

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

You're in a weird bubble. I know a New Yorker who volunteered for Zohran's campaign and showed up to protest Luigi's incarceration when he went to court. They're a communist. They're fighting for a better world and hope is making them fight harder.

parent

[–] Signtist@bookwyr.me 1 point 4 months ago

That's certainly good to hear. I hope that people are indeed taking this seriously, even as my own sphere never stopped claiming that Trump's downfall was inevitable if we just keep our heads down and wait it out.