He’s desperately trying to stop things, but he is completely powerless and that’s not his fault, but also he has actually gotten tons of great stuff done and you’re just ignoring it, and you should ignore the bad stuff he’s done because his opponent will do worse, but most importantly any good stuff he hasn’t done was impossible for him to get done, and that’s why you should vote for him
No, you don’t hear them. They, and OP are mocking libs telling people to vote for a candidate who demonstrates over and over that they do not want the things we want, and will either not stop or help republicans do the things they want.
It’s kind of sad, they understand the democrats do not want the things they want, so they cannot influence them into doing the things that will win the election, so all they can do is tell people not to believe their lying eyes.
What’s the alternative, give the country over to Trump and his sycophants? No one likes what’s happening but as much as I want a change in the current trajectory everything would just be worse under Trump, not just Palestinian conflict.
The alternative is to pressure the democrats into doing the things they need to do to win the election. Currently they are laboring under the delusion that they can win just by saying “Oh, we want the things you want, we’re just powerless until you give us uhhh 50% in the senate! No 61! No, 64 because of Fetterman, Sinoma, and Manchin! You can do it, just vote a little harder and we’ll stop doing the opposite of what you elected us to do!” and “Well trump would also do the horrible things we’re doing, so you have to vote for us”.
That’s why they lost in 2016 and 2022, and trying to silence criticism just helps them maintain that delusion.
There is no alternative. Helping the democrats maintain the delusion that they can be the party of fascism-lite and still win elections is not a viable strategy to win elections.
Telling the dems “You restarted student loans, anything short of forgiving all student debt is literally worse than what we had under trump, if you want to get elected, ending the additional harm you caused is a minimum” until they start doing the things they need to do to get elected is the only way they will get elected.
Joe Biden, the most powerful person in the world, is completely powerless and it’s not his fault. Meanwhile if Trump is elected it’s the end of American democracy.
Not only could he pick the next ones, he would have the power to expand the Supreme Court. Imagine a SCOTUS that isn’t just filled with Federalist Society goons but his own special brand of Conservative from places like the Fifth Circuit in Texas.
Yep, and he didn’t out of some misguided belief that Republicans would behave with some amount of human decency. Unfortunately, the Republicans he knew from his time as a Congressman had given up decorum and bipartisanship for their personal ideologies and fealty to a fraudster.
It would have been and still is the sensible thing to do, because the highest judiciary should be the least partisan, and it’s a progressive move Biden really should make in an effort to maintain that balance.
Instead, we’re going to elect democrats who won’t do anything for however many decades it takes for the current conservative justices to get old and then, when the time is right, they’ll show their cunning strategy for saving the court: Putting forward a slightly less conservative justice that they won’t even fight for enough to push past republican objections.
So do you like not know anything about the court? Sotomayor and Kagan? Those two are fucking rock stars. The best legal minds of the last 30 years. The fuck are you even talking about?
Do you not remember the entire fiasco with Obama’s failed attempt at selecting a justice? He picked a “moderate,” the Republicans stonewalled him until the election, and instead of trying to use any of the procedural tricks to push through the appointment that the Republicans would gladly use, the Democrats didn’t put up a fight. Fast forward, Trump wins the election, appoints his justices, and Democrats let it go through.
If this is an issue where democracy and rights are at stake and if democrats actually gave a crap they wouldn’t be playing by the rules and then accepting the slide into fascism that all this represents.
But for the elite of the party, none of this shit matters. They aren’t really bound by the same laws as the rest of us. So who cares if the plebs lose some rights? If anything it’s a positive for them. They get to run on being opposed to the bad stuff they let the Republicans do instead of anything positive and they fundraise like crazy over the fear that generates.
For the Democratic base: They’re just watching a fucking TV show. Politics isn’t a real thing to them. They say they see this slide into fascism, but then the most they’re willing to do about it is go check a box once every 2/4 years and then accept the horrible things that come after because respecting the system is more important than protecting people from it. Maybe the really “radical” ones will go to some march to hold up signs in a spot that’s not gonna bother anyone and then go home after regardless of if that changed anything.
Meanwhile, their continued uncritical support of the government enables that government to keep working to crush more serious opposition to it.
This is just unbelievably myopic and foolish. Yes Merrick Garland was stonewalled. Although considering what an ineffectual and incompetent AG he is I’m not entirely sure that one wasn’t for the best. But as I mentioned Obama got the two greatest justices of Our Generation appointed. And Biden already got Jackson appointed. Claiming that they’ll never get an appointment is silly when they’ve done it three times. So here’s your choice sit there and stew while fascist put in fascist judges or get actual people appointed. You’ve created some kind of fiction for yourself that allows you to sit there and be myopic and ineffectual for no reason. Is it laziness? Just an excuse to avoid having to do anything? I don’t get it.
Did I also miss the part where we got Roe v Wade, etc back? Has this translated into changes to defend our rights? If not, why isn’t more being done? Procedure? Rules? Why should any of that supersede protecting real people? And what about the more direct attacks on our rights coming directly from the administration such as once again expanding the surveillance state?
As far as my own participation: I’m not doing anything, and that’s distressing, but were this merely a matter of laziness I’d just be voting. It’s not that hard to vote, at least not in my area. I haven’t formed my entire politics around not wanting to drive like <5 minutes to a local poling station once every few years. In 2020 I actually volunteered for 2 different campaigns during the primaries because I still had some fleeting belief that we could change things that way. I don’t know why, I had already learned a lot of the history which informs my lack of faith in the system. But maybe it’s just easier thinking you can change things without the risk of getting shot.
The liberal’s political responsibilities demand almost nothing of them. Vote from a list of 2 things once in a while, perhaps even less than that if the position isn’t contested or one of the choices is a non-choice. After that, shut up and let others do the thinking and politics for you.
Anything more than that, which risks running into the apparatus of state violence, is “the wrong way to do things.” We should just be patient, trust our institutions, and continue to believe in the myth of steady progress over time.
As scary as that is, there are people out there who are brave or desperate enough to be risking their lives to fight the system. I can’t really blame people for being too scared to join in, but I can blame them for insisting that their minimal political participation to support the government that fights against those people is actually a good thing.
Oh so now you want to protect Roe versus Wade? By letting conservatives have more justices? That’s your big master plan? The three liberal justices who were the dissenting opinion on the Dobbs decision. An opinion that you clearly didn’t read, nor have you read any dissenting opinion is my guess considering your absolute lack of knowledge about the justices. Sure though continue to fold your arms and pretend like you’re above it when you’re directly allowing it. Arguing for this disengagement when one side is directly trying to take your rights away from you is basically supporting it. Things only get better by winning. Bit by Bit by Bit. But you got to keep winning to do the bit by bit. The show’s got to keep going. The greatest expansion of civil rights in our nation’s history happened during a string of democratic victories.
True, but those are our two choices. Status quo or hard Conservative Authoritarianism. There is no third option, no matter how much wishing, whinging, or opining people engage in.
If we want a third option, we’ll have to start working towards that possibility the very second Biden gets reelected. If Trump wins, then we’re fucked for the next 40 years, at least.
Also, we have the chance to take back the House and keep the Senate. Republicans may be irrelevant in the decision to choose the next justices, should Biden win. There’s a lot at stake in this next election.
Because it’s too late. What do you think you can achieve in seven months? You’d have to unite leftist Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z and convince them that your plan (third party voting or “industrial action”) is better than the relatively safe option of simply going out and voting for Biden.
And not only that, but thanks to FPTP, convincing people to join you also means convincing people that it won’t throw the election to Trump, whose party reliably turns out to vote for more Republicans.
Unless you know something I don’t, we’re about four years too late to build the momentum needed to make dramatic changes.
Such as? Do you mean revolt? If that’s what you mean, just say it: you want a revolution. I don’t know why you’re being coy about it.
But my core point is that you still have to convince everybody else that revolution or civil disobedience are worth losing their security and privilege. You can’t do this alone, and 100,000 people online who share your ideals aren’t anywhere near the same as feet on the ground.
Yall said we could push Biden further left. The election cycle is such that there is always the next election, and we arent allowed to complain about the candidate, for fear of hurting their chances.
we’ll have to start working towards that possibility the very second Biden gets reelected
I’ve been here before. The second Biden gets reelected, the tune will shift from “we’ll have to start working towards that possibility the very second Biden gets reelected” to “we’ll have to start working towards that possibility after the first year of his second term, since that’s the only time Biden can get things done” to “we’ll have to start working towards that possibility the very second democrats win in 2026” ad nauseam. The time for change is now or the time for change is never.
The time for change is now or the time for change is never.
Okay. What do you expect you can do in seven months? Because you don’t just have to convince people like you—there’s not enough of you to do anything but throw the election to Trump. You’ll have to convince the leftist Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z who don’t share your particular views that it’s worth doing something drastic and potentially dangerous.
You’ll have a much better chance of doing that when you have four years of “status quo” than 4+ years of hard right authoritarianism.
You’ll have to convince the leftist Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z who don’t share your particular views that it’s worth doing something drastic and potentially dangerous.
I mean, yes. That is what I am trying, in a very small way, to do.
You’ll have a much better chance of doing that when you have four years of “status quo” than 4+ years of hard right authoritarianism.
I’m not an accelerationist. I have nothing against voting for Biden as harm reduction. And I want to be clear that what I’m about to say is not me advocating for voting for Trump, which I view as a morally reprehensible and disgusting act. But you are just wrong; 4+ years of hard right authoritarianism will likely make those people much more likely to understand that something drastic and potentially dangerous is necessary. Again to be clear: that one good thing doesn’t justify the rest of what will happen under a Trump admin, and people should not vote for him.
My point is that whatever you think should be done after Biden gets elected, you should just do now, because if you wait, you’ll be waiting forever.
Why is the republican the line for hard core authoritarianism? What the hell do you call it when the government does massive expansions to the military, police, and surveillance state while also designating left wing activists, including climate activists, as domestic terrorists? What about trying to undo the damage caused by the Supreme Court taking away people’s rights? If the republican’s actions were subversions of democracy, then surely it would be justified to take actions outside of normal law to oppose that. But they won’t do that, because at best the democrats are collaborators and more realistically, they’re just the faction of fascists with a better marketing department.
There is a third option: Join up with your fellow workers/citizens/people around the world to work towards something actually productive. Join/organize a union. Sharpen your pitchforks. Destroy some pipelines. Become the domestic terrorist they’ve already labeled you as. That path won’t be any different under a democrat or republican president because both are just as adamant about maintaining the power of the state and capital over people.
If your plan is to vote for one fascist then wish for the system to reform itself, I have 200+ years of history to show to you.
I did not say “hard core authoritarianism.” Go back and reread what I wrote. I said “hard Conservative Authoritarianism.” Biden is authoritarian, and I never said otherwise. Biden is not a Conservative (capital “C”).
Okay. You be the one to start it. Put up or shut up. I’m not interested in this option until I see the ideologues and tankies brave enough to talk about this online doing it in reality. If all you have is, “C’mon bro! We just need to band together,” then it’s not much of a movement. Meanwhile, I plan to hold my nose and vote for Biden, because at least that’s an actionable plan.
One of these things requires effort and involves risk and the other does not. But only one of these things does anything if you end up doing it. Yeah. I’m not doing anything at the moment because I’m depressed, anxious, and don’t really know anyone I live near. I should be doing more, but it’s hard. But you know what I’m not doing? I’m not carrying water for fascists. If you want to talk about harm reduction, for as little as that matters, that inaction is doing less harm than your inaction of telling people to shut up and go tick a box to say they’re ok with fascists.
EDIT: Perhaps more to the point: There have been and are still people who are doing this work regardless. People in countries that have been colonized or otherwise screwed over by the west put up a fight to try to change that. You aren’t just poo pooing hypothetical direct action that nobody has the courage to do. You’re supporting a government that actively attacks those people who are alrighty fighting for freedom and justice.
And see, that’s where we disagree. I see no evidence that Biden is a fascist (authoritarian ≠ fascist). If you want to convince me he’s a fascist, I’m going to need you to define what a fascist is and how Biden fits that definition.
I don’t see why you feel the need to obsess over definitions. I’ve already given a handful of my objections to the US gov and even some specific things done under the current administration.
But hey, if you want another one: How about supporting a genocide? Is that fascist enough for you?
No. Because “supports genocide” is not an exclusively fascist thing, and that’s why definitions matter. People on the internet love to reduce it to “Guh, Biden is a fascist,” but words have meaning. It’s telling that when asked to define what they think a fascist is, they always deflect. I have never once met someone who can, because they know they are committing a reductio ad absurdum fallacy.
Call Biden a fascist all you want, but if you don’t know what those words mean, you’re just making shit up and spouting some bullshit you heard from Political Compass chuds on the internet.
I’m missing the part where the word matters more than what’s actually happening. If your best defense of Biden is “Well AHKTUALLY! Technically Biden isn’t a fascist because of whatever definition I’m using!” What are we doing here? Just say you don’t care about hurting people. It’ll make things go a lot faster.
EDIT: Or if I’m being slightly more charitable: Even if you aren’t ok with hurting people, you view the decision to support current harm being done to people as at worst a neutral act, and possibly even positive since it could be worse. You don’t see how your support for the status quo enables continued once sided violence rather than keeping a fictitious peace.
What I’m telling you is that you ARE making a decision and that decision IS for more state and structural violence. But you’re too caught up in the fantasy land that is definitions and respectability politics.
I’m deflecting from talking about the definitions? You’re using definitions to deflect from reality. What do you even want? If I copy pasted a definition from Wikipedia or the dictionary would you then be happy and engage with the reality of what’s actually going on? Are you then going to talk about sending weapons to arm a genocide or grossly expanding the surveillance state? Or will you just move on to some other pedantry?
It’s not the end-all for me. That’s why it matters. Genocide is bad, and I’m sure we both agree. But imagine you can choose a candidate who supports a genocidal regime or you choose a candidate who supports a genocidal regime and makes being LGBTQ federally illegal, and makes abortion federally illegal, and plans to install a theocracy.
One of those two will be president next year. Period. Choosing a third option will only help Trump, who has a reliable and rabid voting base.
You can choose your own moral logic, but for me I don’t think this argument holds much value.
For one, it takes it as a given that some of that suffering will happen regardless and we are powerless to do anything about it. We’re not. There is another choice, you’re just not willing to accept it as valid.
By supporting the system which causes this suffering, you are enabling the suffering. Period. You are saying “We will not oppose you doing these things as long as you’re not doing some other things.” Except of course even those other things are on the table because you’ve already backed yourselves into a position where any amount of evil is acceptable if there is a greater one out there somewhere.
How can you assign and weigh the moral value of the suffering of any given group against any other? Do LGBTQ rights for the imperial core help the people getting bombed in various countries around the world? Does the legal right to an abortion help the people who don’t have financial access to get one for lack of healthcare? (Remember, in America, a right is only a right if you can afford to exercise it.) How do you even begin to compare the value of any given policy (or lack of policy) to the harm done by living in a surveillance state?
To me, the harm reduction argument is one that says “We are ok with trading the rights of some people for other people and we believe we have the right to make that decision for those groups.” It’s horrifyingly easy to hand wave away the suffering of people you don’t know. But if you were living in Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Vietnam, Korea, Cuba… actually it’ll be faster if I just link this: …globalpolicy.org/…/26024-us-interventions.html
If you were one of the people impacted by US imperialism… would you still make the same choice? Would you still support the US government because a different US government might hurt some US people you don’t know?
How can you assign and weigh the moral value of the suffering of any given group against any other?
Because genocide is bad, but genocide plus other human rights violations is worse. Seems like simple logic, to me. Sucks that those are the choices.
If you were one of the people impacted by US imperialism… would you still make the same choice? Would you still support the US government because a different US government might hurt some US people you don’t know?
Probably not.
Yes. And therein lies the difficult choice. It would be much easier if one was obviously better in every way. Real life is much messier, unfortunately, and I can either clutch my pearls and remain “morally pure,” whatever good that does, or I can choose the least bad option. Also, the “different government” would definitely hurt people I know, because that’s what it did previously and that’s what its proponents do currently.
So for me, it’s “choose Joe Biden,” who will be complicit in Gazan genocide, or it’s “choose Trump,” who will be complicit in Gazan genocide and hurt me, people like me, and people I know. If I vote for “third party person” who has zero chance of winning and Trump wins, I will bear the blame for failing to act in my best interest, and my moral purity won’t save anyone. If I vote third party and Biden wins, it will be in spite of me, and I will get to enjoy the benefits of people who weren’t afraid to get their hands dirty while also being indebted to them.
And that is not a position in which I wish to find myself.
I’m not saying to vote for a 3rd party. I’m saying that the solution does not involve voting and that the act of participating in such a vote is an active choice to support cruelty.
Voting, to the extent that it does anything, communicates 2 things:
You accept the legitimacy of the system. That this is the way you choose to express your will.
Your consent for the policies and actions of the government you vote for. When you check the box, there isn’t an optional field where you say “Well I’m voting for this candidate, but I don’t agree with all their policies.” You have given your consent to everything that government ends up doing.
So by voting within such a system, you provide your support for it. You say that you will not otherwise oppose it’s actions. Your choice isn’t harm some people or harm more people. Your choice is whether or not you will make it easier for the government to harm whoever they’re harming. Not only does that government harm people, but it actively works to crush opposition to it. You are supporting the efforts to do that to. You are actively opposing everyone who fights against the system.
More people will suffer every year that the government stays in the hands of capitalists and imperialists. Those people wouldn’t be hurt in the world where we actually did something about that. You can’t just take them for granted as having already been hurt by something other than your decision to continue participating in the system.
I’m not an anarchist either. (At least I think. Admittedly my understanding of anarchism is a little lacking, but from the gist of it it doesn’t seem very practical.) I’m a communist. The path forward is simple even if it’s very difficult. You band together with people, build power through your capacity to withhold your labor, and be ready to fight back when the capitalists inevitably attack.
Power is about the ability to make people do what you want even when they don’t want it. It’s inevitable derived through the means to reproduce society and force to back it up. Right now capitalists have that means and force and thus can impose their will on others. In that context, voting lacks any basis for power to enforce the will of the voters on the ruling class because the capitalists own things and the workers don’t successfully use their collective productive power to oppose them. It can ONLY turn out this way if your only political action is voting in a capitalist “democracy.” The system isn’t set up to respond to anyone who doesn’t already hold power because if it did, they wouldn’t be in power anymore.
It’s important to have an understanding of the how things work structurally, because if your analysis only begins and ends with the actions and professed ideologies of specific people, you can’t possibly hope to ever break out of the cycle of meager progress followed by regression.
You should read up on anarchism, it’s cool. Our tactics largely the same as you ascribe to the communists, but we aim for only bottom up orgs and not top down.
I’m with you on collective action, like unions, but I don’t really see how that applies to government. The system works whether one person votes or 1mil, and if zero of the regular non-politicians voted, the politicians still get a vote. If you’re talking about collective action to vote for someone different, there’s two main problems with that:
We can’t all agree on what issues are most important, which is part of why third parties never win.
There’s too many bad actors who would use that opportunity as an authoritarian power grab.
I think your idea could work if we had federal ranked choice, but we average people don’t “produce” anything that the government can’t produce itself. If someone wanted a communist government, they’d have to get communists elected, and to do that, they’d have to sell the idea of Communism to regular people who don’t know anything other than late-stage capitalism.
It would have to emerge organically from the ground up, not the top down. I think we’re on our way (I’m more of a socialist), but I don’t think it will happen in our lifetime, and rushing it will only scare the ignorant.
Either way, I think we’ve beaten this horse enough. You’ve been at least respectful, which is more than I can say for a lot of comments. Have a nice day.
this vould almost be a valid single issue to single-issue-vote at this point. the supreme court has been aging incredibly poorly and the republican candidate is running a platform to make it worse.
but im seeing so many comments (edit: including OP and the admin of a very popular instance?) who are down to abstain the vote, ignoring this AND all the other oppression that another maga win would be about, because we have let the “both sides are bad and voting is a blood pact” propoganda take over for the past decade.
both sides are not equally bad and voting is not a blood pact.
Imagine wanting the guy who said he thinks Israel should finish the job as long as they don’t record it, repealed 111 climate policies in one term, and gave massive tax breaks for the rich at the cost of workers, all while installing the most oppressive conservatives we’ve had to the Supreme Court, because you think “he’ll be different this time.”
It sounds like our nation is experiencing battered woman syndrome.
Unfortunately, the polls do. I understand his loyal base not budging, but plenty of people are under the impression that abstaining or voting third-party in November will do anything but get Trump back in the White House.
On the contrary. You absolutely should. I upvoted because I thought it was funny. I commented because I’m concerned some people can’t distinguish criticism and protest from voter disengagement.
100%. If a government representative’s policy is not in line with my personal views, I openly criticize. There’s too much party loyalty in the US compelling people to form their opinions around the actions of their party. We owe them no loyalty, they owe us representation.
This is my problem with this sort of post too. Do I think Biden could do better and deserves some criticism? Yes. Do I think there are people out there who, if convinced that Biden deserves criticism, would decide not to vote? Also yes. Am I terrified of the potential outcome of that? VERY MUCH YES.
Biden shares many of my values and goals, but because he isn’t perfectly aligned with my values and goals, I’m voting Trump, a man that shares NONE of my values and goals, as a protest. What could go wrong?
He passed the IRA, rejoined the Paris Agreement, repealed the transgender ban in the military, restored net neutrality, defended the use of mifepristone, supported Ukraine, and relieved some student debt. That’s enough to earn my vote.
Its that shitty Ben shapiro meme. “You hate the system yet you participate in it, curious?”
Yeah not really many options when you’ve gotta put food on the table. The change comes from the top down down down Esit: I may or may not be misreading your comment.
The top doesn’t have as many options as people think.
Ben Shapiro is dumb and I don’t fault anyone who can’t bring about a worker’s paradise, provided they make an incremental improvement in the lives of others. That includes Biden.
After taking millions of tiny steps forward, we’ll eventually get to where we need to be.
I think the biggest LOL in history is Main Characters who think they can immediately solve the world’s problems. They literally have a 0% success rate.
All of our actual progress has always been incremental.
Perfect example. “The arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice.”
After more than a decade of activism, MLK didn’t live to see the passage of the Civil Rights Act. And that law didn’t solve the problem of racial inequality.
If you were alive in MLK’s time, you would be complaining that he hadn’t done enough.
Still wouldn’t have happened without direct action, which is ultimately what I’m trying to get at in these comments. People like MLK had to put their asses on the line to make change happen. Had to rally support. Simply voting doesn’t really accomplish much. It took Black Americans getting beat in the streets, causing issues for politicians to get the civil rights act past the finish line. You’re right that it does take time for progress to happen but without direct action like what MLK did I don’t think anything would have ever gotten accomplished.
Sure, I agree that it takes more than voting to make change. My point is that change appears incremental when it is actually happening. Only in retrospect, after many small changes have accumulated, can you see a major shift.
It demonstrates precisely the opposite. All it shows is that change can be lost in a moment. And waiting around for it to strengthen only to then backslide into non-existence is not the solution. If we fought half as hard to build up the nation as the right does to tear it down, we’d be making a lot of progress.
Slowly doing the right thing is not a virtue in and of itself. The only people who want slow change explicitly do not want the change to occur if it disrupts those who use inequality to opress.
Do you think the civil rights movement was fighting for slow incremental change? That was a byproduct of the resistance to equality. They wanted it yesterday.
Everybody wants change yesterday, but they never actually get that. They don’t even get major immediate change. At best they get incremental progress.
So when evaluating someone’s achievements, you can’t hold them to an impossible standard. Someone is not a failure if they were unable to change the past. In fact, they are a success if they deliver the best outcome that is actually achievable. And history shows that outcome is incremental progress.
I think you’re misattributing who the villains of progress are. MLK had attributed it to the white moderates that stood in the way of progress. I’m doing the same. The right is not a majority. If the moderates would play ball with the progressives, we could get a lot done immediately, but they refuse.
Leftist support of Biden is why we got mandatory union recognition, student debt relief, and corporate tax increases, all of which were championed by Bernie Sanders but previously had little support from moderates.
I think your definition of leftist is skewed by US media. Nothing listed here is even remotely left leaning. Again, I believe in the dissolution of capitalism. These are all capitalist policies. Unions are only nessessary to combat capitalism on thier own terms, student debt wouldnt exist without capitalism, and taxes wouldnt matter either.
Yall are too narrow minded and are stuck in an industrial era mindset. Remember, US Democrats are right leaning in the rest of the devloped world.
I am comparing Biden’s presidency to those of Obama and Clinton. All of those actions taken by Biden represent a significant shift to the left compared to his Democratic predecessors.
If you think Nixon was more progressive than Obama, then you really don’t understand American politics.
Nixon did for the environment what Bush did for Homeland Security. He took a bunch of agencies that already existed and were already issuing regulations, and put them all under control of one person who took orders directly from the President. Thus making it much easier for future Republicans, like Trump, to interfere with environmental rule-making.
And Nixon didn’t raise tax rates. He signed a tax bill sent by an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress. It didn’t raise tax rates either, but it instituted the Alternative Minimum Tax which everyone ignored until decades later when they realized it had unintended effects on the middle class.
It’s not selfish. People are SUFFERING and DYING. The people who are selfish are the ones who don’t want to give up the privilege and luxury they have that is only made possible by the suffering and exploitation of others these reforms would help the most.
michael-laugh same. Biden has never stood for anything but the worst possible things atcany point in time. Pro segregation, pro imperialism, extreme zionist, architect of the modern Jim Crow, major facilitator of the Iraq War, bagman for the banking industry. And the extreme sexism with which he treated Anita Hill is just icing on the cake for what a shitbag Biden has always been. I can’t imagine thinking “he shares some of my values and goals.” He’s literally one of the worst, and certainly one of the individuals most responsible for how bad the world is
(as much as an individual can be responsible obviously another ghoul would have done the same things etc.)
What values and goals does Biden share with Leftists, other than not being as far-right as the Republicans?
Who said anything about voting for Trump? I myself am voting Biden most likely because he isn’t as bad as Trump, but I share practically nothing with his views.
What person is criticizing Biden from the left but actually voting for Trump, other than the strawman you created?
Supporting of unions is a pretty big thing biden supports that leftists also support, nevermind his views and actions on climate change and bodily autonomy.
Your comment is wildly reductionist and supremely ignorant.
Biden has given concessions to Unions, that does not make him pro-Union. He has fallen excessively short on Climate goals and has done little to expand abortion protections.
Being less right wing for a liberal does not make Biden a Leftist, it just makes him less of a bad thing.
Your comment is wildly reductionist and supremely ignorant.
Biden tossed scraps, yes. He has not proposed radical changes to the anti-union policies that exist everywhere, he has not supported strikes, and he has not expanded protections to Unions. Believe it or not, a Pro-Union candidate can do these things! Biden isn’t actually pro-union, he just tosses scraps when strikes happen.
Yes, I do read what I am typing. I want a Pro-Union candidate, not a neutral one, so I will criticize Biden.
I believe Biden can quit playing softball with regards to abortion. Biden is the king of virtue signaling, he isn’t a king but he does have power.
Moreover, Biden is a Capitalist going far out of his way to support ongoing genocide. I am not going to be happy with his Capitalism, and I certainly won’t be happy with his genocide.
Im not sure it’s possible to be more pro-union than being literally the only president in united states history to ever step foot onto a picket line and protest.
He is doing what he is legally able to do for abortions and unions. The president is not a lawmaker, nor a king like you would seem to have him be.
Again, its not his fault you seem to be ignorant of the structure of the US government.
I literally gave you examples of how a President could be more Pro-Union: by presenting and helping pass actual Pro-Union legislation that protects worker’s rights to strike and form unions. Another good one would be mandating that all companies be unionized, or companies of a certain size must have union representatives participate in Board meetings.
Virtue signaling does nothing materially, it’s an optics thing.
He isn’t doing what he can do, lmao.
I am not ignorant of the structure of the US government just because you believe the job of the US president is to shout slogans and steer the country off vibes, lmao
Which legislation that republicans have allowed to hit floor should biden support?
Its also certifiably nuts you think a president should unilaterally demand all companies be unionized - like the king you would have him be. The destruction that would be wrought is unimaginable.
Biden can do more than sit and wait until legislature passes up to him.
Secondly, it is absolutely not “certifiably nuts” to suggest that all companies be unionized - rather, it’s an extremely sensible thing to do for worker protections.
Probably Biden, I have said that numerous times. This isn’t a gotcha! moment, my point is that voting will not move America leftward unless the parties are under serious strain and stand to fall out of power entirely.
So supportive of unions, thats why he adopted Ronald Reagans policy of making it illegal to strike . All hail the Union loving strike breaker. Couldnt even get em sick days give me a break.
He made sure to remove agency from the workers in the process
The end result may have been favorable, but it seems wack to use this an example of Biden supporting unions. Seems more like he disenfranchised them instead
The union strikes and saber rattling achieved their own results. The workers had the power since they scared the establishment to give them what they wanted. However Biden took all the credit for it even though he crushed their union rights which just goes to show how irrevocably damaged the liberal brain is
Either way, it’s an example of Biden placing himself above workers. I was misled by all the liberals posting about how great Biden was for giving the workers what they want.
Biden does not share my view that genocide is bad. If you want to vote for genocide guy because orange man bad, you are devoid of morals. You are a spineless worm, deserving only scorn and derision.
The whole point is saying I’d rather not get shot at all and I’m not going to give any approval to get shot anywhere. Especially when the question is actually closer to where would I like to shoot some random civilian. I’m not going to give approval to shoot them in the foot nor the face.
And you get to order someone shot in the foot (but let’s be real, they’re going to end up shot in the face regardless face) so congrats on giving the order too I guess
Look, dude, I’d absolutely love for the situation to be better than it is, but the fact of the matter is, it’s not. These are our choices. You can pick bad or worse, and if you don’t pick, it’s going to be worse. You can dream about better options all you want, and if they were available I’d absolutely go for them, but refusing to avoid making the situation worse because you want it to be better is idealistic at best and actively harmful at worst. I’m glad you can feel good about yourself letting the worst come to pass, but some of us are actually trying to do damage control, and that defeatist attitude isn’t helping. That’s my stance, and I’ve spent enough time expounding on it. You can take it or leave it, either way I’m done.
Fully agree and I wish the situation was better. I’ll keep it on the level, genocide is a deal-breaker for me. I’m surprised it’s not a deal breaker for other people too to be honest. And it’s awful that our only choices are awful candidates. Really makes you wonder how we got here and I can’t help but feel that this a vote blue no matter who bullshit along with Dems always backing incumbents Even when they’re terrible has paved the way for our present situation. That’s not going to get better unless we do something to change it. We found ourselves in afucked up hole and the first step to finding a way out is to stop digging.
I hope you’re right though I guess there’s a lot of people that are going to vote for him even though he is enabling genocide, I hope he decides to turn it around and start representing voters.
Well I appreciate you saying so. It just frustrates me how many people are okay with handing Trump the presidency despite how obvious he’s made it what a bad choice he is. I don’t like Biden either, but at this point I see him as a necessary evil.
Trump derangement syndrome really is real if you think there exists a worse possibility than the maximalist position already held by the biggest zionist politician America has had in the last 70 years. You think ‘orange man’ is going to be worse just because ‘orange man bad’?
Yeah, I mean, Trump has never been dishonest in how shitty he is. But sure, “genocide Joe,” go off.
The situation sucks. Truly epitome of “lesser of evils” conundrums. Both suck regarding the quagmire in Gaza, but Trump will suck much harder with this conflict and every other metric that matters. He’s not even quiet about it! Unapologetically blatantly terrible! Bigoted buffoonery of the highest caliber!
No one is having a good time here! It’s like picking which arm to saw off!
It’s a really lazy reduction, too. Biden doesn’t spend his days just looking for ways to support genocide. Even if Trump and Biden are “essentially the same” with regard to genocide (they’re not), you can treat that as a logically moot issue. Therefore, you have to look at their other points, and in no way is Trump a better option than Biden in that regard, unless you’re personally getting kickbacks from the Trump grift mill.
Biden literally did that. He personally went around reporting requirements so that he could send Isreal a greater variety of weapons for their genocide without congressional oversight.
Even if Trump and Biden are “essentially the same” with regard to genocide, you can treat that as a logically moot issue.
This is where we disagree. I can not use moral relativism when a party engages in genocide. Further, i don’t agree that voting for Biden is, as many pro Biden folk argue, a repudiation of Trump.
A vote for Biden (or any representative for that matter), to me, is an implicit acknowlegement i agree with his leadership. An approval and statement that he represents my beliefs and shares, a little, my values.
There is no such thing, in my mind, as negative voting (voting against a candidate). This is not how it works, not how i willnotbe coerced into thinking it works.
A vote for a representative is a positive action. I will not play a game of “what if the boogeyman tho!?” with a party shown time and again to be against my best interest, to ignore my very life in favor of the pocketbooks of donors…
Now, they ask me to help them stop the boogeyman as they simultaneously stand aside while he strips my right to protest, my right to privacy, rip families apart, refuse my brothers and sisters right to live, and kill tens of thousands.
Voting as you imagine it is nothing but reductive. Worse, venal. Finally, to consider genocide as “logically moot” is not logical. It’s fucking gross, and i feel absolutely sorry for you that you’ve come to this conclusion.
I can only hope you put more thought into this immediately
It’s only logically moot specifically because there’s only two options. Refusal to participate doesn’t change the fact that it will either be Biden or it will be Trump in the Oval Office next year. Choosing a third party will also not change that fact.
When functionally presented with two options, you have to compare them. Any similarities (which I don’t agree with the premise that they’re the same, but just for the sake of argument) are thus rendered moot. It’s not moot in the larger sense of human suffering, but when it comes to LGBTQ rights, women’s rights, etc., Trump is the last person to support those issues. Biden is the only way forward if that’s something you care about.
I can only hope you put more thought into this immediately
How you decide to frame the issue isn’t the same for me. I don’t share your, forgive me, extreme views of what is happening in the government or society. If voting is only a positive act for you, then it sounds like you’ve made up your mind. I choose to vote based on other factors, and just like my “chess” falls upon deaf ears with you, so do your impassioned pleas fall upon deaf ears with me.
So there will be no immediate anything. You hope in vain.
It’s only logically moot specifically because there’s only two options.
This is also not true, which is why i said your idea of what voting itself is reductive. There are of course more than two options this and every election.
Allowing your mind to bend to their narrative, believing that voting is a binary choice is one way their democracy-destroying little game works.
If voting were only two choices, i wouldn’t vote at all as you seem to suspect. but it isn’t. i will in fact be participating as i have done for 30 years. Just not gonna do it the way you’d like, an imaginary binary election. Before you say it, there is also no such thing as throwing a vote away.
Oo, tough little tankie over here. Can’t debate anymore, because your position is untenable, so you go to name calling. Classic move. Do the one with that tankie copy-pasta!
-Guy insisting that other people support Isreal’s doomed genocidal war for the sake of a visibly decaying fascist who’s about to lose the election, while capitalism continues to boil the planet.
It’s only logically moot specifically because there’s only two options. Refusal to participate doesn’t change the fact that it will either be Biden or it will be Trump in the Oval Office next year. Choosing a third party will also not change that fact.
This is simplistic. There are only two outcomes to the upcoming election, but there are countless political strategies, many of which do not treat 2024’s presidential election as a totalizing issue. Other people, for example, think that what matters is building a strong leftist opposition so that we can escape the cycle of Republican vs Republican-lite elections, accepting that it means not giving unconditional support to so-called “moderates” for whom genocide is moot. Your logic only makes sense because you are question-begging by framing the question like the future doesn’t exist beyond the next four years.
until and unless we collectively withhold our votes and so express real and actual power, the left will always remain powerless. repudiate the democrats or be forever doomed to an endless cycle of voting for the “lesser” evil. (no moral calculus can ever frame a genocidier as the lesser evil - he’s so far beyond the moral event horizon that I no longer care to calculate)
There’s what Biden is actually doing vs what people think Trump will do. You think Trump will worsen the genocide - but what does that mean, materially? Biden is already sending Israel all the weapons they want and giving them all the air cover they need politically. What more could Trump do?
Send troops. Enact a draft to that end to “make the libz cry.” Send more weapons.
But you’re agreeing with my point. If Trump and Biden are essentially the same on this issue, you have to compare the other things about them, and they are not even close to the same on other issues (LGBTQ rights, unions, women’s rights, taxes for the rich, etc.). If “supports genocide” is the single issue for you, then you live an immensely privileged life that you don’t have to worry about other aspects of governance.
And no matter what you think, thanks to FPTP, those are your two options, because you can’t build the momentum needed to upset the upcoming election; you’re years too late. Abstention is a vote for the person you like less, so you are left with voting for Biden or Trump, whether you like it or not.
Oh sure let’s talk about LGBTQ rights and Women’s rights shall we. Under which president was Roe v. Wade struck down? Under which president have abortion bans in many states popped up with complete inaction from the federal government? Under which president have anti-trans laws popped up with complete inaction from the federal government?
My expectations of Trump is we will have a buffoonish worsening of the current conditions of the world. Under Biden we will have a cynical worsening of current conditions. Am I priveleged? Yes, I live in the imperial core. I live in a blue state. I have a stable job. But don’t think for a second that I can’t see what’s happening around me.
Under which president was Roe v. Wade struck down?
This one.
And who put the Federalist Society justices in place who struck it down? Oh, that’s right. Donald fucking Trump.
Under which president have abortion bans in many states popped up with complete inaction from the federal government? Under which president have anti-trans laws popped up with complete inaction from the federal government?
This one.
What powers do you think they have? Laws are struck down by the judiciary, which we’ve already established has been captured, thanks to Trump.
Here’s a question for you: who has been enacting those laws? What is the nature of the legislature in those cases?
None of your gripes here are Biden’s fault, unless you’re wishing he’d be more authoritarian (fuck that). Trump is 100% to blame for the current state of the law, and helping him get reelected isn’t going to help LGBTQ people or women’s rights.
And who put the Federalist Society justices in place who struck it down? Oh, that’s right. Donald fucking Trump.
Joe Biden had more to do with Clarence Thomas being on the court than any republican
And what did Biden do in response to Roe being struck down? Oh, that’s right. He made statements about how he’s against abortion.
What powers do you think they have?
Executive power, dummy. The actual power to do what he wants to do with federal resources. The court only has the power to talk about what he does after the fact.
unless you’re wishing he’d be more authoritarian (fuck that)
LMAO WELL THEN SHUT THE FUCK UP IF YOU DON’T WANT YOUR POLITICIANS TO EXERCISE AUTHORITY DIPSHIT
Why are you pretending to give a shit about politics in the first place??
so he seems to be authoritarian enough to bypass congress to send billions of dollars of baby killing devices to Israel but not authoritarian enough to try and stop the litany of fascism laws across the country.
Have you considered that maybe Joe “I do not view abortion as a choice and a right, I think it’s always a tragedy” Biden just doesn’t care all too much about women’s reproductive rights, and that Joe “Were there not an Israel, the United States of America would have to invent an Israel to protect her interest in the region” Biden also really wants to unwaveringly support Israel.
The reason he doesn’t put up any more than a token effort to resist the rise of fascism in america (and in fact is actively expanding presidential powers and the power of the state to suppress political dissent) is that he doesnt care about fascism. If he did care about fascism then why is he prioritising supporting fascism in israel so much that he’s going to throw the election to the fascist party by completely alienating the same muslim voters who won him the election in 2020?
You didn’t have to descend to name calling, but you did. The fact that you did that instead of bringing actual arguments tells me all I need to know about how informed you are.
Right? Who else are they gonna find with exactly the same takes and no political acumen to beat over the head with facts? It’s fun, but it’s like fighting in a dream. No matter how hard you hit, online libs have pillowskulls
Reading this gave me a visceral flashback to the roller backpack kid in school who would try to “How very mature of you” his way out of having his jacket thrown up into trees.
Trump is not to blame for the state of the law. The Democrats have had many chances over the years to protect the rights that the Republicans have said out loud, for decades, that they will remove. Time and time again they did not prioritize it. Biden was a senator and then vice president and then president during these opportunities.
None of your gripes here are Biden’s fault
Yes they are absolutely his fault. He has been deeply involved in the highest levels of government for decades.
unless you’re wishing he’d be more authoritarian (fuck that).
You don’t think throwing teenage girls in prison for getting an abortion after being raped is authortarian? How privileged to be able to say that freedoms should be fought for based on your personal opinion of the right way of doing it.
I don’t think we share a common view of reality. You seem to be under the impression that State laws are Biden’s fault, and his inability to prevent them is also his fault. I don’t share that opinion, as I don’t see the facts leading to that conclusion.
I think it’s not worth continuing this conversation. Have a good day. See you at the polls.
and they are not even close to the same on other issues (LGBTQ rights, unions, women’s rights, taxes for the rich, etc.).
Yes they are
If “supports genocide” is the single issue for you, then you live an immensely privileged life
Square peg argument in a round hole of reality. Literally just copy and pasting into a thought terminating cliche what was absurd and ghoulish when you used it for healthcare.
smuglord I’m sorry you just activated my “I shut down emotionally and intellectually if I hear the wrong take” card
I’m assuming it’s your emotional wounds that prevent you from looking into where the burden of proof lies when asserting two things are different from each other?
I’m assuming it’s your emotional wounds that prevent you from looking into where the burden of proof lies when asserting two things are different from each other?
Libs never think they have to back up their claims and assertions no matter how flimsy. The burden of proof is always on anyone whose opinion doesn’t match their propaganda. Then they tell us we’re in an echo chamber michael-laugh
Send troops. Enact a draft to that end to “make the libz cry.”
You are really out of touch. Trump loves imperial domineering, but he generally prefers to avoid boots on the ground because they represent a liability to his image. He will not send volunteers and he knows as well as anyone that it’d be suicide to enact a draft.
Obviously Trump won’t be any better than Biden, but if Biden wants people to vote for him rather than sit home and vote for nobody, he should consider not doing genocide. You know, an elected politician trying to represent their voters? The thing democracies are nominally for?
You’re the one arguing in favor of continuing to bail water out of a sinking ship like Dems have exploitatively argued for decades. This is your status quo, this is what lesser evils of the past have won you.
Disowning the present circumstances requires disowning every single application of your horseshit political perspective for about 50 years. Under neoliberalism, there have only been two Dem strategies: Republican-lite (e.g. Clinton), or lie about not being Republican-lite (e.g. Obama), and you’ve won about half the time and gotten us your “lesser evil” administrations, “crisis” after “crisis”, and all those “lesser evils” have accomplished nothing but serving up new situations to keep choosing between Republican and Republican-lite.
If you want anything other than a farcical good cop/bad cop routine carried on until the country implodes, your strategy has thoroughly failed, repeatedly, for decades.
You have two options: live in madness and keep trying the same thing over and over again in denial of it having the same result, or accept that the “moderate” path is opposed to you ever getting an improvement, instead of the first step towards it.
This is your status quo, this is what lesser evils of the past have won you.
Thank you, this bears repeating. Voting for the lesser evil has consequences. These are them. The consequences are here. Blaming those of us who won’t vote for genocide is like blaming the people who don’t give a homeless beggar $20. Sure, that money could help the guy get a meal today, but he’s in that situation due to decades of neoliberal policy. It’s ridiculous to heap the culpability for all of that on the skinflint today.
If you want anything other than a farcical good cop/bad cop routine carried on until the country implodes, your strategy has thoroughly failed, repeatedly, for decades.
The historical pattern is that pendulum swings and the party in the White House changes after each President. So, there’s a good chance of that implosion coming in 2028.
I mean, if you’re going to pretend this is the first election of all time and the last election ever, sure. or you could take history into account and make a longer term plan so that you don’t have to keep making choices about who the “lesser evil” is. if you abdicate any possible collective power, the ratchet will keep turning the dial further and further towards fascism.
I’m not sure I’ve ever heard anything as incorrect in electoral strategy as voting for “99% Hitler”. elections come every 4 years. a loss today need not remain a loss forever. make the dems come to you! force them to bargain with the left instead of the right!
okay so I read the whole thing. it describes a really shitty, extant system. it defines the spoiler effect. it shows how the spoiler effect makes the already shitty system even more shitty. all that’s fine and well. never once does it say that voting for minor party candidates is literally a vote for republicans, which was the actual statement that I took issue with.
you’re welcome to make the argument that the result is the same and that’s why you specifically will only vote strategically. that’s fine. it does absolutely nothing to compel me to vote for either democrats or for republicans. or even to vote at all for that matter. why participate in such a fundamentally broken system at all then? just to give one more point to 99% hitler? no thank you.
why participate in such a fundamentally broken system at all then?
Because I have no choice. “The System” happens to me whether I like it or not; the laws happen to me whether I like it or not, and if I can have 99% Hitler vs 100% Hitler, I’ll take the lesser. My refusal to participate doesn’t change the fact that those are my two options, and one will be chosen.
I would rather have a voice than let someone else choose for me.
So you’re just incredibly naive or incredibly selfish to not care about the results of what you do as long as you can pretend to be principled about it.
it’s not a strategic vote! it’s an abdication of strategy that pretends only the current election matters! it assumes the present is eternal and that no electoral strategy could ever consider the future. an electoral strategy would admit the left has no real power absent a dedicated bloc and would work on creating one. to do so, you must be willing to sacrifice a few elections, because you must withhold votes and force the democrats to the bargaining table. otherwise you will forever be trapped in a cycle of voting for the “lesser” evil. FPTP does not preclude a long-term electoral strategy.
What values and goals could anyone possibly share with Biden? You’re pro-modern Jim Crow? Pro-imperial hegemony? Pro-genocide? Pro-banks keeping peoole un debt forever? That’s all he’s ever stood for
He’s in charge of the weapon hose and has been cranking that shit further open for 7 months when he could have shut it off with a single phone call.
Or shit, here’s a rogue world leader doing a genocide. Isn’t that the kind of thing the US is supposed to extrajudicially coup and kill people for in the name of democracy? Nope, all of the sudden the world empire is helpless to stop a tiny fake country that literally depends on it to exist.
Democracy works by criticizing your elected officials until they make necessary changes. People NEED to be putting Biden’s feet to the fire to end the genocide in Palestine. Just because Trump would be worse doesn’t make what Biden is doing ok. Criticism of one isn’t an endorsement of the other. And Biden NEEDS the votes of everyone criticizing his response to the genocide. Instead of harassing people trying to end genocide, you should be asking why Biden supports genocide more than the young voters who he needs to win in November.
The meme implies protest at the polls. Their comment is reflective of that sentiment. Criticize and protest US support of Israel independent of casting your vote in rebellion. The point stands that Trump encourages eradication of the Palestinians and Ukrainians, while oppressing working class Americans and repealing climate change progress.
It starts to get quite boring, is that all you people have? He’s old yeah, both are, but Biden won’t run the country all by himself you know. About the genocide, he sure could have tried to do more, but how in hell is that his fault? I mean are all politicians worldwide genociders because they didn’t stop the horrors in Gasa?
You’re going to get one whether you like it or not. Do you want the nicer geriatric or the one who wants to burn shit down? Because if we don’t try to stop it, this will be 2016 all over again.
I hope you choose to vote, or are at least ok with letting the fascist take over because of inaction. “I’m NoT vOtInG fOr GeNoCiDe” is a stupid argument when not voting is more likely to elect the full throated genocider.
I really don’t see how some people can sleep at night with their choices…
Realistically, what are you gonna do? The time for another candidate came and went, so all intents and purposes you've got either Biden or Trump.
Refusing to vote en-masse to stick it to the DNC sounds great, but is it worth giving Trump the keys to the castle?
The guy who's repeatedly given open support towards Israel "war", told them they should "get the job done" - hell his only condemnation towards them is the fact Israel recorded any of it.
Trump being in would only change things for the worse, and that's just with Gaza - I'd argue the status quo is better than the alternative.
Though it's fucked we ended up in this situation in the first place.
I know trump would be worse, but this post is just expounding on how shitty biden still is. Being 5% better than trump isn’t good and he knows he could be better but he’s not.
5%? Who hurt you? It’s way more than that. More like 95%.
You have a literal elderly criminal idiot vs a seasoned politician elderly idiot who won’t fuck the country over like DJT did.
But then again I have been on 5 continents and know for a fact Americans are the dumbest people when it comes to having coherent awareness of their situation.
Ironic you’re calling me an idiot when you can’t see the damage neoliberals like biden have caused and continue to cause. For starters, guy is literally enabling a genocide. He can’t even bring himself to call trump and his goons in the GOP fascists. I do mutual aid work with various organizations and I see the suffering these so called progressives in government allow to continue year after year while spending billions on bullshit like police and the defense industry.
I know i’m not part of this ongoing debate, but it seems like you’re both right for different reasons. From an american standpoint, biden is significantly better, because of the social programs and liberal motivators he puts in place. As far as directly effecting american lives, biden helps and trump hurts.
From a global capitalist perspective, they’re both the same, with biden being slightly worse because those same social benefits pacify the left into apathy towards stopping global war, genocide, destabilization of exploited countries, and the rise of global surveillance.
Since we are forced to choose, biden seems better for america, but how does any real change happen if we’re all given our treats to stay obedient.
To Democrats it means refusing to say “third party vote” in favor of terms like “spoiler” or “protest vote” while claiming voting for Trump is a mainline leftist position, then yelling “nuhuh trump lover” if you point out its false.
Correction: “I’m voting for Biden to make sure the things that are happening right now continue to get slowly better, instead of getting immediately and significantly worse.”
Hey, I generally agree! It’s impossible to revolutionize a system while sticking to the rules of that system. We can and should fight wherever possible to improve things for our fellow man, no matter what we’re “supposed” to do as defined by the people that stand the most to gain from our apathy.
But that fight includes voting for the lesser harm. Voting for Biden to stop Trump from being president is an entirely valid strategy – and for the people who stand the most to lose, like racial and gender minorities, we cannot ignore harm reduction.
Biden was voted in and you had a failed coup. Did you people go and the streets and demand justice? no. You just got worsening conditions and another genocide. Voting didn’t do anything. It didn’t prevent anything. The decent into fascism is inevitable if people just keep voting because they think voting does something. This delusion needs to be ripped out so that people do anything else.
Voting does do something for fascists. Trump got into office, and now we have an insane Supreme Court that is systematically undoing 100 years of progress.
That is because Trump was elected by people voting.
If it wasn’t Trump it would be someone else. Who the figurehead is doesn’t matter. Long term, simple expecting voting to improve your society has proven to be an abject failure.
It’s late at night where I am, so I’m not going to take the time right now to refute you in detail. But if you honestly think we got a worse result than we would have with Trump, you’re either delusional or lying.
The fact that you’re hammering so hard on the idea that voting is useless makes me think it’s the latter. Trolling is a art, and you’re doing it badly.
Both. You can’t get what you want by only doing one or the other. If you don’t vote, you can’t pressure sane politicians that don’t get elected, and the insane fascists are just going to ignore you. And we all know that voting alone isn’t the solution
People need to stop acting like voting is the end all/be all, or that not voting/withholding your vote sends a message rather than let’s psychos who want to destroy democracy have their way.
They like to pretend like successful protests are a people’s moment, but protests don’t go anywhere without in-power support. MLK was establishment as fuck. The National Guard provided a replacement when his PA system failed at the million man march. You gotta make your opinions known by voicing them publicly and supporting candidates that are sympathetic to your cause. Even better, become part of the establishment yourself and be the helpful politician you wish you could vote for.
It seems to have been buried to the sands of time, but I once read an excellent article explaining why modern protest movements have a terrible track record compared to the ones from before the 1980s (or so). The book “If We Burn” by Vincent Bevins has a similar theme.
The long and short of it is that modern protests are too easy to organize, and don’t represent any real power. You can start a Facebook event and get loads of people to show up and stand in the street, but that’s pretty much it. In order to organize a protest in the 1960s, you had to have an established organization and power structure. You had to have regular meetings and a bureaucracy in order to get a large number of people to show up and protest. That same bureaucracy could also be used for other things, like supporting or opposing particular political candidates, and the oppositional and sympathetic establishment knew that.
A modern protest is toothless. It has no weight behind it. If you want to have enough power to take on the establishment that you oppose, you have to become equally structured and monied in order to fight them. That’s what it means to become a part of the establishment. You might not join the established teams, but you’re going to become so well organized and bureaucratic that angsty teams would immediately write you off as boring and just another part of the system if they ever had to participate in one of your long term planning sessions.
On an individual level my suggestion is to join the system and change it from within, because one person doesn’t make for a very powerful organization. Plus, it’s rare for any random person to have the chops or resources to build up a political organization for themselves. On the collective level, you gotta start holding committee meetings.
Bro. Some elections are decided by 10s of votes. I live in a city of 12k people, on smaller elections less than a thousand people vote. By simply showing up you are effectively voting for 10-12 people. It takes like 10 minutes, and ballot measures alone make it worth while.
If you don’t vote you’re just accepting what those who did vote collectively voted for.
Hahaha you don’t vote to try to destabilize the system. You realize a large percentage of Americans never vote right? Not voting isn’t special at all !
I’m sure those women facing prosecution for seeking a medically necessary procedure will find great comfort in knowing about your destabilization efforts, as they endure their noble suffering in coming years.
So? This will just be reversed in a few years. In the long term, these votes mean nothing, The progress to fascism through liberal voting is inexorable.
“The progress to fascism through liberal voting is inexorable, you understand” I explain to the sixteen year old child, victim of sexual assault, forced to carry her unviable pregnancy to term in 2025.
Why 2025? Because you just delivered an entire tirade about your concerns for ‘the long term.’ I aim to highlight the immediate damage being inflicted today or within the next year. Interestingly, I prioritize the well-being of those currently affected by oppressive regimes and don’t perceive women as mere pawns to reach some hypothetical better future.
You can’t advocate for ‘the long term’ selectively and then shift focus to ‘right now under your guy’ when it suits your argument.
With that disingenuous move on your part, my rhetorical engagement here concludes. Have a pleasant day.
The people in the 80s were making the same arguments as you about the “short term”. This inexorably led to genocides, climate apocalypse and abortion bans. Ergo, this “short-term thinking” is and has always been an abject failure. I claim that your approach is directly going to lead to more suffering for women and minorities and likely the death of billions from climate disasters.
To protect these people the answer is to ignore vote and go and do literally anything else for social change.
cite ur source that identifies these parallels and ill change my position. im not here to “defend short term thinking”, im here to defend the rights of human beings. so a subtle difference there.
Did US have abortion bans and was funding genocides back then? Are they doing those right now? Did people vote in the interim years? This is not nuclear science my guy. I can go back as much as you want and we can see how much progress was made through voting, or through activism, unions and making those in power scared shitless.
Do you unironically believe that life hasn’t gotten better for literally everyone that’s not a Rockefeller since 1924? I think you may have brain damage. Which is a much more treatable condition than it was in 1920 fucking 4.
Voting does not change the whims of the powerful. The powerful continue to push their will. Currently that will is massacres and genocide. Genocide Joe does have a nice ring to it. Vote or don’t. The powerful will get their way.
Voting is easy in my state, so I will. My current amusement is voting against incumbents. Preference is Third Party > Democrat > Republican.
Beyond the entertainment of voting: keep building mutual aid networks, be a good neighbor and use a pokeball if 2025 gets ghastly.
I agree that united we can push back. Creating horizontal power structures provide the push. Ideally, dismantling hierarchical power over merely scaring it.
lol looking at the last couple weeks all I see is a crackdown on supposed “open society” in order to combat anti-zionism while the war machine rattles on abroad.
It’s more like saying global warming isn’t real because a new ice age just started. Biden is leading the greatest attack on civil liberty seen since the fucking Patriot Act, and his warmonger inclinations in Ukraine and Israel aren’t counterbalanced by fleeing from the fiefdom of Kabul, and if we take a broader look at how he’s handled policy, we see the continued escalation of the war on immigrants (not that he hasn’t pursued that lately too) and him basically shrugging at Roe being struck down.
Do you actually have anything to contribute to this conversation or are you just here to piss your pants because people you disagree with are making their voices heard?
I used to try to engage with you Hexbear users and all I got was mud thrown at me. You’re not worth trying to debate because you never argue in good faith, your only goal is to spread propaganda.
The IRA act turbocharged private renewable energy investment. I saw multiple local projects that were already underway expand their scope immediately after the legislation was passed because the legislation made renewable energy far cheaper to build.
The new SAVE repayment plan for student loans allows families to pay significantly less on their student loans (I currently have a $0 payment with no interest gain on my 8k of student debt thanks to this plan, plus after 10 years of making my $0 payments any remaining balance will be forgiven)
That’s what they said back in '96 when I voted for Ralph Nader. Now we’re on the precipice of American democracy falling to fascism, if not now, then very likely in 2028. That doesn’t look to me anything like slowly getting better.
Some things have definitely improved in that time, e.g. the recognition of same-sex marriage, or the nascent resurgence of labor unions. Those things have been the result of slow, tough, hard work by the grassroots.
In that same time, though, the Democrats have been slowly helping to put the mechanisms of a fascist state in place, like the PATRIOT ACT, FISA, neutering the 4th Amendment, bolstering the Espionage Act, and setting up collaborative efforts between state police, Federal agencies, and the corporate sector to crush protest movements.
That said, the world is indeed shades of grey, and I voted for Biden in 2020 to stay fascism, if only for a little bit. It’s better to vote for the right-wing candidate versus the fascist candidate. I want to vote for him again, but there are some lines that must never be crossed, and I can’t in good conscience vote for a President enabling genocide. (The fact that both candidates do is madness.)
Maybe my calculus would be different if there were a reasonable chance that Democrats would do the things that are within their power to do to check the rise of fascism, but I have no confidence of that, as the track record shows otherwise.
Hey! So I know you are getting people being snarky and whatnot, but I have a legitimate question.
Could you address the question regarding how the Democrats are at least the party that are at least making slow progress, as opposed to not voting against the party that will turn the country into a Christian theocracy if given the chance?
Like I understand that you don’t like either candidate - neither do we - but realistically, we know the winner will be either a Republican or a Democrat. Why not support the one that at least won’t regress the country 500 years?
I’ve covered a lot of it in other replies, so to keep it brief by analogy: It’s like a survivor from a foundered ship clinging to a bit of flotsam (assuming there’s no chance of timely rescue) rather than swimming for land in the distance. The flotsam keeps him safe from drowning for the moment, but thirst or hypothermia will do him in within days at the outside. His only chance to survive long-term is to abandon it and set to swimming.
The Democrats in this analogy are the flotsam, if it wasn’t obvious. Bill Clinton got into office in 1992, after 12 years of Republican Presidents, and quickly made it clear that he represented the status quo, clinging-to-flotsam choice, rather than making things better. I believed that the long-term health of democracy required making the hard choice to swim for it. I wasn’t smart enough to predict the exact shape of the future back then, but here we are, on the edge of slipping below the waves. That’s the opposite outcome of making things better.
The Democrats don’t even understand the threat of right-wing populism, so they can’t counter it. (It’s not even clear that they would, if they did.) The way to save our democracy, therefore, is to fight for something better.
What is the plan to fight for something better? Like… I’m really not trying to be snarky, I swear, but voting for any party that is not R or D on election Day is never going to result in someone other than someone from one of those two parties being president. That just won’t happen. So unless there is an alternative path for change, I don’t see the point of voting for someone other than a democrat to at least mitigate the damage
Well, should everybody who lives in Alabama vote Republican, because there’s zero chance of anybody but a Republican winning? Do those people have a plan besides throwing their votes away? Or is voting about choosing the candidate that would represent your views, regardless of the odds of winning?
That would be great advice if we weren’t standing at the literal precipice of fascism. Fascism is a storm (pardon the unintentional pun towards QAnon) threatening to overtake us. If ever there was a time to suck it up and choose the “flotsam” to survive to fight another day, it’s now.
The Republicans, aka the Fascists, have a large and cohesive voting bloc, driven by propaganda and fear, that will vote for them just because they’re not Democrats, regardless of the fact that they are known criminals, grifters, and will vote for things that hurt them. This is not the time to divide into ideological factions and hope we make it.
It seemed to me back in the 1990’s that Republicans want to drive the car straight at the precipice at full speed, and Bill Clinton was content to simply lay off the accelerator and coast toward it. I’m not such a canny political analyst that I could predict the exact shape of the future back then, but here we are, at the precipice.
There can be better. That’s the real kick in the teeth. Voting for President doesn’t have to be the biggest thing any of us do. I want to get Biden reelected because it gives us time. Time to carry that momentum into more significant, broader changes. Time to do better and do more and stop sitting on our collective hands for all the remaining days on the calendar.
The things that are happening right now are happening under biden though… why do you think it would get better when he has initiated the worsening?
I guess I should clarify that I’m not naive enough to think that this all started under Biden because history has inertia. Biden, having been VP before president and a Senator for many years before that certainly had an outsized contribution to the things that are happening now. The things that are in motion now are not going to be solved by Biden or Trump or really any of the entrenched political class in the west and pretending they are is just fooling yourself. They are too ideologically poisoned and are busy self destructing.
The choice ultimately comes down to Trump or Biden, it’s not a great set of choices, but RFK Jr isn’t any better than those two and he’s not going to get enough votes to win anyway. Jill Stein, Marianne Williamson, Cornel West, don’t have the numbers either. There aren’t viable candidates that can challenge the front runners at this point when we talk about the POTUS, so you vote for the least harm and try again next time while focusing on pushing Congress, state and local representatives further left.
You sure as shit don’t have the numbers for a revolution either.
I can’t tell you how much of a relief it is to see an instance with a name as normal as midwest.social that still has good opinions, every time I see that suspicious fish face I’m pleasantly surprised by the humanity it expresses.
Obama got almost nothing done in his first term mainly do to trying to work across the isle. Biden was not shackled with this given how clearly republicans have made it that they are not going to work in good faith at all.
Biden isn’t working across the aisle? Several of Biden’s initiatives have been bipartisan. If anything, I think his greatest achievement has been getting bipartisan support during the most politically divided times since the civil war.
Add comment