As an Air Force veteran this all is all hitting home so hard. I joined the Air Force right out of high school because my dad was in the Air Force and my grandfather was in the Army Air Corp, so of course I bought everything they were selling. We always made jokes about turning the Middle East into glass, or said little slogans like, “When it absolutely has to be destroyed overnight, call the Air Force.” I wish I could chalk that up to being young and dumb, but the leadership perpetuated these things and after 9/11 it really dehumanized what we were doing. I felt proud knowing that bombs I loaded on a plane were not there when it came back. I never once questioned why they attacked us in the first place. And I certainly didn’t learn about global politics with my high school education from Texas.
After I got out, and got educated, and started seeing the world through a larger lens, it shifted my point of view. I’ve gone from hardcore republican who voted for George W Bush, to voting for Bernie Sanders. I feel ashamed of how I used to think and act. I am very anti-war on all fronts. No one should ever have to lay down their life for some shithead politician.
With that said, I made the horrible decision to go to the Air Force subreddit to see what they were saying about these recent events. And it hurt me to see them all spouting the same shit I would have said 20 years ago. Crap about how the middle east has been fighting each other for 1,000 years, so we should just let them all kill themselves. And they strongly pushed the Aaron Bushnell was just some crazy radical anarchist. Or people saying his leadership failed him, or how did he have a security clearance, etc. There was not one single mention of how what was going on over there is beyond fucked up.
So, seeing other veterans stand up for this makes me feel a little better and gives me hope. I just hope that is makes it’s way down the ranks and into the young service members and recruits.
Hey friend, I would like to offer you a reframing of this situation. Despite being exposed to some of the strongest cultural indoctrination into warmongering and the military, you made it out and embraced empathy and learning. That's huge. I'm proud of you, that's a positive change most people never make. You should be proud of it.
I just hope that is makes it’s way down the ranks
You have a powerful and important story. Sharing it like you did just now helps more than hopes can. Keep sharing it, you never know who might be reading it and encouraged to question the lessons they were taught.
Thanks. It definitely helps to hear someone reframe it like that. It was actually cathartic just typing that all out. The hope that it could encourage others is even better.
I’m 100% with you. The deprogramming took years. It feels like I wasted so much of my life, and I’m still trying to figure out where I fit in. What’s almost worse than knowing so many vets are still so brainwashed is watching people who didn’t go through the same programming shill even harder for regressive destruction. I work on a construction site and have to listen to these overconfident fascist blowhards rant all day.
I feel you. Luckily I don’t have to deal with it at work because I work remotely and refuse to discuss politics with my colleagues (although I’m sure most of them know which way I lean). But I do have family to deal with. I’d say 90% of my extended family are either Trump supporters or just hate Democrats so much, that they will vote for Trump. Some have gone so far as to call me unpatriotic for things like supporting BLM, not liking Trump, and calling the people who entered the capital on Jan 6th terrorists. The most ironic part is not a single one of them served in the military. I am the only living veteran in my family, and I’m seen as the crazy left-wing guy.
I appreciate this, you totally get it. I hope you can hold onto that remote job. Makes it so much easier to tune out the hate and nonsense. I remain quiet and comfort myself by knowing that if the chance ever arises, I will do everything I can to undermine them. Which won’t be hard considering most of them have the intellectual capacity of a troglodyte.
Wow the more I talk about this the more I want to leave the US forever. There’s so little left here that matches my values.
Someone who is stupid would stay brainwashed but clearly this individual woke up. If you’re taught something from the day you were born then it is ingrained into you and quite hard to change. Thankfully many of the youth have started seeing the bullshit sooner but there are still people being bred into this ideology that need a chance to see the world and form their own opinions lest they be stuck in their parents ways.
Thanks for sharing your story. I hope you continue to tell it. Your point about high school education is important.
At the time the Iraq war was kicking off, I happened to have a history teacher that made us spend every Friday discussing current events. She made it clear to us that the premise of WMDs in Iraq was a lie and that the war would turn out like Vietnam. All these years later these ideas are not controversial, but way back then she said it when many people were saying the opposite. Needless to say, it kept me out of the military and helped me understand what was going on. Critical thinking is so important and we need capable public educators who can encourage young people to think for themselves. It can have a major impact on the life paths people choose.
That’s awesome that you had a teacher who did that. That is one of the main reasons I’m planning on moving out of Texas. I want my kids to get educated by teachers who are not under constant threat from the state.
Not really. I mean, this person who everyone here is hailing as a hero has a long and documented history of making even worse jokes about his fellow soldiers dying.
If it’s good for the goose it’s good for the gander.
Its shorthand for those who suck off Russia and China. If you are a communist who understands that those two countries are the exact opposite of ideals we should shoot for, you are not a Tankie
It’s quite understated just how much worse capitalism is in Russia. They have outright oligarchs, who make US CEOs look like equitable angels.
You can use them as a litmus test for Western politicians who claim to be leftist. If they rail against domestic billionaires and corps but have no issue dining with Russian oligarchs, they’re just trying to trick you. Jill Stein is the foremost example that comes to mind.
I’m not sure how to feel about the level of support shown for Bushnell, when previous self-immolators have been thoroughly ignored.
Part of me is glad that his death is not in vain, and his friends and family can take some solace in that fact.
But part of me is terrified that 20 more people are going to try similar stunts and achieve… less-than-nothing.
There are already too many martyrs. We need agitators. You can’t agitate if you’re dead or otherwise removed.
Please: If you’re considering Aaron Bushnell an inspiration, be inspired by the fact that he did something unusual, not that he did something self-destructive. Go throw some soup on a Van Gogh instead.
And never stop, even if liberals are denouncing you. Stand up for what you believe. Never capitulate to them. Be strong. America is inherently violent. Maybe it’s time Americans experience the terror they’ve perpetuated overseas.
You’re literally calling for domestic terrorism on American soil. You aren’t a victim here, bro. No one is trying to take your tendies. Go outside, touch some grass, have a drink, and get yourself a hooker. Some post-nut clarity will do you good.
He’s calling for direct action against American imperialism. If that scares you, I suggest taking a good hard look at the world and what America has done to it. Believe me, nothing that could happen to America would be worse than it’s done to others.
Oh it is, is it? Seems to me that these days the term “terrorism” is only applied to the actions of people who doesn’t act in lock-step with white supremacists and their liberal protectors… pretty soon, the term “terrorist” might be a badge of honor for everybody that doesn’t have a swastika tattoo hidden underneath their shirt.
You’re attempting sarcasm, but it kinda falls flat when the liberals did indeed line up to give more funding to Israel right alongside the conservatives.
In the US, modern liberalism is definitely associated with the Democrats. Whether they are truly liberal or not can be debated, but they are almost always referred to as liberals over here.
I hate to be the one to break it to you… but the Vietnamese broke the US military. Swallow all the cope the propagandists have been spoon-feeding you about this since the 70s - it doesn’t change anything.
What do you mean by “broke”? I’m quite literally in a class on the Vietnam War this semester, writing a paper about how ineffective our policy of bombing an agrarian society that only needed to supply its forces 50 tons of supplies a day.
ineffective our policy of bombing an agrarian society
“Ineffective” at what? The indiscriminate carnage that the US visited on SE Asia from the air was possibly the most effective mass-slaughter campaign ever perpetrated by a colonialist power - it was even more effective than the colonialist slaughter Germany visited on eastern Europe and the Soviet Union during WW2.
So no… as far as the tenets of colonialist warfare is concerned, it was perfectly effective.
but clearly we weren’t comparable to the fucking Nazis
Actually, the US actions in SE Asia is very comparable to what Germany and it’s allies did in eastern Europe and Russia… not even the Nazis attempted to use chemical warfare to starve their victim population into submission - the US did.
What the Nazis did was nothing unique - it has been standard fare for colonialist powers long before WW2 happened, and it was stadard fare for the US both before and during the (so-called) “Cold War.” The only reason the Nazis became infamous for it was because they literally perpetrated it on the (so-called) “civilized” world’s doorstep on people that looked “white.”
You still didn’t answer what it meant to break the US military.
TLDR - “Our Army that now remains in Vietnam is in a state approaching collapse, with individual units avoiding or having refused combat, murdering their officers, drug-ridden, and dispirited where not near-mutinous.”
What the Nazis did was nothing unique - it has been standard fare for colonialist powers long before WW2 happened, and it was stadard fare for the US both before and during the (so-called) “Cold War.”
Homie, I think you should learn some more about the eastern front. The United States wasn’t on an ethnic cleansing campaign in Indochina. The Nazi’s were on an ethnic cleansing campaign.
TLDR - “Our Army that now remains in Vietnam is in a state approaching collapse, with individual units avoiding or having refused combat, murdering their officers, drug-ridden, and dispirited where not near-mutinous.”
Which had had which major defeats associated with it?
You mean like this? Oops, sorry… wrong war. It’s not my fault - when you get into the grisly details they all start looking the same.
The United States wasn’t on an ethnic cleansing campaign
Ooooh… you completely got me there. The millions dead in the Congo thanks to Belgium exploitation? Perfectly okay because it wasn’t a clear-cut case of “ethnic cleansing.” The millions starved to death in Bengal due to British colonialist policies during WW2? Perfectly fine because it wasn’t a clear-cut case of “ethnic cleansing.”
If only Hitler had you around to handle his PR for him, eh?
Which had had which major defeats associated with it?
I’m just going to go ahead and assume it’s also a complete mystery to you why the vaunted US military failed so abysmally in Afghanistan, eh?
It’s only a mystery to you and your ilk - why do you think that is?
Oh… you didn’t get this the first time around. Here… let me help you along and repost it for you because you sure look like this is going to take you a lot of effort to get.
Ooooh… you completely got me there. The millions dead in the Congo thanks to Belgium exploitation? Perfectly okay because it wasn’t a clear-cut case of “ethnic cleansing.” The millions starved to death in Bengal due to British colonialist policies during WW2? Perfectly fine because it wasn’t a clear-cut case of “ethnic cleansing.”
Also, why bring up My Lai? There was nothing unique about My Lai - except for the fact that it ended up being reported in the US media because one chopper crew decided to grow a backbone and put a stop to it (for once). For the US military in Vietnam, My Lai was Tuesday.
This discussion is on vietnam
So do tell… how does a military end up being completely broken by a (supposedly) “inferior” enemy without actually having lost any decisive battles?
I’d hate to think what would have actually happened if the US had lost a clear-cut battle in Vietnam - the entire US may just have imploded in on itself due to shock.
I never once said anything about the Vietcong being inferior.
This is not about what you said or didn’t say. The US empire is a fundamentally white supremacist empire - no different than the fundamentally white supremacist empires that gave birth to it - and therefore views anyone it wishes to subjugate, exploit and/or exterminate as “inferior.”
I worry about this too. I don’t like self immolation as a form of protest. Normally I’d say it accomplishes nothing, but in this case it did draw a lot of attention – that by no means though should be an endorsement for others to do this. We can find better, equally effective ways to organize. There’s already enough senseless death going on.
I appreciate his gesture, but I wish he hadn’t done it. I wish he was alive.
You are correct… Bushnell isn’t even the first USian to self-immolate as a form of protest this decade - the others barely made the news.
While I can’t bring myself to criticise people like Bushnell (for obvious reasons), I also cannot endorse it. I don’t want to die for a cause - I want to make the fascists die for theirs.
It’s a paraphrase from a Patton quote. I don’t have the exact quote readily available, but the gist is, “The objective of war isn’t to die for one’s country, but to make some other poor bastard die for his.”
Except for that last part. Don’t waste food. And don’t destroy unique stuff.(Yes, the van Gogh was protected by glass iirc, but most other paintings aren’t) Plenty of ways to get attention without doing irreversible damage to art.
In case you haven’t seen it there’s a great documentary from 2005 about the anti-war movement within the ranks of the United States Armed Forces during the Vietnam War.
Weeeelllll back in the day we called soldiers “baby killers” and then after 9/11 we had to jerk every military member off we saw and repeat “thank you for your service” with a handful of dick.
Does he believe in the state using force to kill and brutally suppress its citizens to enforce their rule and limit democratic freedoms?
Because you can be a leftist and not support that shit by holding positive views of the Soviet Union or China. We don’t call those people tankies, we call tankies tankies.
We didn’t enter the war with Germany until after Pearl Harbor. So, it was less Hitler than Tojo that ultimately provoked our entry into the war.
You can and should oppose fascism and authoritarianism
It should be noted that FDR opposed fascism in Europe by sending enormous amounts of military aid to a certain Russian Communist by the name of Joseph Stalin. Quite a few of his peers argued the opposite. It was Stalin who was the true menace and Hitler who should have been our natural ally.
So, who should we have opposed? The Fascist or the Authoritarian?
Ali was making a statement about his refusal to be sent to fight in Vietnam. That soldiers are individuals, and that they have more in common with each other than they do with their own leadership.
I mean, yeah fascism and its leadership must be opposed in all its forms, but the average German soldier in WW2 wasn’t any more brainwashed than the average American soldier is now.
The armies of the enemy are not our enemy. They are distant parts of ourselves, ruled over by wicked masters just as we are.
Me: Because you can be a leftist and not support that shit by holding positive views of the Soviet Union or China.
Them: To paraphrase Muhammad Ali: “I ain’t got no quarrel with them Viet Cong. No Viet Cong ever called me the N-word”.
You: It’s a warning, that in fighting fascism we must always remember that the enemy is not the people to avoid becoming the oppressor.
That seems like a very unrelated tangent you’ve gone on here?
Unless you’re trying to argue that the people who push for and actively want those oppressive regimes are not the enemy? Which is so utterly ridiculous that I don’t think that’s your point.
That seems like a very unrelated tangent you’ve gone on here?
Don’t worry about it, my ADHD-ass brain always has trouble explaining these intuitive leaps.
Unless you’re trying to argue that the people who push for and actively want those oppressive regimes are not the enemy? Which is so utterly ridiculous that I don’t think that’s your point.
Actually, that’s precisely it.
They might not be innocent, being complicit or even active participants in the oppression, but they are also victims of the regime as well. Those people are not the enemy, but the enemy’s base of support.
Fascism builds its base with false promises of prosperity and blames its own ills on outsiders. Fighting them directly risks validating the regime’s propaganda and making martyrs to their cause, but subverting that base erodes the regime’s support and builds your own at the same time. It’s easy because fascists love to broadcast their crimes and any prospefity that can be found never falls far from the top of the hierarchy.
Are you saying you have no issue with China because you aren’t a Uigher?
Leftism should be accompanied by the belief that no matter where someone is born or with what traits, they should be able to live a happy and comfy life. No government should be exempt from persecuting people. A Tankie says “well, hold on” if it’s a government they like.
Leftism should be accompanied by the belief that no matter where someone is born or with what traits, they should be able to live a happy and comfy life.
You’re not describing “Leftism”. You’re describing “Consumerism”. The leftist struggle for a free and equitable society does not guarantee happiness or comfort. It guarantees a worker’s right to the fruits of one’s labor.
And sending troops abroad to butcher civilians and burn down their homes does nothing to accomplish either.
A Tankie says “well, hold on”
Again, it is absolutely crazy to see to “tankie” conflated with “please stop bombing people”.
How the hell did you get “a Tankie says to stop bombing people” from “a Tankie excuses genocides if they like the country”?
My whole point is that there’s certain countries where they don’t say “please stop bombing people” and make excuses defending the country instead.
It’s very telling however that your thought of people being able to live happily and freely no matter where they’re born or with what traits is “consumerism”.
“a Tankie excuses genocides if they like the country”
Fascists constantly telling me that we need to bomb the village in order to save it, and if you don’t support napalming My Lai, you’re with the Terrorists.
My whole point is that there’s certain countries where they don’t say “please stop bombing people”
Name. That. Country.
It’s very telling however that your thought of people being able to live happily and freely no matter where they’re born or with what traits is “consumerism”.
Its Utopian to believe people simply stop having problems under a particular ideological system. Capitalists and Communists alike need to deal with droughts and pandemics and supply chain failures and climate change.
Neither system guarantees people happiness and freedom.
But recognizing ecological limits means you’re a “tankie”? While devouring seed corn because it makes you happy is… what? Real Leftism?
I get the feeling we are terribly misunderstanding each other and talking past the other. I think I see your point about there being problems in any system, but I think it behooves us to strive for the ideal, even if it’s unattainable.
In general, Russia tends to be the country that tankies make excuses for. Instead of condemning the actual country invading Ukraine and bombing civilians, they’ll say it’s Ukraine’s fault for wanting to join NATO, for instance.
If you disagree with that thinking, then good. You aren’t a Tankie. There were a number of “leftist” thinkers at the outset of the war who blamed the West and NATO for Russia invading, instead of Russia. And some still insist the bloodshed has to stop by Ukraine suing for peace, instead of Russia leaving.
Fascists constantly telling me that we need to bomb the village in order to save it, and if you don’t support napalming My Lai, you’re with the Terrorists.
In Ukraine war, Tankies suggest Russia is just defending itself and its “spheres of influence”. It’s not dissimilar from your example. If you don’t understand Russia’s “very reasonable” response of bombing Ukraine to prevent it from joining NATO, you’re called a Western imperialist, unironically.
The other main example is with China and the Uighurs. Detaining a cultural group in concentration camps and forcibly reeducating them and erasing their culture is typically seen as genocide, but with China you’ll hear Tankies make excuses that it’s to stop terrorism and that is all Western propaganda and there’s nothing suspicious going on at all.
Once again, if that isn’t you, you aren’t a Tankie. I’d argue tankies actually have a concerning natural alliance with fascists.
Moderates are eager to paint leftists as Tankies when that isn’t the case, I agree with you there. That doesn’t mean the term has no meaning nor utility however.
In general, Russia tends to be the country that tankies make excuses for.
I doubt one in ten leftists (much less westerners) could tell you about the 1956 Hungarian Revolution in any kind of detail. So I’m skeptical of the claim that you’ve got a bunch of rock-ribbed old school Stalin-Shouldn’t-Have-Stopped-At-Berlin Soviets running around.
Some of the fiercest leftist criticism I’ve seen has been aimed squarely at Gorbachev and Yeltsin, for selling the Soviet States down the river during Perestroika. I’ve gotten an earful of criticism over the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, I’ve seen all sorts of complaints about their poor environmental record, and plenty of leftists bemoaning the vestigial state of the modern Russian Communist Party in the face of United Russia.
If there’s a bunch of DSA folks or Brooklyn comedians or LA Nurses Union members or Corbynite / Trudeauite Labor Organizers insisting “Russia Good Aktuly!”, I’m not seeing it.
But I do see a lot of folks going to the old Parenti quote:
“During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”
I see leftists dismissing the cynical attacks on civil rights leaders, anti-colonial organizers, and opponents of western financialization/privatization as “useful idiots” of some evil foreign hand. And I see them labeled as “tankies” because they refuse to correlate BLM or climate activism or anti-war protests or anti-surveillance libertarians as “pawns Russia”.
If you disagree with that thinking, then good. You aren’t a Tankie.
The term is bullshit. If you look at the folks who advocate driving tanks across Europe, you’ll find them in Anthony Blinken’s State Department and Olaf Scholz’s Defense Ministry as quickly as Rupert Murdoch’s news department. The only question is which direction those tanks should be driving.
I don’t see any kind of shortage of pro-war advocates. I don’t see any shortage of military spending. I don’t see any shortage of tanks.
What I see a vast deficit in is anti-war advocates at any level of power. And anyone who voices an objection to Ukrainian forced conscription or the next $50B spent on new tank shells or another year trading artillery fire over a mile of mud in the Donbas… these people are called Tankies. The folks paying for the tanks and cheering the tanks and egging on another year of tanks firing on one another, these… aren’t.
In Ukraine war, Tankies suggest Russia is just defending itself
Are you referencing anyone in particular, or are you just describing Cable News Republicans as “Tankies”? I’m hard pressed to name anyone outside Elon Musk or Tucker Carlson who was “Pro-Russia”
All I see are a bunch of people with heads in their hands, who see the decade of civil war in Ukraine and the next three years of war with Russia as a phenomenal and catastrophic lose for the region. I see people watching the death figures roll in - 10,000 new dead Russians + 8,000 new dead Ukrainians + another 100,000 new refugees fleeing their respective borders - and wailing “STOP! Sue for peace! End this madness!”
And these people get called “Tankies”, too. They’re pro-Russia because they don’t see an inevitable Ukrainian victory. They’re pro-Russian because they don’t see thousands of dead infantrymen as some kind of Win For The West. They’re pro-Russian because they don’t want to chime in and cheer when some comedian says “Putin Is A Big Gay Who Is Definitely Going To Die Soon of Stupid Person Disease”.
Moderates are eager to paint leftists as Tankies when that isn’t the case, I agree with you there. That doesn’t mean the term has no meaning nor utility however.
You are going off on massive tangents I don’t have have the time to address. Let’s just step back a second. You’re getting too hung up on semantics.
Do we agree war is bad? Do we agree that there’s no excuse for invading and oppressing people? Do we believe that genocide is fucked up no matter who’s doing it?
If yes to all of the above, we’re in agreement. We dislike people who believe genocide and invasions are justified because they like the aggressive country.
That’s the simplest I can distill this down to, and I do think we’re aligned on it. We just disagree on the term Tankie.
I think we agree its bad. I’m not sure we agree on how to end it. Too often, I see “War is Bad But Necessary” used as a caveat to continue it indefinitely.
Do we agree that there’s no excuse for invading and oppressing people?
There’s definitely some kind of excuse, given how many folks on this site are fans of D-Day and the Pacific Theater.
I might argue that there’s no excuse in throwing human lives away for a nationalist ideal. Which is why the best response to Gaza is to get all those refugees the fuck out of there and on to a neighboring safe territory, while the worst response to Ukraine is to round up another 20,000 teenagers and charge them through Russian minefields.
Do we believe that genocide is fucked up no matter who’s doing it?
I’d like to think so. But at some point I gotta ask where this leads us? Is it to here?
And when we get into the harder questions, the more historical bits and pieces, and the gray areas of a conflict that go beyond “Is Word Bad?”, I imagine you’re going to end up calling anti-war folks “Tankies” because the plans they have to end these conflicts don’t benefit the folks you’ve decided are on the Good Team.
Give me a fucking break, no self respecting leftist would give Biden their vote. The vast majority here is liberals cosplaying as leftists to undermine actual left unity.
TL;DR Third party is not viable in the current US voting system no matter how hard you fantasize about it. And not voting for the non wannabe dictator so you can stroke off over how you “showed it to the system” is even dumber or you actually like dictators.
“Everyone to the south of a ML is a liberal”. Ironic.
America has no choice, they don’t live in a democracy. They get to pick Trump or Biden, you can whinge that they should all grab their guns and revolt, but they can’t even get enough people together to peacefully change things so that isn’t happening any time soon.
You can be an accelerationist and hope that Trump winning will create class consciousness, but you’re paying for that with the lives of christo-fash victims.
Stop supporting war hawks and capitalists. Do grass root activism, vote third party and do work to get the people around you to do the same. It’s not fucking rocket science.
Guess what, one of the only politicians who could have beat Trump back in 2016 usually runs as an independent. He took a chance with Dems and look where that got us.
You’re literally posting on an article about someone who does just that. Honoring someone who gave his life to do just that.
Get lost with your our way or the high way bullshit. You’re disrespectful to the memory of Aaron Bushnell.
What will not voting Biden in a few months time achieve?
A) increase the amount of votes for third parties B) make my vote reflect my politics and discontent with the current regime?
You’ve said no such thing, but you keep implying that you have an issue with it…
Is the next election the one when it’s gonna be ok to vote third party? No? What about the next one? No not yet? What about the previous one? Neither? See how that works…
Okay so you get a negligible increase in 3rd party votes and a sense of pride and satisfaction in reflecting your political views.
That’s got to feel great and all, but how does that solve any of the issues with the US governments actions?
I get where you’re coming from, with the time to vote stuff, because there will always be another even worse option. But how does the worse option winning this election help you achieve your long term goal of systematic change?
And what about the fact that the current bunch of worse option isn’t just some typical 80s neolib conservative keen on axing all social welfare and demonising the poor, but literal christo-fascists who would like to see the system overthrown for a regime that will offer even less chance for you ever achieving long term change.
My issue is with the lack of any clear long term plan or goal here for a solution. The only way I can see change happening is through grassroots organisation, and if you haven’t managed to build that up by now, it’s certainly not going to be achieved within 8 months time.
You’re right. As the saying goes, “Vote for who you love in the primaries and against who you can’t stand in the general election.” After all, the enemy of my enemy is-
Give me a fucking break, no self respecting leftist would give Biden their vote.
…the bitter irony.
Let’s face it, the facts are that every 4 years, we have 3-ish years to push for grassroots efforts and electing local officials for things like 3rd party candidates and ranked choice voting, a chance to make a statement by voting for who you love (or a vote against who you hate if you live in a state that let’s independents vote in either primary) that no politician is going to take notice of in the primaries, and then we have to vote against the guy we don’t want in office come the general election.
The Republicans won’t allow us to do otherwise, and for one simple reason: they toe the party line, regardless. They don’t care who is on the ballot. It could be Trump, Bush, Putin, or Stalin himself, risen from the dead to destroy capitalism once and for all. So long as they have that R next to their name, that’s who they’ll vote for. As an old boss of mine once said, and my grandfather before him, both with the same incredulous look as if they couldn’t understand why somebody would possibly ask them who they were voting for: “I’m a Republican. I vote for the nominee.”
Leftists get all riled up once every 4 years, like a swarm of cicadas screaming about 3rd party candidates when it comes time to vote for the President, and then go back to sleep. And the Dems love it. Because Republicans vote down the party line all year long, meaning that when those 4 years come up again, there’s no other choice against the continuing slide further and further right than voting for their corporate sponsored candidate of choice. We need to claw seats from both Dems and Republicans for any meaningful change (preferably from Republicans). Otherwise, weakening the Dems only furthers the goals of the Republicans.
You wanna make a difference? Vote local, vote often, and help other people get to the polls. There’s a reason that election days aren’t holidays, and any real change isn’t going to start with those lifetime appointees whose best interests are in opposing any meaningful change in the system. It’s going to start in your town and state elections.
Appreciate it. My dad was involved in town politics when I was a kid, so I got to see plenty of how policy is shaped by the crusty old Republicans who can show up at every town meeting to spew nonsense and incorrect information and vote on every decision in town because they’re retired and don’t have to worry about work. And then I spent many years training kids at a job and got to see firsthand how those policies drove those kids to get out of town as soon as they’re able. And I understood how they felt because I felt the exact same way.
Remembering how the old ladies used to call the people who wanted to get a new school built “the enemy” still gets my blood boiling.
The majority of users on Lemmy are leftists liberals, so I doubt that immensely.
ftfy. At least on lemmy.world. And no being a liberal doesn’t make you a leftist, nor even necessarily left of center, depending on what brand of liberalism you subscribe to.
I’ll take that as a no - so I’ll be happy to educate you.
Right-wing politics exist for one reason and one reason only - to protect the status quo. This means liberalism (which includes that which gets called “conservativism” in the US) is perfectly and fundamentally right-wing.
The only thing that liberals and their right-wing fellow travellers disagree on is the means by which the status quo should be protected - liberals believe that the status quo should be protected by making it “nicer” through “reform” in the hopes of eliciting less resistance while fascists (for instance) believe that the status quo should be protected through unrestricted state violence. But no matter their differences, upholding the status quo is something these right-wingers fundamentally agree on.
A leftist doesn’t believe that applying lipstick to a pig changes anything - as a liberal does - but instead believes that the status quo must be dismantled by whatever means necessary. This is what makes leftists leftist.
So no… this place is flooded by liberals - leftists are still a minority here.
Edit: let’s talk for a minute about some really important history here. Leninists have ridden anarchists to victory then turned around and murdered them, starting with Lenin himself. Makhnovists saved the Red Army from being destroyed by the white. The Soviet Revolution was originally an anarchist one until it was betrayed by the Bolsheviks, who murdered anarchists from the beginning.
Even Trotskyists need to be held accountable for this, since Trotsky himself was responsible for crushing dissent at Kronostat.
Aaron Bushnell was an anarchist. He was an anarchist service member. MLs honoring his sacrifice need to face the fact that their ideological ancestors did murder people like him for their own resistence.
MLs try to take over anarchist actions even today. PSL has tried to co-opt actions that my anarchist comrades have organized. They are overwhelmingly ineffective, which is why the feed so much on anarchist energy and appropriate anarchist actions all the time. Tankies use anarchists to get attention for themselves and dispose of us when we become inconvenient.
And if you can’t honestly acknowledge the dissonance between the history of appropriation and oppression of people who you openly acknowledge are on the same side as you, then you don’t really want a more free and equitable world, you just want your cult to wear the boots that are on everyone else’s neck.
So yeah, fuck tankies. This is a great action. Don’t let them appropriate it.
Observe the natural tendency of the tankie to label the left anarchist as a reactionary whenever confronted with facts. Notice the complete refusal to engage with those facts and instead distract from them by attempting to discredit the anarchist.
I don't know much about the guy but, as someone thats perfectly willing to call tankies tankies, he seems like the opposite of one. Just don't do tankie shit and you wont get called one.
Its genuinely crazy to see how quickly Americans have adopted the idea that “Tankie” is the best way to describe Anti-war advocates, while the Blue Lives Matter crowd are in favor of peaceful coexistence.
Add comment