this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2024
1541 points (95.3% liked)
Political Memes
5429 readers
1798 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Cool, now which is easier to build movements under, a fascist regime, or a moderate milquetoast capitalist regime?
Will throwing your vote away in protest of 'the duopoly' do anything, in this election, to change that or meaningfully contribute to a grassroots movement for the working class?
We have a thousand tools at our disposal. Voting is one - an important one. Tools should not be misused, but each one used in its own unique way to maximize its effect on your goals.
Let's be real here, the kind of person ranting on the internet about "ThE DuOpOlY" is not actually interested in building anything at all. They just like to stomp their feet, and shout "no fair!" over and over again like the petculant children they are, while the grownups are busy trying to prevent the country from descending into fascism.
Not the same person, but I carry similar sentiments. I helped form the second largest tech union in North America. What are you doing to support the working working class and build alternatives to capital? Tossing support at the nearest person in fear doesn't prevent fascism.
To use your example, here are the options:
Or
Which would you choose, second largest tech union guy?
False dichotomy. The stakes of the second version are the same for the first regardless of union size. There never has been and never will be a guaranteed union campaign until we overthrow capitalism.
Voting against the fascist candidate abso-fucking-lutely prevents fascism. This is an extremely simple concept that one would imagine the founder of the second-largest tech union in North America should be able to wrap their mind around.
I think my point has been missed. The fact that there's an openly fascist candidate running for president means that fascism is already here and in power.
They're not in power. But you're helping them get back in power. If people like you decided to get behind the non-fascist, it would be a non-issue, hence the post.
I can name some of them. You probably recognize them.
Nowhere did I say I wasn't voting. Voting is the least effective method of change that exists, but it's still a method. I will still be participating because it can lead to minor changes. If you think that defeating fascism can be done by voting once every 4 years however, you will be played.
I'm glad that you participate. Voting is the easiest and most direct method of change.
And yeah, it can be defeated by voting (every 2 years, for primaries too) if you have enough people to join. It's unfortunate that there are enough cynics who don't participate who could make real change if they did.
Every time Trump's judges make another radical ruling, I'm reminded that people stayed home. And now pregnant women aren't safe in red states, just as one example.
It never has been. Even in France with the left coalition, Macron has been courting the fascist right.
We are currently in a fascist regime; both parties are heavily lobbied by corporations that dictate policy.
People continue to struggle more and more under both parties, while they play political theater to continue to divide us.
Voting outside the two-party system will help establish that people do have standards when voting.
Yes, and a good percentage of the populace decides to stay in and not reward the duopoly with their vote.
The problem with this take is that you cannot conversely punish the duopoly by withholding your vote, regardless of whether or not you think they "earned" it. Even if you don't vote, one of them still gets in. The problem is, the people who are going to vote for the significantly worse of the two options are very motivated to vote, and they will do so.
Yeah. Somehow they think that if they don’t vote- no one gets elected. They don’t understand that a decision will be made without their input.
Or they do, and that’s the entire point.
Lord.
The Lord won't help us on this one; we need to be the ones to fight for what we demand.
The civil rights movements happened because people were fed up with the status quo.
The presidential election year before the Voting Rights Act of 1965 saw relatively high voter turnout. 61.4%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_United_States_presidential_elections
People voted in the Democratic Party candidate by a wide margin. 61.1%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_United_States_presidential_election
If we protest, but then don't vote, nothing will change. So voting in records numbers is the answer. Specifically, in our present case, voting for the party that wants to improve things incrementally over fascists.
I see the duopoly as the fascists, though...
Believing in lies doesn't make them true. The Republicans are fascists who believe immigrants are poisoning the blood of our country and that the genes of people of color predispose them to be criminals. Just because Republicans believe it doesn't make it true.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/07/trump-immigrants-crime-00182702
And the Democrats are perpetrating a genocide, sending cops and SWAT after students and people protesting that genocide, not letting them talk at the DNC, and trying to suppress their freedom of speech and assembly. That's also very fascist.
The Democrats are neoliberals. As neoliberals, they are both center-right and institutionalists, so they do stuff like police crack downs on protesters. This is not fascism on its own. Denying a speaking slot to the Uncommitted Movement was a strategic failure, but it is not fascism.
Biden is a Zionist, so on top of sticking to 70 years of US foreign policy of allying with Israel he has been actively complicit in genocide. Zionism is a form of fascism that attempts to manipulate Jews and Christians alike to build a Jewish ethnostate. Not everyone who is a self-described Zionist is inherently bought into the actual ideology. There are plenty of people who want a place for Jewish people to be safe. Zionism is not that, but there have been plenty of people who have been fooled into thinking it is. Biden is not a fascist, but he has given the fascists in Israel nearly everything they wanted. Thankfully Biden has so far refused Israel's request to attack Iran.
Also, thankfully Kamala is running for president, not Biden. Kamala is not a lifelong Zionist. Kamala has said she is willing to defend Israel, but being willing to defend a long standing ally is not the same as letting them do whatever they want. Under Kamala, the Democrats are going to do everything in their power to get a ceasefire deal to end the war and the genocide.
Trump is on record as saying Israel needs to finish what they started. Trump is going to let Israel complete its genocide of the Palestinians. He's going to allow the war to continue indefinitely so Benjamin Netanyahu can stay out of prison, deny Palestinian statehood, and form a greater Israel by conquering as much of the Middle East as possible.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/04/politics/trump-israel-comments/index.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-israel-gaza-finish-problem-rcna141905
The Republican Party has been taken over by the fascist MAGA movement, not the Democratic Party. Trump is the fascist, not Kamala. And Trump being elected would be worse for the Palestinians and the Middle East as a whole. So we should strategically vote for Kamala.
Kamala has already said they won't institute an arms embargo, which is basically the one material thing she can do to restrict Israel, and has put all the blame on Iran. Without that on the table and the other rhetoric, she's saying the same thing as Trump but with nicer words, she will allow them to finish the job. Sure she's covering it by saying she'll try for a ceasefire, but so has Biden for months now and that's gone well. The war with Iran she's hinting at is basically Biden's policy and it plays right into Israel's hand. It let's them continue the he genocide, avoid a ceasefire, take more land, keep elections suspended and Bibi in power, and let's us continue to destabilize the Middle East as we have always done. Trump's rhetoric is bloodthirsty, Kamala's is ostensibly more apologetic (except for the most lethal army in the world bit), but in the end, it's the same thing.
I was hopeful Kamala was different than Biden, too, but so far, she has not shown any difference whatsoever. To believe otherwise is naive, it's trusting in the same lie that's been repeated for months and led to nothing. She'd have to say something concrete to change my mind again, like she's replacing Blinken with someone more progressive or she will agree to stop vetoing resolutions against Israel, or something. Just saying you're going to work at a ceasefire without saying how is just running on vibes.
Kamala wants a ceasefire and Trump does not. These positions are not the same. With Kamala we have a chance to make things better. With Trump they will only get worse. The fact Israel is sabotaging efforts to achieve a ceasefire is not indicative that Kamala does not mean what she says. Wanting things to get better and wanting them to get worse are not the same.
Kamala chose Tim Walz over Josh Shapiro, a Zionist. Kamala met with leaders of the Uncommitted Movement. So Kamala has shown she is going to be different than Biden.
Kamala is getting rid of Blinken. They phrased it as Blinken wouldn't stay even if she asked, but she's not asking. It's safe to assume that there will be a change in US foreign policy for the better where the US will be less lenient to Israel. Again, considering how the US position on Israel has not changed in 70 years this is a substantial improvement. Democrats got rid of Biden and put Kamala in his place on the ticket. It is possible to move the needle further, but we need our democracy in order to do that. Under a christo-fascist dictatorship US foreign policy can only get worse.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/2024/09/05/blinken-kamala-harris/
She says she wants a ceasefire but none of her actions have indicated as such in interviews or the DNC. You can't just ask for one from Netanyahu, you have to use leverage. If she refuses to do so before negotiations even start, then it doesn't matter what she says, she won't get that ceasefire. Biden also has said he wants one, for example. Don't be Charlie Brown with the football.
However, I will have to admit I didn't know Blinken isn't staying on, which does make me breathe a sigh of relief. I'm also glad for Walz, or was in the beginning, but he hasn't been much better lately. Historically, he's been better than Shapiro, who volunteered to run Hasbara for the IDF, but lately his rhetoric has been the same. Hopefully she impresses, but I wouldn't bet on it.
And the US has smacked Israel down before. It's weird that Biden is to the right of Kissinger and Reagan on Israel.
They only replaced Biden because they were afraid of losing the election. The election is where all the leverage is. After that, there's nothing, no power that can be exercised that those in charge care about (except for money, but the ones with that are right leaning and Zionists).
Thanks for the article on Blinken, though. That's some much needed good news in these sad times. It'd be better if he was tried at the Hague but at least he won't in power still if she wins.
An election is an exercise in basic civic duty that should be a mechanical choice. It is not leverage. Leverage is building grassroots movements between elections. If we lose our democracy there will be no Democratic Party to leverage against. Republicans want a christo-fascist dictatorship and want to jail their political opponents.
If we keep our democracy it will be possible to vote for candidates to the left of Kamala. Without it we will have fascists running the country who will not give up power freely.
Here's a website for searching what Republicans want to do on your favorite issues:
https://www.25and.me/?topics=
Maybe the real fascists were the friends we made along the way
Please provide examples to justify your claim. I’d like to know more. I’ll give you your first one since it’s everywhere in the headlines nowadays - weapons to Israel.
There is the right to cast a vote, also a right to protest.
Please don't confuse the two and protest by not voting.
Voting and protesting: to create a better society, people need to be willing to demand more than what the status quo can provide.
Heads up. “Left of Shill Stein” is what most know to be called democrats.
How is giving your vote to whoever becomes the largest by not voting winning anything? You can do all the other things you mentioned and still make a conscious choice to do the least harm by not voting a demagogue in. It's just one of the many steps you can take as a person wishing to influence the world around you.
Just like eating no meat or less meat. Will it fix everything wrong with farming? No. Does that mean you should just start buying more meat and not eat it, letting it rot in your fridge instead? Also no! No one cares if you did that and it accomplishes nothing except make the problem much worse, which is exactly what not voting gets you.
Again, the duopoly is the staus quo, it will not help fix the systematic problems our society faces.
Then get involved in a 3rd party that works against the republican fascists and coordinates with Democrats for ballot access like WFP.
Whining about "the duopoly" and not voting will just move things further right.
Reading comments like this is unbelievably frustrating, because you’re so close to being right, but you refuse to take that next tiny step, which makes you dangerously wrong.
Yes, both parties are lobbied out the ass, it’s bad and it’s wrong, but which party at least tries to mitigate the harm? Yes, there’s unproductive political theater that divides, but which party at least tries to talk about real issues that matter to everyday voters?
Your approach is akin to burning down the house instead of doing the hard work of fixing the roof. You will never get the outcome you imagine by voting for a third party, unless you do the hard work of improving our overall system, from inside the system. You play the game with the team you have, not the team you want.
That's not fascism.
100% people need to engage more. And in national elections quit voting for 3rd parties. Showing solidarity with and not dividing themselves from the rest of the left. Till our voting system is reformed and 3rd party presidential candidates are no longer a mathematical impossibility. With the only message being sent, that you're safe to ignore.
That's literally the exact opposite of what it does.
Then they get the lack of change they've committed to.
Why is it that any time these pseudo-intellectual “leftists” pop up to spew their bullshit, they’re knocked back by like… 5-10 people that absolutely school them and in the end, all they can respond is-
“Nuh-uhh!”
And then rinse and repeat the following day. What do they think they’re accomplishing? I mean, it’s especially very telling that they’re downvoted into the dark ages on a platform that supposedly leans heavily in their direction.
This says a lot in my opinion. In that there may be hope for lemmy once the election is over and these vapid people eventually collapse in on themselves like a dying star.
THEY ALWAYS COME BACK. But it will be quieter for a year or two. If they're sincere, and some are. They're suffering form the same mental weakness/illness that the MAGATS are. They want to believe they are righteous, correct, and in possession of special knowledge or insight. That they believe those that disagree with them can't comprehend.
If they're not sincere. Well they're still like the MAGATS. Malicious, spiteful, and crab mentally. Either hypocritically, simply anti-west like most ML you see. Or benefiting disproportionately on the backs of labor. And know the best way to keep labor down. Is to divide it against itself. Kind of like ML governments do as well.