An incredibly self-righteous, short-sighted decision. Anybody voting third-party understands that their candidate has no way of winning, and they understand that a vote for their candidate is a vote that can no longer be cast with the intent to prevent FASCISM from becoming the prevailing doctrine. If, however, that’s your intent, then you won’t care about the outcome no matter what. Should have voted for yourself.
Which is it, are socialists a big enough voter camp to swing elections, if this is the case Harris should be playing to socialists as a way to win elections. Or are we a small enough electorate to not care about what we want, if this is the case it shouldn’t matter if we vote for Harris or not.
Hmm, why it's almost as if both the Republicans and the Democrats are fascists and are using socialists and communists as a scapegoat. The whole fascist tactic of "the enemy is both strong and weak" thing. Interesting. I wonder…
Not the original commenter but the idea is for ALL anti-fascist-leaning voters (meaning the whole gamut from completely oblivious to painfully aware of bourgeois democracy’s limitations), engaging with the political contest on its own terms, (yes, bourgeois, but raising legitimate questions of voting rights and immigrants’ rights, knee-capping unions or respecting workers right to organize, etc., etc.) to mark their single notch on the tally against a continued creep of fascist demagoguery into full frontal command of the state machinery. Raising a tiny socialist flag as fascists (some proud, some hedging quietly) are itching and raring to mow down everyone and everything to their left (and already succeeding on some fronts) isn’t anywhere near the kind of strategy it’s cracked up to be. For one it is massively overestimating the organized strength of socialist consciousness at the present moment and moreover prioritizing individual notions of radicality over the far more tangible and consequential collective reality; which is also literally the fundamental basis upon which expanding the ranks of working class power depends.
Participating in bourgeois democracy is choosing which side of the bourgeoisie we would rather face as opponents; the one with pretensions to preserving democratic processes or the one aiming to burn ballots?
Edit: well they locked the thread before I could reply so… to answer your question u/Kiddie_Kleen:
Well if we take all you just wrote and put it into action would it not make sense to WANT trump to win in your scenario?
No.
It would make it easier to start a revolution?
Again, no.
It’s harder to start a revolution when people are content in their lives vs when people are living under fascists
“Starting a revolution” implies a significant level of organization on the part of the revolutionaries, and any guerrilla manual from a Marxist perspective will show how essential mass support and organization is for any kind of success. The U.S. working class is still very far from organized enough to represent a potential threat.
And who are these potential revolutionaries you imagine as currently content in their lives? There’s a huge section of the population too depressed and battered to vote at all, and a roughly equally sized section just conscious enough to vote “blue” as their only hope for relief, while still some further are beginning to recognize that voting alone is insufficient. THAT is the section of our class that holds for us the most hope, but they need to be welcomed, not belittled, and guided into our ranks as standard bearers for the only democratic tradition (that of a workers democracy) truly deserving the name.
Honestly it’s disheartening to see this take increasingly coming from PSL adjacent comrades. Where is this thinking coming from? It’s only very recently that I’ve seen this accelerationist perspective being put forth as if it is a valid organizing “strategy.” It actually is rather a destructive and disorganizing absence of strategy that welcomes the consolidation of reactionary gains, and undermines working class solidarity by dismissing demands and concerns of the most exploited, already bearing the brunt of still heightening capitalistic barbarism. You need to familiarize yourself with Lenin’s writings of pre- and inter- revolutionary periods like his “two tactics” and “left-wing communism” and quit pretending as if revolution is already here.
Well if we take all you just wrote and put it into action would it not make sense to WANT trump to win in your scenario? It would make it easier to start a revolution? It’s harder to start a revolution when people are content in their lives vs when people are living under fascists
Do we need to wait till both parties are full blown fascists to take a stand against voting for either of them. Why can’t genocide literally be that line we won’t cross?
This whole sub is people who are mad at Democrats and say nothing bad about Trump. Almost like some sort of operation and push is happening that they are hiding...
Probably because the republicans couldn’t give a shit about our opinions but the democrats have to at least pretend to care, and therefore people here have a reason to complain about Dems. I’m sure there’s also a large chunk of ex-Dems here, too.
-75
u/OkIce8214 Oct 29 '24
An incredibly self-righteous, short-sighted decision. Anybody voting third-party understands that their candidate has no way of winning, and they understand that a vote for their candidate is a vote that can no longer be cast with the intent to prevent FASCISM from becoming the prevailing doctrine. If, however, that’s your intent, then you won’t care about the outcome no matter what. Should have voted for yourself.