There's nuance. Obviously, vote for the liberal over the fascist, it's not even close. However, the fascists are absolutely represented in government, while there's no leftist candidates to speak of. Leftists have to plug their nose and vote liberal, while fascists gleefully vote republican.
Voting is entirely for loss prevention, because ultimately it absolutely impacts minority groups and people who stand to lose a great deal by a republican victory. However, leftists will not be able to move America to the left by voting.
That's why grassroots movements and building up of parallel structures are so important for leftism, it cannot work within the confines of a 2 party Capitalist state, and must be built from the bottom up.
You said there’s nuance but then went on to explain that there isn’t nuance and the only reasonable vote is for Biden. And you’re not wrong. There are a lot of folks pretending to be on the left acting like there’s a whole lot of nuance here, and that voting for someone other than Biden, or not voting at all, is an acceptable option.
None of this precludes advocating for your positions or doing other praxis, but when it comes to voting the answer is clear
That is true, but not voting or casting a protest vote right now ensures fascism, under which there will be literally no choice at all.
At least under a democracy there are chances to improve things, like replacing FPTP with a better voting system that will actually allow the left a seat at the table. That’s already happening in some places and there’s a movement (supported by democrats and vehemently opposed by republicans) to enact alternative voting methods.
Unfortunately there’s been so much apathy for decades that the fascists have got their foot solidly in the door. There was nuance years ago, but we squandered it. There’s little point debating left vs liberal when fascism has taken hold. That must be stopped first.
There’s no such thing as moral neutrality in this environment, and as much as it sucks, not voting against fascism is the same as voting for fascism.
Hence my original point, leftists must vote for liberals, even if it isn't ever going to improve the system, and must work themselves to build up leftist structures without hoping for help from liberals. If they don't vote, then fascists take power, and leftists lose the chance to build leftist structures at all.
I do think you're too hopeful that a 2 party Capitalist state designed to change as little as possible would meaningfully improve from within, rather than under pressure from without, but it would be great if you were right about that.
I’m not that hopeful that the left can change the system from within, to be honest, I’m just certain it’s too late to think about that because under fascist rule, not only will things not improve, but many of us will face genocide.
The time for leftist change was 20 years ago, or with any luck, 8 or so years from now after the fascist threat has been quashed. Right now we have to think about unifying like it’s 1932.
Only thing I disagree with is the idea that leftist change was more possible 20 years ago, Capitalism's instability and inherent structural flaws only make themselves more apparent and severe as time goes on, and with that comes potential for change. The left is larger than ever before, and is constantly growing.
That’s already happening in some places and there’s a movement (supported by democrats and vehemently opposed by republicans) to enact alternative voting methods.
eta: I’m on mobile so searching and linking is hard, but you can find people running for office who support these efforts by googling the office (senator, mayor, or whatever) and ‘free vote initiative’ or some synonyms. There are some (mostly local) republicans, substantially more democrats, and a huge majority of 3rd party candidates for obvious reasons).
I strongly recommend bringing it up with your representatives. 3rd party and democrats have been teaming up for this, and republicans have been fighting it because FPTP greatly benefits them and they know it.
Reread the original comment. It's absolutely important to vote as loss prevention, but you're never going to get meaningful systemic change towards the left via voting.
Vote to protect, actually make grassroots movements like unionizing and organizing to move to the left.
Reread the original comment. It's absolutely important to vote as loss prevention, but you're never going to get meaningful systemic change towards the left via voting.
Vote to protect, actually make grassroots movements like unionizing and organizing to move to the left.
I suppose it might look that way if you aren't a minority or a woman or gay. If nothing meaningful has changed in the last 100 years, then we could go back to the policies of the 1900s-1920s without any difference. And I very much doubt anyone wants to do that, because there are very big differences.
"Am I so out of touch? No, it's the voters who are wrong."
No, it's more like "LOL you have to vote for me, or the fascist will win". Democrats love opponents like Trump, because he helps them fundraise like crazy.
Voting for someone other than Biden or not voting is an absolutely acceptable option, and I’m not pretending to be a leftist when I do so. I have Ranked Choice Voting in my state, but even if I didn’t, I would vote for who I most want in office because I have no faith in either democrats or republicans to fix the most important issues currently plaguing 99% of the people. Vilifying people for voting third party — when third parties are currently the only viable presidential and congressional solution apart from a violent revolution — is misguided.
Democrats are not your friends; you deserve better.
Leftist 3rd parties split votes between leftists and the more conservative liberals (who are the vast majority), increasing the chance of a Republican victory. I fully support right-wing people voting Libertarian though :)
With the politics of the U.S. population, and violent revolution would likely be fascist.
Just a random note: Most proper libertarians (not those weird tea party fucks) make Democrats look positively authoritarian on social issues. Economics, no, but social? Absolutely.
True. I considered myself a libertarian when I was in high school (mostly for cannabis legalization and guns, lol). Then, some of my first job experiences were pretty bad (persistent wage theft on multiple jobs, an owner coercing sex from minors, etc), and started becoming more of a leftist.
I get that. Libertarians have a bad habit of downplaying economic hardship by saying that markets will solve themselves. Maybe there's a world in which that might work, but it isn't this one.
I do think that some progressive influencers know that the DNC is much closer to the GOP on social issues. Attacking libertarians is, in my opinion, a calculated lie designed to distract from that fact.
This is very well written and well said. If we want change that doesn't come from working within the Democrats, we have to build our own robust party across all 50 states, drawing on strong local support. No one outside of the two parties is currently trying to do this, which speaks volumes about the Green and Libertarian Parties.
Leftists really have no choice other than to vote Democrat. We have to protect people who would be targeted by Republicans. We fundamentally go against left wing values if we don't. I cannot call myself liberal or leftist or wherever in-between if I sit out an election where innocent people will suffer if one of the candidates wins.
I like how you've phrased this -- voting for Biden isn't because you necessarily like his policies or viewpoints, but because you want to protect people from Trump and the Republicans. I'd love if we didn't have to worry about fascists, but we don't have that luxury. As long as they're a hair's breadth away from power, we pick the option that opposes them.
Exactly. There's one terminally online radlib here that I blocked because they were just shit-slinging for daring to suggest both voting Biden and unionizing, organizing, protesting, etc. As a leftist, we must work from without the Democratic party.
Speaking purely from a leftist perspective, I'm actually of the opinion that Anarchist principles of building up parallel structures actually may be more applicable to the American political climate, even if you're more of a Council Communist, Libertarian Socialist, Marxist-Leninist, etc. The US is seeing rising Unionization, and dramatic impacts from it, so I think Syndicalism actually has some revolutionary potential, unlike waiting for a Vanguard Party a la MLism.
It's funny, I thought that unions had passed their usefulness, and we needed a new structure to effectively push CEOs. And then the UAW and SAG proved me completely wrong, and I'm glad for it.
I think either way, you have the perfect viewpoint on this. Voting won't work to create change, but that doesn't mean you just ignore voting. You use it to protect what we have from fascists while initiating change from a new organization built from the ground up.
I'm extremely anticapitalist, and Unions are currently the best way for Workers to protect their own interests within current structures, and have the potential to replace current Capitalist ownership. A full replacement of Capitalist structures will be necessary eventually, but Unionization can be an arm to muscle that change through.
We have to protect people who would be targeted by Republicans.
How's that going? Republicans are enacting all manner of bigoted policy. What are the Democrats doing to reverse their hateful shit at the federal level?
I’d love if we didn’t have to worry about fascists, but we don’t have that luxury. As long as they’re a hair’s breadth away from power, we pick the option that opposes them.
We don't have that option. We have Democrats, who will always care more about decorum and procedural bullshit than they ever will about protecting anyone.
They don't have the numbers in Congress necessary to take federal action. It's a vicious circle -- people don't think they're doing enough, so they don't vote for them. As a result, they don't have the numbers necessary to actually affect change. And then people don't think they're doing enough, and so forth. The justice department is suing states at least, but I agree that's nowhere near enough.
If you have a way to get 60 Senate votes to protect minorities (or 50-51 who also are willing to overturn the filibuster) and the House majority, I'm all for it, and you have my support. In the absence of that, any action we take will be inadequate, no matter who is in office.
And Democrats may not be perfect, but a vote that doesn't go to fascists is a win in my book. I also think we should try to maintain norms and decorum for as long as possible -- if we can beat back fascism without compromising on our institutions, we emerge as a much stronger democracy than if we have to break the rules. If that's what it takes to stop fascists though, then so be it. I just worry that you end up in a French Revolution type situation where there's no stable governance because everyone's given up on the rules.
If I was a fascist, I'd vote Dem - fascism just gets more traction with liberals in the Waffle House, and Dems are utterly ineffective at actually doing anything to stop fascism anyway. It was Trump whipping the fascists into a froth while a lib was in the Waffle House that brought antifa into the streets - not Trump actually humiliating himself on a daily basis in the Offal Office.
Fascists just gets more from a Dem regime - the Dems are doing a fine job strengthening fascist institutions. If Pig City was being constructed under Trump, the resistance to it would be ten times stronger.
None of this means you are wrong, of course (you're not) - but if voting can stop fascists it simply means the political institutions aren't ready to hand power over to them just yet. They are working on it, though.
but there legitimately are fascists in the republican party.
Doesn't matter. The actual fascists doesn't matter. The thing to be concerned about isn't the fascists themselves - what matters is the liberals that will hand power to the fascists if their precious status quo is threatened enough.
The thing about fascists that nobody except leftists seem to understand is that fascists serve a very distinct purpose in the classical liberal nation-state - they don't exist in a vacuum as some kind of "aberration". Fascism cannot exist without threatened capitalists funding them. Fascism cannot exist without liberals handing power to them to maintain their precious "Law & Order."
There is no such thing as "grass-roots fascism" - it's all coming from above.
It makes sense, but I think the downvotes are from people feeling like this is victim blaming as opposed to recognizing what you're actually saying.
It's not Johnny Democrat going to the polls that's allowing fascists to take power, it's Joe Manchin protecting his own wealth by "allowing" a "friendly fascist" to take power, or pass a bill, if it means stopping a Bernie Sanders from taking office or stopping a popular bill that would cost him potential profit. Unless I'm the one who's misunderstanding lol
No, you're not. If voting could undo fascism it wouldn't exist. If the wants of the majority of people in the US actually counted the US would be a place we couldn't even imagine in this reality - and so would the rest of the world.
downvotes are from people
I got the exact same response in 2016 as well... even leftists who should have known better hysterically accused me of "accelerationsim" for stating that a Trump presidency would energize the left - which it did (mysteriously, without any "accelerationism" on my part at all).
I don't blame them... people are grasping at straws. It was the same in 2016.
yes, we could have preserved basic human rights for women by just voting for them directly when we had the chance, but it's much more entertaining for me if a bunch of people suffer needlessly to achieve the same goal
How fucking privileged can you be? This isn't a fucking game. Grow the fuck up.
My farts smell better when they are uncorrupted by any semblance of nuance or pragmatism.
Yes, we all understand that you've smugly absolved yourself from the burden of real statecraft by being smarter than everyone, but I assure you that plenty of vulnerable people still think your privileged shit stinks like hell.
millions of people will die if Trump wins a second term.
Probably. And if the US political establishment actually manages to dig out a competent fascist, many, many more than that will die or have their lives destroyed (which has never been an unusual thing in the US at all - or anywhere the US does "foreign policy").
Your problem isn't Trump. There's a lot more (and much viler) where he came from. Your problem is the political establishment that allows his existence - will they be allowing you to vote on that any time soon?
Lol! It's quite hysterical - the one minute I'm arguing with people who don't believe anything in the US could possibly be fascist, the next I'm arguing with people who believe fascism can be stopped through voting.
No - the fascists don't matter as far as your actual vote is concerned. You can't "establish" fascism through voting. How much power the fascists get depends completely on the political establishment regardless of how the voting goes. You've had four years of Biden and the fascists haven't grown any weaker, have they?
When you vote for a liberal you are basically voting for them because they pinky-swore that they won't hand more and more power to the fascists (never mind them actually doing something about the fascists because they won't) - but they don't need your permission to do so. You have to understand that they, being political elites, will inevitably be incentivized to do so.
There's a good reason we call US "formal" politics a glorified "good cop/bad cop" routine.
If Pig City was being constructed under Trump, the resistance to it would be ten times stronger.
I think I once would have believed this but I do not anymore, and I wouldn't be willing to bet the lives of all people who aren't white, heterosexual cis-men on a resistance suddenly appearing. If anything, it seems like people are more willing to normalize, or at least look away from, atrocities than I would have ever imagined in the past.
Feels like for months all we heard about was kids in cages and how terrible it was (under Trump). Now nobody says a gd thing (under Biden). Seems like it's only acceptable to fight against fascism when it's "the other team."
and I wouldn’t be willing to bet the lives of all people who aren’t white, heterosexual cis-men on a resistance suddenly appearing
You won't get the chance to bet on it - it is simply the direction in which the US political establishment is careening. By all means, vote your conscience - hell, I'll vote with you - but don't be surprised when that doesn't alter the course much... or even at all.
If anything, it seems like people are more willing to normalize, or at least look away from, atrocities than I would have ever imagined in the past.
Certainly - but then, again... a lot of us always have. That's how we ended up here in the first place, isn't it?
We're not going to get rid of the two party system without switching to a proportional representation system. I have my preference for America (5 seat districts with proportional approval voting) but any reasonable proportional system will do.
That's why you pull a reverse Sinema. Lie your ass off and pretend to be the most corporate corpodem that ever sold out. You'll only have to fight one major party instead of both of them to get elected, then you can move as far to the left as you want, so long as you avoid small aircraft.
Even there, though, even as a president, you can't meaningfully move much without the support of the party. The difference for fascists is that the Republican party legitimately has a ton of actual fascists, so fascist presidents are extremely dangerous. If a Socialist led the DNC, it would be spoiled and wouldn't have much of a chance to move left.
Neither was I. An activist Socialist can't do much except in local and state levels, at a national level it takes a mass worker party for electoralism to have any real bite.
That's why I call national elections loss prevention, because you can either vote to maintain the status quo, or let marginalized groups be attacked and vilified as fascists gain power.
That’s why I call national elections loss prevention, because you can either vote to maintain the status quo, or let marginalized groups be attacked and vilified as fascists gain power.
The status quo already has marginalized groups being attacked and vilified.
Yes, which is why you have to combine that with grassroots movements. Just voting third party or for Trump gets fascists elected, and voting is therefore just loss prevention. To move to the left and improve things, Unionization, protesting, and organizing from the bottom-up is necessary.