this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2024
1370 points (96.4% liked)
Microblog Memes
5582 readers
2792 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
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
A Socialist revolution is "hard mode" whether the Democrats or Republicans are in charge, I don't know where you're getting the idea that the establishment parties would be any friendlier or more hostile to a literal revolution.
I also don't know why you're saying I am suggesting voting for Trump either, not once have I encouraged it.
Only one of two people will win. You're asking this person if they considered voting against the less awful choice.
I'm sure we're both pissed off about how protesters are treated right now. Only one of two parties is saying we need National Guard, deport the protesters, that presidents can execute whomever as an Official Act, that the military should be used against the opposition over speech.
Yeah, so go with your "nach Trump kommen Wir" plan, it will be equally hard to achieve socialism either way, NBD. Not sure why it isn't, "equally hard either way so let's pick the ones at least pretending women and LGBT people should have human rights," but you do you.
I am asking people to listen to directly and indirectly impacted people, rather than thinking they are more "enlightened" than them for voting for the genocidal establishment. Additionally, both parties have been cracking down on pro-Palestinian protestors, Walz even sent in the National Guard after BLM protestors, that's not a real point.
No, you are deliberately picking which impacted people you want to hear the voices of. Not these ones, huh?
Or was Walz approving a request to send the NG in against arsonists taking advantage of a BLM protest?
Thats how this is supposed to work. A collective of different perspectives all place votes for their and their families/communities best interest.
Democrats are really struggling to accept that half the country isnt better off under their administrations.
Are Dems improving things, or improving them fast enough? No. But I think the reality of today is that the only ones not better off under a Dem administration are wealthy people and bigots who want society to be a white supremacist hierarchy. I'm not saying people are well off, I am saying the alternative is worse, and by a lot.
If it were not possible to win an election as a MAGA the political parties would have to move further left. Instead we have Dems looking back on elections and deciding to move further right in attempt to pick up voters who actually cast a ballot.
This will never happen, because the source of MAGA is Capitalist decay, as I explained in another comment already.
You did write that. But you cannot tell the difference between New York arresting protestors who deliberately enter a fenced off area as civil disobedience and the federal government doing black vans and urging violence. So I don't know if I trust your perspective or opinions on much of anything.
I can tell the difference, and I can tell the similarities as well.
99% of the population is worse off under their competition, so there's still not really much of a choice.
The Uncommitted movement didn't say to vote for Harris. And yes, Walz sending in the National Guard against BLM protestors is a bad thing.
You can read the article if you like. Or continue to participate in a distorted reality.
I disagree that arsonists were actually with the protesters. You have a really delusional perspective that allows you to pretend sending in the guard at all is the same as black vans. Or this. Or this.
Alright, link me to some of the worst of the Dem federal response to protests about Gaza. I'm ready to be wrong.
Yes, the Dems collaborated with the Republicans to crack down on BLM protestors. It wasn't simply Walz acting as a rogue agent, but a collaborative effort.
Very recently, 200 protestors were arrested in New York.
Arrests are the same as black vans and the president urging for brutalization of protestors, I see.
Of course they aren't 100% the same, why lose face when you can let your opponent do it for you? There's good reason the Democrats let Republicans do whatever they want unpunished, they both serve their corporate donors above all else.
I see. Both sides bad, and colluding. Ratchet effect. But instead of pushing the gear so we rest against a tooth, allow the ratchet to do another click. Ignore Uncommitted, since we don't like what they're saying any longer. Listen to individuals when we like what they're saying. What we like is to have a ratchet click. Then socialist revolution with Repubs at the helm.
Even if we push the gear, it clicks again. The Democrats are moving to the right, against their voterbase. You have no solution, fascism is coming even with Dems at the helm.
Therefore allow it to come faster with Repubs, I see.
No, the Repubs are also evil.
What is your solution? How are you proposing fascism be stopped?
You're right about organizing outside of elections. You're wrong about "elections alone cannot fix it therefore throw your ballot in the garbage." Whatever the solution is, I would rather attempt it under a slower transition into fascism.
Fascism comes from continuously deteriorating material conditions, not from whichever party is in power. Harris is already campaigning on improving conditions for "small business owners," continuing Capitalism in decay continues fascism's ascent. My point is that voting will not slow down or speed up fascism, that's something that comes with the economic conditions of society and the class relations within.
There's no difference between Harris's "small business owners" and Donald's "dictator day one" in terms of fascism, I see.
What do you think fascism is? A mold? The Democrats are not anti-fascist, they are the polite face of a duopoly.
Sorry, I'll try to go with your definition of fascism. So fascism is when protestors are arrested, either because they deliberately got themselves arrested or if they are snatched up in black vans.
We went over this. Both sides bad. Ratchet effect. Therefore instead of trying to rest against a tooth, let it click backwards another step.
You can't "rest against a tooth," the positions of the parties aren't unflinching, unchanging policies but reflections of economic conditions. The Democrats haven't abandoned Medicare for All because the Republicans vibed themselves to the right and they followed, but because economic conditions are deteriorating as disparity rises.
You're taking the ratchet effect metaphor far too literally. As the Material Conditions change, so too do the policies of the ruling parties, they are not guided by popular sentiment.
Whether we are under Dems or Repubs, economic conditions are the exact same for everyone, I see. Are student loans the right direction? No, of course, Dems deliberately caused Repubs to obstruct that. Dems are Repubs. Therefore throw a ballot in the trash.
Are you capable of answering my comment in good-faith? I do not give a hoot who you vote for, voting for Harris will not stop fascism, and neither will voting for Stein or Crúz, nor will voting for Trump, obviously. Fascism is Capitalism in decay. Disparity is rapidly rising regardless of who is in power.
It's the fact that economic conditions move in the same direction regardless of which party is in power that a vote for Harris does not slow fascism down. Fascism is not synonymous with Republican. Fascism isn't a policy that can be enacted. Fascism is a defense mechanism for decaying Capitalism, and neither party being in power will change the overwhelming force of that decay as Capitalism continues to swell to the point of bursting.
If you were capable of commenting in good faith, I'd roll with it. Instead you drop points (Uncommitted) when you are proven wrong, give false equivalences between responses to protests, participate in bothsidesing when one side is saying Haitians eat pets.
Your only position is to assert economic theories as material fact, and pretend that your assertion proves conditions are equally awful under Donald or Harris. Socialism is equally hard under Donald or Harris.
Unfortunately for your argument, one half of the (muh both sides) Duopoly will in fact more swiftly reach the point where they are executing socialists. It will be harder to get to socialism while socialists are being executed. Therefore we should take actions that may delay that.
I have offered supporting evidence for my points, and rather than counter any of it, you make the baseless claim that the GOP would start executing Socialists before the DNC, when that's a bipartisan time-honored tradition.
You have not explained why you think that the GOP would execute Socialists faster, nor why you think disparity would meaningfully slow down or reverse under the Democrats. Far-right violence rose under Biden compared with Trump, because neither party works against climbing disparity.
The answer is to join revolutionary orgs like the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) or Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO). Only through organization outside the electoral system does the Proletariat have any hope of steering the ship and seizing the reigns.
I addressed your "supporting evidence." It turns out it very easy to have supporting evidence if you pretend deliberately being arrested is the same as being brutalized over a protest. You do not address that. "They're different but actually the same. Therefore both sides are the same."
It turns out if you define fascism such that everyone in the government are the same party contributing to it, then both sides are equally fascist. "Dictator day one" is the same as "small business" because the economics are the fascism. Are ridiculous tax cuts for the wealthy the same? "Yes, both sides are the same because the Dems are not stopping it." Oh. Should we vote against more tax cuts by hoping the facade that the "Dems" (Uniparty, actually, muh both sides) are against it? "No, because of reasons.
"They should ignore Uncommitted, listen to their wife instead, throw their ballot in the trash. I'm not urging anyone to vote in any way, just discussing economics."
"Far right violence is rising under Biden because of disparity." Oh. Should we have a president that maintains a facade (muh both sides Duopoly, of course) of being against far-right violence or one that encourages it. "Actually both are the same."
Yes, your arguments are very serious and you are the only good faith participant here.
I did not say they were the same. I said I recognize where they are similar.
You are drawing false-equivalences that I did not draw. Again, what is fascism? You haven't answered that. You just continued to make the same assertions.
Uncommitted is one group, and evem Uncommitted didn't endorse Harris. Abandon Harris has endorsed Stein, for example. Why is Uncommitted the group you listen to? Why not the majority of Arab-Americans, who are going to Stein? I am telling you that voting will not stop or even slow fascism.
We should stop thinking either will slow it down and instead focus on organizing.
Now you're making sense!