• Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Voters: Can pick between fascism and no fascism

    Voters: “Hmm I will not vote”

    Lets be real. The non voters are to blame and they deserve project 2025

    • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah… not a great idea to blame the very people you needed to stop fascism.

      Oh and just a reminder the choice was between:

      1. The ruling party
      2. Literal fascism

      That is not a democracy at that point, just authoritarianism though the threat of worse authoritarianism (in this case fascism).

  • sit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    And this is when you vote for a third party. IMO the mentality of “having to vote one of these two” is toxic for a democratic system.

    It’s a trap and these two parties massively profit off of it.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Its the fundamental death of democracy. There is only ever one “correct” choice on the ballot. No real decision except to show up and vote straight ticket or suffer guilt or derision from your peers.

      This works just as well on Republicans as Democrats. You don’t see any dark horse Buchanans or Perots on the ballot anymore. Conservatives know any vote for someone other than Trump will be seen as a vote for the Democrat, just like Liberals know the opposite. And when the top of the ticket sucks (as with Hilary in 2016 or Romney in 2012), turnout sags and upsets happen.

      The bitter truth Dems can’t face is that they ran bad candidates on weak platforms after disappointing terms in office. And this is what drove down turnout. Not insidious Arabs or nefarious Jill Stein voters or Russia. If they’d had a candidate as appealing to voters as Trump, running on the left side of the ticket, they could have won. Instead, they shed 15M votes chasing the Liz Cheney endorsement.

    • And this is when you vote for a third party. IMO the mentality of “having to vote one of these two” is toxic for a democratic system.

      So close, and yet so far.

      The third party isn’t going to save you from the toxic system, nor stand a chance to fix it.

      You can’t reform the system, nor fix it from within no matter how hard you participate. It must be completely eradicated from the root.

    • TwoBeeSan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Someone like AOC and Bernie will never be allowed anywhere near actual power. God damn money.

      • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        and even if they did get in power, they’d still support NATO and imperialism in general, still support capitalist exploitation, and still would only pay lip service to or fight symptoms of systemic issues instead of ripping the cause that is capitalism out by it’s root

            • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              Theoretically, but having an actionable idea means to have an idea that you have a plan to put in action. So as always, where is it?

              • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                You can easily look up the answer to your question by yourself: leftist theory, often in the form of books (or even just watching video essays, listening to podcasts etc. etc.)

                You can start over here https://www.marxists.org/

                One could argue that there are too many different socialist approaches to revolution or rather that it’s not all that easy finding the correct one to your situation

                • latenightnoir@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  Additionally, check out the previous revolutions from around the world! Most of them didn’t happen on a basis of theory, but of people determined to change their condition.

                  Take Romania, for example. Sure, that’s an example of a revolution which ended up replacing one disaster with another, but even that holds a lesson for us: word-of-mouth is king, don’t give into desperation when figuring out the next attempt.

  • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    It’s funny because no one on here was talking about the how bad the Democrats’ strategy had been before the election, yet now suddenly everyone is an expert on what went wrong

    • freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Not only that, but they done forgot pro-corporate, “PrO-gEnOCiDe” Biden WON the previous election, running the same kind of campaign.

      In 2016, Hillary received 65,853,514 votes, and Trump received 62,984,828

      Harris received 68,103,050 votes. Trump received 72,757285.

      It’s almost like a lot of Republicans worked hard and encouraged each other to cast their votes for Trump.

      Meanwhile, all I saw on the Dem side was smug aholes trying to create voter apathy every chance they got. Either that, or there are a lot of Dem voters that will just. NOT. vote for a woman for president.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      This is just pattenly untrue.Unless you litterally live I. a corporate news echo chamber, the writing for this has been on the wall, and being discussed as such, litterally everywhere.

      However, it was also being downvoted at a preposterously high ratio. So while it was present, Lemmy (and reddit too and pretty much all social media) was dutifully ignoring and abusing those saying that Kamala wasn’t winning.

      Not only that, but there were bans, and significant bias in moderation behavior to support the building of that echo chamber.

      So no. Only if you live in a self construct d bubble was this not obvious since the convention.

      • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Wait a minute, is it “patently” untrue, so false that you couldn’t even get a copyright on it, or is it “Pattonly” untrue, a feignt tactic like those used by US general Patton in the Great War 2 against Irwin Rommel in Africa?

    • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Yeah, everyone who spoke up was told to shut up. Already white middle class liberal Americans are scrambling to blame anyone but themselves and the democratic party. Liberals are not a challenge to fascism.

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Going online to gripe about DNC strategy to other online leftists accomplishes nothing but generating more apathetic non-voters. Organizing in effective ways can actually accomplish something: mass letters directly to the DNC, banding together into massive documented coalitions, mass petitions.

        If the Uncommitted movement had tens of millions of registered voters come together and pledge to vote Harris if and only if she took a harder stance on Israel, that might have helped.

        When you’re speaking up to the wrong audience, and thereby doing more harm than good, yes you should shut up. Toward that audience, or at least with that message. The Democratic party is a lot of unsavory things, but they aren’t totally stupid. They have a great number of analysts developing strategy based on the information they have. If you want them to change, they need actionable information that supports that change.

        Complaining in already largely leftist anonymous online spaces is not actionable information.