Recent comments in /f/Elections_and_Voting

celebratedrecluse wrote

You better believe he will militarize the border, dump nuclear waste in POC communities, and fall in line with the military brass about maintaining our foreverwar.

Don't get me wrong, I will probably vote for him in the primary. But that's not because I have some illusion that a bernard victory will "fix" anything. In many ways, a victory by him would likely demobilize a lot of people from taking direct action or organizing for socialism in any way-- "our guy won, we're all good now". Call it the Obama effect, but it's clear that we're not past that mentality of elections as the end-all be-all of politics in the US.

And anyway, Bernard is almost certainly going to lose. the Democratic party is filled with centrist fuckers, and they've spent years now defining themselves as the anti-trump, which they conceive of as being an impolite norm-breaking populist. Bernard, to them, is just another Trump, because the problem they have with Trump is not the policies he implements, or the things he has done, but rather his crass nature.

Don't believe in Bernard. Believe in direct action. Believe in organizing. Believe in yourself.

Listen to him: "Not me, Us". Vote for whoever you want, if you have the privilege of doing so, but you had better be ready to throw down, sacrifice, and protect each other in your community because no matter who is president we must become ungovernable.

2

pearl wrote

People under the age of 29 years old make up 21,4% of the electorate or around nine million people. If they wanted to, they could ensure that political parties and politicians would pay close attention to addressing their concerns.

Yeah. I'm sure they could. Voting always works.

It seems to me the article jumps through hoops to avoid acknowledging that people understand that they can't make politicians address their concerns, instead pushing the idea that anything outside of voting is for naught.

Happy to hear they get that it doesn't work, though.

2

F_x wrote

The first line sounds like you think voting as "harm reduction" is good as long as people continue to organise, direct action, etc. While the second part reads like a "it's useless". Was that on purpose or what you meant from the beginning was saying that it's useless?

1

Ant OP wrote (edited )

That said, not only have Democrats not actually run on an explicitly anti-fascist agenda or explained how they would suppress the current fascist insurgency, they have actively promoted fascism overseas. In the Ukraine the US under Obama sponsored neo-Nazi parties that now dominate the government there. Fascists are actually in state power thanks to a Democrat.

The same is true for the Islamist extremists he backed in Syria, as well as the reactionary coup regime he backed in Guatemala. Yes, Trump’s footsie with domestic Nazis is outrageous and wrong, but outsourcing the fascist problem to other countries and calling yourself pure is a means of protecting your own neck at someone else’s expense. It’s not harm reduction, it’s harm redistribution away from the imperial center and towards people we’ve already screwed over.

3

arduinna wrote (edited )

Hi, trans girl. Vote for the farthest left candidate you got, and if they get into office, shoot them.

More seriously, we're used for brownie points in areas where it's popular and dropped when its not. Candidates in swing areas especially drop us like a rock. Chances are that if you're in a place where voting Democrat is a harm reduction option, it won't do shit for us anyway.

5

arduinna wrote (edited )

It couldn’t be that decades of Identarian Politics rendering “white male” a dirty word paved the way for Trump’s nationalism, could it?

uwu if you werent so mean to the white people they wouldnt vote in fascists uwu

Antifa thugs beating people senseless, “social justice” crusaders rioting to shut down speaking events for views they consider heretical,

Sorry, I clearly should instead nicely ask the President to not deport people I personally know. Its horrifying to see individuals opposing things like that, isn't it? We should sign petitions and make sure to be really nice to the white and cis folks so we don't accidentally make them fascists.

If you have a belief in traditional marriage, you’re a HOMOPHOBE.

This usually translates to opposing gay marriage- so, yes, homophobe.

If you question whether an asthma inhaler can alter the world’s climate, you’re a GLOBAL WARMING DENIER.

Or, more accurately, there's a huge amount of conservative Americans that actually deny global warming.

If you think resources are finite and inviting tens of millions of economic and political refugees from the Third World to live here is harmful, you’re a RACIST XENOPHOBE.

Perhaps one should take into account that the west has stolen their finite resources, continues to, and is the reason there are refugees.

This all feels like it was written by an anti-IDPol /leftpol/ user the more I read on.

Meanwhile, the contemptuous political commentary coming from the supposedly tolerant “left” never changes.

UNIRONIC SO MUCH FOR THE TOLERANT LEFT

4

ziq wrote (edited )

If the lesser evil helped minorities, Obama wouldn't have deported more poc than any president ever, built concentration camps for poc, maintained offshore prisons for holding/torturing poc without trial, and used drone strikes to destroy poc countries more than any president ever.

1

Pop wrote (edited )

Isn't it that we punch/protest against and resist in all ways except those that are mediated? except those that separate us from our own autonomous power? It's not just voting that we don't do.

the "we should resist in all forms" argument doesn't really work because there are tonnes of other forms of resistance that we don't do but nobody mentions those

If you think that voting makes no difference and ultimately only reproduces bad things, but that we should do it because diversity of tactics, then you could use the diversity of tactics argument to argue for anything that's completely useless and counterproductive

e.g.
Let's all baaaa like sheep at people in the voting queues!

Fascists do come into power in part because they are voted in (much of the time), but to suggest that this is the key point in fascist power-building is to miss out on all the other important elements of fascist power building, of which there are many
organising autonomously against those elements means we keep our power and we grow in it

5

LostYonder wrote

Electoral democracy is by far one of the most powerful tools of the capitalist system to pacify people, distract them into "struggling" for their own party whose platform and policies are not significantly different from their opponent, and creating divisiveness between those who should be collaborating.

But, once again, there are some differences that are meaningful for some people. Rights to minorities, abortion, openness to sexual and gender differences matter to some people. The policies may be minute in the end, but for many people's lives, they make a tremendous difference. It is a privilege to not vote...

Another point is that ultimately, as a non-voter your rejection of the farce goes unnoticed and unmarked. Rather than a resister to the system you are viewed as apolitical and apathetic. There needs to be a more productive means of resisting the electoral system as anarchists and not merely be ignored...

Finally, as in my first post, I do think Trumpism and the Trumpites are a different breed of fascism in the US. Yes, they have a long history and are an inherent part of American culture and socio-political history, but it doesn't deserve such a prominent platform. Just imagine how the fascist forces were to react if Trump was to get a resounding defeat in 2020! No, they won't go away, and yes, the victors will court their own proto-fascist policies and practices, but it won't be Trumpism...

It is anti-anarchist to participate in electoral democracy, but sometimes praxis has to be modified in abnormal circumstances and I believe Trumpism is one of those moments...

5