this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2024
172 points (67.9% liked)

Memes

1193 readers
60 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] darthelmet@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm not saying to vote for a 3rd party. I'm saying that the solution does not involve voting and that the act of participating in such a vote is an active choice to support cruelty.

Voting, to the extent that it does anything, communicates 2 things:

    1. You accept the legitimacy of the system. That this is the way you choose to express your will.
    1. Your consent for the policies and actions of the government you vote for. When you check the box, there isn't an optional field where you say "Well I'm voting for this candidate, but I don't agree with all their policies." You have given your consent to everything that government ends up doing.

So by voting within such a system, you provide your support for it. You say that you will not otherwise oppose it's actions. Your choice isn't harm some people or harm more people. Your choice is whether or not you will make it easier for the government to harm whoever they're harming. Not only does that government harm people, but it actively works to crush opposition to it. You are supporting the efforts to do that to. You are actively opposing everyone who fights against the system.

More people will suffer every year that the government stays in the hands of capitalists and imperialists. Those people wouldn't be hurt in the world where we actually did something about that. You can't just take them for granted as having already been hurt by something other than your decision to continue participating in the system.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Okay, but what alternative do you propose? I'm not an anarchist, so "just tear it down" isn't an option I'd agree with.

[–] darthelmet@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I’m not an anarchist either. (At least I think. Admittedly my understanding of anarchism is a little lacking, but from the gist of it it doesn’t seem very practical.) I’m a communist. The path forward is simple even if it’s very difficult. You band together with people, build power through your capacity to withhold your labor, and be ready to fight back when the capitalists inevitably attack.

Power is about the ability to make people do what you want even when they don’t want it. It’s inevitable derived through the means to reproduce society and force to back it up. Right now capitalists have that means and force and thus can impose their will on others. In that context, voting lacks any basis for power to enforce the will of the voters on the ruling class because the capitalists own things and the workers don’t successfully use their collective productive power to oppose them. It can ONLY turn out this way if your only political action is voting in a capitalist “democracy.” The system isn’t set up to respond to anyone who doesn’t already hold power because if it did, they wouldn’t be in power anymore.

It’s important to have an understanding of the how things work structurally, because if your analysis only begins and ends with the actions and professed ideologies of specific people, you can’t possibly hope to ever break out of the cycle of meager progress followed by regression.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 7 months ago

You should read up on anarchism, it's cool. Our tactics largely the same as you ascribe to the communists, but we aim for only bottom up orgs and not top down.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 1 points 7 months ago

I'm with you on collective action, like unions, but I don't really see how that applies to government. The system works whether one person votes or 1mil, and if zero of the regular non-politicians voted, the politicians still get a vote. If you're talking about collective action to vote for someone different, there's two main problems with that:

  • We can't all agree on what issues are most important, which is part of why third parties never win.

  • There's too many bad actors who would use that opportunity as an authoritarian power grab.

I think your idea could work if we had federal ranked choice, but we average people don't "produce" anything that the government can't produce itself. If someone wanted a communist government, they'd have to get communists elected, and to do that, they'd have to sell the idea of Communism to regular people who don't know anything other than late-stage capitalism.

It would have to emerge organically from the ground up, not the top down. I think we're on our way (I'm more of a socialist), but I don't think it will happen in our lifetime, and rushing it will only scare the ignorant.

Either way, I think we've beaten this horse enough. You've been at least respectful, which is more than I can say for a lot of comments. Have a nice day.