Lol, I meant if you didn’t expect the Dems to fight fascism, how is voting for them harm reduction. And I’m pretty sure you knew that and took the cheap dodge bcs you don’t have a good answer but let’s make that explicit and find out.
Because they do slightly less harm than the fascists. I’m not even voting for the Dems, I’m just voting against the fascists. It’s not a cheap dodge, it’s the whole principle. Voting isn’t going to give us “good” anytime in the.near future, so trying to use it for that is foolish. The comparatively slow march towards fascism under the Dems gives us time to utilize tools besides voting: mutual aid, community building, workplace democracy, etc.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the concept of “harm reduction”. It doesn’t mean “Vote for Democrats because they will reduce the harm caused by fascists”. It means “Both the Dems and fascists cause harm, but the Dems cause less harm, and since one of the two is going to win in the current political landscape, voting for Dems reduces the amount of harm added”.
The only rational voting strategy is voting for leftists in the Democratic primary, and then voting against the fascists in the general, even if that means voting for the neo-lib. If you want to vote against the fascists while also voting for a leftist, you need to make sure leftists win the Democratic primary. We’re seeing that starting now.
The only rational voting strategy is voting for leftists in the Democratic primary, and then voting against the fascists in the general, even if that means voting for the neo-lib.
That strategy is only rational if you believe that voting progressive in the primary will create change faster than the status quo will kill us all. And forty years of the party continually fucking off further right at the behear of it’s Wall St paymasters screams loudly that that belief is a fantasy, and your strategy is delusional.
You continue to hand power to the people making things worse and pretend you’re doing harm reduction.
That strategy is only rational if you believe that voting progressive in the primary will create change faster than the status quo will kill us all.
False. The best strategy is still the best strategy even if the outcome is still bad. Voting for a third party has a worse outcome. Not voting has a worse outcome. Despite voting for Dems still being a bad outcome, it is the least bad achievable outcome. Hence, harm reduction.
And forty years of the party continually fucking off further right at the behear of it’s Wall St paymasters screams loudly that that belief is a fantasy, and your strategy is delusional.
On the contrary, it screams loudly that protest voting is not only ineffective, it’s counterproductive. When they lose progressives, they don’t shift left, they shift right to try to get more centrists.
You continue to hand power to the people making things worse faster and pretend your protest achieves something. It does not, the rightward shift of the Democrats screams this.
Voting for a third party has a worse outcome. Not voting has a worse outcome
Only if you’re a spoiled child incapable of thinking any further ahead than right now.
In the king term your strategy has no chance of ever improving anything. Your best case outcome is “thing get much worse. But a little bit more slowly”.
You’re clinging to the ratchet for fear of the wheel, when the only answer is to destroy the whole machine. Voting outside the duopoly or abstaining altogether offer even a slim chance of that. The good news is the chances get less slim with each person who gives up on the genocidal war party in disgust, so the numbers are shifting in ways that give me hope. In ankther cycle or two, when even more Dem voters realize that the DSA isn’t going to change anything either, I expect the rate of attrition for the Neoliberal ghouls to increase starkly.
I expected it, I just hoped you were better than that. How is harm increase beneficial in any way? Absolute nonsense.
Lol, I meant if you didn’t expect the Dems to fight fascism, how is voting for them harm reduction. And I’m pretty sure you knew that and took the cheap dodge bcs you don’t have a good answer but let’s make that explicit and find out.
Because they do slightly less harm than the fascists. I’m not even voting for the Dems, I’m just voting against the fascists. It’s not a cheap dodge, it’s the whole principle. Voting isn’t going to give us “good” anytime in the.near future, so trying to use it for that is foolish. The comparatively slow march towards fascism under the Dems gives us time to utilize tools besides voting: mutual aid, community building, workplace democracy, etc.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand the concept of “harm reduction”. It doesn’t mean “Vote for Democrats because they will reduce the harm caused by fascists”. It means “Both the Dems and fascists cause harm, but the Dems cause less harm, and since one of the two is going to win in the current political landscape, voting for Dems reduces the amount of harm added”.
The only rational voting strategy is voting for leftists in the Democratic primary, and then voting against the fascists in the general, even if that means voting for the neo-lib. If you want to vote against the fascists while also voting for a leftist, you need to make sure leftists win the Democratic primary. We’re seeing that starting now.
That strategy is only rational if you believe that voting progressive in the primary will create change faster than the status quo will kill us all. And forty years of the party continually fucking off further right at the behear of it’s Wall St paymasters screams loudly that that belief is a fantasy, and your strategy is delusional.
You continue to hand power to the people making things worse and pretend you’re doing harm reduction.
False. The best strategy is still the best strategy even if the outcome is still bad. Voting for a third party has a worse outcome. Not voting has a worse outcome. Despite voting for Dems still being a bad outcome, it is the least bad achievable outcome. Hence, harm reduction.
On the contrary, it screams loudly that protest voting is not only ineffective, it’s counterproductive. When they lose progressives, they don’t shift left, they shift right to try to get more centrists.
You continue to hand power to the people making things worse faster and pretend your protest achieves something. It does not, the rightward shift of the Democrats screams this.
Only if you’re a spoiled child incapable of thinking any further ahead than right now.
In the king term your strategy has no chance of ever improving anything. Your best case outcome is “thing get much worse. But a little bit more slowly”.
You’re clinging to the ratchet for fear of the wheel, when the only answer is to destroy the whole machine. Voting outside the duopoly or abstaining altogether offer even a slim chance of that. The good news is the chances get less slim with each person who gives up on the genocidal war party in disgust, so the numbers are shifting in ways that give me hope. In ankther cycle or two, when even more Dem voters realize that the DSA isn’t going to change anything either, I expect the rate of attrition for the Neoliberal ghouls to increase starkly.