• m13@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Of course. If I was American I wouldn’t spend a second campaigning for Biden or telling people “you need to vote!!” online, because I’d rather spend that time unionising my workplace, doing mutual aid, building up communities. Things that build real structural change no matter who’s in power. But on the day I’d still go vote for the lesser evil candidate. It takes a small amount of time. Then I’d go straight back to real work. I think most leftists do the same.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Legitimately yes, that is the actual point most leftists tired of liberals punching left are making.

        Actual organization outside the bourgeois state apparatus is far more important, plain and simple. I’ll probably be voting for Biden, but I am not going to pretend it’s “fighting fascism,” that happens on the ground.

        • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think that you and people sharing your thoughts are the target of the meme. There is an exceptional amount of accelerationist and/or anti-electoralist (they are indistinguishable in outcomes) posting going on. People are trying to discourage voting for Biden AND voting altogether.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I still have my Bernie sticker on my laptop. Big RIP to the future that could have been.

      • somethingp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Long before Bernie there was Al Gore in 2000 who lost because of a supreme court decision saying the majority vote did not matter in the US (not really, but it did decide the election and stop the Florida recounts). Not only changed the narrative on climate change for the future, but also about what matters for federal elections.

      • kinther@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        2016 taught me that 3rd party and no voters tilt the scale in the favor of Republicans. I’m getting flashbacks with all the comments on Lemmy here saying as much.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Funnily enough it worked in the opposite direction in 1992. But in 2000 yeah, it happened then, too. And 2016.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I still legitimately have flashbacks to election night in 2016. Fuck. It’s insane that it’s almost a decade ago. I can remember it like it just happened.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wrote in Bernie in the Democratic primary. IDK if that even gets counted; I don’t know how it works, but fuck man, someone reads it I know, even if from there it goes straight into the “N/A” column.

    • FenrirIII@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Biden hasn’t been the worst president, but he’s far from what we’d like and streets ahead of Trump. It sucks knowing our government is completely bought by the rich.

  • fifisaac@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re own post history is a pretty clear example of liberals hating leftists more than fascists

    • HauntedCupcake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      They don’t even seem to be liberal, they’ve made posts criticising the dems for exactly the same reasons other leftists are.

      It just seems like a leftist arguing with leftier leftists because the right wing doesn’t appear to have any major presence on lemmy

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sure, I also think left-punching on a mostly Liberal instance like Lemmy.world is also mostly preaching to the crowd.

        • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          One liberal so far that didn’t like a member of an internet community not playing America’s dumb “liberals are our left wing!!!” game.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is Lemmy.world, on a PugJesus thread no less. Of course there are going to be liberals thinking they are leftists.

      • ADTJ@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sigh

        Some people are not native speakers

        Some people are dyslexic or have other difficulties with writing that they can’t help

        Sometimes people just make mistakes, like you did two comments before this one where you wrote “its” instead of “it’s”

        You’re not better and this isn’t helpful or kind

  • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Splintering of the establishment left (SDP) versus the actual left (KPD) in the 1932 German elections was a big part of what allowed Hitler’s rise to power. Even while both were literally gun-battling in the streets with the paramilitary force that later became the SS, the KPD was calling the SDP “the main enemy” and “social fascists.” The SDP saw what was coming and allied with their conservative opponents to promote Hindenburg in the 1932 election, so that Hitler wouldn’t win, while the KPD ran their own candidate who siphoned off 13% of the vote.

    Hindenburg still barely squeaked into power, but Hitler was the only candidate with a strong unified front behind him, and on Hindenburg’s death Hitler assumed power and immediately starting killing the KPD members en masse. The SDP and KPD blamed each other, for not compromising and thus allowing Hitler to gain so much ground instead of facing a unified opposition, but at that point it didn’t really matter who was or wasn’t at fault, and the KPD were the first grouping explicitly singled out for death once he took over.

    You can read all about it in here.

    I had someone on Lemmy tell me not that long ago that the lesson of this was that the KPD was right, and the SDP were the real enemy for compromising with the conservatives, and if they’d just been more left and earned the support of the real left people then the whole thing wouldn’t have happened. I do wonder what attitude in hindsight of one of the KPD people in the camps would have been to this “it’s not my job to vote for you, it’s your job to earn my support” electoral philosophy, but it’s impossible to know, because of course they all were put to death.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I had someone on Lemmy tell me not that long ago that the lesson of this was that the KPD was right, and the SDP were the real enemy for compromising with the conservatives, and if they’d just been more left and earned the support of the real left people then the whole thing wouldn’t have happened.

      Yeah, that sounds like my experience on here.

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lmao that was me again

      KPD was responding to the same economic distress as the NSDAP, they were right to believe the national populist movement would continue growing if they didn’t deliver on real material relief to the German people.

      That the SPD eventually fell to the NSDAP (with hindenburg placing Hitler as chancellor, allowing him to assume power after his death) certainly doesn’t exonerate their responsibility in allowing the rise of the nazis.

      That was a banger conversation, if I wasn’t on mobile I’d go back and find it.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think I got irritated and just abandoned the conversation, but we can continue.

        What you just said actually made a lot of sense and as far as I know the history, I agree with it more or less completely (and would allocate blame for Trump at most of the Bill Clinton / Nancy Pelosi type Democrats in exactly the same way for exactly the same reason)

        So if it sounded like I was exonerating them I was not. My point was, once Hitler comes around it doesn’t matter; if you’re still running a 13% spoiler candidate to weaken the alternative to Hitler, and then blaming the ones who won the election because they didn’t do a good enough job of compromising with you… I mean, you may have a case, but you’ll still be dead if Hitler wins. Surely that is relevant?

        They sure didn’t get the real material relief to the German people by not supporting Hindenburg; definitely not until 1945 and even then it came with some caveats.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Plenty of area of agreement I think.

          I just don’t think the NSDAP would have been defeated even if the SPD and KPD somehow fully united (I probably have as much knowledge of the history as you do, or less). Fascism doesn’t work like that, it would have just continued to boil under their thin coalition until eventually they would have to put it down forcefully. Just like I don’t think beating trump in a single election will defeat the fascist movement he represents. Whoever it is that’s leading the opposition has to take (likely un-democratic) action against them if they really want to put it down, and honestly I don’t know if it’s a good thing or a bad thing that Biden wont cross that line.

          Revolutionary movements generally don’t fully resolve until the conditions that seeded them change, one way or the other. That’s why it’s important that whatever coalition that forms the opposition is serious about addressing them, and in my mind simply having the coalition isn’t enough.

          • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Just like I don’t think beating trump in a single election will defeat the fascist movement he represents

            I don’t think anybody is under the illusion that stopping Trump from winning would end republican fascism.

            But at the very least, delaying it is preferable. Because in that delay time we can weaken their movement, help get trans people to safety, and so on.

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Then Biden should be doing what he can to make that happen, and from where I’m standing there’s at least one thing he’s doing that his base is irate about

              If the one thing he needs to do to kick the can is be popular then woah is he not the right candidate

              • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                he not the right candidate

                He’s the less wrong candidate. Sorry reality is this hard for you but them’s the breaks.

      • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ah yes, remember the part where the Spartacists had a literal armed uprising because they didn’t like the prospect of participation in a democratic government? Something Luxemburg herself voted against?

        Oh, what am I saying, what I meant is “The Weimar Government should have put the gun barrel to their head and begged the Spartacists to pull the trigger on them”

        • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          She was still killed in spite of that, which was my point: establishing that the political bridge was burned; the division was not healed in time to form a united front against the Nazis.

          There is no disagreement here the SPD fought the KPD and won.

          They mainly used Freikorps to do it, and those Freikorps were nothing close to left wing or even democratic. They were imperialists and monarchists who formed the basis for other more infamous paramilitary groups. Interwar history is wild.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is no disagreement here the SPD fought the KPD and won.

            “How dare you fight back when I try to armed-uprising you, that is very unfair and my feelings are hurt now and so I can’t support you.”

            I love the left dearly but this sounds exactly like left person logic, yes. 🙂

            the division was not healed in time to form a united front against the Nazis

            And again, it’s relevant that the SDP was willing to heal divisions with (at least some of) their enemies to fight the Nazis, and the KPD (from what you’re saying) were not (at least where the SDP was concerned).

            I have no particular dog in this fight; I’m out of my depth now in terms of what happened and who was at fault. My point is, those bitter divisions and arguments and the justifications for them that you’re talking about – however you want to allocate blame for them between the SDP and KPD – didn’t do either of them a lick of good when the NSDAP started kicking down doors and shooting them both in the back of the head, and that’s relevant to the upcoming US election.

            • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Why is it always a fake made up quote to respond to? It will sound however you want since you came up with it.

              I really was just trying to point out that the division between the SPD and KPD didn’t start in the 30s and went back further and involved some pretty complex shit regarding World War 1 and its aftermath.

              But I may have been too partizan bringing up the Freikorps: whom the SPD allied with in 1919 and some of which formed the Sturmabteilung, the Nazi paramilitary organization: in 1921. Maybe that context is too inappropriate.

              • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I wasn’t trying to put words in their mouth; just saying how it sounded to me if they were upset that when they took up arms against the SDP in 1919, what came back to them was violent and unfair. There’s also the issue (which is maybe why I’m so unsympathetic in general) that it’s silly to still be upset in 1932 about something that happened in 1919, when the way to stay alive and keep alive a whole bunch of people who had nothing to do with either SDP or KPD, would have been for both of them to let it go and start fighting the bigger enemy.

                But yeah, maybe I picked an unkind / unfair way to make the point, you’re right. And like I say, we’re into the detail points that I really don’t know about, so I am learning also from you about all of this for the first time.

                • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I won’t launch into the end of WW1 or the civil wars and revolutions replacing monarchies and empires overnight, so I’ll just give a contextual thought.

                  1932 and 1919 are thirteen years apart.

                  Donald Trump was elected eight years ago.

                  It isn’t too crazy of a timeline, politically speaking. And for the germans their leadership was summarily executed by paramilitary groups sent by the government.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              I have no particular dog in this fight; I’m out of my depth now in terms of what happened and who was at fault. My point is, those bitter divisions and arguments and the justifications for them that you’re talking about – however you want to allocate blame for them between the SDP and KPD – didn’t do either of them a lick of good when the NSDAP started kicking down doors and shooting them both in the back of the head, and that’s relevant to the upcoming US election.

              No, it didn’t. Which is why I’m all-in on making sure that the NSDAP doesn’t win this election.

          • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            She was still killed in spite of that, which was my point: establishing that the political bridge was burned; the division was not healed in time to form a united front against the Nazis.

            And you think the division between the SPD and KPD in 1933 was due to… the actions in the chaotic post-war environment of 1919, despite periods of participation in a common united front before that and the fact that the KPD’s final break with SPD cooperation came at the behest of the Stalinist USSR, which made demands the KPD, like most interwar Communist Parties, cheerfully danced to without question?

            There is no disagreement here the SPD fought the KPD and won.

            More precisely, “There is no disagreement that the democratic government, which included the SPD, fought the armed uprising against the democratic government, supported solely by the KPD, and won”.

            • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              I am am clearly stating the political schism between the KPD and SPD from post war Germany wasn’t mended by the time of the Nazis. More examples of that division worsening isn’t really counter to that notion.

              • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ignoring the extended period of a united front breaking apart because the leader of the KPD was a Soviet puppet isn’t exactly “an issue in 1919 wasn’t mended 😔”

                • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Their deaths easily left a power vacuum that was filled by soviet leaning german communists, most especially after 1922 when the civil war ended and the soviets emerged victorious. While some of the prominent german communists that werent russian soviets… were dead.

                  The Nazis had formed by 1920 and the S.A. formed from some Freikorps by 1921. It isn’t like there was an expansive amount of time there.

  • Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Making up a guy to get mad at and owning him super hard on reddit lemmy, the pugjesus classic

    • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m not on Lemmy much and have I talked to like five of these guys.

  • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Big bridal shower at a gay bar energy these fake leftists be bringing to the defense of America’s most vulnerable when it involves them doing something other than just showing up at the grammable protests and marches.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      One of them told me any amount of collateral damage to vulnerable groups is acceptable as long as massive numbers of white moderates are executed, which will teach them a lesson. Except it will be the leftists who are executed? IDGI. It’s like they love any sort of authoritarianism far more than they love leftist economics.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe he didn’t mean it. There’s plenty of overlap with edgy teens and the useful idiot authoritarianism fans.

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Surely what will emerge from the ashes will be a stateless, classless egalitarian society and not a fascist wasteland!

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s astounding. My only comfort is that online communities rarely reflect the makeup of the real world.

    • Zombie-Mantis@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’re supposed to be an NPC, a “Non-Player Character.” The term comes from video games, but in this meme format, it refers to a person who doesn’t think for themselves, thoughtlessly repeating talking points, without engaging in good-faith discussion. Sort of like how a character in a video game just repeats predetermined lines of dialogue.

      In this specific case, it’s representing a particular sect of leftists, who criticize Liberals for being uncooperative with them (or will cooperate with people furthermore to their right, such as conservatives, reactionaries, or fascists, instead of with said leftists), who also won’t vote for Joe Biden in the upcoming Presidential general election.

      This is neither an endorsement nor rejection of the message, but they’re saying (this sect of) leftists are hypocrites, thoughtlessly bashing Liberals instead of working together.

      I hope that answered your question :-)

      • ???@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Big thanks! It did answer my question and I also learned something new about this meme type.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The kind of people who say “Liberals hate leftists more than fascists” and then proceed to oppose liberal coalition candidates in situations where a leftist coalition candidate is nonviable, even though fascism is the only realistic alternative outcome to the liberal coalition candidate winning.

  • inlandempire@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    From a European perspective, this debate is saddening, because it results in people alienating voters if they didn’t pick the “right” option, where “right” is whatever moral position you want them to have, on the basis of putting onto them a direct responsibility of an unwanted result, from their indirect action. It is your responsibility to campaign for your own party, and this is not a way to convince people to vote, nor join your side. Your two-party political system is ruining any possibility of political debate for smaller parties, and you end up silencing the voices of minorities that aren’t represented by your two monoliths, all thanks to your holier-than-thou attitude. The people voting for Trump are the ones who will get Trump elected, not the people voting for whoever supports their political affiliations, not participating in your dirty voting shenanigans. The only thing you’re achieving is guilt tripping someone you could otherwise convince to vote for another party, and pushing them away, making sure they will not vote in your favour next time.

    We had the same thing happen in France, where voters were consistently asked to vote against a party for the presidential elections, rather than for the party that represents their ideals. In 2022, upon being elected Emmanuel Macron declared “I also know that many compatriots voted for me, to block the ideas of the extreme right. I want to thank them and tell them that I am aware that this vote binds me for years to come. I am the guardian of their attachment to the Republic”, and then proceeded over the next few years to apply a political program that would make Le Pen proud. [1] [2] [3] [4]

    Here are some articles on the subject of “useful vote”, translate at your convenience :

    And a quote from a random internet user, roughly translated :

    No need to be from Saint-Cyr to understand that induction does not only concern cooking in the kitchen, even if it is electoral. The concept of a useful vote naturally leads to that of a… useless vote! Indeed, it may seem legitimate to think that to “have influence” on an election, it would be better to do like the others by voting for those whom the polling institutes place at the top of voting intentions. This is how for a long time, elections have been scrutinized through surveys in which respondents tell you “the trend”. The useful vote is a concept, the reason for the survey which creates the opinion of the respondents. Isn’t the real usefulness of voting to choose according to one’s own convictions and to grant a useful vote to the candidate whose program best defends our values, our interests determining airtime which has determined, finally, did his sound sound in the polls? Not recognizing this means admitting that “uselessness” leads to abstaining from voting. This is unfortunately a real trend today.

    This is the only time I’ll interact on the subject, because I know how abrasive it is, but I felt some are in dire need of a reality check. You may disagree because your political culture, landscape, education… are quite different from the ones I experienced so far, but please engage in respectful discussions about it, provide sensible arguments, and don’t downvote just because you read something that doesn’t validate your feelings. If there’s someone you need to blame for Biden’s potential failure to get elected, it’s him for not running a better campaign to get enough votes, and yourself for vilifying other voters for not sheepily following your orders. These scare tactics are no better than dictatorial behaviours.

    Edit : here’s a book that will better explain what I’m trying to say https://www.editionsdivergences.com/livre/comment-soccuper-un-dimanche-delection

    • squid_slime@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As another European it is difficult to see the Americans constantly fight over voting. The two party system is definitely the issue here.

      Either way well said.

      • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Technically, the Two Party system isn’t actually a thing. It is instead simply the work of Market Forces. Multiple competitors in any market, shall result in that market being split between two competitors and an also ran. Then Market Power, if abused, shall prevent any actual competition to the duopoly. Something truly disruptive is required to change that. ATM the US has a pair of more or less captured political parties market. They are in no way an official part of the Government. Nothing in the Constitution empowers them. They should have no power at all. No say in who runs nor any influence beyond whatever PR for issues they advocate. However, they worked out how to make getting elected very profitable, and thus very expensive. Rather quickly money called all the shots. Then the manipulated monster these very wealthy and connected folks created to get elected, lost their minds because a “them” got elected President, and the “useful idiot” they brought in to pacify things with some good Fascism, turned out to be in multiple pockets and beholden to no one but himself. There is your US Political History tldr;

        • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Technically, the Two Party system isn’t actually a thing.

          Nothing in the Constitution empowers them.

          This part is kind of inaccurate. Because of the constitution, we use first past the post voting, which naturally devolves into a two party system. It’s like trying to build a sky scraper out of just wood. The blueprints don’t explicitly call for it to collapse, but because of the chosen materials, it is bound to happen.

          While the rest of what you said is true though.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            we use first past the post voting, which naturally devolves into a two party system.

            this is not causal

          • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            first past the post voting, which naturally devolves into a two party system

            This is a myth. L’ook at the legislatures of other countries that use FPTP, and count the parties that get more than 5 seats. The UK has 6, Canada 4, Russia 5 and India, my country, 11. You certainly can have more than two parties.

            • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is a myth.

              No it isn’t. It happens through a well known phenomenon called the spoiler effect.

              L’ook at the legislatures of other countries that use FPTP, and count the parties that get more than 5 seats

              The data you’ve just quoted doesn’t support your position, and this bit about 5 seats is arbitrary.

              Each of those countries has 1-2 dominant parties, with the rest being involved in name only. And as another user already pointed out to you, these countries dont use pure FPTP voting. You’ve also ignored prime minister/presidential positions, because those elections especially prove that it isn’t a myth.

              Local/smaller seat positions are significantly easier to win, as there is less competition, and therefore more opportunity for 3rd parties to win. But it isn’t enough, because they still get sidelined.

              The spoiler effect requires voters to vote strategically, which means no third party viability.

              • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                this bit about 5 seats is arbitrary.

                Fair. I had to put a cut-off somewhere.

                Each of those countries has 1-2 dominant parties, with the rest being involved in name only.

                In the UK, the Lib Dems have decided which of the ‘big’ parties sits in government and which in opposition. The Bloc Quebecois is one of the major parties in Quebec. In India, the two biggest parties get 50-60% of the total votes polled, and most governments are composed of multi-party coalitions. Also about a third of states have governments led by a third party.

                And as another user already pointed out to you, these countries dont use pure FPTP voting.

                And as I pointed out, they were wrong. The UK, Canada and India use pure FPTP, and Russia has three big parties even if you only consider the FPTP seats.

                The spoiler effect requires voters to vote strategically, which means no third party viability.

                Third parties cannot win only when everyone thinks they can’t win. Labour went from a small third party to forming the government in about a generation. The BJP did the same in India. At the state level, there have been many cases of a third party coming from a single-digit percentage of the vote and winning the election.

                • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  In the UK, the Lib Dems have decided which of the ‘big’ parties sits in government and which in opposition. The Bloc Quebecois is one of the major parties in Quebec. In India, the two biggest parties get 50-60% of the total votes polled, and most governments are composed of multi-party coalitions. Also about a third of states have governments led by a third party.

                  I am aware. But that doesn’t really change what I’ve said. You’re comparing smaller elections for seats with a big election like the U.S. president. Those elections still have 1-2 dominant parties, etc.

                  Third parties cannot win only when everyone thinks they can’t win.

                  You can’t just wish away the spoiler effect.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                also, biden isn’t depicted in your analogy at all. he’s more like the emporer: more experienced as a statesman, older, but even more evil.

                • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  That’s kind of unavoidable when comparing politicians to what ultimately equate to super heroes and super villans.

                  The point of that graphic is to show how the spoiler effect works, not to say that Biden is good.

                  Biden is old and evil, but preferable to Trump.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                your fiction, helpfully pointed out by the star wars characters, is based on a non-falsifiable theory. it’s not science, it’s storytelling.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Technically, the Two Party system isn’t actually a thing. It is instead simply the work of Market Forces.

          It’s also Article 2 of the Constitution. To wit:

          The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President

          That last part being the main reason there’s an Either / Or in elections, e.g. two parties. Getting to First-Past-The-Post whether via electors or total popular vote turns out to be difficult for some reason. And to your point, yes, money is a major, as they say, bitch.

    • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Um, no. Opposition to a Fascist Kleptocracy beholden to Theocratic Fascists is not open to negotiation. My allegiance is to the Republic, to democracy!

    • whoreticulture@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Last time I met a French person was on the selection process for jury duty. The dude was rightfully shocked at the entire process. Americans do not have real political education.

        • whoreticulture@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No, wealthy liberal county in a blue state. It could have been that other prospective jurors were also displeased with the process but were less vocal about it, I know that was me. Trying to keep my head down so I get picked (serving on a jury while being aware of juror’s rights is one of the best direct actions you can take. use knowledge of juror nullification.)

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      These scare tactics are no better than dictatorial behaviours.

      Ah, yes, the REAL fascism is when you tell people voting for fascism is bad. Great.

      • inlandempire@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I accept to believe that you skipped the entire comment to only react to the last sentence, and I will not partake in discussing with you. Good day.

        • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I will not partake in discussing with you. Good day.

          Always comes off as pathetic ‘last-wording’ when someone takes the time to reply “I’m not going to talk to you.” when you could have just stopped talking to them.

          • inlandempire@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Maybe because I took the time to write a lenghty comment contributing to the discussion, which they purposefully decided to ignore with a snarky remark? I am open to debating on the subject, but not with an intellectually dishonest or dismissive attitude.

            Welcome to politcal memes! These are our rules: Be civil

            Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

            • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Truly amazing you completely missed the very simple point I was making.

              I’m sorry- did my comment ‘disturb’ you- lol. You need thicker skin but feel free to report me.

              • inlandempire@jlai.lu
                link
                fedilink
                Français
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Please enlighten me on said point ? I’m trying to contribute to the discussion. Why would I interact with not only their, but now your dismissive comments on such a complex topic ?

          • Optional@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            And blocked them. I mean, these kinds of threads are a sort of gold mine. (In general, I mean, not in this specific instance)

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I accept to believe that you skipped the entire comment to only react to the last sentence

          No, I read everything except the links. It’s the normal “Democracy isn’t real because democracy involves strategic decisions on the part of voters” spiel from people who don’t take their civic duty seriously, and instead think of voting as a kind of virtue masturbation for their own gratification instead of being involved in making political choices of the polity, which necessarily involves compromise and deeply imperfect choices.

  • hark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    democrats fund fascists: https://www.vox.com/23274469/democrats-extremist-republicans-mastriano-cox-bailey

    and boosted trump into the presidency: https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

    Democrats promote fascists so they can pretend that they’re heroes for running against them. Vote for biden, but don’t fool yourself into thinking that you’re not voting for a fascist, because democrats are absolutely allies of fascists if not outright fascists themselves. They would rather lose an election to a fascist than let a leftist win, 2016 is a prime example of this. As the saying goes, scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.

  • TunaCowboy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Liberals: “We’re on the brink of fascism!”

    Also liberals: “Black rifle scary, and should be limited to only law enforcement, politicians, and the wealthy”

    *liberals big mad cause they’re gonna defeat christofascism by voting republican light.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Cool, so you don’t care if fascism wins and minorities are murdered. Unsurprising.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          The American political system is not changed in the ballot box.

          I think it’s fascinating you wrote “in” the ballot box.

          Not to mention, the system is literally changed first and foremost by the elections. But sure, biden bad, let the orange chips fall where they may and so on.

          If you are in fact able to vote in the US presidential election, I hope you’ll do it and support all the downballot candidates as well.

            • Optional@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ich wünschte, ich könnte Deutsch sprechen. Aber wenn ich könnte, würde ich mich wahrscheinlich nicht zum deutschen politischen System äußern, nur weil ich erstens nichts darüber weiß und zweitens sowieso nicht dort lebe?

                • Optional@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Ein fairer Punkt, denke ich. Aber wir schwimmen bereits in Leuten, die Trump helfen, es wäre besser, wenn wir Trump keine Hilfe von Leuten geben würden, die nicht einmal wählen können. Wie die russischen Trollfarmen. Ich wäre daran interessiert, eine deutsche Sicht auf die Wahl zu sehen, aber das ist ein freiwilliges Interesse, denke ich.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “We will only throw some people into a wood chipper.” is not a great platform and I understand those who dont want to be complicit.

          And by refusing to be ‘complicit’, they are instead complicit in “We will throw as many people as we can into a wood chipper”.

          Not exactly morally praiseworthy.

          The American political system is not changed in the ballot box.

          Not changed for the better, maybe. But it absolutely will be changed for the worse at the ballot box. Forgive me for not being excited for fascism.

          • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You know who has the power not to toss people into the wood chipper? President of the United States Joe Biden.

            And the fact that currently he prefers to have many people being thrown into the wood chipper instead of not throwing some people in himself, should make you very worried about how his policies will look like, when he has no reelection to work for.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ah, good, you’ve convinced me, I will work towards seeing the fascist who has pledged to never leave office and throw as many people in the wood chipper as possible win.

              • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well you are working very hard for that. Instead of holding Biden accountable but offering to vote, if he stops being a genocide supporter who runs interment camps at the border and builds the wall for Trump, you divide the people so they don’t take power and get fucked by whoever wins in the end. And with this you are demotivating people to vote in the first place, helping Trump the most.

                Congratulations. The American Elites have successfully played you, to do their bidding.

                • bobburger@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Lol what a shit take.

                  Don’t try to blame other people for your choices and actions. If you want to live in a Trump America, don’t vote for Biden. Just remember, it was your choice and not something “Corporate elites” made you do.

      • dogsoahC@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Okay, but that’s the entire reason the “left” in the US is so pointless. They just have to be less shit. They don’t even have to try too hard to avoid a genocide. They still win. But as Trump showed, that doesn’t weaken the right. The right can just say “Hey, look, the leftists don’t do shit! Now if you’d kindly be distracted from our increasing fascism…” Liberals have no recipe against fascism. At best, they just postpone it by one or two election cycles. Like, I’m not saying don’t vote for Biden. I’m glad I don’t live in the US with your stupid two-party system. I’m glad I don’t have to decide whether to vote for everything that’s wrong in that country rn, or the worse alternative. If you think voting democrat is the right move, good on you. If you want to convince others from that view, great. Just, don’t be a dick about it. That “so you’re secretely a fash, hur di hur di hur” shtick isn’t gonna do anything but alienate others further.

          • dogsoahC@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I guess then it’s a good thing that I’m not advocating for inaction. We just have very different ideas on what to do.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Liberals have no recipe against fascism. At best, they just postpone it by one or two election cycles.

          Perhaps you can clear this up by directing me towards the political ideology that has the recipe against fascism?

          • dogsoahC@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I highly doubt that you’re gonna like this, but… communism. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe it’s anarchism. But liberal democracy has failed that task time and time again.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Would you like to inform me when and where communism has indefinitely thwarted the rise of a totalitarian regime like fascism?

                • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  How so? The question regards indefinitely thwarting fascism, which the other commenter accused liberal democracy of being unable to do. I ask which ideology it is they think CAN indefinitely thwart fascism in a way that liberal democracy has failed to.

              • dogsoahC@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                First of all, what the fuck kind of standard is that, “indefintely”? At least it doesnt actively lead to fascism. I’d cite the “fascism is capitalism in decline” thing, but since Lenin said that iirc, that’d be like citing the bible to prove the bible.

                Second of all, socialists, communists, and anarchists were always on the forefront of fighting fascism. They were the major force in the Spanisch civil war until they lost because fascism is better at the military. They were the ones arguing the loudest against Nazis, which is why they were such a threat that the first concentration camp were made for them. In Cuba, they literally overthrew the fascist dictatorship that was there at the time. Even reformism won out in places like Chile until the USA (you know, that liberal democracy that’s all the rage now) decided they’d rather see a FASCIST DICTATOR in its place. And even though I don’t like the Soviet Union for a variety of reasons, especially once Stalin took over, they were the ones who bore the brunt of the war against the Nazis while the USA were initially only helping for profit. And yes, I am aware that the USSR also played a significant role in letting the Nazis grow to power. Like I said, Stalin (and the system he represented) bad.

                To get back to the original topic, since we both evidently disenjoy fascism, we (as in, our respective ideological groups) should maybe join in a united front against it. Not as a centrist “reach across the aisle”, just to work together on this particular issue. And I’d love to do that. But Joe seems stuck in the proud 'murican tradition of panicking at the sight of red flags and siding with fascists.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  First of all, what the fuck kind of standard is that, “indefintely”?

                  Is that not the standard you’re applying to liberal democracy?

                  They were the major force in the Spanisch civil war until they lost because fascism is better at the military.

                  That’s not even close to true. The fascists won the Spanish Civil War due to a mixture of outside help and the Soviets literally backstabbing the socialists and anarchists.

                  In Cuba, they literally overthrew the fascist dictatorship that was there at the time.

                  Oh, cool. What did they replace it with?

                  And even though I don’t like the Soviet Union for a variety of reasons, especially once Stalin took over, they were the ones who bore the brunt of the war against the Nazis while the USA were initially only helping for profit.

                  Jesus Christ.

                  And yes, I am aware that the USSR also played a significant role in letting the Nazis grow to power. Like I said, Stalin (and the system he represented) bad.

                  Okay, then you are also aware that the USSR was a fascist regime painted red which engaged in a great deal of ethnic cleansing and mass murder, as well as autocratic governance and the destruction of workers’ political, civil, and economic rights.

                  So you’ve still not offered a single ideology that has actually managed to hold off totalitarianism in a way liberal democracy has not.

                  To get back to the original topic, since we both evidently disenjoy fascism, we (as in, our respective ideological groups) should maybe join in a united front against it. Not as a centrist “reach across the aisle”, just to work together on this particular issue. And I’d love to do that. But Joe seems stuck in the proud 'murican tradition of panicking at the sight of red flags and siding with fascists.

                  Cool. The United Front here is really easy. Vote for the coalition candidate; you know, the one running with the party that has DemSocs and SocDems in it in addition to moderates and neolibs; against the literal fucking fascist.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Is this the same Soviet regime that ran a totalitarian society whose primary difference from fascism was the coat of red paint? The same Soviet regime that itself collapsed into modern Russia?

  • Pleb@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Still assmad that people don’t want to vote the way you want?

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, I remain upset at the prospect of people voting to murder minorities and usher in fascism because it makes them feel good. Sorry that you find fascism such a minor issue, but I understand - people with such flexible morals often do very well for themselves under fascist regimes. :)

      • Pleb@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh, I wouldn’t exactly say I have flexible morals, which is why I vote the way I do. But I’m across the pond, I couldn’t give any less of a shit which wanker y’all vote into office next to be quite honest.

        Still, after preaching “just go vote!” for a while (not specifically from you though tbh), I see a lot of “everyone I don’t like is a tankie” and “vote for my candidate, you facist!” which doesn’t vibe well with “just go vote!” if you don’t like their choice of vote. Might feel good to you, but won’t help you.
        Hoping people vote against something rarely ever works. And when your candidate doesn’t seem to want to give the voters their reason to vote for him, well… he’ll have trouble.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re absolutely right, the fact that we’ve been imploring people to take their civic duty seriously is definitely undermined by the fact that we find voting in fascism morally unacceptable. Silly me.

          • Pleb@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, that was totally the point of my comment.

            Anyways, have fun continuing throwing shit on each other across the pond. I’ll be watching with some popcorn.