Lurker > legendary_zell

Cemith posted...

Believe it or not, there are religious folks that believe that Trump isn't very good. But you better fucking believe that they think Israel's "retaliatory" actions are completely justified because of the Hamas attack.

Trump voters are voting for Trump no matter what happens. We're referring to fence sitting voters. And more specifically, abstainers.

But we're talking about the religious right though. I don't think there's any evidence there's a large group of voters who are religious right AND think Israel is the holy land AND can't do anything wrong AND that Trump isn't good AND would consider voting for Biden.

But we KNOW that there's lots of people on the left who are disgusted by Israel's actions and our facilitation of them. It seems like Democrats are constantly bending over backwards to compromise themselves and do the wrong thing to get the awful people on side.

Cemith posted...

I think you're underestimating just how popular israel is with Americans. Obviously people like us understand that what's happening in Gaza is genocidal, But most religious folk, especially the religious right, see Israel as some bastion of holy land. They, unfortunately, don't really give a fuck what's happening in Gaza because they consider Israel's autonomy above everything else.

Biden would lose more support from them than support he would gain from preventing what's happening in Palestine. At least, that's how it reads to me.

I certainly wish I was wrong, but I don't think I am.

Ninja'd :/

What religious right, apocalypse seeking voter is voting for Biden? Whereas, I know a lot of people who are disgusted by Biden's policy on the left and center left. There's losses for each side, yes, but the losses are not at all equal or proportional.

Even Trump's monstrosity is not self evident, though I agree, you'd think it would be. But it's not, nothing in politics is or ever has been. There's things in politics that people take for granted, that the believe so deeply that they don't even think of it as a belief. But even those aren't universal.

But that's not what we're debating. We're debating the intersection between Biden's monstrous actions and Trump's general monstrosity. And what to do in response to dueling monstrosities. Unfortunately, that's the exact scenario that Trump and fascism grows in and can win with. So my solution is to make Biden non-monstrous. You may think that's not a fair way to describe him and what he's doing, but many people do and those people are almost all in the democratic coalition.

Cemith posted...

I take you didn't read my post from the last topic. It's not my job to coddle idiots that "need to be swayed" to vote against fascism. If people need their vote "earned" to vote against fascism, then they weren't going to vote for it anyway. You can't seem to wrap around that I haven't ever tried to convince anyone of anything. I'm merely admonishing apathy that has already ruined lives through conservative pull.

You're telling me that you understand politics, but this is how you think politics works? Anyone who is not already completely on the exact same unpopular wavelength that you are is a lost cause, an idiot, unworthy of breath? The Democratic Party would have already collapsed if most thought like you. It's like 2016 never happened.

What's absurd is acting like there's a choice between Trump and Biden. Don't see you criticizing them, though. Hmm. Wonder why that is?

I do criticize anyone who says they're the same or who says Trump is better. I'm actually trying to talk to move the needle though rather than writing people off.

I see that Trump winning is the end of actual democracy. Everything I say is from that perspective. I'm sorry you don't like it.

I'm coming from the same perspective, you seem to have gotten the wrong message about what actions flow from that reality though.

Cemith posted...

No I just want people to be honest. Something some on this board seem to struggle with, it seems. It's also not about the democratic party. If the "Rent is Too Damn High" party was the only one that could prevent the fascist rise, I'd vote for them.

I've never been anything but honest in this topic, on this subject. It's not something to troll over.

So do I, but I show that by criticizing people that claim they will abstain. You only show up to piss on people with a modicum of pragmatism. You stop the genocide by pressuring Biden. Not by punishing every non white non religious person by letting Trump win.

How's that been working out for you? Have you convinced anyone that way? Have you or anyone using this "strategy" secured even one more vote for Biden? I agree that we stop the genocide by pressuring him and not letting Trump win. That involves changing Biden's stance and you can't do that without at least the threat of disruption. You haven't explained how silence and a landslide victory for Biden under his current policy is supposed to stop the genocide. Or how pledging support regardless of what he does would do that either. Care to elaborate?

I'm not twisting anything. What don't you understand about the US electoral college? One candidate wins and the other loses. You know what's on the line if Biden loses so why pretend like you don't?

You accuse me of vanity and then say shit like this? It's absurd. You claim to understand politics and yet people with your mindset are so so so bad at it. You only see what you want to see, you think repeating the same message louder and with more condescension will somehow make people see the error of their ways.

Let's talk about the electoral college then. You can win/lose in multiple ways. The goal is to hit a target number of votes in specific areas that will add up to 270 electoral votes. You can lose when your opponent overshoots their number, and you can lose when you undershoot yours. The overshooting for Trump is probably unlikely in this election. But the undershooting for Biden is a big risk. That's what happened to Hillary. You gain or lose votes depending on what you do and what that makes people think of you.

This issue is the exact type of thing that affects favorability so much it causes a candidate to undershoot. You seem to think the way around that is to browbeat people into not caring. That didn't work in 2016, regardless of whether you think it should have. I think a better approach is to change what he's doing, using whatever tools we have at our disposal. You can think that people should have a different stance, you can yell at them about it, but there's better ways to spend your time. That's what I'm saying.

Great! So do I. That means you do understand the point and are just here sitting on your high horse talking down to people like me because I understand how elections work.

And hey! You addressed it! Nice! You don't want Trump to win so you'll be voting Blue in November. That's all I care about. I don't give a fuck what you say about Biden.

One of the big reasons we have all these tech sociopaths running around destroying the fabric of society and creating torment nexuses daily.

Very bad.

Cemith posted...

This is hilariously hypocritical coming from you. You and your verbose vanity.

Some of us live in the real world where we can't risk a Trump win and in so doing don't like it when people pay lip service to fascists.

In fact, let's just cut to the chase. I want you to tell me that you're okay with a fascist takeover of the US because of how much you care about Gaza. Tell me you're complicit the robbing of women's, minorities, and LGBT rights because of Israel's genocide of Gaza.

Save us all the trouble.

There's nothing verbose about my posts. I'm not posting walls. You just seem to want to read a Democratic fundraising email.

No one is paying lip service to a fascist. We're criticizing a genocide and want it to stop. You simply have to twist that into something evil so you don't have to look yourself in the mirror and question what you support.

I already told you yesterday that I want a Biden win and an end to the genocide. I want equality and safety for all people everywhere. We went back and forth on this just yesterday, and yet you're already reverting to your "say the thing so I can dismiss you outright and don't have to address that creeping feeling of dread" stance.

LightningThief posted...

Nah, I'll still be calling a spade a spade.

Believing what they believe doesn't change what it is.

I think right wingers love America like they claim they do in their twisted way. That doesn't change the love for a piece of cloth and song over the actual vets is also something I'd call, virtue signalling.

Those people believing in what they believe is irrelevant.

Although to be clear, those claiming to believe what they believe also tends to breed bad faith actors in thr mix as well.

It sure seems to be highly relevant, that's why you and Pelosi etc keep trying to accuse us of supporting Trump. You can't keep doing that, then claim it doesn't matter what we believe. You couldn't even help yourself in this post.

"You just conveniently ignore the literal users who have a history of saying "both candidates are the same", "it doesn't matter which candidate wins" and happily promote voters staying home in roundabout ways.

We have literal users who are doing that and this has been pointed out in over several topics. Like always when pointed out, you conveniently have selective reading its happening.

This isn't the first time this has been discussed on this board, and the usual are well knows by now on making this a single issue vote."
Straight from a post or 2 ago. This is not the first time those people have been pointed out to you. Like always, you selectively ignore them and claim there isn't people here who, "claim both sides are the same, and it doesn't matter who wins 2024", and you ignore the user's who happily float/defend/promote not voting in 2024.

I just went through and read every post in this topic. Every single person who doesn't agree with you is saying they want Biden to change his mind. No one has advocated voting against Biden or actually withholding votes. At most, people are expressing their personal dissatisfaction with a president that they believe is committing an atrocity. No matter what you do, you will not be able to get them to stop and you harm your cause by trying.

What you are taking issue with is strong efforts to actually push him to change or people acknowledging the depths of how awful the current policy is. You take that as roundabout attempts to push people to not vote for Biden. That's your perception, not reality.

Biden or Trump is going to win. This is an inescapable reality. The ones happily promoting left leaning voters to not vote, are objectively helping Trump. There's no dodging that. Anyone willing to not vote, telling others to note vote, or constantly spreading the great word why you may not vote, is indeed virtue signalling. As such an act is in the long run hurting the people they claim to care about far more. That includes, LGBT, abortion/women's rights, and so much more. Including their one issue cause, Palestinians and Muslims as their pro protest non vote hurts those Muslims and Palestinians here in the United States too. So yes, it's virtue signalling to ignore said reality that is inescapable to say or promote or defend, "don't vote" if you lean left, and risk fucking over groups of people even harder if Trump wins.

Again, there are users on this board who literally flirt/defend/promote left leaning voters and swing voters to stay home because of Palestine. Essentially the one issue voters angle. You just conveniently ignore them every topic as this has been pointed out before.

There's more than one issue on the table that affects even the people you claim to care about. More issues that affects even Muslims and Palestinians here in the United States. But you ignore that, for clear reasons. So your "moral courage" angle is bs.

I have never once ignored the other issues. There's countless existential issues at stake for Americans. By urging people to ignore the ongoing genocide, rather than exercise political power to stop it, you're merely hoping for the best and putting all those other issues at risk. If you want people to vote for Biden, you should be doing your best to make Biden better, not hectoring us. That's the only safe outcome here. Browbeating people into ignoring genocide is a losing battle, and a battle that blackens you, Biden, the Democratic Party, and America. Even if it did work, which there's no guarantee it would. If we're going to be taking big risks with the electorate, why not shade that risk in favor of doing the right thing?

Some of the issues are that we live in an individualistic, car centric, and alcohol centric environments, don't have great access to healthcare, and don't have great support systems for alcoholics, and addiction is very hard to treat.

You can suspend people's licenses, but they still have to drive to get around. Suspending their license doesn't help with alcoholism and neither does being trapped at home, spending time in jail, or losing a job because you can't drive or were in jail.

We have a car dependent culture that's reluctant to punish people for crimes they commit behind the wheel for some reason and courts seem reluctant to deprive people of their cars because they know they're probably screwing that person over completely if they live in suburban Michigan or something.

Treating the underlying causes is hard and expensive, and in the meantime people have to live and also feel they should be able to do whatever they want. It's all a recipe for disaster.

None of this is to excuse people who drive under the influence. I absolutely hate them. But these are some of the reasons you get people with 10 DUIs before their license gets suspended, and then they continue to drive.

And always remember, the "one issue" we're talking about here is the fucking genocide of a group of people that's already been living in refugee camps for 80 years. We're not talking about a tariff or the percentage of a tax rate here.

That influences how people react to bad stances on the "one issue." And why people expect a Democrat to be "pure". Because. We're. Talking. About. Genocide.

LightningThief posted...

Exhibit A where you conveniently dance around things to virtue signal on one issue.

Learn another phrase man. Goddamn. I'm starting to believe you're writing these posts with ChatGPT that's overusing that word like it does with the word "delve."

It's a sign of a small mind that you can't give your opponents even the courtesy of accepting that they actually believe what they say believe. In your mind it has to be a plot or an act.

What did I sidestep that you want me to address? I addressed why they say same things both sides, why they talk about staying home. You are the one who has failed to respond to those explanations, you simply repeat what you post in every topic as if I haven't said anything, you cut out those parts of the post and repeat the thing you already said and thought.

In a voting system where most of the power we have is our votes as individuals and blocs, and demographics, threatening not to vote or vote third party before the actual election is one of the only ways to influence anything. That's reality if you want to talk about reality. They understand that, and you understand that, but you don't want them to so much as acknowledge or discuss that reality. And when they do, you ascribe the worst possible motivations to them despite them outright telling you their motivations. Because you are okay with the status quo. And because them doing that and all the other things they're doing to try to influence things puts you to shame for not doing the same.

Well a lot of people aren't okay with the status quo and they're doing what they can do voice that, whether that's protesting, boycotting, occupying, organizing labor actions, or yes, threatening to withhold votes. That's all different from actually withholding votes or telling people to vote for Trump.

LightningThief posted...

It's not an assertion. You just conveniently ignore the literal users who have a history of saying "both candidates are the same", "it doesn't matter which candidate wins" and happily promote voters staying home in roundabout ways.

We have literal users who are doing that and this has been pointed out in over several topics. Like always when pointed out, you conveniently have selective reading its happening.

This isn't the first time this has been discussed on this board, and the usual are well knows by now on making this a single issue vote.

Lastly they most definitely are virtue signalling based on all the reasons already laid out multiple times in multiple topics. The ones happily promoting left leaning voters to not vote, are objectively helping Trump. There's no dodging that. Anyone willing to not vote, telling others to note vote, or constantly spreading the great word why you may not vote, is indeed virtue signalling. As such an act is in the long run hurting the people they claim to care about far more. That includes, LGBT, abortion/women's rights, and so much more. Including their one issue cause, Palestinians and Muslims as their pro protest non vote hurts those Muslims and Palestinians here in the United States too.

So you're going to just stick to your party line then. You won't acknowledge what I'm actually saying, you refuse to grapple with what a reality that makes you uncomfortable or that you don't understand, you'll redefine words to mean what you want/need them to mean.

That's very disappointing and I hope actual Democratic strategists are better than you. It doesn't seem like it though, judging by the establishment responses I've seen lately. I'll continue to hope the people with their heads on straight, with moral courage, can convince those in power to change their ways before it's too late and that this genocide agnostic, dissent crushing stance doesn't permanently poison the reputation of the Democratic party among young people.

LightningThief posted...

It's not a straight up lie.

There are literally people in this topic who literally "both sides the same" Biden and Trump. One user even went far as to heavily imply other major issues such as abortion is Bidens fault to double down on his point that things would be no better under Biden instead of Trump.

It's also dishonest there isnt "single issue children" (your characterization, not mine) here. You are aware there are those here who consistently bring up why not voting in 2024 in November is something they won't be doing because of Palestine. This topic is literally about those who are literally threatening they will not vote, and the dishonest discussion that there isn't those who are dead serious about it, over Palestine.

Which again, says they don't care about other major issues like abortion, student debt, LGBT and more. Even Muslim actually inside the US would have it worse.

Your assertion is that we don't care about Palestinians, we're virtue signaling, and we want Trump to win. You have no proof of that at all and you can't defend that idea.

You keep asserting that people are saying that Trump would be better or that Trump wouldn't be worse. That's not the case. Trump would be worse, but the fundamental line here is that someone who facilitates genocide is disqualified from receiving a vote in many people's eyes. There's a line to receive a vote and that's far below it. Can you acknowledge that? Can you grapple with that for once? Just once? I've never seen any of you "Vote Blue No Matter Who, No Matter What" people grapple with that. Instead, you assert that people don't actually have those lines, they merely pretend to and that they actually just want Trump to win.

Just because Trump will be even further below that line doesn't mean Biden is off the hook. Is it really your position that Democrats cannot possibly go too low as long as Trump goes even lower? Or that facilitating genocide is an unreasonable place to draw a line?

They're not saying that Trump and Biden are literally the same, they're instead saying that both are facilitating genocide and therefore both are disqualified. I'm sure that prior to this whole situation that if asked in the abstract whether you should vote for someone facilitating genocide, you'd say no. But now that you are presented with that reality, you don't even try to change it, you just say yes and expect everyone else to do the same.

If we ever get to the point where the American people can knowingly cast a vote for someone committing genocide without batting an eye, that'll be a sad sad day. I hope we never get there.

LightningThief posted...

The answer is no.

Their angle is too "both sides the same, so it doesn't matter who wins 2024." With the sole purpose to convert as many swing and left leaning voters as they can to not vote.

They don't actually care about abortion, LGBT rights, Muslims, or Palestinians beyond virtue signalling they do.

The more they can convert, the better Trumps odds. Who is objectively worse for even just the people they virtue signal to care about. Just here in the US alone, life for Palestinians and Muslims would be worse under Trump. Hence why they always pivot away from the subject as much as possible.

This is just a straight up lie. Does it make you feel better to imagine the people that disagree with you as such villains?

Are we single issue children who don't understand that Biden has no choice but to support genocide? Or are we virtue signaling wannabees who pretend we care about Palestinians, but actually don't? Or are we knowing propaganda agents who are in it to get Trump elected? We can't be all three.

You're just spewing whatever invective you need yourself and others to believe to get your preferred political outcome and to protect your self image as a good person despite urging people to vote without regard to a current genocide.

You can't acknowledge that some people are assessing the same facts, the same reality, and coming to different moral and tactical conclusions. You can't look genocide in the face at any point because it would shatter what you think of yourself.

All Biden had to do was give the same statements Bernie just gave, cut off funding to Israel, and pressure for a ceasefire. The only valid thing to do electorally and morally is to do everything in your power to make that happen before the election because lives are on the line. But instead, you want absolute silence and unconditional support for the unsupportable.

Zidane or Noctis for sure.

Hopefully, I could teach Zidane to respect women. Noctis is already pretty well adjusted.

LearntoRead posted...

For me, Long Island native was the first red flag.

We need to stop accepting people from Long Island until we can figure out what's going on.

This is all true. The most useful thing about college is that it gives some people a time outside of work to read and experience useful things. The college kids protesting now are learning that and seeing things that the people criticizing them refuse to see.

People who go to college and don't learn anything about society, who never learn how to think and simply parrot back received knowledge, that's worse for society in many ways than people not going to college, because they end up thinking they learned something and earned something. That's exactly why conservatives and neoliberals want to turn school into yet another market and ban defund liberal arts or any form of education that could conceivably encourage people to challenge the status quo or even be aware of what it actually is.

Cemith posted...

Fortune Cookie does. But I don't see you telling him that he's wrong, you're focused on Cemith the meanie.

My approach to him and his stance in this topic is much more likely to get him to change than yours is. He's not saying he'll vote for Trump or abstain, he's saying he will abstain if Biden doesn't change his stance. Urging the types of actions that might bring that about is the best way to strengthen democracy, fight fascism, and ensure Biden wins.

Again. No one that needed convincing was going to vote anyway. I'm sorry the US Election System is shit but I'm not willing to kowtow to fascism because our system is broken

That's absolutely not true. There's many people who can still be brought on board. Believing otherwise is just your version of a blackpill and can also lead to a Biden loss. Except instead of organizing to direct your anger at the powerful, you're directing it impotently at randos online. If that's not kowtowing to fascism, it's at least kowtowing to the conditions that produce fascism.

I'm glad they're helping! Doesn't change the reality that if Trump wins the election that Gaza is glassed. Why you refuse to acknowledge this is disturbing.

I do acknowledge it, that's why I want Biden to win. The only good outcome here is a Biden win and a change of stance by him. That's the outcome I want to see, you don't seem interested in that.

The US is a binary. He either wins or loses.

Defending democracy is up there. It's why people need to vote Blue in November.

Cemith posted...

No one is preventing a genocide by abstaining, I'll fucking tell you that much. If anyone claims to abstain because they care about Gaza, they are fucking lying to themselves. They don't give a fuck about Gaza. Why would they? They can't be fucked to do the absolute bare minimum to prevent similar atrocities happening domestically. You expect me to believe that they care about Palestinians overseas? Give me a fucking break. I can claim I hate illegal dogfighting till I'm blue in the face, but saying that while I'm actively breeding and abusing dogs kinda muddies the message, don't you think?

I don't advocate abstaining. I've made that clear in every topic. But the irreducible truth is that some people are not going to leave their home, hop in their car and pull the lever for someone currently facilitating a genocide in November. You must grapple with that reality and your current approach won't change it. The exact problem that blackpills people is that there's no option not to facilitate a genocide. That's not a system that inspires participation.

You're gonna have to tell my Jewish and Palestinian friends who are organizing relief efforts, trying to evacuate family, and organizing protests across the US to pressure the government and other institutions that they actually don't care about Gaza because they don't feel comfortable voting for the guy supplying the bombs killing their family. They'll be surprised to hear that they don't care and that what they're doing is equivalent to breeding fighting dogs!

But please do tell me how Trump winning is so much better for the people that feel for Gaza.

No one has said this. Trump would be worse. That's why some of us are doing everything we can to stop Biden from doing anything that could make him lose and others are trying to shout those people down and get Biden to just bulldoze through and hope for the best.

Please.

I'm fucking begging you.

I'm going to vote against Trump for the sake of democracy. Not something some on this forum can say.

Here's the rub. The election is a binary. One side will win. One side will lose. If you facilitate the loss to fascism, you are just as culpable as those Maga psychopaths. I'm sorry you needed Big Uncle Cemith to tell you the reality of the US Election System, but here it is.

Smugness seems to be far more important to you than anything else. Biden will be responsible for blackpilling his own base if it comes to that. But I don't think that's actually what will happen. I think Biden will squeak by due to the collapse of Republican infrastructure and approval and the genocide will continue and that's nothing to be proud of, even if it's better for us.

Cemith posted...

I'm not the person that's upset that Biden won't tickle their genitals about the one single issue that upsets them and not the literal dozens of other issues that he's helped out forward. Don't get it twisted. Remember -

No one should need convincing. It is self evident just how fucking awful and miserable this country would be with another Trump candidacy.

Although I appreciate Umbreons more careful approach, I'm sick of abstainers claiming that they both understand how much worse Trump is but also that they still can't vote for Biden. That isn't something that can be squared with reason. It is selfish moral grandstanding. It is vain and disgusting.

I'm not here to convince anyone of anything. What I want is for people like Cookie and BM to see their gross, incongruous stance in a mirror and reflect that they are culpable, even indirectly, by abstaining.

It's disgusting for you to present not facilitating a genocide as tickling our balls as if that's some frivolous, unreasonable, wishlist request. It's the bare fucking minimum for a decent human being! You can never ever deal with the reality of what's going on head on because then you'd be forced to reckon with the moral abhorrence of everything going on and what you're really asking of people.

You clearly just want to vent at your political and cultural inferiors, go ahead. But don't think you're fighting for freedom/democracy by doing so. You're not going to see anything and they're not going to see anything. And we're all going to pay for that, potentially.

DrizztLink posted...

Which brings us back to:

What makes you think people here aren't?

Other than you just deciding that.

If you do personally, that's good, keep doing that, I commend you and I'll try do the same. I'm talking to the people who simply say "vote" in response to every question and who think the exclusive/sufficient condition for victory is a Democratic Supermajority that's somehow supposed to appear because reasons. As if that's possible or would even be effective under current conditions.

We see that the people who just vote or simply tell others to vote are not doing the other things that need to be done. If even a quarter did, our democratic institutions would be immeasurably stronger and you wouldn't have to spend time failing to convince people to vote.

Umbreon posted...

Well I guess FortuneCookie doesn't want to continue the conversation so I guess we'll see what happens.

Chainsaw man kills the babies. Fortune's loved ones, and then Fortune. I choose not to shoot the Chainsaw man because my morals dictate "Thou shall not kill".

I'm a good person because I'm a pacifist.

...right?

The point I was trying to convey, is that sometimes you have to do things you don't enjoy out of necessity. To 'stick to your guns no matter what' isn't, in this context doesn't speak to your integrity.

It says "The lives of others are secondary to MY comfort".

The thing is, your stance doesn't make sense. If you combined voting for Biden with using each and every means at your disposal to get him to stop arming and caping for Israel, that'd be a reasonable stance. By voting for Biden reflexively and without an attempt to push him in any meaningful sense and advocating for others to do so, that IS sacrificing the lives of Gazans and Palestinians for your comfort and the comfort of Americans. We know what the outcome of that will be, he's clearly not going to change without pressure, and things are currently on a course for genocide for Palestinians and safety for Americans. Yes, that's objectively better, but it's exactly what you're accusing him of.

One such method is threatening not to vote for him unless he changes his stance, seems to me that's one of the few things that could change his mind, one of our most powerful tools as individuals and as a collective. As long as you don't actually vote for Trump or sit out, it seems like that's the moral thing to do.

DrizztLink posted...

The fuck do you want us to do about that here?

Nothing much, there's nothing you can do about it on CE. That's why I said to go outside and get involved in things that build democracy and can break people out of that attitude. Instead of spending inordinate amounts of time online telling people they're personally killing democracy and every LGBT person in America if they don't vote for Biden or by so much as saying they don't intend to vote for him.

Cemith posted...

Unfortunately the people that love bombs will kill everyone, even the ones that aren't in the same building.

You can not reason with people that willingly burn their hands on the stove.

You can't keep infantilizing people like this if you want to convince them. I'm not even sure what your goal is here. Do you want to dunk on them and call them children? Or do you want to change their minds? Pick one and go with it.

I'm trying to get you to understand that most of the people who are reluctant aren't "willingly burning their hand on the stove", they think that their hand will be forced on the stove regardless of what they do. They tend to think decisions are made in the backrooms of power and aren't up for debate anyway. That it's downhill either way and that people are just yelling at them to choose their version of downhill that ends up in the same place. I know you don't think that, but understand that they genuinely genuinely do, it's not a bit, it's not something they do to spite you, they're not secret Republicans/fascists. People on all ends of the political spectrum reach that conclusion.

That's why fear and harm reduction messages don't work on them. They've already deadened themselves/been deadened to any possibility of anything better. They've given up on agency. The only thing that would change that is getting involved in a project to change that fundamental reality.

hockeybabe89 posted...

When a bomb is about to explode and kill a bunch of people you scream "Run! Get the fuck out! There's a bomb!", not consider the ineffectiveness of fear tactics and form a measured and personalized response that will present people with the benefits of running away.

I tell you fear doesn't always work and you respond with "but fear!!!"

You're refusing to get it. You SEE that it's not working and yet you insist that it will. You have never convinced anyone on this board or elsewhere with this tactic and yet it seems to be your only play.

If you see that people are not running away from the bomb when you yell bomb, then YES you must do something different at that point.

The bomb analogy is overly reductive, but let's complicate it to make it more accurate. Some people in the room love bombs and wanna die, some don't believe there's a bomb at all, some are paralyzed by the prospect of death, but most believe the room is locked and there's no way out whether they stay or go, or that they can't get enough people to pull the heavy door with them. People have been promised that they'd be saved from previous bombs, but they weren't. The people who are supposed to save them are not promising them complete safety from the bomb, only that it'll take only an arm or leg off, rather than killing them outright. Some people want to know why they're in a room with a bomb and how they can prevent that from happening in the future.

I could go on.

In that circumstance, you can't expect yelling run alone to be effective. That's far closer to the circumstance we're in.

justaguy3492 posted...

Out of the things you listed, gathering signatures for a ballot initiative or a recall are the only things that are on par with the efficacy of voting.

Those things are electoral, and just like voting, they're not effective or reliable without those other forms of organizing. But they're more useful as ways to encourage small d democratic behavior than voting because they require fewer people and more active participation/organization.

Those other things I mentioned aren't good just because of their direct effect, which may be minimal, or even negative in some instances. They're necessary because they build democratic habits and solidarity. They let people practice democracy.

The limited efficacy of voting alone should be very apparent in a world with an unelected, stacked, right wing judiciary allowing gerrymandering, dismantling the regulatory state, and striking down voter protections and popular laws/policies. Without those other strategies, that's the end of the story and apathy is increased because anything good that's passed will be struck down with no recourse anyway. That reality trains lawmakers and voters to think smaller and smaller and problems become impossible to solve, making politics less relevant to your average person who doesn't base their identity in being a Democratic Voting Antifascist.

Cemith posted...

I agree, but I'm not the one that apparently needs to be convinced that voting is good.

Change is granular and short of a revolution does not happen overnight.

You don't convince someone that voting is good by simply telling them that, especially when they don't believe any options that actually represent them or will improve their lives are on the table.

You do it by getting them involved in a social/economic project to transform things, they have to believe that better things are possible and that they have a role in securing those better things. That they can join with other people to influence the conditions of their lives. Then voting becomes a matter of course as part of that larger project. That's orders of magnitude more effective than telling someone to vote so their life doesn't get 80% worse instead of 20% worse.

That doesn't have to be revolutionary, but you can't always fight through well justified apathy with fear. There has to be something better and a way to achieve it that's different from what people are already doing.

DrizztLink posted...

Do you think nobody here does that?

That comment was not just about the people on CE, it's a response to the overall state of the Democratic Party. The vast majority of the people who believe that democracy is at stake don't do much more than vote. That's why all our democratic institutions like our unions, media, many local parties, etc are all broken and corporatized compared to what they used to be. Whenever they speak about their own vision of what fighting fascism entails, it starts and ends at electoral politics, at most voter registration and GOTV/phone banking. To permanently win over fascism, it'll take a lot more than that.

Cemith posted...

Telling people to vote against fascism isn't helpful?

You said a bunch of shit that means nothing.

I've never said that. Because I don't believe that. Voting is necessary, but it's just one part of a larger constellation of strategies. Simply talking about voting alone creates a disengaged citizen that can't really influence or exercise power because voting is a one time act every few years, it doesn't build organizations that influence elected officials or the media, it can be blocked or ignored by those very officials or the courts, or the the military or the police etc, it can be influenced by historical events, and without the other strategies, it's not sufficient to sustain a working democracy.

Cemith posted...

Making decent decisions 4 and 8 years ago do not absolve you of not doing the same thing this year. I held the door open for someone this morning, doesn't mean I get to punch someone in the face tonight.

You are either against the rise in fascism, or you are complacent and culpable.

I wish y'all took this attitude and channeled it towards things that would actually help save/revive democracy instead of badgering holdouts online. Do something to hold the President accountable so he gets more votes, go start a democratic union, go protest, organize a boycott, organize a political education or study group, gather signatures for an initiative or recall, picket, give a speech, DO something, anything.

Don't just tell people to vote and call it a day, do something effective that sparks democracy and makes the world better in the meantime, something that makes nonvoting or voting Republican unthinkable. That would be fighting fascism. Many of the people who talk about fascism the most don't react like they think fascism is coming. If you did, you'd be learning to shoot and organizing your community.

It's a fundamentally different time, a fundamentally different technological, economic, and cultural situation. It's pretty hard to do any type of historical comparison.

But anecdotally, she has white women on lock, but I doubt my extended family on other continents have ever heard of her. They all would have heard of MJ and could sing his songs. Most of us just live and interact with US, White, and White woman dominated spaces so it seems like she's supernova right now.

EPR-radar posted...

I actually see it the opposite way around. Hope and inspiration is great when it happens, but it is fickle and it's a rare talent for candidates to actually be good at campaigning on it (and delivering on hope and change is even more difficult, given the reality of the Republican menace).

What is it going to take to peacefully defeat the GOP and get back to something resembling normal politics in the US? The only answer I can see is the GOP consistently losing in national elections, to the point where it really does have to reform or die.

Which is the easier sales job?

A) running on hope and change for 12+ years with little/no actual progress to show for it because the GOP is still strong enough to block progress at least that long, or

B) trying to grow a solid D base for 12+ years that understands that the highest priority is opposing the GOP menace every November, in every election, at every level, and that all hope of future progress is contingent on first dealing with the Republican menace? Sure, it looks like running only on "Republicans are awful", but that is the truth. It is also true that Republicans have a lot of power, and it's going to take a long, hard campaign to do something about that.

I thoroughly disagree. Hope doesn't just come from one candidate or focusing exclusively on electoral politics. It comes from an orientation towards and understanding of politics that then drives your communications, policy, electoral strategy etc.

People develop hope when they think they can influence their futures in a meaningful way. It comes from encouraging people to think and take action in democratic ways. And promising that you'll be the avatar of that already existing movement. That last part is what FDR did, it's what Reagan did, it's what Trump means to his people. It comes from the bottom up and the promises, expectations of effort from the people, and results all have to match up.

You can't match all the forces, resources, and organization of capital, religion, militarism, racism, sexism, etc with "vote every 2-4 years for candidates that don't, won't, and can't even promise to change or fix anything you really care about."

To match those forces, you need deeply organized forces of your own that cut across all potential divides, but organizations of that nature will not be easy to control and manage from above and will make big demands, and if those demands aren't met, they'll become dispirited and disorganized again. The only solid basis for consistent positive results in electoral politics is a party built on that basis and focused on supporting, amplifying, and being led by those organizations.

Instead, the Democrats just want individuals and organizations that they have no obligations to, that expect nothing from them, but that dutifully vote in huge numbers regardless of how well or poorly the party is doing at addressing people's problems.

What people in topics like this try to sell is that "no your definitely life won't improve in any meaningful way if you do X, but in some abstract way that you may not actually fathom, it'll get much worse if you don't do X or instead do Y."

That'll work on some, but it has a variety of different effects. It produces positive anger, negative anger, disbelief, indifference, apathy, blackpilling, suspicion. Only one of those is useful for Democrats.

When CE is shutdown, I'll likely never post on this site again. I might visit once a year, with every adblocker known to man.

A positive vision that inspires hope works pretty well actually. Democrats just refuse to present one and seem to prefer "the other guy is terrible" as their only strategy.

Fear doesn't have the effect of making people think in the exact way you'd hope or expect. It often simply paralyzes and embitters. That's why you need hope.

I've tried to explain it to you countless times: people do not vote or participate in politics based on the mindset you present in these topics. Even someone like Humble Novice who is constantly pushing the "save democracy" button thinks Biden is actually good, not just that we're choosing between slow ruin and fast ruin. People check out if they think that's the case.

The only things that have historically prevented Nazism or stopped it in its tracks are working class politics and solidarity providing an alternative, or denazification and violence.

DnDer posted...

A federal ban would have been nice, but I know there's not the political will or capital to do it.

It should be constitutional to do it. I don't think there's any state policing power that would override something like due process or cruel and unusual...

How is there not the political will???? We had the biggest protests of the century about specifically this. Democratic politicians kneeled wearing kente cloth in the halls of Congress. If there's not enough "political will" to stop this one thing after that, there's no political will for anything.

This has been something conservative/white supremacists have done over and over throughout American history and historically, the best response has been a federal military presence. That's what Biden should promise and do no matter how much anyone on the right howls about it.

Apathy comes from the ostensible """"left"""" and pro democracy party seeming unequipped and uninterested in doing the things that would reenergize democracy as we've hurtled towards the cliffs for decades. If not actively hostile.

It comes from all the worst elements of society seeming to get their way and avoid consequences over decades and them being unafraid to seek and wield political power over decades.

If the worst comes to pass, it'll be because of all that rot, not just because of Palestine or a lack of student debt relief. It'll be all the big and little failures of liberalism and the wins of conservatism and fascism..

It's what they do and what they always do. They exist as a concept to maintain borders, social hierarchies, break strikes, and destroy protests and social movements. That's been the only real constant in their role since they were invented.

They do it reflexively, even if they have no personal dog in the fight. Like how many of these cops really care about Israel, Zionism, campus safety etc? Likely very few, but they will brutalize whoever they're told to brutalize.

Hyena_Of_Ice posted...

Uh, that's more than just an optics problem.

Don't forget you have extremists who proclaim that any action is justified against occupiers, and "occupiers have no rights" We used to have a few people like that on 261; they held a cynical view of history in which major changes in civil rights only occurred after rioting and violent protest or outright massacres (e.g. Haitian independence from slavery.)
In this revisionist view, MLK Jr and Gandhi were completely ineffectual, and it was only the widespread rioting after the death of the former, and the continued widespread political violence in India in the latter case, that brought about the Civil Rights Act/independence for India. They additionally claim that peaceful protesting and even civil disobedience are useless.

I don't agree with that version of the view, I think both were absolutely essential to scaring the powers that be into conceding. You have to convince some, shame some, and yes, threaten others. It's always been that way.

I don't think any action is justified against occupiers because after a certain point, that deadens you to the humanity of others and makes you go off the rails. I mean Israel is doing this all this garbage because they have an "anything is justified to preserve our settler colonial apartheid state" mindset. But we've known for a long long time now that by making peaceful protest impossible, you make violent action inevitable. And Israel does not allow any action in any form, peaceful or not that challenges their vision for Israel. On pain of extrajudicial and collective punishment, torture, imprisonment, and death. And so we get our current situation.

LightHawKnight posted...

The thing is, the only really awful thing Biden really has done is what every single US president would have done, support Israel. So much of the good stuff he does never ever gets mentioned for some reason. Even by Democrats.

No President has done only one awful thing. It comes with the nature of the country and the nature of the office. And none of this is a reason not to hate Biden either. Other people doing it doesn't make it okay.

I agree that his positives are not advertised enough by his supporters. I just wish people would do that without adding the extra part of "therefore you're insane not to love him" or "he's the best President ever"

Doom_Art posted...

Why don't people like Biden? Are they stupid?

Just like each and every President we've ever had, he's done countless awful things and neglected to stop the doing of awful things. It probably has something to do with that.

That said, this is very good and this is what I wanted from him in the runup to the election.

Why get mad at people for pointing out that Biden and Democrats also wanted this ban? It's something they've openly talked about for a long time now. They weren't forced into this. The ban was popular among elected Democrats when it stood on its own.

It's their fault for committing an own goal if it affects them negatively. The status quo would have cost them nothing considering they're fine with mass tech surveillance and brain melting when it's done by domestic companies.

I don't think this will have a big effect due to the built up hatred against Trump and the Republicans, but if it did, I wouldn't be surprised. This is one of THE most anti-youth things they could do.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


This point is not going to get any better or more correct however many times you post it.

There's no conflict in the minds of the right. They wanted the ability to have free access to the minds of the youth to get them to blame minorities for problems caused by capital and other similar systems. They don't want free access for the people fighting that. No conflict there, all entirely consistent.

Just like there's no conflict between wanting an inclusive and pro-equality atmosphere on campus and not wanting to be repressed by the state and the school you pay tuition to for peacefully protesting a genocide.

specialkid8 posted...

When has the right ever not owned religion?

There's been many times when religion has been associated with radical reformist and even revolutionary left wing or at least populist movements. For example, the Progressive era was heavily associated with dominant strains of protestant Christianity. Before that, many peasant rebellions in Europe were inspired by a Christian socialist tradition.

The almost total capture of the "Christian" identity and political expression by the right is largely a 20th century thing.

This is always the default response to challenges to the status quo. Years/decades from now, when the genocide is completed/admitted and these protesters are repressed as they were in the 60s, everyone will be crawling all over themselves to regard the protesters as heroes and pretend they were on their side. The Universities will apologize and put up plaques commemorating all this.

But no lessons will be learned, it'll happen again in response to the next crime people can't accept. Because these institutions profit from war and expansion and the people who have the ear of University presidents and can threaten them are always on the side of whatever current evil is happening.

Johnson-Destroyed Reconstruction and our country's one real chance for racial and economic justice. We're still digging out of the hole this guy put us in and may never get out.
Buchanan-Gave up the farm to Southern slave interests, resulting in death and destruction.
Reagan-Completed capitulation to capital, death squads, empowered religious right.
Nixon-Shattered public trust, started creep towards fascism, killed millions, sabotaged peace.
Trump-Corruption, fascism
Bush-Criminal Wars, inflation of financial bubble
Jackson-Genocide

Honorable mention to Wilson for his racism. Honestly, almost all our Presidents have been awful. Even the two "best" ones, FDR and Lincoln did horrible things to people they felt they didn't have to care about.

Whether this stands will depend on why Obama's rule was struck down and whether there's been enough technical changes to this rule to let it stand. This is genuinely good, but I don't see why there should be an income cap on it. People who work over 40 hours should be paid overtime, regardless of if they're hourly or salaried, low income or medium income.

Tyranthraxus posted...

Now ban mandatory arbitration agreements

This is what I really really want. The dominance of these "agreements" pisses me off more than almost anything else. It's just such a false idea of agreement and consent that is inherently, purposefully titled towards the powerful/capital.

Always has been.

Businesses under capitalism want isolated, desperate workers who see other workers as competition, not allies in the same bucket. Regardless of their individual morality or intentions, they have strong incentives to use, abuse, and replace any particular worker. That's the regular course of things and has been from day one and will continue to be, no matter what coat of paint is put on it.