• assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is very well written and well said. If we want change that doesn’t come from working within the Democrats, we have to build our own robust party across all 50 states, drawing on strong local support. No one outside of the two parties is currently trying to do this, which speaks volumes about the Green and Libertarian Parties.

    Leftists really have no choice other than to vote Democrat. We have to protect people who would be targeted by Republicans. We fundamentally go against left wing values if we don’t. I cannot call myself liberal or leftist or wherever in-between if I sit out an election where innocent people will suffer if one of the candidates wins.

    I like how you’ve phrased this – voting for Biden isn’t because you necessarily like his policies or viewpoints, but because you want to protect people from Trump and the Republicans. I’d love if we didn’t have to worry about fascists, but we don’t have that luxury. As long as they’re a hair’s breadth away from power, we pick the option that opposes them.

    • Cowbee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      Exactly. There’s one terminally online radlib here that I blocked because they were just shit-slinging for daring to suggest both voting Biden and unionizing, organizing, protesting, etc. As a leftist, we must work from without the Democratic party.

      Speaking purely from a leftist perspective, I’m actually of the opinion that Anarchist principles of building up parallel structures actually may be more applicable to the American political climate, even if you’re more of a Council Communist, Libertarian Socialist, Marxist-Leninist, etc. The US is seeing rising Unionization, and dramatic impacts from it, so I think Syndicalism actually has some revolutionary potential, unlike waiting for a Vanguard Party a la MLism.

      Just my 2 cents.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s funny, I thought that unions had passed their usefulness, and we needed a new structure to effectively push CEOs. And then the UAW and SAG proved me completely wrong, and I’m glad for it.

        I think either way, you have the perfect viewpoint on this. Voting won’t work to create change, but that doesn’t mean you just ignore voting. You use it to protect what we have from fascists while initiating change from a new organization built from the ground up.

        • Cowbee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’m extremely anticapitalist, and Unions are currently the best way for Workers to protect their own interests within current structures, and have the potential to replace current Capitalist ownership. A full replacement of Capitalist structures will be necessary eventually, but Unionization can be an arm to muscle that change through.

          Thanks for sharing!

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      We have to protect people who would be targeted by Republicans.

      How’s that going? Republicans are enacting all manner of bigoted policy. What are the Democrats doing to reverse their hateful shit at the federal level?

      I’d love if we didn’t have to worry about fascists, but we don’t have that luxury. As long as they’re a hair’s breadth away from power, we pick the option that opposes them.

      We don’t have that option. We have Democrats, who will always care more about decorum and procedural bullshit than they ever will about protecting anyone.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        They don’t have the numbers in Congress necessary to take federal action. It’s a vicious circle – people don’t think they’re doing enough, so they don’t vote for them. As a result, they don’t have the numbers necessary to actually affect change. And then people don’t think they’re doing enough, and so forth. The justice department is suing states at least, but I agree that’s nowhere near enough.

        If you have a way to get 60 Senate votes to protect minorities (or 50-51 who also are willing to overturn the filibuster) and the House majority, I’m all for it, and you have my support. In the absence of that, any action we take will be inadequate, no matter who is in office.

        And Democrats may not be perfect, but a vote that doesn’t go to fascists is a win in my book. I also think we should try to maintain norms and decorum for as long as possible – if we can beat back fascism without compromising on our institutions, we emerge as a much stronger democracy than if we have to break the rules. If that’s what it takes to stop fascists though, then so be it. I just worry that you end up in a French Revolution type situation where there’s no stable governance because everyone’s given up on the rules.