Turns out, if you’re further left than either realistic candidate (because FPTP), it makes it really easy to figure out who you should vote for. “I wonder if I should vote for the person who’s not left enough for my liking, or the one is so far beyond that as to be the diametric opposite of left. Whatever shall I do?”
Well, the electoral college isn’t actually FPTP, it’s even worse than that.
You’re not wrong. I was keeping it simple.
Both candidates fall under the latter category. An AG that was a prosecutor with a history of perpetuating the war on drugs and arguing in court innocent men should stay imprisoned because prison labor is good for the economy, who was also vice president to one of the most right wing men ever elected?
That’s literally the state half of the fascist alignment of corporate and state power.
Except, none of that is true and you’re just making shit up.
K-hive is now declaring Harris was never a prosecutor?
Liberals and doublethink.
Yeah, the “you’re voting for genocide” argument is also ridiculous, as the choices essentially boil down to:
🔲 One genocide (with a potential of partial mitigation)
🔲 2+ genocides (and the one being even worse)
🔲 Don’t care (in green)
🔲 Don’t care (in yellow)etc.
Genocide is bad. That should not be a controversial statement. I will use my vote to choose the least genocide that it has the power to choose, and I will use my other energy to advocate for less (and hopefully zero) genocide.
You don’t have to like that fact. I certainly don’t like it. But this is exactly what harm reduction looks like.
This is just a monstrous reframing of a bipartisan genocide. Voting dem or voting rep is a vote for genocide, full stop, because they support the same genocide to the same magnitude, materially. Pretending Dems are better because genocide makes some of their voterbase sad is wrong.
I will use my vote to choose the least genocide that it has the power to choose
Then vote Greens or PSL.
Then vote Greens or PSL.
Sorry, I’m not going to vote “don’t care” on genocide no matter how many faux leftists pretend it’s the morally superior option.
It’s morally superior to vote for genocide but pretend your flavor of genocide isn’t the exact same as the other flavor of genocide.
Look, if you don’t care about LGBT folks, women who need abortions, asylum seekers, etc. you can pull that “don’t care” lever. But “I care about making a symbolic, but ultimately toothless, gesture about Palestine more than I care about the lives of thousands, possibly millions of others” is what voting third-party is telling the system right now. If that makes you feel morally superior, we’re at an impasse because I don’t know how to explain to someone that an action to save lives is more powerful than an unrealistic gesture about saving even more lives, but which will realistically increase the amount of death and suffering.
Is there a red line for you in the sand, or would you vote for Hitler if 101% Hitler was running? When do you abandon hope in the Democrats, if being genocidal Imperialists doing nothing to help marginalized groups, and are running to the right of Trump in 2016 with respect to immigration, doesn’t?
That’s a non-sequitur, because that’s not what’s happening by any means. But thanks for ceding the point that you’re okay feeling morally superior by doing something that’ll get more people killed.
Look, if you don’t care about LGBT folks, women who need abortions, asylum seekers, etc. you can pull that “don’t care” lever
Not a person living in USA, wouldn’t a coalition govt be better then, as the Roe vs Wade issue happened while the Democrats were in power?
Or are coalitions not allowed?
Or is the central govt powerless in such issues?The US government is essentially a theatre troup trying to convince the public there is nothing outside the 2 party system, while both parties serve their donors alone.
The overturning of Roe vs. Wade was a direct consequence of Trump’s election, as it was the three justices he was able to appoint (including Mitch McConnell’s fuckery about Merrick Garland) who changed the Supreme Court’s makeup to include so many right-wing partisans.
You’re going to have to explain this convoluted logic to your grandchildren when they ask you why you voted for genocide.
What I’m going to have to explain to them is why I voted “don’t care” in 2016. That’s a mistake I will forever have to live with. But if I can convince a few people not to make that same mistake, I will at least be able to reduce the harm I did.
Dont care may be not voting at all, not automatically applicable to people who vote for the candidates libs dont like.
Voting third party is telling the system that you don’t have a preference between the two candidates who have even the slightest chance of winning. It sucks that there’s such constrained communication one can do (and we need a better voting system), but in the short term, the three options I’ve listed are what you have the options to communicate.
The cool thing about independent thought is I dont have to ascribe the same value judgement or perspective as the DNC. Im able to vote closer to my principles by choosing a socialist candidate every time the DNC nominees move toward the right.
Bad faith lemmings will paint that as not caring about the outcome, but I can sleep at night knowing that when offered a choice between slow descent to fascism and rapid descent to fascism, I chose no fascism.
eh. one thing is to choose a candidate who seem less bad somehow, another is to be an actual liberal.
The US has two parties: center-right and far right.
(This is a lie internet lefties tell each other)
What’s the lie?
While it isn’t what they mean, I would say both parties are different flavors of far-right. Both are genocidal imperial warmongers that promulgate oppression of the marginalized in support of neoliberal capitalism. One does it openly while the other plays a game of taking credit for social changes it opposed and occasionally throwing a bone or two to those constituencies even while materially screwing them over in all other ways. And it will throw them under the bus the moment they can get away with it.
Really, they are part of the same team and they fight those opposed to them far harder than they fight each other. Good cop/bad cop for the same precinct.
That Democrats would be considered right-of-center in other countries. They’re clearly a center-left party.
Center-left? In what way? They are genocidal imperialists, they aren’t anticapitalist in any form.
They want to use the power of government to reduce the harms of capitalism, via minimum wages, social safety nets, child tax credit, subsidizing more environmentally friendly energy production and electric cars.
No they are not as far left as you and the people you talk to online, I didn’t say that. You are allowed to want different policies. You’re just incorrect to call them right wing.
They want to use the power of government to reduce the harms of capitalism, via minimum wages, social safety nets, child tax credit, subsidizing more environmentally friendly energy production and electric cars.
-
No they don’t, lol
-
That isn’t “center-left,” that’s center-right.
No they are not as far left as you and the people you talk to online, I didn’t say that. You are allowed to want different policies. You’re just incorrect to call them right wing.
Leftism starts at anti-Capitalism.
Ok I don’t expect you to see it but this is exactly why I said it’s a lie that online lefties tell themselves. Globally, in real life politics, yes you absolutely can be center-left without demanding the overthrow of Capitalism.
-
minimum wages, social safety nets, child tax credit, subsidizing more environmentally friendly energy production and electric cars.
Republicans have also votes for bills supporting all of the above.
You have to realize that Republicans are not the party pushing for these things. What you are saying does not retort anything I said.
They’re clearly a center-left party.
by what measure?
Seeking social justice through redistributive social and economic policies of government.
the extent and effort at which they create and enforce those policies is the measure of left or right in this country; not the existence of those policies because both republican and democrats say that they want those things; but when you investigate beyond the lip service you find that conservatives will give token-at-best support for the policies while leftists will support it with full vigor.
tldr: the democrats very tepid support for these things is what makes them center-right; because the party that calls itself conservative takes pride in doing this, while most democrats do it too and hope you don’t notice.
longer: democrats only push for re-distributive policies (if at all) once it becomes popular and they’re forced to respond; not because democrats are progressive. see biden’s decades long anti-gay crusade that suddenly stopped once he needed the votes and his expansion upon trumps draconian anti-immigration policies; or clinton’s establishment of anti-gay service and anti-gay marriage; and then see kamala backtrack on liberal positions like pre-k; community college, childcare, medicare expansion, etc. only the democrats very weakly seek social or economic policies of government and; for the most part; behave like republicans when it’s time to put their money where their mouth is; that’s why they’re center-right
it sounds like you’re judging these books by their cover without reading any of the material. we’re on social media so it’s par for the course; but your takes are going to be divorced from reality if you don’t bother to go further than shallow understanding.
Actions speak louder than words, though even their words aren’t saying much these days.
Her campaign videos with Obama asking for fundraising money boil down to “Gieb $5 or I let the orange man win” for me.
No, this is literally where the U.S. falls on a global political spectrum. The Democrats would be considered center-right in most other nations. Even by their own historical standards, they’re center right; if you took a Democrat from 1975 and transported them to 1995, they’d ask you why the party had adopted the Republicans’ fiscal policies.
Well, from where you’re standing, everyone’s a leftie.
surely if you enable a genocide that makes you extreme right right? so it’s extreme right and extreme right
Eh, not sure it’s got anything to do with the political spectrum anymore. At this point I’m not sure what to call it but the US and allies’ obsession for maintaining ties with Israel no matter what feels divorced from… Well, a lot of things, really. But among them the left/right spectrum.
I can’t talk much. Canada is also selling Israel the supplies they use to do their mass murdering.
Support for Israel is right-wing, not because Israel is genocidal, but because support for Israel is how the US secures the Petro-Dollar and brutally extracts the Global South with predatory IMF loans. It’s Imperialism in action.
Liberal extreme right and authoritarian extrem right.
I don’t understand how the Democrats in USA can be considered left-wing. Sure, they are more left than the Republicans, but in my eyes they certainly not left-wing.
I don’t know what country you are from or how your voting system works. But I will guess that your country has many parties and after the election, a governing coalition is formed.
In the US voting system, similar parties get punished by stealing votes from each other. So, in effect, we have to form our coalitions before the election and choose the single candidate that will stand for all of us. So, you can think of the Democratic Party as the Democratic Coalition, made up of some truly left-wing factions, as well as some not very left-wing or even centrist factions, and so our candidate will be much more watered down than what you’d see in a different system.
I am from Sweden. You are correct that my country has many different parties that together form a governing coalition.
Thank you for making it a bit clearer to me! I appreciate it.
Calling the democratic party a “coalition” is extremely generous. It’s historically been a corrupt patronage network since Van Buren and any attempt to make it represent the will of its voters is thwarted internally. Its history is a graveyard of progressive movements.
There are also Right-wing factions in the “Democratic coalition” you mention like The Cheney’s.
You said it yourself, they are less far-right than Republicans, so Liberals get to pretend they are punks and rebels despite supporting the status quo.
basically, the US is a one party system, but it has two parties
“The United States is also a one-party state, but with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.” - Julius Nyerere
Easy. We set the FBI on all the actual leftists decades ago. So the movement is having to slowly rebuild itself in the US. As a result Progressives are the farthest left things most Americans have experience with.
In the American sensibilities, the Democrats are left wing.
I know we’ve shat on Americans too many times that Democrats are not leftists and Republicans are far-right, but there is a place and time for doing so and I learned to cut Americans some slack. Americans simply have different Overton window because of different history and culture (I have explained before as to why, but I cannot be bothered to write another wall of text about it). Other countries don’t even follow a left and right political dichotomy. Many places, especially in developing countries, vote on personalities than policies. But few of us crap on people from developing countries for not following policy-based discourse, or not following the European-originated sensibilities of “left or right” politics.
Americans are heavily propagandized and are politically illiterate. Generally speaking, they do not even know there is a world beyond “liberal” (Democrat) and “conservative” (GOP). It is considered nerdy and wonkish to even know very much about the two party bourgeois electoral system. So their sensibilities only mean as much as propaganda has eliminated any possibility of political education, let alone capacity for action in solidarity with humanity (even when empathy is there, correct analysis is not) for the vast majority of them. That requires developing projects dedicated to political organization and education outside and away from the two bourgeois parties.
Americans should only be cut slack to the extent that they are ignorant. They should not be cut slack for their knowing embrace of war, domination, racism, and so on. And when you simply inform them of the existence of such things, they will rapidly educate you in their commitment to the project. Perhaps they will momentarily feel bad, but most of the time they will quickly find a psychological salve for cognitive dissonance, lest they act outside of the tracks laid down for them by reactionary and genocidal capital. Our work on the left is to peel off more and more from those tracks and turn them into fellow track-peelers, this is naturally an opportunity for exponential growth if we can consistentlu break past what keeps them on-track.
[Partisan] americans also like to wave off the roughly 1/3 of eligible voters who don’t vote at all as if they just forgot or were too lazy to vote or something. A lot of people are disillusioned with the whole thing, but the partisans are the loudest and the media mostly cares about them so it makes it sound like it’s 50/50.
According to the latest gallup data about 27% identify with each of the two major parties and about 43% as independent (of major parties).
Yes, this is absolutely true. And comparing those who say, “why should I even engage?” with those who overemphasize electoralism I have a hard time saying the latter are more correct. There is a visceral truth to someone who votes for X to get positive change all of with all their friends, then doesn’t see that change because X sold out, screwed them over, told them a line, etc. That is more valid and politically astute than mental gymnastics for why those who campaign on something don’t fight for it once in office.
We don’t currently have our own special political spectrum.
We can make a new one for you so you can feel better about this whole situation. Let’s call it the “the imperial political spectrum”. I’d be happy with that solution. Then you can say you’re left on the imperial political spectrum and it’s all good.
Because American politics is weird and partisan a f.
Anything even remotely left will get you labelled a Commie or tankie by the right, while anything remotely right will get you labelled a Nazi by the left.
while anything remotely right will get you labelled a Nazi by the left.
Yeah it’s crazy how attacking the White House just cuz you can’t deal with the results like an adult gets a group a bad rep. What an unfair world what with actions having consequences and all that.
To be fair, a Left wing revolution is necessary. The Jan 6ers weren’t Nazis for trying to do a coup, but because fascism is Capitalism in decay, and an alliance between the Petite Bourgeoisie and Bourgeoisie. Most Jan 6ers were small business owners and the like.
Oh it’s been like that long before January 6th, and long before Trump even stepped foot in the Republican primaries eight years ago.
That wasn’t me defending Jan 6th either. Trump’s little Beer Hall Putsch was frankly inexcusable, and the fact that he’s likely not going to face any kind of criminal repercussions for it makes the US look weaker than the Weimar Republic.
The Left begins with anti-capitalism. If you aren’t against capitalism, you aren’t left.
Libs are seething at this absolute correct take. If you’re pro free market, you’re a liberal and thats as ‘left’ as you’ll ever be.
Libs are seething, period.
I suppose you could be a free-market type of market socialist? Heavily doubt its common though
That’s actually a really good layman’s explanation. I’m going to use that combined with, “you’re not a capitalist just because you support them. Capitalists are the people who own the capital.”
Won’t even draw a hard line at genocide
It sucks. Liberals will be blaming Arab Americans going to Jill Stein if Harris loses, rather than Harris and Biden, just you wait.
when they say they’re left, but then they’re authoritarian
Marx and Engels were called “authoritarian” so frequently by their contemporaries that Engels wrote On Authority. What’s considered “authoritarian” is a moving target, an arbitrary line in the sand just for people who succeed in revolution, or at least in throwing off western Imperialist powers.
If your argument is that Marxism isn’t Leftist then that’s hilarious
my argument isn’t that marx isn’t left (especially since I’ve read his later works), nor that auth-left isn’t left… just that I’m an anti authotitarian leftist
Gotcha, you’re just anti-Marxist then. Can’t say I agree with that, but that’s less nonsensical than saying Marx isn’t left.
I don’t belive marx to be really auth, since he was striving for a stateless society, I just disagree with him on how we get there
so I’m not exactly an anti marxist, but neither a marxist
What Marx calls the “State” and what Anarchists call the “State” are different concepts, ergo what Marx calls “Stateless” would still have hierarchy, and what Anarchists call “Stateless” would still have implementations of class oppression. Marxists and Anarchists do not want the “same thing.”
If we take your statement that your only major aggreement with Marx is a “Stateless” society, but you’re working off the Anarchist definition of the State, then you are necessarily anti-Marxist. I’d rather you say that openly than try to twist Marxism despite being an Anarchist, so I hope it’s just a misunderstanding on your part.
well, then I’m an “anti-marxist” I wouldn’t really like to put it that way tho, since I agree with him on a lot of things
also sry for twisting things, it’s been a long time since I read marx
That’s fine, I would just focus more on your “pro-Anarchist” identity than your “anti-‘authoritarian’” side. You can be whatever you want to be, your political views are your own.
also sry for twisting things, it’s been a long time since I read marx
It wasn’t a moral judgement! Just wanted to clear up a clear misconception. I obviously recommend reading more Marx. What do you agree with about Marx?
Authoritarian left is a thing…
ik, it’s just that I’m anarchist left
No it isn’t.
Ever heard of the USSR? Was a big thing once.
Yes, but drag doesn’t see what the USSR has to do with leftism.
Drag has a funny understanding of the word leftism, then.
Radicalization vs. sensibility
I wouldn’t call Kamala a radical, but I guess I could see why you think that.
I mean she is very radical, in support of Israel.
“Sensibility” is maintaining a dying genocidal Empire?
Ah yes, genocide and imperialism are just international peace and order :3
Stop with that rhetoric. It’s over done
As long as the people yearn for a truly free future socialism will never be finished. Liberalism will lead the workers to their graves while the capitalist nods. So no, I will never stop my rhetoric and I will never stop promoting freedom. If the workers being liberated offends you so much maybe you should vote for Trump
It doesn’t offend me at all. I just know you don’t know the difference between socialism and communism
Then you would know not everyone on the left side is communist
I didn’t say they were. That’s just you assuming what my political and social views are. Good try though
You just assumed my knowledge of leftism, I used the term Socialist because its a term that applies to all of them (on the left side).
Get your nasty political memes out of here
That’s the old passage to lemmy.world. We don’t go there anymore.
Lemmy.world is anti-Marxist, including the moderators, so posting leftist memes there is a no-go.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Fidel Castro and Che Guevara were ridiculously handsome dudes
Sankara too, holy moly
Removed by mod
'Aha, I have depicted my opponent as the soyjak emoji and myself as the chad!"
Removed by mod
Nobody did.
Saying liberals aren’t left wing is gatekeeping the term. Imagine saying that I’m not left leaning enough. Wtf is that supposed mean!
Would you prefer blue conservatives?
I used to think you were one of the good guys
Leftism is to go against the current class order, Liberalism supports it. Leftism isn’t an arbitrary vibe, if you’re pro-Capitalism then you aren’t against Capitalism!
Leftism isn’t to go against capitalism though. Leftism broadly refers to the ideology that supports socioeconomic equality. If I’m to remind you of the origin of the terms “left” and “right” as it relates to politics, the terms right and left refer to political affiliations originating early in the French Revolutionary era. “The Left” implied support for republicanism - becoming a republic, and not American republicanism, secularism and civil liberties.
Political scientists and other analysts usually regard the left as including anarchists, communists, socialists, democratic socialists, social democrats, left-libertarians, progressives, and social liberals. Movements for racial equality, as well as trade unionism, have also been associated with the left. Source
The sort of leftism you Marxist-Leninists advocate for is radical leftism. Social liberalism is still leftist.
Leftism broadly refers to the ideology that supports socioeconomic equality
Then by your own definition Liberalism is right wing! This is ridiculous.
Liberalism is the political ideology of mainstream capitalism, particularly for the imperialist countries. As the global economic system for decades and decades, this makes liberals a conservative ideology, its members attempt to maintain the fundamental capitalist status quo. Its members that attempt to make substantial changes begin to push at the fringes of liberalism and end up working against it. Reactionaries try to “restore” a largely fictitious past glory and reinforce conservative social mores in order to scapegoat the problems of liberalism onto marginalized communities. Those on the anticapitalist left, those that actually oppose the system itself, are the actually progressive historical actors nowadays. You could have given liberals that label in the 1700s to mid 1800s perhaps, but they are not the defenders of the current order.
you are not left enough.
its not about gatekeeping anything its about describing reality, if u are a worker either u are a pathetic boot licker or u are leftist and ur mouth looks rather muddy.
(just straight up misogyny)
Scratched liberal alert
Smart cutie pies?
I mean, she is prettier than Marx. Which one did you want to date?
I’m sorry but like, look at his beard. I’d date Marx
That is a pretty good reason.
sankara and luxembourg are both 10/10s
Removed by mod
Didn’t Castro lead the group that freed their country from the dictator Batista?
They have a very high literacy rate now. Their life expectancy is quite decent in their region.
And they have good healthcare.All this in about 60 or so years, while being under sanctions and other crisis.
Multiplied life expectancy by 1.5, brought literacy rates to 99%+, freed the slaves and peasants from the fascist Batista regime, there’s a lot to love about Cuba.
Who are the bottom two people on the left side?
Thomas Sankara, a Marxist-Leninist who liberated Burkina Faso, and Rosa Luxemburg, of Reform or Revolution fame.
Thomas Sankara and Rosa Luxemburg
I’d like to see memes that are embracing the left but with a clear cut against authoritarianism. This one is too ambiguous.
