• altphoto@lemmy.today
    5·
    16 小时前

    Let’s not muddy the waters…the orange turd we can’t name is the type of ism we don’t want ever again. We also don’t want George Bush or another repeat of any of the political families currently in power or their friends. We want direct vote not college vote. WTF is an electoral college doing now that we have communication technology? Its an old and stupid idea.

  • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zipEnglish
    5·
    17 小时前

    If Mamdani wins and keeps his mandate strong to the point that opposition to him is career suicide, he can implement some amazing improvements.

    Bernie’s success in Burlington was never going to translate to broader America, but NYC is hard to ignore.

    The real test will be what Democrats do nationwide in response to a Mayor Mamdani administration. If they do the same old New Democrat/Third Way bullshit they’ve been doing since Bill Clinton won* in 1992, they’ll continue to be irrelevant in the face of populist hucksters like Trump.

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    2·
    14 小时前

    We need a digital liquid democracy platform. We have the technology and infrastructure for it now, and it’s time for the people to rule themselves.

  • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
    4·
    19 小时前

    Democracy can and will work once a simple rule is implemented. Namely: no one who wants the power to rule should ever be allowed anywhere near power. Of course the rich won’t allow such a law to be passed, and enforcing it is the stuff of thought crime dystopic nightmares, but I’m sure we can overcome those small issues.

  • VoxAliorum@lemmy.ml
    7·
    23 小时前

    I really like the idea of randomly elected representatives. Sure, they will try to better their situation for afterwards but with enough corruption control (which is probably easier to implement), this will only ensure that they support their kind of workers a bit more than the rest.

  • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
    14·
    1 天前

    Democracy has as a necessary precondition that people are intelligent enough to differentiate good candidates from bad candidates.

    The real question therefore is whether the people are intelligent enough. That decides their fate.

    • narwhal@mander.xyz
      23·
      1 天前

      I think your capacity to think is irrelevant or even played against you when the elites pour obscene amounts of money to change your perception of reality. Even the greatest minds can’t escape this.

      • turdcollector69@lemmy.world
        6·
        9 小时前

        I feel like the belief that intelligence somehow grants immunity to propaganda has utterly devastated media literacy and subsequently our political landscape.

        When people started taking memes and blogs as legitimate sources of information we were cooked.

      • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
        6·
        18 小时前

        I have come to dislike the word “education” as it refers to plato’s cave analogy in such a way that somebody else leads you out of it.

        “Education” is therefore not something that you do yourself, but that somebody else does on you. It is therefore objectifying and puts the humans in a passive position.

        Meanwhile, “insight” or “inspiration” is something that you do yourself as it is you who brings up the interest to learn something. Therefore it is a much better word.

        • mad_lentil@lemmy.caEnglish
          3·
          14 小时前

          Yeah I kind of didn’t like that word as I was writing it. Similar to how “tutoring” literally means to “straighten” or basically to inculcate to normativity.

          Meanwhile, “insight” or “inspiration” is something that you do yourself […]

          Good edit, this is a better word choice.

  • PearOfJudes@lemmy.ml
    6·
    1 天前

    ngl I do hate this kind of nhilism in terms of democracy. Like I agree with that one quote from that greek guy which says that a democracy needs smart people, but democracy is the best system we’ve come up with that to a small extent, makes politicians meet the peoples needs.

    • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      4·
      18 小时前

      The ancient greeks did not consider electoralism to be democracy. They used a combination of direct democracy and sortition. And it should be apparent now that they were right, and we’ve been played for fools for 200 years by the capitalist class who holds all of the true power in our states.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      16·
      1 天前

      The problem isn’t democracy, it’s democracy under capitalism, and the idea that we can actually transition to socialism via electoralist means.

  • SoyViking [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    62·
    2 天前

    You’re giving the liberals too much credit by saying they admit that electoralism has never worked.

    The liberal position is not only that electoralism works but that it is the only thing that works.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.mlOP
      27·
      2 天前

      True. After years of letdowns, some might accept that electoralism is a rigged game, but then the next generation completely forgets everything.

      And for all of them, the socialist road is demonized and kept hidden, so no alternative seems possible.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      23·
      2 天前

      There’s a split in liberalism, between true believers and those disillusioned but who can’t see a way out. I believe the latter are more common these days, and are the target of the meme. The cure is organizing and reading theory, becoming a leftist in the process, but right now they still cling to faux-progressivism and electoralism.

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    45·
    2 天前

    The great lie of liberal democracy is the idealist notion that literally anything can be voted in if enough people vote for it, and that this will have political supremacy over those in power. This analysis puts the state outside of class struggle, above it, and not as the mutually reinforcing superstructural aspect of society. The role of the state is to reinforce the base, ie the mode of production, and it does so through propagating ruling class ideology (ie, liberalism), and through a monopoly of violence.

    Electoralism is a sham. The lessons of the failures of electoralism scar the global south, the coup against comrade Allende taught us all too well. The state is not outside or above class struggle, but is mired in it. Without replacing the bourgeois state with a socialist, proletarian one, the ready-made levers for reinforcing the bourgeois mode of production will cause a reversion. The Paris Commune was the first such example of this failure in action, and it has happened again, such as with the coup against Allende and the installment of Pinochet.

    What is there to do, then? Organize. Build up parallel structures that take the place of existing capitalist mechanisms. Join a party, read theory, and solidify the politically advanced of the working class under one united banner. Build a dedication to the people, defend and platform the indigenous, colonized, queer, disabled, marginalized communities, and unite the broad working class. It is through organization and revolution that we can actually move on into a better world.

    If anyone reading wants a place to start with theory, I made an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list, aimed at absolute beginners. Give it a look!

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
      12·
      2 天前

      Without replacing the bourgeois state with a socialist, proletarian one, the ready-made levers for reinforcing the bourgeois mode of production will cause a reversion. The Paris Commune was the first such example of this failure in action.

      The Soviet Union was one of the latest. Yeltsin taking office, failing to get his way, and then shelling parliament into surrender being the most prominent example of the failures of electoralism, even in an ostensibly proletarian state.

      Gaza also a great instance of the wages of strict electoralism. You rally your people behind a more militant political body (Hamas in 2006) and the end result is your heavily armed neighbors using the results of an election as causa belli. Hell, the American Civil War is another great example, what with a Southern coup government rising up after a Presidential election defeat.

      It is through organization and revolution that we can actually move on into a better world.

      It gives us a fighting chance, at least. But it is also hard, painful, and requiring enormous self-sacrifice particularly among the early adopters.

  • stinky@redlemmy.comEnglish
    7·
    1 天前

    Which greek philosophers said that? and what did they say? do you have any sources to confirm?

    • Dessalines@lemmy.mlOP
      26·
      1 天前

      Both plato and aristotle, but aristotle thought that any election-based state turned out in practice, to be an oligarchy or aristocracy, not a democracy (which he define as rule by the poor, with random selection by lot).

      Aristotle’s politics books 4-6 talk a lot about this:

      http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.4.four.html

      In other words, what today we call “representative democracy”, the ancient greeks correctly identified as oligarchy.

      • jaxxed@lemmy.world
        4·
        1 天前

        Did the greeks suggest any replacement?

        I see electoralism weaknesses, but what other systems are less prone to power capture and then raw authoritarianism?

        If people don’t choose their representation, then who does? Or is representation the flaw?

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          13·
          1 天前

          Socialist democracy. The political structure is a way to reinforce the economic base, so by moving onto socialism, the working class is in control of the state. The issue isn’t with voting, period, but the idea that we can escape capitalism just by doing so.

          • jaxxed@lemmy.world
            1·
            17 小时前

            That is more clear. I think I should have better defined “electoralism”. Social democracy sounds much better than raw unfettered capitalism.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              7·
              17 小时前

              Social democracy is capitalism with safety nets, I mean socialism. Rather than private ownership being principle, ie covering the large firms and key industries with the state dominated by capitalists, public ownership should be principle and the working class should dominate the state.

      • stinky@redlemmy.comEnglish
        5·
        1 天前

        Your response is rational, informational, based in fact, and measurable.

        The original image is uncited incendiary garbage. This is not a time where we need more division and infighting. If you can’t be nice, please just stick to the facts.