“organize” is vague. I’ve been doing some activism locally.
But let’s say, for the sake of argument, there is a huge socialist revolution in America. One that somehow didn’t involve voting and the government at all, something completely outside of the system.
The thing with that sort of revolution is that it takes time. Not only to build, but to actually do something when it’s started. It would probably take more than a year, probably more than four years, to effectively take over the country.
So during this revolutionary period, let’s also say you’re a secret revolutionary so you can get into the ballot box. You’re on a secret mission and you can change the election results.
You need to do this in such a way that it’s not obvious that the election has been tampered with, so a third party candidate is right out. If they saw one was rejected to the presidentcy they would throw the whole election out the window and you’d also get caught, so it’s pointless.
So you’re left with generic Republican and generic Democrat. Generic Democrat is doing what generic Democrat does, a lot of lip service to the center and light left, still is in cahoots with big business, saying we can make peace with the revolutionaries, and passively for Israel. Generic Republican is doing what generic Republican is doing, overtly says they are going to attack minorities, overtly saying they are going to crack down on revolutionaries, obviously going to be catering to the interests of capital, and is extremely pro genocide.
So, secret agent, which one do you rig the election for, for the betterment of everyone and the revolution?
The Democrats wouldn’t be making peace with the revolutionaries, lmao. Your hypothetical is already absurd when you imagine that the revolution would risk secret assets to rig elections, but the very idea that outright revolution would be going on and elections would both continue and that the democrats somehow would be aiming for peace with revolutionaries is even more fantastical.
I reject the hypothetical because it will never happen.
Ok, to scared to answer because you don’t like cognitive dissidence, no problem. I’ll talk with people who are willing to have a good faith discussion if you’re not even willing to try to understand people around you.
Not a great tactic for getting support for your cause but you do you
Dudes argument was the hypothetical could and would never happen, but that’s the whole point of hypotheticals. I was going to use it to illustrate a point but hey, they copped out.
That, while the revolution is important and what we need to work towards, it’s also not happening right now. Right now, we need to do what we can. The US government still exists, the empire isn’t toppled yet, so while that system is still around, you should be doing what you can within and without the system to help people. So yeah, both sides are bad, but one is slightly less bad and the other has gone rabid, so maybe don’t hand over the reigns to the rabid worse people? Both are shit sandwiches but one is on fire and covered in glass, so if you have to make everyone eat some of the sandwich, do the regular shit sandwich.
I know what a hypothetical is, the purpose of a hypothetical is to propose a relevant and reasonable question. Your hypothetical only makes sense if we assume that the DNC would treat revolutionaries differently from how the GOP would, which is historically inaccurate. Accusing me of bad-faith for pointing out where your hypothetical falls apart is nonsense, it isn’t bad-faith to reject a useless hypothetical, I took your hypothetical seriously and responded as such.
It was going to illustrate a point but hey, whatever, if you can’t figure out how to play in the sandbox it’s not my fault. I was going somewhere but if you’re refusing to work with me then we can try this a different way or not bother.
What point were you trying to illustrate? That it would be strategically better to organize under a milquetoast liberal regime than a republican regime? My response is how I already responded, neither is acceptable and both would pivot to open fascism against revolution if it actually broke out.
Hell, in modern days, organizing under the GOP is paradoxically easier because they are less competent managers of empire, and spark more discontent among the populace, driving support for revolutionary change. I would never argue for voting for the GOP though, so that’s why I support third party voting, at most.
Nah, accelerationism would be supporting the DNC. Accelerationism isn’t “ruin everything,” it’s a strategy that says that if capitalism continuing results in crisis, we should have the most competent managers of empire in the front seat. This accelerates capital accumulation and crisis. I also said I am not in favor of the “ruin everything” tactic either.
That’s why I am a revolutionary, and I don’t support the DNC nor GOP. I told you why I wouldn’t vote for the GOP nor DNC. Sacrificing minority groups is unnacceptable, and climate change is an ever-present danger. That’s why revolution is necessary.
You’re probably referencing the Nazi bar that stalks communists at the end there, for what reason I don’t know.
Are you going to organize? I’m not an accelerationist so I can’t recommend voting for the DNC.
“organize” is vague. I’ve been doing some activism locally.
But let’s say, for the sake of argument, there is a huge socialist revolution in America. One that somehow didn’t involve voting and the government at all, something completely outside of the system.
The thing with that sort of revolution is that it takes time. Not only to build, but to actually do something when it’s started. It would probably take more than a year, probably more than four years, to effectively take over the country.
So during this revolutionary period, let’s also say you’re a secret revolutionary so you can get into the ballot box. You’re on a secret mission and you can change the election results.
You need to do this in such a way that it’s not obvious that the election has been tampered with, so a third party candidate is right out. If they saw one was rejected to the presidentcy they would throw the whole election out the window and you’d also get caught, so it’s pointless.
So you’re left with generic Republican and generic Democrat. Generic Democrat is doing what generic Democrat does, a lot of lip service to the center and light left, still is in cahoots with big business, saying we can make peace with the revolutionaries, and passively for Israel. Generic Republican is doing what generic Republican is doing, overtly says they are going to attack minorities, overtly saying they are going to crack down on revolutionaries, obviously going to be catering to the interests of capital, and is extremely pro genocide.
So, secret agent, which one do you rig the election for, for the betterment of everyone and the revolution?
Go read a book. Seriously.
Revolution comes out of the barrel of a gun, not a ballot box, not because we seek violence but because capital will respond to nothing less.
I know. It’s like I was using this hypothetical to illustrate a point. Get some reading comprehension, I was leading up to a point.
This is the most 12 year old “what if” nonsense retort I’ve ever seen.
I was gonna go somewhere with it but I guess people can’t like, imagine something very well these days.
The Democrats wouldn’t be making peace with the revolutionaries, lmao. Your hypothetical is already absurd when you imagine that the revolution would risk secret assets to rig elections, but the very idea that outright revolution would be going on and elections would both continue and that the democrats somehow would be aiming for peace with revolutionaries is even more fantastical.
I reject the hypothetical because it will never happen.
Bro never heard of what hypothetical means, lmao
Ok, to scared to answer because you don’t like cognitive dissidence, no problem. I’ll talk with people who are willing to have a good faith discussion if you’re not even willing to try to understand people around you.
Not a great tactic for getting support for your cause but you do you
“What if my arms and legs turn into rubber and droop down and you have to help me carry my arms like a big firehose”
“Not only is that never gonna happen, it has fuck all to do with studying for your driving test”
“Psh, bro’s never heard of a hypothetical.”
Dudes argument was the hypothetical could and would never happen, but that’s the whole point of hypotheticals. I was going to use it to illustrate a point but hey, they copped out.
What was the point gonna be?
That, while the revolution is important and what we need to work towards, it’s also not happening right now. Right now, we need to do what we can. The US government still exists, the empire isn’t toppled yet, so while that system is still around, you should be doing what you can within and without the system to help people. So yeah, both sides are bad, but one is slightly less bad and the other has gone rabid, so maybe don’t hand over the reigns to the rabid worse people? Both are shit sandwiches but one is on fire and covered in glass, so if you have to make everyone eat some of the sandwich, do the regular shit sandwich.
I know what a hypothetical is, the purpose of a hypothetical is to propose a relevant and reasonable question. Your hypothetical only makes sense if we assume that the DNC would treat revolutionaries differently from how the GOP would, which is historically inaccurate. Accusing me of bad-faith for pointing out where your hypothetical falls apart is nonsense, it isn’t bad-faith to reject a useless hypothetical, I took your hypothetical seriously and responded as such.
It was going to illustrate a point but hey, whatever, if you can’t figure out how to play in the sandbox it’s not my fault. I was going somewhere but if you’re refusing to work with me then we can try this a different way or not bother.
What point were you trying to illustrate? That it would be strategically better to organize under a milquetoast liberal regime than a republican regime? My response is how I already responded, neither is acceptable and both would pivot to open fascism against revolution if it actually broke out.
Hell, in modern days, organizing under the GOP is paradoxically easier because they are less competent managers of empire, and spark more discontent among the populace, driving support for revolutionary change. I would never argue for voting for the GOP though, so that’s why I support third party voting, at most.
Removed by mod
Nah, accelerationism would be supporting the DNC. Accelerationism isn’t “ruin everything,” it’s a strategy that says that if capitalism continuing results in crisis, we should have the most competent managers of empire in the front seat. This accelerates capital accumulation and crisis. I also said I am not in favor of the “ruin everything” tactic either.
That’s why I am a revolutionary, and I don’t support the DNC nor GOP. I told you why I wouldn’t vote for the GOP nor DNC. Sacrificing minority groups is unnacceptable, and climate change is an ever-present danger. That’s why revolution is necessary.
You’re probably referencing the Nazi bar that stalks communists at the end there, for what reason I don’t know.