this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
8 points (52.9% liked)

Memes

45673 readers
888 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/4134651

American bourgeois democracy

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago

Typical "both sides" bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yes they're both shit, but one IS much worse than the other. Don't let this kind of shit tier meme allow fascism to slide in (yes trump is a textbook fascist)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Biden sidestepped congress to fund and provide weapons for genocide and the dnc went to court to tell their voters to eat shit, pretty fascist if you ask me even if they wave a pride flag as they fascist.

Pretty crazy how everyone is cool with fascism as long as they leave the gays alone (because, famously, fascists who pit group A against group B have NEVER gone after group A once Group B was subjugated)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah that's not fascism. Pretty fucked up, sure, but not fascism

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Going to court to have it ruled that you're a private institution that's not bound by any obligation to your voters, supporters, etc sounds pretty "centralized autocracy" to me.

But whatever getting semantic won't stop them from gunning for marginalized populations in a few years in order to ""court centrists."" Look forward to seeing how yall justify it then!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

Easy choice.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I've decided to abstain from voting, this time.

Granted, it may be because I'm nowhere near the U.S.

If you are, though, do pick your poison. You have this system, make use of it. And none of that "but it won't change anything" nonsense!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Electoralism is a bullshit. Only a revolution will change things

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Revolutions, on average, make things worse. Seriously, the outcome of the median revolution is pretty terrible. Things need to be incredibly bad before it's an improvement in expected value to do a revolution, instead of trying to improve the existing system.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Do you genuinely believe you can vote Socialism into place in the first world?

[–] [email protected] -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Seems to be working for the Nordic countries. I genuinely think that if you try a revolution in America, what you get will not be socialism. If you're lucky, you will fail and get violent government rerribution. If you aren't lucky, you'll get full on authoritarianism, with mass bloody purges of undesirables of all shades. The rate of revolutions leading to good outcomes sucks. Mostly you get various flavors of dictatorships. Often with state sponsored mass murder.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Nordic countries are not Socialist, they are Capitalist with ever-eroding safety nets that still depend on Imperialism to subsidize their safety nets. Their disparity is rising as Capitalism decays.

Revolution, ie siezing control of the state, does not need to be violent.

You should read Reform or Revolition.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

How would you do so nonviolently? Would you get your people into office? That seems like the nonviolent way to seize control of the state, but if there is another, I'm interested to hear it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Syndicalism is another method. The vast majority of Leftists don't believe you can simply use a Capitalist state for Socialism.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Wasn't familiar with that term, looked it up. That looks like reform within the system rather than seizing the state. To do "through industrial unionism, seeks to unionize workers according to industry and advance their demands through strikes, with the eventual goal of gaining control over the means of production and the economy at large through social ownership," you need to not get shot when you strike. Trump would absolutely hire the Pinkertons of old to kill strikers and union leaders. Biden has been an outlier in how good he has been for unions, and capital is trying to use the captured supreme Court against him in that. So, I'd prefer that he stay in office and keep doing that, while yes, absolutely, 1000%, organize and do strikes and generally fight harder from within the system than just casting a vote every four years. Just don't flip the table or encourage others to rather than do these things, is my perspective, and that's what revolution means in my understanding.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Syndicalism is literally siezing the means, it isn't reform. What do you think Revolution is? Bombing everyone?

Biden being less terrible doesn't make him a force for good.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Biden being less terrible doesn’t make him a force for good.

No, but him being adequate to not dragging leftists out behind the barn and having them shot is a necessary basis for any sort of improvement.

What do you think Revolution is? Bombing everyone?

Bombing everyone seems inefficient to the goal, which in a revolution is overthrow of the existing order. I'm not aware of any peaceful overthrowings of existing orders, can you point to some?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Depends on what you consider peaceful, I suppose.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What would you say was the least violent revolution that succeeded, by whatever metrics you use for those words?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Depends. The Russian Revolution was fairly bloodless, and overthrew the Monarchy. The USSR obviously had a whole slew of different issues, but was dramatically better than the Monarchy.

How do you think Electoralism could achieve genuine change?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Sure the country needs to be turned off and on again, but clearly the median isn't interested in that. So what remains? The system.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago