The headlines over the past few weeks have been unrelenting. The Trump administration is activating the full power of the federal government against perceived enemies, from liberal groups to elections officials to a former FBI director.Meanwhile, autocratic powers like China and Russia are running i...
Hopefully yes, because that’s exactly what it is. You can’t fight fascism with fascism lite.
You don’t vote for the candidate you want to fight for you, you vote for the candidate that’s easier for you to fight.
It’s not about fighting fascism with fascism lite, it’s about fighting fascism lite instead of full strength. Whatever you’re going to fight with is going to be much more effective against a weaker enemy.
If that is the case, then I assume you voted for the geriatric cult of personality who will be dead within the year?
The fascist with a cabinet full of fascists, congressional control, SCOTUS control, and a detailed fascist playbook?
No, that would be stupid. Even if he is on death’s door, his replacement will be just as bad.
Ah ok. Then I assume you voted for the PSL candidate who isn’t quite on-board with full communism now (She still believes in markets) , but could probably be swayed that way right?
I did not give any consideration to candidates with no chance of winning, for obvious reasons.
I voted for the one who wasn’t a rabid fascist, and also stood a snowball’s chance of beating the rabid fascist. So the Dem candidate.
If it was useful to vote for allies instead of enemies (say, if our elections were some variety of ranked choice) I would have voted for whoever was most socially liberal and closest to market socialism (since that’s about the farthest we can hope to push the needle in a term or two; after that I’d start considering positions moderately to the left of that, rinse and repeat).
But it isn’t, so I didn’t. Dirty break is the only strategy that makes sense in our political environment. Obstruct the worst major party while you build a better platform grassroots style, and then once that platform is popular and normalized, and the worst major party is neutralized, then start running outside the Dem tent.
Voting for a candidate with no chance of success, with a population effectively propagandized against the platform, does not improve the material conditions of the working class in any way.
Ah, so the very least you could do, not voting for capitalism, you refused to do. However you have concocted a series of didactic expressions to help you rationalize your unwavering support of the “lesser evil”. But added some additional qualifiers that make your position indistinguishable from the average blue no-matter who voter. I’m sure eventually, somehow, your pragmatically compromised morality will certainly defeat fascism.
In the meantime, things have gotten a lot worse for a lot of people, so maybe it’s time for you and the other liberals to try something different?
What? Only if by “least” you mean “least helpful”. Capitalism was going to win that election. It’s probably going to win the next one. The choice we have is between fighting Christo-nationalist fascist capitalism, or milquetoast neo-liberal capitalism.
The very least we can do is choose the fight with fewer literal casualties. Accelerationism is cringe.
That’s exactly my point. Protest voting keeps not doing anything, fascists keep winning. You have to abandon this strategy, it obviously isn’t working. The Dems aren’t going to “learn their lesson”, and your third party darling isn’t going to gain 49.97% of the vote overnight.
There are appropriate axes of praxis for principles and integrity. FPTP elections ain’t one of them. Elections are a support action. You’re not going to get to vote for someone you like until after a lot of people spend a lot of time on some serious local work.
Fascists keep winning cause the Dems are also fascist. Either support actual non-fascist parties or just accept you’re no better than Blue MAGA.