this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
1063 points (88.8% liked)

Lefty Memes

4355 readers
803 users here now

An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.

Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.

If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.

Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low-quality!

Rules

Version without spoilers

0. Only post socialist memes


That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme)


1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here


Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.


2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such


That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.


3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.


That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).


4. No Bigotry.


The only dangerous minority is the rich.


5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.


We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.

(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)


6. Don't idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.


Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.



  1. Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

So, what do you think will happen if you continue to encourage people who dislike both candidates to abstain from voting?

One of the two candidates will win, and one of the two candidates will take office in January. Hopefully they are both the same person.

It sucks that the choice is "who is less bad". But that's US politics for you. Not voting for the less bad is not going to make anything better.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I'm not saying that either. I told you to use your right how you see fit. It is not my place to tell you how to vote, nor is it my place to negatively pressure strangers into voting for my preference. I think everyone should vote. I'm also saying that promising votes to politicians regardless of their actions indicate that their actions won't hurt their chances.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

You have to choose your words more carefully. There's a lot of astroshitting all over the place. Should expect no less, if the primary races and 2016 and 2020 were any indication.

I agree "vote blue no matter who" is potentially dangerous. However at this current juncture, it really doesn't matter. Republicans can't be allowed to have control of another branch. They've shown their hand, and are pulling no punches. Straight up lies, exaggerations, and accusations fueling a culture war in a strategy to get to 270 with as little a popular vote as possible.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

If we could win by more than the slimmest margins, there'd be a hell of a lot more room for division within the party.

Ideally the Dems would win so hard that the Republicans would be forced to change or go extinct. And ideally, the Republican party would lose so badly for so long that they cease to be relevant and the Dems split into two parties.

Why 48% of the country votes against this is mind boggling.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Paradoxically, people somehow think that voting for a third party will make the Dems change their platform n

Not sure how that's supposed to work. The more people that vote for a third party, the less people vote for the main party. That could make the result 48-47-5 with Trump still winning, and the Dems have no way to move the needle, because now they have no office. Or it could make it 28 third party, 30 Biden, and 42 Trump. Either way Trump wins.

Third party votes take votes away from the most aligned primary party and ultimately makes the outcome less desirable. The only way they can be effective is when the aligned party already has a very comfortable lead, and even then its risky.

I also think it's incredibly arrogant to think that a third party could come completely out of left field and score the highest office in the land while holding few (if any) state and local offices.

[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Third party votes take votes away from the most aligned primary party

so-called primary parties don't own the votes, so voting for a so-called third party doesn't take them away. it's up to politicians to earn votes.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You don't understand how FPTP works. It is designed to penalize people for voting for a third party (because it will always devolve to two parties. They may occasionally change, but it starts at the bottom, not at the oval office).

This "lesser of two evils" is a consequence of that. No one candidate is going to be best aligned with the majority of people. When there are two candidates, one will be more aligned than the other.

When a third candidate enters, they have to be closer to one of the two, and attracts voters that were more closely aligned with the primary party candidate.

So if you've got a close FPTP race, you could easily take a race that would otherwise be 51/49, make it 47/49/4, and even though the majority of people were more closely aligned with Candidate A, because some of them went for C, candidate B won instead.

Therefore, it's foolish to abstain because you disagree with all candidates, because somebody is going to win no matter what. And it is foolish to vote for a third party, because they will not win, they will only detract from the closely aligned party, which in turn favors the less-aligned party.

[–] VictoriaAScharleau@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

it will always devolve to two parties.

you don't have proof of this.

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm also saying that promising votes to politicians regardless of their actions indicate that their actions won't hurt their chances.

That's very true and likely going to lead to a very nasty future once this is thoroughly exploited. But I don't think that just "there should be something better" might help. Also, there might exist unsolvable problems, and if this is one of those we're in a very bad position, indeed

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

That's also part of my point. Voting will not get us out of this problem. We need to pressure politicians, we need to protest, we need to organize, and we need to implement more successful alternatives to the status quo. We will never avoid fascism if the only thing we do is vote. Right now the best way to pressure the better candidate is to make him believe, right up until election day, that he will lose.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The time to pressure the candidate is during the primaries. The general election is waaay past that point.

Did you vote in the primaries?

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Primaries are also a thing, generally. By all means, do more than vote.

But voting is the bare minimum.