this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
39 points (100.0% liked)

Chat

7497 readers
42 users here now

Relaxed section for discussion and debate that doesn't fit anywhere else. Whether it's advice, how your week is going, a link that's at the back of your mind, or something like that, it can likely go here.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I was trying to think about why today has significance, and then it hit. History may not repeat, but it rhymes.

Today, U.S. voters determine the future direction of the entire world. We shouldn't have this power, but that is irrelevant. Do we explore the world of authoritarianism, with major powers all falling under despots, or do we stand alone?

There is no way to overstate the stakes here. This is not hyperbole; this is simply the truth.

There's only one thing you can do. This election is not about you (though you count); it is about what we leave to posterity. An unlivable world? Permanent oligarchy? For those with kids or those who want them, do you want them to grow up with clean air and water?

And do not do this third-party shit. We got Bush instead of Gore because of 700 votes for Nader in Florida. Harris isn't perfect, but don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump unless you're in a ranked-choice locale.

Yes, we have a broken system, but now is not the time to lament it by further fucking things up. We can eventually have that conversation as a nation, but in the '90s, when I lived in Germany, it was still considered gauche to be proud to be German. Is that the 50 years you want going forward here?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Not to take away from the importance of voting Harris today (or hopefully, prior to today), but this:

We can eventually have that conversation as a nation, but in the '90s, when I lived in Germany, it was still considered gauche to be proud to be German. Is that the 50 years you want going forward here?

feels out of touch. It's already gauche in most progressive circles to be proud to be American (What are you proud of? The settler-colonialism? The Imperialism? The choice to back genocide? The still-haven't-abolished-slavery-ism?). Lots of us know that this supposed "eventual" conversation will never actually come. We're never going to get the country to move to RCV or abolish the electoral college, if we forever stick to the parties who directly benefit from the status quo.

Vote Harris today if you can, people, because it's too late for anything else this cycle, but we have to stop this spiraling descent rightwards by adhering to a party that would rather lose Leftists than "Centrists". As people who care about social justice and progressive politics, we should be abhorred that our platform is palatable enough to Dick The-Fucking-War-Criminal Cheney to get his endorsement.

For every person claiming that we'll eventually totally have the conversation about the party platform, there's another Centrist Democrat who is saying, "No, actually, the party doesn't need to move leftwards... It's always been a lesser of 2 evils choice... Don't let perfect be the enemy of good by drawing hard lines like not supporting genocide...".

Republicans unshackled themselves from their Centrist arm of "respectable" anti-social-justice goons to fully embrace their white supremacism in the open, and those goons have now taken up residence in the Democratic Party in response.

If we're just fundamentally unwilling to consider unshackling ourselves from them, we're never going to stop the rightward-shift happening now. We didn't move Leftwards in the 60s because our politicians led us there, people protested and rioted and made people uncomfortable until they acquiesced and got off their asses. And unless Citizen's United gets overturned, that route isn't going to work within the Democratic Party, because the police are now powerful enough to keep protesters from actually making politicians feel uncomfortable enough to choose their constituents over their corporate donors.

At the risk of not be(e)ing kind, unless you can give me a timeframe for when "eventually" is, you are part of the problem, providing cover and excuses for our rightward shift as a country.

We got Bush instead of Gore because of 700 votes for Nader in Florida.

No, Gore likely had more votes (if they had performed a statewide recount). We had Bush (and Cheney the now-Democrat) because SCOTUS stepped in to stop the recounts, and the Democratic Party chose to "keep the peace" instead of fighting it. Just like they will every time.

[โ€“] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 3 points 1 week ago

I've neither the inclination nor energy to relitigate the details of 24-year-old events. Rest assured, we agree on what the outcome really was; this was when we as a nation stopped believing in voting.