No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
Not voting for someone who is aiding and abetting genocide is morally correct, it's not complicated.
If genocide isn't a red line for you, what is?
But, given that Trump will very likely be as bad or worse, why give him the chance? Just to be able to make the statement?
So you didn't vote for anyone for president?
Stein and Kennedy were only on ballots to help Trump win, and he is even worse on Palestine than Harris.
So in the US "democracy", if you vote for any party other than the Democrats, you are voting for the Republicans ?
Since voting for both the Democrats and the Republicans is the same as supporting fascism ( unless you want to make me believe that supporting Genocide is not fascist ), I guess it is easy to understand why many people chose not to vote.
But I guess a fascism that pretends to be democratic is better in your eyes than one that is explicit. In my opinion none of the two deserve any support.
Also imagine how full of themselves the Democratic party elite must be to run the VP of a president that people see negatively on both foreign policy (Gaza) and the economy ( a lot of people see their financial situation as worse off after Biden's 4 years). And Kamala H. literally aligned herself with Biden on everything !
There was no reason to vote for her other than "she is not Trump". She gave no hope to the electorate for a better future, and for this reason people didn't show up and vote for her.
A vote for Stein or Kennedy instead of Harris is like voting Republican since they are spoilers that have said they want Trump to win and only criticize Dems for genocide, which makes their purpose clear because Trump has said he wants more genocide.
Voting 3rd party for president is like not voting at all. It doesn't send any signals to the main parties like it would in a system with more than two parties. Well, in some cases it would send a signal that their spoiler candidates worked out.
And yes, she failed to get an increase in turnout because she ended up just being more ofnthe same by cozying up with Cheney and not focusing on progressive policies.
In other countries fascist get elected as well, it is not just a problem of the system itself ( don't get me wrong, it is also a bad system, but it is not the only problem ), the big problem is that the Democratic party ( and a lot centrist parties in Europe as well ) are not electable.
People don't want them, the Democrats don't represent the average working person. It is not the fault of the people for not voting for them, the Democratic Party is not their party.
And since this centrist parties invest billions in every campaign to make every leftist party look unelectable ( and this happen with every voting system ), there is no big leftist opposition.
Obviously other countries with better electoral systems have it better than the US, but that is not where the problem starts and ends, it is just a small piece of a much bigger puzzle. After all everyone here knows what happened with Bernie, he was never going to be allowed to actually run.
The centrist parties fear the leftist ones much more than a right wing one, because they represent the same interest, the same people. That's way they allied with old Republicans, that's who they are the party of.
It is only the fault of the Democratic Party for loosing this election. They actually showed the people that they didn't care about them. And probably a lot of US citizens already felt that they didn't, so this just confirmed it for them.
Also not that many people gated for Stein or any other 3rd party candidate. They just didn't vote, because the still believe what the Democrats told them about voting for 3rd parties never working, so they were left with nothing and just did nothing.
And you should hold Harris much more accountable for doing the genocide right now, rather than keep telling me about Trump. I know Trump wants the Genocide as well, but Kamala is already doing it, so to me that is not an alternative.
And if the Democrats don't learn from this election, I don't think they will win that many elections in the future. And honestly, they don't deserve them, this is just a 100% Hitler (D) against 101% Hitler (R) sort of situation.
After all, if they aim at right wing voters, why should right wing voters vote for them rather the the traditionally right wing party of the Republicans. People should really stop alienating non-voters / 3rd party voters when they are the only one that dont want to support Genocide. Really says a lot about the US.
But now I just started to rumble so I'll end the comment here.
This is fucking hilarious.
Dems do represent the working class. They are the ones who promote and occasionally pass minimum wage increases, worker safety laws, the ACA, funding for FEMA, social supports, and a ton of other things that positively impact the working class and 98% of the population.
The Republican party actively works to destroy all of those things so they can guve the wealthy tax breaks while lying about whether the working class will benefit.
The problem is messaging. Republicans are great at lying and riling people up, the Dems suck at propoting the positive things they attempt and occasionally succeed at.
You know Trump wants more and you are blaming Harris for what Biden is currently doing because she didn't explicitly state she wouldn't do a complete 180 and stop support entirely.
That is like saying pooring gasoline on a fire is an alternative to not putting it out. I guess that is an alternative...
You are deeply unserious.
You defense of Harris for not being like Biden, when she explicitly said she supports Biden policies, must be a bad joke, because it is not funny.
Also saying that the Democratic party supports the working class, while they are refusing to update the minimum wage, helped break some strikes and keep financing the military, like never before in history, instead of doing any sort of welfare, must be a belief born out of pure fantasy.
Since I'm tired of responding to comments, I found a great video published today on why Kamala lost, it focuses a lot on the economics and the messaging of the Democratic Party.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSBi0m5xCJs
He shows a lot of main stream sources in the video so that shouldn't be an issue for you.
If you want to read an interesting comment written by another user that answers some of your positions, I'll copy-paste it here:
The DNC learned nothing from 2016. It is the definition of irrationality to do the same thing twice and expect different outcomes.
Bernie could garner huge crowds and massive support by campaigning on the basis of policy that has mass appeal, such as universal healthcare. Kamala chose not to do this because she prioritised business as usual over stopping Trump.
You say "things will get worse under Trump". That's true. But things got worse under Biden/Harris after Trump's first term as president - environmental policy, the border camps, reproductive rights, trans rights, cop city, the genocide of Palestinians etc. So when you say "we must vote for Kamala or things will get worse" that line of reasoning is at best unconvincing and at worst it betrays the 4-year state of amnesia you have lived in because you are so politically detached from the consequences of your voting.
Telling people to protect democracy—the system where you vote for the candidate who best represents your political values—by voting for a person who in no way represents your political values in order to save democracy is tortured logic.
No, I'm not an accelerationist. Me advocating for people not to vote for Kamala Harris is not an accelerationist position because we should not be giving a mandate for a genocide, climate change, and civil rights-eroding accelerationist by voting for them.
How many delegates did Harris win in the last primaries? How many did she win in the primaries to get her to run for president this time? Is this what you claim as your democracy?
When I list a number of legitimate grievances with Kamala Harris and Joe Biden's regime and issues with Kamala's election platform, none of which have a single thing to do with her race or gender, and you respond by calling me racist or misogynistic it drives home how little you are willing to listen to my political concerns and how intransigent your favoured party is. When you act this way and then tell me that people have to vote for Kamala in order to push her left while you yourself are unwilling to even acknowledge the fact that Kamala's platform has serious issues, it signals to me that there will be no shifting left on anything. I already knew this fact but you have done an exceptional job of inadvertently teaching other people this lesson.
When entering into negotiations with someone, it's a uniquely terrible tactic to hand over your one state-sanctioned bargaining chip before making even one single demand.
You are chasing the DNC to the right and one day you will wake up and wonder to yourself "How did I end up all the way over here?" I'm not following you into that marsh but you're welcome to go into it yourself, just don't get upset at me when I point out what you're heading into and don't get angry when I refuse to blindly follow you.
Kamala Harris is the only thing that can stop fascism. Kamala Harris cannot do anything to protect reproductive rights, trans rights, Palestinian lives, the lives of Marcellus Williams and Robert Robertson etc. because she is powerless to do anything about it 🫠
Kamala Harris said she would "follow the law" regarding trans people. She was angling to become the primary lawmaker in the US. Not only does this show a lack of whatever libs care about like "leadership" but it shows how cowardly and detestable she is because she understands the law and she is willing to follow it but not when it comes to things like international law, only when it's laws that she can use to hide behind while trans people are subjected to further oppression through legislation that strips them of rights.
Historically, fascism has never been stopped at the ballot box. You being convinced that this is possible does not sway my opinion on any matter aside from my estimation of your political awareness and your ability to achieve change.
You had four years (eight+ if you count Trump's regime and the lead-up to it in this calculation) to "stop fascism". What did you do in this period of time? Did you push Biden and Kamala to adopt policies which have mass support? Did you do anything except go to back to brunch?
When you accuse me of not organising irl, when you say that I'm not doing anything:
I'm not about to dox myself
I'm not going to make a laundry list of the things that I have done w/organising and activism just to impress (?) you, especially not when you've already told me that I haven't done anything
It's a huge self-report and it's obvious that you're projecting
You alienate others by telling them "I do not recognise your efforts and everything that you have done is unimportant in my estimation"
You aren't entitled to others' votes. Stop pretending that you are.
We aren't splitting the so-called left, Kamala Harris did that all by herself.
You have no red lines. There is nothing that could make you not support Kamala Harris and we know it. Telling people to drop their standards and ignore their conscience to vote for Kamala is a fatal strategy and you killed her campaign by deploying it.
Selective invoking of people of colour to advocate for Kamala was ridiculous and disgustingly tokenistic. Yes, Angela Davis is smarter than I am. Telling me that I'm stupider than her and so I should take my political cues from her with regards to electoralism is a losing argument and it's low-key ableist became you're arguing that the person who lacks intelligence also has a commensurate lack of political virtue. Historically speaking, very intelligent people have had absolutely atrocious politics. Also people like Thomas Sowell and Clarence Thomas are almost certainly a lot smarter than I am. It would be wrong of me not to defer to their superior intellect and their politics, isn't that right?
You say that democracy is going to be strangled in its crib and that fascism has come to town. You are maybe posting about this online in your echo chamber and that's it. You do not take politics seriously, not even your own, yet you demand that I take your politics more seriously than you yourself do. There are things that I am doing right now to avert this trend in politics. There are things that I would do if fascism proper had seized power, none of which I would post about online. We are not the same. Enjoy your brunch though.
Almost all of your arguments for voting for Kamala Harris (aside from the "it will stop Trump" argument which, in retrospect, appears to be a dismal failure) also apply to reasons for voting for Trump. "You can push them left", "By voting we will get a seat at the table", "Voting third party or not voting at all is a wasted vote", "We have to vote this way to protect the country", "Politics is about comprise - you cannot expect them to be your perfect political candidate", and whatever hold-your-nose-and-vote arguments you trot out. Did you ever stop to ask yourself why it is that you do not find these arguments for voting Trump to be convincing?
Last time Trump got elected you were brutally vindictive. You took glee in the thought of people in red states and marginalised groups suffering due to policy and things like natural disasters, regardless of their politics or how they chose to vote. You were excited to tell these people that they were going to get deported and put into concentration camps. You will do it again this time too because you have learned nothing. November came and these people you targeted with your vicious schadenfreude remembered. They aren't going to forget how effortlessly you abandoned them and how you wished the worst suffering and ill-fate upon them.
You said that a non-vote or a 3rd party vote is a vote for Trump. We have been shouting from the rooftops that Kamala Harris is fundamentally unwilling and incapable of stopping Trump. History vindicates this position; Trump managed to win the popular vote while Harris underperformed by millions of votes, even compared to Joe Biden. Thus your support for Kamala Harris was therefore support for Donald Trump's presidency. Congratulations on getting the candidate which you campaigned so hard to get elected.
I don't care about the US. America must die and if Trump is to be its undertaker then I am relieved to hear it. What you have done is to accelerate the destruction of the US. If I were cynical about achieving my political objectives, wouldn't have said any of the above. If I was an accelerationist I would have been pushing for all of the things that you've been pushing for instead of pushing back against them. I would have even gone so far as to furnish your side with more poisoned chalice arguments (I do this with the far right, I exactly know how to do it). Instead I've been defending your political project against your own excesses and self-defeating narrow mindedness. You are right in the fact that I am your enemy but you are wrong to oppose me because you are a far greater enemy to yourself than I could ever have the stomach to be. You won't listen to a word of what I've said because you refuse to learn and to reflect.
A cynical person might argue that my strategy is to oppose you in the knowledge that this will make you react by becoming more deeply entrenched in your position, encouraging a sort of siege mentality in you, so that you see any criticism or difference of opinion as being an existential political threat that must be eradicated as a means to create more disaffected people to radicalise out of bourgeois democracy. This is not my intent. If things improve for the proles and the marginalised because of what I argue for then that's a win for my political objectives. However I can't control your actions and if you choose to respond by taking a hatchet to your precious liberal democracy then, likewise, that's a win for my political objectives. Which way, western man?
I'm not American, if I was I would have voted for Stein though.