And you decided lesser evil wasn't lesser enough? Now we get greater evil.
And we'll get to see what the alternative provides. Yay, you won.
What? No it isn't. Fascism is fascism, neo-liberalism is neo-liberalism. You can certainly make a compelling argument that neo-liberalism eventually begets fascism. But fascism is already fascism, it's not waiting to be begotten.
When the viable options are the road to fascism, or the destination itself, non-fascists are best served choosing the road. At least on the road you have a chance of slowing down or steering down an alternate road, or even turning around as remote as that possibility is. When you're at the destination, it's too late.
Going online to gripe about DNC strategy to other online leftists accomplishes nothing but generating more apathetic non-voters. Organizing in effective ways can actually accomplish something: mass letters directly to the DNC, banding together into massive documented coalitions, mass petitions.
If the Uncommitted movement had tens of millions of registered voters come together and pledge to vote Harris if and only if she took a harder stance on Israel, that might have helped.
When you're speaking up to the wrong audience, and thereby doing more harm than good, yes you should shut up. Toward that audience, or at least with that message. The Democratic party is a lot of unsavory things, but they aren't totally stupid. They have a great number of analysts developing strategy based on the information they have. If you want them to change, they need actionable information that supports that change.
Complaining in already largely leftist anonymous online spaces is not actionable information.
How I "want" you to vote is pragmatically. If you vote 3rd party in a FPTP election, you're pragmatically indistinguishable from a non-voter.
If you're a leftist, the pragmatic strategy is to recognize the ratchet effect and vote for the "halt movement" party over the "full send fascism" party. It's much easier to push leftist policies and promote leftist representatives under a neo-liberal regime than under a fascist one. At the absolute minimum the neo-liberals decelerate the plunge into fascism.
Help me parse this logic. I'm having trouble figuring out how "Leftists are much too small and insignificant a demographic to make a meaningful difference in elections, therefore Democrats should implement leftist political strategy" makes any sense.
If they didn't vote, they're not a voter. Non-voters get their fair share of the blame, and non-voters who want to complain get shamed.
That would be the inevitable consequence if everyone decided to not have children.
And complementary to Chesterton's Fence is a principle I've heard called Grandma's Ham or the Monkey Ladder Experiment. Sometimes "we've always done it that way" is covering up outdated practices for purposes that no longer exist.
I second this recommendation. This review is sincere and left an impression. I do not feel as if I was spoiled
Looks innocuous enough at first glance right? Let's zoom in on the problem:
These don't go together. If the semicircle on the left is correct, then this is showing moon phases, and the symbol on the right should be of a gibbous moon:
If the cookie-with-a-bite-taken-out in the right is correct, then this is showing an eclipse, and the symbol on the left should be of a 50% partial eclipse:
It drives me crazy every time I look at it.
Lot of conservatives out there who aren't MAGA. In an election against any other "normal" Republican you'd be 100% correct, but against Trump I can see the logic of targeting frustrated moderates over progressives, considering how unreliable progressives are on election day.