I live in Oregon, which has had all-mail elections since the 1990’s. It’s so great being able to sit down with my husband, some endorsements, the voter’s guide, and a computer to make my decision. So much better than scratching my head over half the ballot (well at least the title sounds good) and voting straight for the other half (vote blue no matter who).
On one hand, I wish I could do that in my country. On the other hand, voting already takes me less than 10 minutes including “commute” (walking down a single block), so it’d probably be a bigger hassle.
People you’ve never met or spent any time alone with basically make your life better super frequently. Medical scientists developing new treatments, engineers coming up with better/more efficient/safer alternatives, state and local governments and councils maintaining services, etc.
If you’ve never met or contacted your representatives, that’s likely by your own choice. They generally make themselves fairly available to some degree.
I find a lot of people arguing that one shouldn’t vote because although easy, it is the least effective form of political engagement.
I’d argue that you should vote because it is the easiest form of political engagment and, if possible considering your material conditions, you should also try to participate in other forms of engagement.
Especially since those people refuse to actually provide an alternative form of political engagement besides vague references to a revolution, which has absolutely zero chance of coming out in the Prolitariat’s favor in Americas current political climate, because there is nowhere near enough class conciousness for that to happen.
Yes, voting is the baseline. It’s the least you can do.
I’m sure that there are anarchists out there who refuse to vote out of principle, but they still do activist work such as participating in mutual aid groups and so on. They’re wrong, but at least they’re still helping society in some way. I think the vast majority of people who don’t vote are just lazy, though.
I consider voting to be the minimum buy-in to ask something of your representative. You may not get that thing, especially if your ask is far outside the mainstream. That’s part of a democracy. The next part of democracy is protecting its status as a liberal democracy, where the people’s freedoms are protected from the government so there is remove for improvement.
My state is doing a special election. No fucking idea what on, but thankfully they’ll have info outside the polling stations so I’ll do some googling before submitting a ballot.
Liberals, please acknowledge that if there is a possibility every election that fascism will win, fascism will eventually win unless you take political action outside of electoralism
This is why it’s important to build strong democratic institutions to resist fascism, populism, and the like. They won’t last forever, but they can take a few election cycles of abuse. Part of the problem with many countries that have truly fallen to fascism or fascist-like movements is that they started out with weak or non-existent institutions. Contrast that with the US, where even the election of Donald Trump of the “Lock Her Up” slogan (very fascist) got basically nowhere with both prosecuting Hillary Clinton and overturning the 2020 election.
How so? Fascism is rarely a matter of a single election. It’s usually a slide. Providing a bulwark against that slide means you have several election cycles to snuff out fascism and return to liberal democracy.
Rereading the thread, I think we’re in agreement. I was more adding onto your point, that building strong institutions and norms is important along with political activism. Institutions and norms slow the rot from the inside, political action slow it from the outside.
Lmao where did I demand people vote? I asked what the dude calling me out was doing irl besides being an internet sjw, while fully acknowledging that I very much am an internet sjw. Dude couldn’t give me one answer and called me going to multiple ceasefire protest in D.C. as being a performative action, like no shit, thats what protesting is, showing your disdain for what your country is doing with my physical presence. Y’all are so fucking dumb.
Also calling someone a sjw isnt nazi terminology, thinking that sjw has a negative connotation makes you align with Nazis who view social justice with a negative connotation. Lol
There is nothing wrong with being a social justice warrior lmfao, the fact that they abriviated it doesnt make it nazi terminology, nor does it make being a social justice warrior a negative thing. You are actively reinforcing nazi ideologies by implying that being an sjw is a bad thing… cause advocating for social justice is a good thing lmfao.
The system is designed to have two parties. With fptp voting you encourage a system of two parties that agree on most things because you’re not allowed to have a party with nuance as that will be a wasted vote and simply allow your most disliked candidate to win by splitting the vote.
while this is true, most western nations have some level of FPP, and while they usually have two major parties, Like Conservative-Progressives and Labour in Canada, they still have more than two parties represented in the legislative body. I'm unaware of the last time someone was elected to congress who ran as a party other than R/D (no independents don't count).
I think cause and effect are mixed here. Americans having to pick between two shitty right wing parties is the reason why one would feel like every election is the most important election. The fact that they’re so much alike is the biggest reason why they create as much dissent as possible.
Back in the 1970s, The Moral Majority took over the GOP by voting. They would show up at every local GOP club at every event. If 20 people had shown up the last time they picked the new dog catcher, the MMs would show up with fifty people. They didn’t have a lot of money or connections yet, but they had people showing up all the time. Need someone to pass out petitions? MMs were there. Drive folks to the polls? Meanwhile, the Dems had counted on the Unions to do those jobs. That’s why the GOP hated the Unions and did everything to dismantle them.
I agree with everything you just said but I don’t think either big US party can be reformed to serve people instead of capital. Whichever organizing done by people, through the the voting system or otherwise, will fall flat if allowed to be co-opted by them, the two party system ensures it.
That's a defeatist additute. You can be a realist withotu being a defeatist. There's always hope. I probably have as little faith in electoral politics as you do, but forming real relationships with real neighbors we can actually create the world our politicians would never support.
I sincerely doubt they’ll change past what their owners allow them to. Maybe that’s a step towards actual change but it’s certainly not enough by itself.
Politicians do what it takes to get elected. Period.
What part of that confuses you?
Nelson Rockefeller was one of the richest men in America. He thought he was a shoo-in to be the GOP candidate in 1968. Nixon had no big backers and was seen as a loser by the media.
Except Nixon had spent all his time after his California Sneate race loss working 24/7 for every GOP candidate he could find. He made speeches, raised money, helped organize, and when he went into the 1968 convention, he ran rings around what the establishment wanted.
Money is huge in politics, but organization can beat it.
Don’t put words in my mouth. If what you took from the last however many comments is that I’m saying “voting useless”, I don’t think you’re qualified to have this conversation in the first place.
But to answer your question, they will bend whatever laws they have to to keep themselves in power. I don’t know why you thought that showing an example of how fucked the US voting system is is a point in favor of it.
Well, yes and no. The Democrat Party is structured to prevent takeovers like what happened to the GOP (e.g. super-delegates). I think it is moving to the left, but glacially slowly. 20 years ago, somebody like Bernie would have been a joke. Now, he’s a viable contender. Maybe in another 50 or 60 years, they’ll be where European leftist parties are now.
Super-delegates had the their role in the nomination massively reduced, with no role whatsoever in the first round of voting. Bernie is not a viable contender at the moment because he represents only the left flank of the party. He’s also toxic in the general election. Praising Castro and honeymooning in the USSR just aren’t great things to have on a president’s resume.
Or, and here’s a wild idea, you can vote in the coming election. The entire House and a third of the Senate changes hands every two years. The GOPs vote in every single election. That’s the absolute least we should be doing. Pushing for more Squad members starts in your town.
and yet nearly half of American union workers vote Republican. Usually because they are more concerned about "conservatives" two bread-butter issues, abortion or gun rights.
I don't think so. In Michigan, for example, seven parties have auotmatic ballot access for the general election. Often people will say the would prefer one of the so-called third party candidates, but they just cant' vote for them this year because the greater of two evils is so incredibly evil but next year will be different.
My favorite analogy is: You don’t have to choose what’s for dinner, but you’re going to be forced to eat whatever was chosen.
Ever since I was old enough, I’ve voted in every single election I was eligible for. I don’t care what people say or how unlikely it was for my candidate to win, I would still get out and vote.
Extending the analogy- if you are forced to eat shit or shittier shit every dinner you’ll fucking die, and you need to find a way to stop being force-fed shit every night.
Add comment