I think we should be working to organize the anti-genocide caucus of Democrats away from the Party and form a revolutionary party that can challenge the two right-wing parties for power. I think we can do this within the unions too, the rank and file are much more radical on this issue than the leadership. There’s a huge political movement right under our feet.
Ah, so just divide the Democrats up to destroy their power. Typical.
I know I’m not going to convince you, so this is for everyone else reading this thread. Because of our shitty electoral college and FPTP system, calls for third parties on the left translate into more political power for the right. Here’s how it works…
Let’s say you have two main political parties, the Snuggling Puppies party and the Kicking Puppies party. The Snugglers usually win, because the Kickers are violent weirdos.
Then the Kickers get the bright idea of helping out fringe parties that also love puppies, like one called the Worshipping Puppies party, which takes their love of puppies to the extreme. They secretly fund and promote these other parties, and it’s very effective. In the next election, it’s so effective that the Kickers win.
Wait, what? How? It’s simple. With the people who love puppies dividing their votes between multiple candidates who love puppies, the Kickers get a plurality.
Let’s keep it simple and say the Kickers clandestinely supported three parties that are ideologically opposed to them, meaning people who love puppies divided their votes up four ways. Each of the puppy-loving parties gets 19.5% of the vote, for a pro-puppy total of 78%! But the Kickers didn’t divide up their vote, so with a 22% plurality, the winner is… The party that everyone else hates!
It’s a classic divide and conquer strategy. It only works when astroturfers manage to convince people on the leftpuppy lovers to divide themselves up, rather than consolidate to fight back against the rightpeople who hate puppies.
My goal is to destroy and replace the Democratic Party. If there can only be two parties then let’s build a revolutionary party and replace the useless liberal party.
My goal is to destroy and replace the Democratic Party
With what? I doubt even 15% of the voting public agree with any of your ideas.
If there can only be two parties then let’s build a revolutionary party and replace the useless liberal party.
In what world does destroying the further left, liberal party do anything except create a power vacuum for the right to fill?
This is why nobody takes you seriously, you don’t even have thought out plans, just “burn it all down and magically good people who agree with me will rise up and seize power” You’re delusional and completely disconnected from reality, go read more theory and let the adults handle things.
You could have a goal to destroy and replace the Republican party instead, no? Seems like it’d be an overall better solution to be, shifting all parties further to the left, especially if you consider the Democractic party too far right. I mean, why keep the reactionary party?
None of that is incompatible or inconsistent with a Harris victory. If this is your expressed goal and desired outcome, it is MUCH easier to do under Harris than under Trump where any action you take is more or less guaranteed to be met with responses from any number of empowered supremacist groups.
Also, I only EVER hear these revolutionary ideas and pushes during the last 6 months before an election when people proudly virtue signal about their intent not to vote for the Democrat. Just like with third parties, where is all of this political will and activity during the off-years when there’s time to actually BUILD a grassroots movement?
I’m with you. Our choices suck. The time to start doing something about that is November 6th, after the election is won and a backslide has been prevented. Build out a movement and come back in 2028 with a platform, a base, and a candidate.
The person you’re arguing with has admitted that they want to destroy the Democratic party elsewhere in this thread, with the bizarrely naive belief that somehow this wouldn’t result in permanent Republican control.
Under a Democratic president everyone just stays home and hopes things get better. It was only under Trump that we had the largest protest movement in US history.
And this is despite the fact that police killings have only gotten worse under Biden. I need to be clear, I am not an accelerationist. Conditions get worse no matter who the president is, but it’s only when liberals are out of power that they can be convinced towards revolutionary goals.
Perhaps, but that motivation is only useful when it can be translated into political action - not creating an untrained army to be fed directly into fascist prisons and police brutality meat grinders.
You might be creating more revolutionaries under a conservofascist administration, but in practice it’s just doing this:
Edit: You don’t even need to look far into the past to see that this doesn’t work. Look at Hong Kong. The city’s leadership swung to fascism, and your prediction came true. Some of the biggest protests in the history of the city by some of the most motivated demonstrators… followed by a brutal crackdown, arrest, exile, and now fascist control of the city is more or less guaranteed for generations. The population is no longer CAPABLE of mounting ANY kind of resistance. Yes, Hong Kong had its fascism forced on it rather than choosing it at the ballot box, but the result will be the same. Fascism doesn’t care how it gets its power.
I think we should be working to organize the anti-genocide caucus of Democrats away from the Party and form a revolutionary party that can challenge the two right-wing parties for power. I think we can do this within the unions too, the rank and file are much more radical on this issue than the leadership. There’s a huge political movement right under our feet.
Ah, so just divide the Democrats up to destroy their power. Typical.
I know I’m not going to convince you, so this is for everyone else reading this thread. Because of our shitty electoral college and FPTP system, calls for third parties on the left translate into more political power for the right. Here’s how it works…
Let’s say you have two main political parties, the Snuggling Puppies party and the Kicking Puppies party. The Snugglers usually win, because the Kickers are violent weirdos.
Then the Kickers get the bright idea of helping out fringe parties that also love puppies, like one called the Worshipping Puppies party, which takes their love of puppies to the extreme. They secretly fund and promote these other parties, and it’s very effective. In the next election, it’s so effective that the Kickers win.
Wait, what? How? It’s simple. With the people who love puppies dividing their votes between multiple candidates who love puppies, the Kickers get a plurality.
Let’s keep it simple and say the Kickers clandestinely supported three parties that are ideologically opposed to them, meaning people who love puppies divided their votes up four ways. Each of the puppy-loving parties gets 19.5% of the vote, for a pro-puppy total of 78%! But the Kickers didn’t divide up their vote, so with a 22% plurality, the winner is… The party that everyone else hates!
It’s a classic divide and conquer strategy. It only works when astroturfers manage to convince
people on the leftpuppy lovers to divide themselves up, rather than consolidate to fight back againstthe rightpeople who hate puppies.Cute story.
My goal is to destroy and replace the Democratic Party. If there can only be two parties then let’s build a revolutionary party and replace the useless liberal party.
True story. If you dispute it, you dispute math. It’s literally how FPTP voting works.
Your goal is a permanent Republican majority. Might as well start openly rooting for Trump.
With what? I doubt even 15% of the voting public agree with any of your ideas.
In what world does destroying the further left, liberal party do anything except create a power vacuum for the right to fill?
This is why nobody takes you seriously, you don’t even have thought out plans, just “burn it all down and magically good people who agree with me will rise up and seize power” You’re delusional and completely disconnected from reality, go read more theory and let the adults handle things.
You could have a goal to destroy and replace the Republican party instead, no? Seems like it’d be an overall better solution to be, shifting all parties further to the left, especially if you consider the Democractic party too far right. I mean, why keep the reactionary party?
None of that is incompatible or inconsistent with a Harris victory. If this is your expressed goal and desired outcome, it is MUCH easier to do under Harris than under Trump where any action you take is more or less guaranteed to be met with responses from any number of empowered supremacist groups.
Also, I only EVER hear these revolutionary ideas and pushes during the last 6 months before an election when people proudly virtue signal about their intent not to vote for the Democrat. Just like with third parties, where is all of this political will and activity during the off-years when there’s time to actually BUILD a grassroots movement?
I’m with you. Our choices suck. The time to start doing something about that is November 6th, after the election is won and a backslide has been prevented. Build out a movement and come back in 2028 with a platform, a base, and a candidate.
The person you’re arguing with has admitted that they want to destroy the Democratic party elsewhere in this thread, with the bizarrely naive belief that somehow this wouldn’t result in permanent Republican control.
Under a Democratic president everyone just stays home and hopes things get better. It was only under Trump that we had the largest protest movement in US history.
And this is despite the fact that police killings have only gotten worse under Biden. I need to be clear, I am not an accelerationist. Conditions get worse no matter who the president is, but it’s only when liberals are out of power that they can be convinced towards revolutionary goals.
Perhaps, but that motivation is only useful when it can be translated into political action - not creating an untrained army to be fed directly into fascist prisons and police brutality meat grinders.
You might be creating more revolutionaries under a conservofascist administration, but in practice it’s just doing this:
Edit: You don’t even need to look far into the past to see that this doesn’t work. Look at Hong Kong. The city’s leadership swung to fascism, and your prediction came true. Some of the biggest protests in the history of the city by some of the most motivated demonstrators… followed by a brutal crackdown, arrest, exile, and now fascist control of the city is more or less guaranteed for generations. The population is no longer CAPABLE of mounting ANY kind of resistance. Yes, Hong Kong had its fascism forced on it rather than choosing it at the ballot box, but the result will be the same. Fascism doesn’t care how it gets its power.