Just make sure you don’t get authoritarian bourgeois sneaking into positions of power during the chaos like they tend to do.
Sneaking? The authoritarian bourgeoisie are already in power.
I’m saying that during a revolution, authoritarian type people tend to grab power.
What would a non-authoritarian shift in power look like? Secondly, Bourgeoisie is a class, not a synonym for bad. The Tsar was bad but wasn’t Bourgeoisie.
They won’t
Lol. Lmao.
I hope you have a better reason than “trust me bro” because this literally always happens
My reason is that it has never happened before.
LOL. LMAO.
What would you call Stalin, Mau, and Kim Il? They all consolidated power, cracked down on opposition, and created cults of personality.
Isn’t there an argument that the kdp sdp split helped hitler get into power?
How do you figure sport
Where’s the funny?
Removed by mod
In real, actionable, practical terms: What is the alternative you propose people choose, that will reduce the likelyhood of a fascist government right now at this election?
Primary them in!
Edit: too late for this election.
First past the post voting in a two party system gives you a 99.9999% likelihood of a facist government this election IMHO The only practical action to enact change seems to be a mass general strike.
It’s a shit voting system. But the election is happening. How to effect a mass general strike large enough to change the voting system and introduce a new candidate with a chance of winning within two months?
Because that is needed in order to safely tell people not to vote.
Do both? I’m not saying don’t vote I’m saying the impact of voting is not enough to enact substantial change in policy.
Congrats for destroying your credibility with “both sides” bullshit.
Meanwhile, back in factual reality, the Democrats aren’t fascist and have more than a 0.00001% chance of winning.
Would you like to place bets on the chance of there being a 2028 election? I won’t even ask for 1:100000 odds, I’ll happily accept 1:100
Claudia de la Cruz from PSL
Okay, and how do you plan to get them into the hearts and minds of around 50% of the population in the next 2 months, when the vast majority haven’t even heard of her? It’s not enough to have someone who could be a good president, you also need to get people to vote for them. If you want most of the population to vote for someone, they need to be aware of them as a viable option years beforehand.
I agree that the 2 choices are pawns of the rich, but even if every person who knew about Claudia voted for her, she wouldn’t even get enough votes for her to make the news, much less win. We’re talking about tens of millions of people voting in unison for an election win to happen in this country. At this stage in the game, there are only 2 candidates with that kind of draw power. If you want to focus on the 2028 election (assuming there is one, since there clearly won’t be if Trump wins) to get a 3rd viable candidate on that ballot, that’s a noble plan, but by now this election’s potential winners are already down to 2.
Voting isn’t about closing your eyes and saying “I want someone good to win!” It’s about assessing which people might actually win, and voting for the one that best aligns with your views, however loosely. It’s about strategy. If you want to change that, you need to build national presence in the name of your preferred candidate, and you need to start years ahead of the elections. Big changes don’t happen at the ballot, they happen during the campaigning stage and beforehand. If your candidate isn’t on the news every day leading up to the election, most voters won’t even know they’re an option.
Voting is about choosing good candidates (or parties, or policies). If your system doesn’t let you vote, then you should consider changing your system.
Voting is about choosing good candidates well before it gets pared down to 2 options. It’s about choosing a good local government, choosing good representatives, choosing good senators. If the only thing you care about is the President, then you’ll never have a good pool of options from which the parties will pick a presidential candidate. They’re not on our side - it’s our job to force their hand with a deck stacked with good candidates. But only the people who pay attention to politics well before election year get to have a say in stuff like that.
Voting is about choosing good candidates well before it gets pared down to 2 options.
In the US, yes. I was making a general statement. A voting system can be set up in multiple ways, but if it forces people to play lesser of the two evils then it is broken and needs to be changed.
Vote Blue no matter who
THEN we can think about changing something. Cant run if you never learned to walk after all…
…THEN we wait 4 more years to vote again for another dissapointing politician.
this is the most pro union ticket in decades. if you want progress, the path is collective labor power. it’s how we won the weekend and the 40 hour work week. it’s how we won paid lunch breaks (which are now being lost in many places). it’s how we earned paid maternity and paternity leave. if you want things to get better and stay better, join a union, STRIKE and just keep building coalition and class consciousness.
nothing pro union about union busting for the last 4 years.
and probably the next 4 if you aint naive to believe campaign promises from a career politician.
Yeah, the Joe guy should take himself off the ticket or something.
Vote genocide no matter who
Works like a charm to expose the fakers.
Every. Single. Time. :)
i don’t think the genocide is fake
How many times do you have to be fooled by the Democratic Party though? This is just a cult problem by this point
Removed by mod
Man, just shut your fucking American hole
It’s funny how ineffective this propaganda is and how mad yall get about that
The US was built on genocide and no party wants to do something about that.
Claudia de la Cruz from PSL wants to do something about it
Removed by mod
Block the op i guess. People will upvote anything they agree with in ‘all’ filter
Mod removed their comment which is telling and seems to confirm what their comment was asking.
Amen lmao. Seems they hit the nail on the head.
Not a single one is communist, so what’s your point?
I think you get the point.
No I really don’t. What is the point?
That China is highest in property ownership?
So a capitalistic dictatorship has the best metric in one area makes capitalistic dictatorships good?Surely that can’t be it, as it’s completely moronic, so what is the point?
Nah. I think you get it, even if you’d rather pretend not to. But remember, you are what you pretend to be.
Nope I literally still don’t get your point. Feel free to spell it out for dumdums like myself…
Nah, you get it. It’s not hard to infer.
Yeah, but you don’t have more than two options for president of the united states. You have the one supporting unions and the weird racist loony hater one. Anyone suggesting something else might happen this year is lying to you.
One can only dream
We don’t get to order off a secret menu in the polling booth. It’s just Value Menu or Shit Sandwich.
Claudia and Karina from PSL are an option
I don’t think big corporations really believe in proletarian revolution happening so probably not that worried about it tbh
We have to accept false dichotomies because the only alternative is cannibalism.
Not funny
Didn’t laugh
Removed by mod
Ah yes, a single random data point having nothing to do with the original post. You’ve convinced me.
It was never about you.
This list isn’t by percentage with a home - it excludes people who rent, so all this shows is that nobody rents their home in China
I was wondering how Cuba and China made it so high. I know the Chinese lie about everything.
My brother in christ, these are all dictatorships
And yet… Interesting number i’d say.
