I've been seeing a lot of anti-voting sentiment going around. Can't believe I have to say this, but you need to vote. Not only is there more to the election than just the president. (State policy, Senate, house), but not voting is not an act of protest. C'mon guys

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pkill@programming.dev 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The people of USA succesfully beat two tyrannical systems in 18th and 19th century so why wouldn't they now if the current state of things deteriorates in that direction. And so did the Russians who have lived under the tsarist tyranny. Or the people oppressed by the colonial regimes who have not attained their independence as a gesture of good will. Or Cubans overthrowing Batista. Or Chileans ousting Pinochet. Or South Africans overthrowing the apartheid.

All of that required militancy. Polite pleas are not a language tyrants understand. But, by extension, blind faith in electoralism has failed when the KPD failed to respond with proper militancy to the Reichstag fire decree in 1933. The militancy must be proactive. One should not be deluded that a "progressive" government will welcome with open arms any advanced, massive expression of social anger any more than a reactionary one would. See France where it is basic street knowledge to wear at least a solid fucking helmet with plexiglass visor to any protest if you don't want to say, lose an eye under the oh-so-benevolvent rule of the liberal Macron.

Aaron Bushnell had a gun pointed at him as he died.

[–] mulcahey@lemm.ee 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, that's all true. But that's a good argument for "You shouldn't only vote," not "You shouldn't vote." See the difference?

If the only action we take is voting, then the tyrants who aren't constrained by law will win. If the only action we take is direct action, then the tyrants win as soon as they outgun us. If we use voting to advance things in civil society inside the lines and direct action to keep the tyrants playing inside the lines, we win.

[–] pkill@programming.dev 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Reactionaries, like real fucking fascist shock troops are actually a minority compared to interwar period. Most Trump voters are just tired, frustrated and desperate, not actually fanatically rallying behind him. His bravado may resonate with some social anger but it will probably run out of steam as soon as people find out he offers no real solutions. On the contrary, Nazis and fascists were able to rally a significant number of strata of the population. So let's compare the relevance and position of the groups upon which the Italian, Spanish and German fascists based themselves:

Demobilized soldiers and mercenaries like the Moroccans in Spain and Freikorps

Nowadays many people join the military in the US just to get free college and healthcare etc. And yet they still fall short of their recruitment targets. See the recent protests in solidarity with Aaron Bushnell. Also after WW I most armies were infantry based and there was initially mass unemployment amongst the veterans.

Medium to large-scale landowners/peasants

1-3% of the society. And if anything, their militancy at least makes the ruling class tremble, lest it was adopted by workers.

Clergy

Even in the US religion is losing relevance

Students

Massively shifted to the left almost everywhere

Small business owners

They are still getting screwed every once in a while by the ruthless law of the accumulation of capital but still mostly they might be partly correct but still go into some major distortions in their understanding of things. Petty bourgeoisie is not a revolutionary class. But at the same time, they no longer compete with other small business owners of other (Jewish) ethnicity but actually rely heavily on unskilled migrant labor

Organized criminals

Crime has mostly economic causes. For massive spike in crime that could serve as the manpower pool for the fascist militias, the system would actually need to be built on a prejudice against white males, not just in /pol/cel projections grounded in not seeing shit primarily through economic lenses.

So even if the unavoidable aggravation of capitalism's agony happens sooner:

to reject the possibility of emerging from it victorious is actually a defeatist internalization of downplaying the potential of own class, just what the porky wants
to tail the liberals will not serve in any way to convince the less politically educated people that we are any alternative...
...and if anything, ends up being a self-fulfilling prophecy for their besieged fortress myth about some leftist conspiracy
most dictators came to power not by election, but by a coup or manipulation
even if we think about the most notable example when they did, that is in Germany in the 30s, it's all actually vastly different. While KPD's sectarianism towards SPD and the refusal to take advantage of several revolutionary situations were what led to it not being able to successfully withstand Hitler, there are some key differences here:

Democrats are as much of a millionaire club as Republicans. SPD was a massive workers' organization. CPUSA actually endorses Biden because that's what most IMCWP parties not in power do: legitimize the status quo and maintain a watered-down programme. No diff here with CPRF in Russia. And such sort of passivity and conservatism is what permeated the leadership of KPD under Thälmann and it is the reason why a revolutionary party aspiring to stand as an independent force that won't ever let itself be co-opted into the system is needed.

I get that feeling of FOMO. But ask yourself, which do you think matters more against millions of other voters whom you'll never talk to:

a) voting

b) organizing to defend yourself against the Trump regime, by force if necessary where a loud and consequent group can easily sway thousands if not millions under the right conditions. That vs trying to basically convince people why one shade of the same color is better than the other which serves mostly narrowing their worldview and proving that you are not willing to stand up for your ideas.