On voting and not voting
I want to address some misconceptions, and hopefully clear the air about a few things.
First all I want to say - I get it. I understand why someone wouldn't want to vote.
The system is rigged. It's obvious. By giving it your vote you are giving it legitimacy.
Why would you want to do that?
It's like gambling in a card game that you know is rigged ahead of time. It's throwing away time and money.
To many that's a full stop. There's no need to go further.
It makes perfect sense not to play.
So if I understand that, why do I support voting?
For three reasons:
1) It's not totally rigged. It's more like a Vegas casino, where the House wins 60% of the time. Not 100% of the time.
2) Not voting won't change anything. Just look at other nations where the opposition party calls a boycott of the elections. Lots of people still vote, and (here's the important part) the establishment, the media, and the majority of the public accepts the results in every single case. Legitimacy is simply assumed.
3) The establishment wants you to vote for a major party. But if you don't do that, they want you to disengage and not vote. The one thing they don't want you to do is vote third party and be politically involved/active.
Now if those three reasons aren't good enough for you, I can understand. I won't hold it against anyone that does the "full stop" on a rigged system.
But don't hold it against me for thinking otherwise.
The second thing I want to address is the Dems and I.
I would think that the dozens of essays I wrote denouncing the Democratic establishment would have been enough, yet I'm still accused of gaslighting for the Dems.
I think that accusation is hilarious! I honestly can't take it seriously.
Not only have I not voted Democrat since 1996, but I got banned from the GOS for essentially being insufficiently loyal.
If anyone on GOS still remembers me, your accusation of me gaslighting for the Dems would be met with stunned confusion.
Also, I made a statement that there are individuals in the Democratic Party worth voting for.
That statement was challenged, but it shouldn't have been. There are always exceptions to the rule, and this year there are more exceptions than normal.
For starters, there are the DSA candidates, who have won roughly 20 seats so far and counting.
They run as Democrats, despite having nothing in common with mainstream Dems.
Then there is the growing number of working class Dem candidates. This is a good, inspirational article about them.
Finally, we may indeed be past the point of no return. The system may be too corrupt to save.
We will find out if that is true one day.
But I also have read about the first Progressive Movement 1890-1920. It had to overcome very similar levels of corruption and wealth concentration (not to mention institutional violence).
To a certain extent, it made remarkable progress despite everything against it. There were countless stories of individual, working class heroics.
We are seeing a growing grassroots movement, very similar to the first Progressive Movement.
Are they doomed? Maybe. But I think it's an enormous disrespect to throw shade on them.
I have every intention of being a cheerleader for them. Please do me a favor and tolerate my cheerleading for these individuals, and don't make the silly and nonsensical mistake of thinking that my supporting their fight against the Democratic establishment makes me a supporter of the Democratic Party.
I support policies and values, not party. If the Repubs had similar policies and values, I'd be talking about them.
Comments
Beautifully and sensibly expressed.
That, and I couldn't agree more. Everything potentially helpful must be attempted, to give any chance of change and to increase life's survival chances; flood the corporate/billionaire reps out by filling any Party, by any name, with Progressives, and the Party will be Progressive.
It's the contents that matter, not the label.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Beautifully and sensibly expressed.
, "That, and I couldn't agree more."
I can't improve on that, one iota. When I read your first group of paragraphs, gjohnsit, I wanted to run right over there (wherever there is) and give you a big hug, slap you on the back, shake your hand, buy you a beer....
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Voting dilemma
First let me say I'm with you gjohn.
I wish I had a candidate like this one in NY to vote for (3 min ad w/ 7 more min commentary)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j91ZKcp7wGw
I've never voted republican, but I'm considering it this primary. When I moved here 30 years ago this was a solid democratic county. People remembered FDR.
That has changed and has been accelerating for the last several decades. Now the county is mainly rethuglican. Compare these two ballots. There is hardly a dem to vote for.
https://sos.alabama.gov/sites/default/files/sample-ballots/2018/pri/Cher...
https://sos.alabama.gov/sites/default/files/sample-ballots/2018/pri/Cher...
The election is this Tuesday. What would you do in this situation? Vote dem or rethug? Not voting is also an option. I value your opinion.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Don't vote for the lesser evil
Hey, you've got a guy who put his nickname on the ballot. He's got to be "cool".
Is there a 3rd party option?
Until they changed election laws in California in order to crush 3rd parties, I used to use a rule:
1) Green Party, if no option
2) Peace and Freedom,
3) any other 3rd party, even including Libertarian
4) if no other option, Dem or probably nothing
Whatever you do, don't vote for someone you don't like.
On an unrelated note, I spotted this
The green party is only in the general
My choice is validating a couple of dems or playing defense voting against the most egregious of the rethugs. I'm still in limbo. I'm headed to Montgomery tomorrow for the PPC march for health and the environment. I plan to ask around but none the less I'll be the only one there from my county.
I submit this is the real voting conundrum ... no one to vote FOR, only those to vote against.
Thanks for your thoughts and ideas!
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
I voted Republican in the primary
Mostly because the County Commission Chair was up for grabs. Two developers and one retired county worker vied for the seat. Needless to say, the two developers had the county establishment behind them as there is still potential for massive growth and they all see $$$. Quality of life for us mere citizens??? Not so much.
Enough people voted for the retired county worker that she will be in a runoff. It will be close so I plan to vote for her again.
But come November, it's Stacey Abrams for governor!
Maybe there is hope in GA
I noticed Bernie endorsed Stacey. Hope that plays out next door. I was glad that Stacey won the nomination!
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Alabama: get away!
Get myself the F out of Alabama!
Make peace with snow. It's easier to deal with than life below the 37th Parallel.
IMHO, anyway.
[video:https://youtu.be/AcMYPkga_CU]
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
It is the natural system...
...not the political system that is Alabama's gift.
Most rivers and the most provinces/ecosystems of any state. I bought my holding for $330/acre 30 years ago, and have invested in building my little homestead. The hell with failed politics. It is all about living in harmony with the larger system from my view.
When I go to town everyone calls me by name...Mayberry like. Yes the politics are all wrong, but if you have a flat tire people stop and help you here. You can leave the keys in your car. Soils and climate are productive. Water is abundant. The Cherokee lived here for a reason. That is worth something, and is part of the reason I live here.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
homesteader
I was unaware you were a landholder. Most of us c99ers, myself included, aren't. So moving to a place with some political hope is more of an option for us than for you.
You're facing the really hard road: talking with your neighbors, finding out that they really support progressive ideals (like all decent people everywhere) and getting those who fight for those ideals elected to local office.
$330/acre in the 1980's? Colorado never afforded any such thing, at least, not in my day; the cheapest I've ever seen an acre of land go for here was around $2500 -- again in the 1980s, so apples-to-apples. And, as you point out, no reliable water; land that cheap in Colorado has a nasty tendency to be hardscrabble desert and badlands, which have the name of bad lands for a reason!
And yes, it's often been said that Alabama would be heaven on Earth if we could just rid it of the worst of its right-wing inhabitants, who, unfortunately for the place, tend to be the ones running things. It certainly was that way under the Cherokee.
Anyway, I meant you no offense there.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
no offense taken and a valid point
However if I was to uproot it would be to another country rather than state. I appreciate your comment.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
@Lookout Hard for people
Hard for people outside the South to understand, perhaps.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
hard to understand
Confiteor. (I confess.) I genuinely fail to understand why anyone would want to live where -- and this is in the words of a native of Spartanburg, South Carolina -- "it's too hot, too muggy, too buggy, and too many of the people are too stupid; and it's the stupidest ones who tend to be in power!"
In fairness to yourself and Lookout, however, you have both done yeoman's service enlightening me as to just why it is that someone of the c99p ilk would choose to live there. And the problem of the stpidest ones being in power -- kakistocracy -- is rapidly becoming the norm nationwide as our most recent Presidental Election testifies.
Given the choice of utter bigotry and stupidity in political power -- the thing about which Lookout was complaining -- or snow, your humble scribe here readily chooses the snow.
After all, you can't sled or ski or snowshoe on bigoted dick politicians. And their demise does nothing to fill the watersheds.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Was in Hunstville in May
The political ads were sickening.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Georgia's were pretty bad too
like this 30 second one...
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQBENgYJxgs]
...and if that didn't gross you out try this other half minute....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dqs3M85E0iI
....and this guy made it to the run off?
...but at least they have a progressive dem running for governor.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
@Lookout Here is a link (https:/
Here is a link (https://www.reddit.com/r/WayOfTheBern/comments/8kl78t/bkas_recommendatio...) to a summary of candidates for some offices in Alabama. It will give you some idea about the candidates, though to tell the truth, the choices in Alabama aren't great (except Audri Scott Williams in Congressional District 2).
Thanks!
I appreciate the info.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
I'm sort of with you... no, I'm with you.
1 minor point: non voters do not succeed in reforming one of the first 2 parties, as you say, but they are providing a justification for those who call for reform or a new party. Just because they don't succeed in a year or in the newspapers or even the history books does not mean that they have no impact.
As for "democratic" Democratic candidatess - even if they fail to take over the party (like I assume they will) this will not prevent them from joining - even leading - a new party. I believe that Bernie would have succeeded and succeeded quicker and better if he had denounced the corruptocrats in March 2016, but that strategy would have been very dangerous, and not just because it might have been premature. I believe that the situation is dire, that a cautious strategy will have disasterous consequences, but I refuse to condemn someone for being cautious.
On to Biden since 1973
Trying to reform the Dems is a necessary step
If they succeed, wonderful.
If they don't, it's necessary to prove that the system can't be saved before people will understand that the system has to be torn down.
Either way, this has to be done.
I think that might happen durin the next presidential primaries
I think that is when we'll see how reformable is the Democratic party.
Beware the bullshit factories.
My thought exactly
On to Biden since 1973
@gjohnsit No, trying to reform
No, trying to reform the Dems isn't a necessary step to anything but continuing on the same treadmill we've occupied for the past 45 years.
However, since 21 people agree with this comment, again it seems to me that you have substantial support on this site, and have no reason to feel disrespected.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Quite why you have to explain yourself
on a non partisan site, is beyond me.
Cogent material is all good.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
Seems that some people have been burnt too many times
to understand the strategy and altered circumstance and therefore dislike seeing it promoted as an option with any chance.
Which is understandable, therefore the lucid explanation in the essay.
At least, that's my best guess, FWIW.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Yah but
They don’t have to agree, but they don’t get to tell others what to do.
Like gjohnsit, I always vote. I agree it is an exercise in futility, which is why I am going to vote third party. imagine what would happen if everyone did.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
I always vote.
Likewise, I always vote, against the 0.1% and the pols they own. If nothing else, it clears me of the "silence = consent" issue, as I sure as fuck do not consent to the crap we're dealing with today!
Among other things, we both have clear title to:
"Don't Blame Me -- I Voted, and NOT for Her!" (Clinton)
"Don't Blame Me -- I Voted, and NOT for Him!" (Trump)
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2KVORRKsxE]
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
Vote for Cthulhu
Vote for Cthulhu! If you're going to vote for evil, vote for the greatest evil!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Imagine what would happen in everyone did
The results would be quashed. Why wouldn't they be? Why would it be any different than what happened in the 2016 primaries?
THIS is why I refuse to vote in any presidential election moving forward (local races are different, but I'm increasingly frustrated by that exercise as well). I appreciate and support those of you who choose a different path; and certainly, there's some merit to proving the current system is beyond reform for those who don't already know this. I'm already convinced, and won't participate in such a sham.
Regardless of our tactics, we're all in this together. My one wish is that our many different actions can collectively make some sort of difference. I don't have much optimism, but am trying hard to hold onto the few shreds of it I have left.
I never have missed a vote
in recent years except once. However, I am done with voting the lesser of two evils. If a third party choice is available, I will most likely vote that way. But I am very done with voting automatically for a person running under the Democratic party banner and doubt I will ever vote Republican.
My choice going forward is only vote FOR a deserving candidate. Otherwise I will exercise my option not to vote.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Ditto, we mostly vote, but usually
by mail because we are out of the country so much. We paid dues to DSA this year for the first time just to try for a better way. Just nos we are camping in South Africa and interesting to meet so many disaffected SA citizens looking for a better way as well.
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
Cheers loudly!
If only everyone did that!
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@dkmich OK, now I'm starting
OK, now I'm starting to feel downright uncomfortable. It seems that those of us who don't believe in voting (anymore) are being portrayed, en masse, as disrespecting others and telling them what to do.
As one of the main proponents of the not-voting side of this community, I can't recall a single time that I have disrespected gjohnsit or attacked his character. I am trying to think of members who have attacked him, or others who agree with him (I can think of three or four prominent posters who do), and I'm not coming up with much.
I'm damned uncomfortable with the direction this is going, and feel a bit backed into a corner, because I hardly want to demand specifics or ask gjohnsit to call out specific people who have disrespected him by name. God knows that's a recipe for horrendous flamewar. But the down side of generalized accusations is that, if I were a casual user instead of seriously dedicated to this site, I'd be thinking that maybe my kind aren't wanted around here about now. I know better. But not everybody would.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
uncomfortable
I have seen no message attributing any such thing to you. And I certainly never intended any such, anywhere.
We who still vote are describing the hows and whys of how we do so in a manner that denies the corrupters the use of the said votes. And, for the most part, you who abstain from voting have responded in kind, with respect on both sides.
gjohnsit's words still apply here:
And that's pretty much my attitude as well. Moreover, as I ask, so do I grant: as I ask that abstainers don't hold it against me for thinking otherwise, so I don't hold it against you who abstain from voting for thinking differently about it than I do.
The item on which we agree -- that the system is broken and in desperate need of redress -- is the point here, and we're each doing what we best see we can to make that redress happen.
p.s. Please check your private messages.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
@thanatokephaloides Thanks, Than.
Thanks, Than. (check yours)
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Nobody would have been referring to you!
Or to anyone else agreeing to disagree on tactics.
The problem, at least that I've seen on this thread so far, was in the effect on a person assuming that because he, personally, had quit voting, he was no longer welcome, simply because people who encourage selective voting write essays and post here also - which was very sad and horrible. The scars of DKos and inflicted by The Dark Side propagandists evidently run deep...
People have every right to explain and promote their favored routes toward democracy, with no intent to make anyone else feeling differently excluded, as they certainly are not, at least here.
But there's been a lot of US media propaganda over the years aimed at making people fear and hate any difference, so perhaps that might also, in at least some cases, trigger that feeling by unconscious association? Just guessing, because I find such responses to different viewpoints puzzling.
Nobody ever has exactly the same viewpoint as anyone else on everything, after all.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@Ellen North Well, that's the
Well, that's the problem with generalized complaint--makes it look like it's directed at everyone who falls into a particular category-- but it's a regular Scylla and Charybdis because the alternative is calling out particular users by name.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Oh, I certainly do very much agree that nobody
can tell anyone what to do with their vote, only present their reasoning and some encouragement.
But it's also a potential indication of people being frightened/angry/propagandized one way or another to try to insist that all people think as they do in all areas in order to form any alliance in any area or to refuse to maintain any contact at all - even for varied and general discussion and information sharing - when faced with those having any difference in viewpoint.
As with this instance, that of not voting at all, because the proponents believe that this will somehow register as a protest in a country where low voter turn-outs among various groups have long been deliberately created to become common and too-often passed off previously as voter apathy/laziness - even as satisfaction with the status quo - rather than by a lack of anything to vote for and voting made difficult-to-impossible for too-many.
And perhaps that a lower voter turn-out among those voting against their candidates will adversely affect the ruthless psychopaths in stolen power, despite that falling into line with what TPTB want, likely working toward ending any pretense at elections.
It's their vote - and speech - to do with as they please, as it is for us all.
It seems to me that both US corporate parties already make it hard to vote, even to the point of utterly revealing themselves by en masse unregistering/disqualifying, by various means, groups of voters deemed likely to not vote for their selected primary candidates and by, among other such stratagems, drastically cutting polling places and, where ballots are used, having insufficient in stock or forcing the use of provisional ballots for groups likely to not vote as demanded, which they plan to leave uncounted/throw away.
Where electronic machines are used, apart from myriad other issues, these are said to be privately owned - as are both of the Trade-Off permissible-to-vote-for US political parties - and protected by corporate-protective law against verification processes or any accountability demanded by the public, this regarding public servants being elected by the public for the people's own public service.
If voting per se had been entirely controlled and pointless, they'd hardly bother with all of this voter prevention and after-the-fact thwarting, focused in areas where people are more likely to vote their own interests, having an actual decent option available, rather than for the pre-selected corporate stooges.
If they're trying for plausible-appearing results, the now-blatant electoral cheating in seemingly endless ways kinda defeats that. (And Progs have been winning elections, despite all impediments and smears. Many people now know enough to distrust at least the claims of corporate Dems, although the Repubs still continue to get away with literal murder...)
But the long-running covert influence/propaganda campaigns to fragment movements and any and all actions aimed at discouraging people from voting at all do an end run around all that.
When a high voter turn-out occurs to vote for that too-rare good candidate, the electoral cheating becomes exceedingly blatant and has been proven in many of the obvious cases to have occurred in 2016.
This because for the first time ever, the American people - or a number among them - have coordinated in an effort to achieve the democratic government of, by and for the people which they have been told life-long they are Constitutionally entitled to and started running, themselves, for the public service, and have by-passed the corporate monopoly news media black-outs and dismissive, false or derisive propaganda promoted by these against them.
This success was achieved, in great part, by using the internet (initially permitted the global public by DARPA/TPTB in order to spy upon their every communication and activity) which is now being censored and may soon be no longer useful for any purpose beyond keeping the massive multiplex of public/private spy systems updated on the public's private affairs while said public is seeking entertainment and 'permissible' censored communication with each other, (right now, it's beginning with such things as commonly used swearing and the like, in private communications on the internet, perhaps to protect the virgin ears of the legions of public/private spies recording/listening in, or to keep ever-learning AI bots from learning to 'talk dirty') and with people reliant upon internet ultimately having only corporate/billionaire/PTB-approved propaganda for 'information'.
So this next couple of elections would appear to offer the last pacific, electoral shot at human survival, as well as that of any move toward democracy via what remains of the US democratic process, by voting in enough Progs to replace enough corporate representatives to actually affect the legislative process.
A few can do nothing, where a majority can.
And, in my belief, too-obvious-to-fake-away landslide wins for Progs in both of these elections, combined with an en masse public refusal to accept any suspicious electoral results, form the last chance for democracy in America (or anywhere else,) as the gloves come off and the internet becomes essentially a communications/entertainment weapon used to control and spy upon its users in an ever-more-blatant fascist state.
AI war drones and autonomous killer robots are seemingly to become the norm within NATO countries within the next few years; India plans to be using them on her borders shortly. (And there would appear to be a number of things regarding military goals and weapons planned for fruition in 2020, which happens to be also the year of the next US Presidential election, for whatever reason(s), budgetary and/or otherwise.)
Does anyone believe that these will not be used to replace civil forces currently brutally repressing peaceful protesters now, by the psychopaths running the US?
Not just for the terror and elimination aspects, as we see now expanded and enacted with the psychopathic Israeli PTB's snipers targeting and slaughtering/maiming caged Palestinian protesters, farmers working in their fields, children, medics and journalists, with UN and global outrage stymied by the psychopathic US PTB.
And maybe not just because of some among human soldiers/security forces prospectively having empathy and a conscience to limit them, (we know that humans refusing to nuke when ordered have saved the world from mistakenly inflicted catastrophe a number of times, where a machine wouldn't have had the capacities or the urge to rethink this,) as AI-equipped machines cannot, lacking the genetic inheritance and biology involved, and therefore capable of being as brutal as desired or even more so, if they independently decide this might be expedient, being like human psychopaths in having intelligence without empathy, and unlike in being unkillable and also incapable of feeling or wishing to avoid pain administered by struggling victims.
But I'd personally suspect also so that none of the 'Disposables' have to be paid money to repress their own people, by those having sucked it all up, in order to be able to feed and house themselves and to live, going by The Psychopaths That Be's demonstrated tendencies and the corporate/billionaire trend toward human-independent automation of even their killing.
If they believe that they will no longer need human normals, we can all be instantly designated Disposables taking up their planetary space; as a group, they seem to resent anyone else having anything at all, even health, as 'it all' should be theirs only - many psychopaths despise human normals as 'weak' prey for caring about others, using such 'weaknesses' to manipulate us.
TPTB typically became what they are through absolute ruthlessness. Remember the video of the room-full of Repubs applauding Poors dying due to lack of money for health-care?
Look at such as Bolton and Cheney, respectively in and advising the Trump Admin while Dems have been 'rehabilitating' the Bush Admin, and at the sadistic torturer intended to head an even more vicious CIA, while Dems voted for her and Dem leadership made approving noises.
That proverbial handbasket is moving - and heating up - awfully fast, and I know that I personally feel strongly about convincing people to vote Prog only against all this and for democracy, for their lives (and, where feasible, run like hell for public office as a Prog) so I don't find it surprising that those who believe that self-silencing their vote will somehow help, apparently by making psychopaths without conscience feel guilty and behave, may also feel strongly about promoting their viewpoint.
However, in any human relationship, there will be times when people have to agree to each person feeling that the other is wrong in some area even if they often feel that that they're both right in others, or at least partially so. If all human relationships are based on total agreement on all issues, there won't be any, and the same goes for everyone on an internet site, perhaps apart from ones like DKos.
And I also feel that even where some preferred action/inaction in one area may diverge widely between individuals/groups, that those who are allies in areas of other goals should not necessarily be rejected for collaboration within those shared areas - unless, of course, they're psychopathic/psychotic-thought-based groups/individuals in themselves, as with neo-Nazis or those otherwise promoting violence/repression against other vulnerable groups.
TPTB have won so far by fomenting division to fragment the more aware human 'leftist' groups which could otherwise have overcome them, and following this ingrained pattern of squabbling and separating, especially over less imperative issues, is an imposed habit which we need to kick in order to unify in the effort to kick out all psychopaths/self-interests from our public policy and our private lives.
That is, at any rate my personal opinion, based on my current understanding. YMMV.
Others better informed than I also see this as a last-ditch moment, with a variety of suggested responses, any of which (being non-violent) might strike people as being potentially effective.
But we'd had Alex Ocana here, a wonderful human being and a precious resource, who'd been an activist in the successful, pacific (on the protester's side) Bolivian revolution, who had a lot of experience and advice and who I miss and worry about. I hope he's OK and just gave up on us for never actually doing anything...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ITLWxw0AVI&index=98&list=PLXctIVhQimRKz...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAmaMfJBQ1g&start_radio=1&list=RDbAmaMfJ...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@Ellen North Oh, I miss Alex too
Oh, I miss Alex too, so much.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
" they don’t get to tell others what to do. "
Would you give me a single example of this behavior here.?
I'd really like to see it.
Can't tell people who to vote for or whether or not to vote.
I have experienced and observed the aggressive attitude JtC has twice written about here and other places. Much, much more on Facebook than here at c99.
Whether it is directed at me personally or someone else, I have a hard time with it. I can't help but think, "Who died and made you boss?" If I defend a male or white people, someone will call me a racist. If I don't support "me too" to the nth degree, someone will tell me how much I hate women. I catch more than my fair of anger and accusations on the tubes because I don't conform. I am a product of my life's eclectic experience just like everyone else. I attempt to speak and write in a passive voice because it allows me to speak my truth without directing it at someone.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
I am asking if anyone here
has ever told you not to vote, or bullied you over this issue.
If that has happened, would you please give a specific instance?
This thread is all about the vote/no vote issue and that is what I'm asking about- not racism or sexism. At c99 and not anywhere else.
Sorry if I was not precise in my question.
Thanks very much for your response.
Never been bullied here on whether or not to vote.
I was examining voting for Trump, certainly not because of who he is but despite it. I saw it as retaliation against the Dems and a form of a double tap in the voting booth. Not only would the Dems lose my vote, but their enemy, and unfortunately mine, would gain it. My goal was to make them lose. Silly me thought it would teach them a lesson. And given how much Obama couldn't do with his majority, who knew Trump could and would do so much with his. Still, I don't regret my vote for Stein in Michigan.
This apparently really pissed off an active contributor much loved by the group. I was spoken to so aggressively that JtC actually stepped in. I think we lost his/her participation as a result of it. So I have been bullied here about my vote. I wasn't bullied on should or shouldn't I vote, but I was bullied on who or who not to vote for.
I understand how the frustrations of our political reality can carry online with us. I just wish people wouldn't hold a grudge when they bump heads. Everyone here wants a better life and a better country for everyone. We all get angry sometimes, but I believe most if not all of us try to manage that anger as constructively as possible. When we fall short, I just wish we could get past it. Why people have to take their bat and ball and leave is beyond me.
I am more of an anarchist than a liberal. My values are all over the board, some right, some left, some elitist, some not. I can understand someone getting frustrated at something I might say and saying so. I have no problem with candor, but I do have a problem with emotions that run out of control and can't be put aside ever. Afterall, what right do any of us have to demand or expect that someone will do or think what we think they should just because we tell them to? As I said, who died and left anyone boss?
PS: Edited for clarity. Getting old.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
thanks for clarifying.
I believe your remark was misunderstood by some here.
thanks again.
peace out.
You are welcome.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
cogent
In this case, it's because his reasoning applies to many of the rest of us, myself included.
gjohnsit even managed to fill this self-explanation of his with a lot of cogent material!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
I really respect the intention and clarity of your position.
You seem to have some conviction that a bottom-up cleansing of the system is possible — because, of course, new authentic talent can only be introduced through the doorways with the fewest power-grabbers standing guard. Enough uncontaminated and uncompromised souls coming in at the bottom will wash away some of the filth — and they may then percolate upward toward the Pretorians that run the place.
(We won't discuss how they handle their mandatory free trip to Israel, learn how it works, clock their first million, get the first glimpse of their post-political career possibilities, and spend every waking moment from Day One working on getting re-elected. We will assume that they remain untainted, even after they come to realize that sometimes the end really does justiny the means. Every great endeavor has an underbelly.)
You are exactly who you say you are. I am sort of surprised that you have been challenged on that. I am sort of surprised, too, that your credentials center around NOT being a Democrat for a long time. I've never thought about that as a criterion for anything. Or maybe I dismissed it because there really is no such being as a Democrat. There are "Republicans," and there are "people who are not Republicans" who have a Party, too. They are comprised of the other five missing political parties in a country the size of United States. The most prominent of them right now are the Reagan Democrats.
If you had not led with the business about not voting, and instead put it at the end, I would have probably nodded along with it because it was contained in a cosy narrative that I am in agreement with. But when you put voting up front, without all the mitigating circumstances and political intentions and references to intimate local elections birthed in people's living rooms — it is exposed as intellectually dishonest. Because it is. It pretends that the anguish of the voter who must decide which bullet he will be shot with — is not the grim dilemma of voting in America.
Look at this disgrace of a nation. That's how we got here.
Now, all that being said, I think you are on to something with the voting theme. There seems to be a lot of activism surrounding voting procedures at the moment. And since the US is too lame-assed to have a grown-up national voting system with full-on transparency — we have 50 cheap and going broke, military-armed fiefdoms where intensely effective political agendas can take root. In recent months, I've seen movements to strengthen the electoral college and make it a crime of treason to challenge it, and I've seen movements for dual paper ballots and electronic accounting. There are proposals to move election days to the weekend and proposals that make voting lines with waits over an hour financially lucrative for those forced to wait.
There are movements to tighten voter registration requirements and movements to do away with voter registration altogether. This last one has caught my attention. Other nations don't have cumbersome voter registration, most don't have any such thing, and they seem to do just fine. Think about it, This nation has a credit reporting system that can verify the residence of every single one of us for a $20,000 loan in under a hundred seconds. The federal government probably has one, too. Surely we can borrow it once every couple of years.
This voter registration Ponzi we have been lashed to is just anther money-pump for fundraising and suppressing votes. Otherwise, it is just a dumb system for gullible people. This country needs more spontaneous voting by more people who are already instantly empowered to do so. I think when a nation is set up like that, as the constitution implies, the fresh blood can start pouring in at the top where it can do some good.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
A full cleansing of the system
is impossible without overthrowing the capitalist system. That won't happen without a collapse of the financial system and a whole lot of bloodshed.
What is possible is a New Deal style reform. That would actually save the current system but tptb are to greedy to allow it willingly.
This is the crossroads we are at, isn't it?
This is the only possible exit before we are crushed by the totalitarian regime. And it will happen in the rest of the world. It's happening now. But we could remain a colonial plantation of winners and losers, free men and political prisoners.
I see nothing that changes anything that would give rise to bloodshed. The people have no leverage over the people in control. That power is held outside the US.
It's the only thing that could save the current system. But the people in power are too dumb to enact it. And the rest of us are too smart to fall for it again, on those revokable terms.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
Beginning of the end?
As usual, Pluto, you summarize the whole situation very well.
I expect Trump to be unaware of anything not directly related to his fragile ego. But I'm beginning to think that our politicians and the neocon elite are having delusions of infallibility and invulnerability. When I read the Asian, Iranian, European, and Arab press it seems obvious that most of the world knows the US is in rapid decline. They see impending economic disaster hitting the US because of our loss of the dollar as reserve currency, our profligate spending on war, our ignorant climate and science policies, and our elites' indifference or hostility to their own populace and the rest of the world. We are heading for extremely bad times.
-Greed is not a virtue.
-Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.
-Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962
Not only that, but the current crop of Democrats
are too focused on Idpol to ever allow any real New New Deal to happen.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VUa4BJ4M5c]
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
@The Aspie Corner The other day I saw a
The other day I saw a guy on YouTube explain that he was liberal because he didn't have any problem with people of any race, gender, or sexual identity. In fact, he hires people for his software companies from all round the world, proving that he is liberal and has no problem with other kinds of people.
He followed up by saying he was conservative about money "Don't touch my money."
But he thinks he is a liberal.
Those are our choices politically: support people like the guy I just described, or people like Trump who spend their time hating various others and trying to make political hay out of it. Neither option will address climate change (don't touch my money), a living wage (don't touch my money), the horrendous tax code (don't touch my money), our crumbling infrastructure (don't touch my money), fracking (don't touch my money), or the problems of industrialized agriculture (don't touch my money). It won't protect the lands of the South Dakota Sioux tribes or get clean water to the people of Flint.
Further, for some reason, people like the gentleman I described also seem uninterested in stopping wars, torture, assassination, or the fairly continual murder of Black people, Latino people, handicapped people, and just plain unlucky people by cops, which proceeds without any accountability or consequences, as far as I can see.
Our choices are this kind of "liberalism," or alt-right Trumpism. Which is exactly the political world the Bushes and the Clintons wanted us to inhabit.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
don't touch my money
What he is, is a dick.
The ancient saying of "put your money where your mouth is" comes into play here.
(don't touch my money).
Fuckers like this one need a good comeuppance, in my humble opinion.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
@thanatokephaloides If he's a liberal
If he's a liberal, than Phil Ochs was right all along
10 degrees to the left of center in good times, 10 degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally.
And if he's a liberal, I guess most of us here are leftists.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Nailed it!
And that's also the only sort of people they want available for voters to choose from...
If it's cutting back on my potential maximized money to spare your life, don't touch my potential maximized money.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@Ellen North But I'm a real
But I'm a real good person because I don't automatically hate everyone with darker skin.
For fuck's sakes, how did the bar get lowered this much?
People actually think they ought to be praised for opposing Nazis, now.
When I was growing up, opposing Nazis was a given.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Bloodshed yes, system collapse
not necessarily, empty suit had a chance to
do it right but sided with the bankers, had he sided
with the people back then and w/clowngress a D super
majority he could've been the one.....but we all
know what happened, sadly.
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
I severely disagree
Communism is not the answer any more than the uncontrolled capitalism we have now. We need managed capitalism, the system that FDR introduced (and I don't care if he had to be dragged kicking and screaming, he did it). Government projects where the good of the whole is the object and capitalism where consumer choice is paramount, with corporations controlled in what they can do with their customers, their competitors and their workers.
I don't want the government deciding what I can eat, what I can wear, how beer is made, what books I can buy, how cars should look, or where I can work doing what. I do want the government to to do drug research and production, operate utilities (including the internet), and build their own tanks and ships based on national need, not corporate greed.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
It's not an either/or choice
There are many more options.
Anarcho-socialism is what I'm leaning towards.
If you think about it do you really think that capitalism is the best we can do?
Bakunin!
I agree with a lot he had to say, but I like Kropotkin's, even better.
(Wikipedia)
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Many animal species use altruism for mutual benefit
I remember taking a biology class where game theory was used to show how altruism benefits a species. It's all over the animal world but I can't remembter specifics other than bees, but any nature documentary will show it. Altruism, I think, is a key part of the "success" of the human species.
Beware the bullshit factories.
His whole book "Mutual Aid" is online
, it's a bit long and repetitive, but chock full of examples.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
altruism
It's a key part of the "existence" of the human species. With our lack of superior natural armor, weapons, or sensors, the only way we humans could have survived at all is through the use of altruism.
As usual, Ayn Rand is full of shit.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Damn straight!
Psychopaths are typically parasitic upon the humans they manipulate and despise for their 'weakness' in caring about others, and she was very obviously in the former category.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
We wouldn't have survived as a species
without altruism. It's a survival trait.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Yes, anarchy is only a transient state
Until some thug organizes a group of thugs and makes himself the monarch. Then you have monarchy.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Not anarchy like punks
I mean anarco-socialism. It's a fully functional system
mafiocracy
.... mafiocracy!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Communism?
I am very sorry to see this.
Along the way, something evil was done to you, I suspect. Some sort of mental sabotage. I doubt this was an experience you had in the real world, so it comes from some narrative meant to frighten you away from cooperative constructs. The kind that actually do exist on earth for the benefit of all but the oligarchs.
It must be a heavy compulsion to push back so hard, although you are welcome to do so here. If you feel it is important to exert an influence in this area, approach it more subtly with more familiar examples, and try to avoid using the word "communist." It's not really on the spectrum of this discussion.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
If you are not capitalist, you are communist.
Even socialism allows the existence of free enterprise. Only communism allows no sellers other than the State.
I never lived under communism. But if there aren't competing stores, just one government bureaucracy, THEY decide what food is for sale and what clothes are for sale.
My daughter had a new classmate from Poland in 1982. She vividly described the lack of choices and waiting lines. When she and her mother first went to Jewel Tea Company (a large supermarket chain) and the entrance way was lined with loaves of bread, she had the urge to fill the cart with loaves of bread which was very scarce in the Worker's Paradise.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
You need to do some research
Because it isn't either or
And the top down Soviet style communism
is only one of many different forms of communism...an ugly one, obviously. Everyone pretends it's the only one.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
@The Voice In the Wilderness Holy shit.
Holy shit.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
democratic socialism
That system exists and is quite successful, especially in Scandinavia.
It's called "democratic socialism", and it's what many of us here at c99 want to happen.
The Lenin-Stalin-Maoist totalitarian system put the Socialist cause back decades, if not centuries. Mere replacement of Tsars with "Commie-Tsars" who rule identically isn't Socialism, regardless of what such regimes call themselves. And that was what Soviet rule and all its descendants were all about.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
You mean like Europe?
But capitalism isn't dead there. Socialism is limited capitalism. The opposite of Capitalism is Communism.
Democratic? We have Democratic Capitalism here. The Rich capture the party apparatus. They seem to have done the same in France and Germany, Only the Scandinavian countries have avoided this for a while.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
We most certainly do not have
democratic Capitalism here, that's what our owners want you to think. This country is an oligarchy, period, and we edge closer to full on security state totalitarianism every single day. Think our media is so far off of the old Pravda?? We don't live with daily, heavy doses of blatant propaganda? Not here in America? Please.
Saving capitalism should not be our goal in reality, it is literally destroying us and so many other species on this planet, it cannot go on without a radical change. This paradigm is extremely difficult for those of us who've been raised and braised on "Democratic Capitalism" our whole lives but it is the one big change we need to make. This is a political choice and we surely do not have only one or the other - Communism or Capitalism - we really could make it what we want if we had an actual choice in the matter. Our owners WANT us to think the choice is limited to either/or, kind of like that lesser evil "voting" thing we're taught so well to believe in while all factual evidence points out that fallacy.
As for government telling us what to eat and wear, we already have a form of that with our owning manipulative class in reality but I agree, it is far more subtle and appears to retain some measure of "free choice" but that's a sham as well.
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Second that. eom
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
@lizzyh7 I wish I hadn't
I wish I hadn't missed this comment on the first go-round; you said what I said down below way better!
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
democratic?
We don't have "democratic" anything here, for the exact reason you yourself specified:
And there's more genuine resistance to the oligarchic capitalist seizure of power in France and Germany than here. But, as late-stage oligarchic monopoly/monopsony capitalism does what it always does, I expect that to change, as late-stage oligarchic monopoly/monopsony capitalism is not sustainable.
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Is communism inherent to the result of overthrowing
rabid corporate/billionaire capitalism draining all others and destroying the planet?
What seems to be termed Communism so far seems, in practice, to be invariably based entirely the wrong way around, with the people viewed as serving The State, as embodied in the oligarch(s) on top - just using another name for tyranny.
What's needed, in my view, is a more sustainable system where the public service exists to serve the public interest. A nice social democracy run of, by and for the people, with plenty of worker-owned/operated co-ops and mutually beneficial Fair Trade for what's needed from/by various countries would hit the sweet spot nicely. Might still be capitalistic to that extent, but with reasonable profits, living wages, a well-constructed social safety net, all essentials (water/sewage, power, refuse collection, health care and the like) publicly owned and operated for the best possible service at the lowest cost enabling decent wages and pensions, and progressive taxes based on ability to pay.
With decent wages for all and real-economy circulation providing a good tax base within the population, public-protective regulation and no more War On The World or corporate welfare and with publicly owned and run banks not failing, I suspect that things might go rather well. Let me go ask my unicorn.
Edit: I should have known that this would have been already better answered just down the thread - I love this place!
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Unicorn my ass! :-)
Unicorn my ass! Ask the people of Iceland, that truly nice land where crooked bankers go to jail, real-economy circulation provides a good tax base within the population, public-protective regulation and no War On The World or corporate welfare prevail!
I'd move there if they'd have me (they won't, alas!).....
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
I think there is some validity to lesser evilism
That road seems filled with false equivalencies. I'll vote for Richard Nixon over Adolph Hitler.
edit: Somehow (having nothing to do with my rushing to post), this comment got to the wrong place. Sorry.
Beware the bullshit factories.
I think the idea was an evolution from a highly industrialized
vulture capitalism state to worker cooperatives. That's my impression from second hand sources, having never really read Das Kapital.
That's never happened yet. Russia at the turn of the century, although rampant with exploitation, was not a highly industrialized state. It was much more agrarian than most Western European countries. I think the same is true of China which still calls itself communist despite such worker paradises as the Apple computer producing Foxconn factories, which have suicide barriers to keep its
serfsproletariats alive.Beware the bullshit factories.
Commie-Tsars
Commie-Tsars, just like I said.
Compare the situation of the workers who built the Great Wall of China under the Emperors.
Not much different.....
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
currently it is the corporations that are...
Watch the first couple of minutes of this story of monopolization to see what I mean...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLfO-2t1qPQ
I've always been amazed why people think private corporations serve us better than government. Fearing government control is a capitalist tool to promote profit for the few.
From my view. You are entitled to yours.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
I love this comment!
When I was in high school back in the dark ages, all seniors were required to take Americanism versus Communism in order to graduate. Many of my classmates never explored other alternatives even though two of the most popular government programs today across the political spectrum are both socialist in nature: Social Security and Medicare.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
@Lookout At this point, I
At this point, I don't see much daylight between the government and the private-sector wealthy.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Yes, but there is more than one!
So, you have choice. You can also start your own company offering a different choice. That's the difference.
And so many people here that I can't respond to them all think I support the crony monopolist form of capitalism that we have now. NO! I want what we had in the p[ast, when new companies could create new goods. Not Big Brother deciding what is for sale. Because if you elininate capitalism, there is nothing left but the State! Capitalism needs checks and balances. If there is only the State there is no check and balance. Where would we be if the current US government owned all the companies? I submit worse off than we are now.
Imagine Trump or Hillary in control of the entire economy.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
worker coops are not the state
and do exist in the capitalist system. Democratize the work place. Richard Wolff does a good job explaining the approach I find appealing.
https://www.democracyatwork.info/
It may be semantics that creates the misunderstanding. Communism/socialism = dictatorship.
I know that is not what I mean and I think... the anti-communist propaganda to promote the cold war is still very much with us. To the point where we can't even explore other systems without peoples heads exploding.
If we look at our origins (which include genocide and slavery)
It seems we never got to the promote the general welfare. The oligarchs prefer their own welfare, hence the destructive nature of pure capitalism.
That my view as a socialist. By our natures we have to sort out our own paths. All the best on yours!
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
@The Voice In the Wilderness I think we've already
I think we've already got most of the authoritarian bullshit you mentioned in your examples--or, if we don't have the government deciding those things, we have the wealthy doing it, or the wealthy and the government in cahoots with one another.
It's not as extreme as it was under Lenin or Stalin--yet. But the thing is, I don't believe that the economic system one chooses is automatically authoritarian or free. It seems fairly clear that both capitalism and communism can be turned into authoritarian shitpiles.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Pages