Glad they’re taking off the gloves a little, but it’s always been a non-option to just make our lives significantly and irrevocably better like M4A or the PRO act and although they’re good at trying and failing, they never talk about the consequences as dire as they actually are with few exceptions.
What, are you going to vote for the guy who will put his knee on your throat and murder you? No, of course not. You should vote for not that, because not that will not do that and if someone else does, they will glare disapprovingly from a safe distance, secretly appreciating that it isn’t them being murdered.
Democrats. We’re not actively evil.
Simpsons in 1994:
And yet, if I have a choice to be policed by Chauvin or Thao, there is no question that I choose Thao.
Yes, the ultimate goal is to deprive both of these men of their power. But for that to happen we need Chauvin to take his knee off our neck.
This is barely a metaphor by the way. Since Trump pardoned Chauvin and the Democrats didn’t.Evidently I must have been thinking of another pardon.No you need the guy with the camera to set it down and throw a fucking Molotov.
Become ungovernable. We already live in a police state.
Becoming ungovernable is not incompatible with voting though. And again, will be easier without a knee on your neck.
Tankies here are ultimately the meme they post about the dems preventing a shift back left with how they discourage voting.
You know we need to destroy the power of both
Of course. And my belief is that neither voting nor abstaining from voting for anyone is going to achieve that.
However, it may make the task easier or harder.
yeah the other option is revolution, and with that it’s still not guaranteed you end up with what you want when the dust settles. Good chance China or Russia will take advantage and jump in and fill the power vacuum in the US when civil war happens.
Revolution is so far away in the US I think it’s just an unserious idea at this point, and it has a poor track record in history anyway. Personally, I think political organizing outside of the parties is the best model, then use that organized power to disrupt the status quo and demand concessions. Syndicalism, basically, but it doesn’t need to be only at the workplace. Shut down roads, block police from going anywhere, etc. Anything you can. But there needs to be a large constituency that supports these actions first. How to build that is an important question.
In case you choose Thao you get same course but in slow pace. The whole Trump thingy just accelerated things and showed the real faces of current politicians not only in us but worldwide
If you do nothing other than voting, then maybe. But I’m saying voting is just a small part of a larger overall strategy. And the non-voting actions are how things will get better.
This is largely how we got the new deal. Roosevelt was forced to adopt a lot of these programs by the organized demands of the labor movement.
That’s a nice false dichotomy you made there.
How is it a false equivalency?
False dichotomy, not false equivalency. Two different things.
Right here is the false dichotomy, considering the context of the comment this was written in reply to (the one by meatbridge) being a metaphor for voting, equating Chauvin to Republicans and Thao to Democrats.
You frame it as if we only had two choices. Which is verifiably wrong.
deleted by creator
If it gets really bad, Chuck Schumer will write a stern letter and Cory Booker will, like… stand in one spot for a long time talking about stuff.
Except they are actively evil they don’t just ignore Republican actions it wasn’t like Biden was looking the other way when murder by police officers was reaching record highs and Israel was commiting a genocide with his support or Obama was looking the other way when millions are violently deported and many others blown up at weddings by drone strikes. They commit plenty of active evil themselves.
BoTh SiDeS
Are you saying I’m saying that, or are you mocking people who say that?