If the left is going to dump on electoralism, we have to present some sort of realistic alternative. Otherwise, anyone who isn't already on the left will correctly write us off as a dead end to any sort of improvement. It's just doomerism unless we offer a better idea. Consider the difference between criticizing the American healthcare system and proposing a solution like Medicare for All. Which is easier to organize around?
And it needs to be a lot more specific than something like "join a union." Unions are great, but are they going to address climate change? Are they going to dismantle police departments? Are they going to have any effect on imperialism? If you think they will, we need to lay out a clear case for how they will. If the answer is "they're not, but neither will electoral politics," then we're back to doomerism and offering nothing better.
The important point of joining unions etc is that these are more rudimentary forms of organization which are the first building steps towards something larger which regardless of what people say can also participate in electoral politics.
My thinking is that we need to draw a clear path from "our collective labor is our best political tool" to specific solutions for climate change, police violence, imperialism, etc. Because that is not clear at all right now, especially to anyone who's not already on this (or a similar) forum. The concept is good, but we can't just leave it at that. "Healthcare is a human right" is a good concept, but it's not as useful of an organizing tool as "here's a proposal for how Medicare for All would work, and here's what we need to do to pass it."
Medicare For All is already pretty easy to understand. Like, it's a well detailed law, wrote to fit in the fucking US system which is the worst case scenario.
Exactly! If someone only talks about the failures of U.S. healthcare, it's easy to write them off because they're not actually proposing a solution. Even "healthcare is a human right" isn't really a solution -- it doesn't tell you how you would deliver healthcare for everyone. It's just a statement of what should be. If this is all we're offering, people aren't going to see that as a realistic way to accomplish anything.
But Medicare for All? That's an actual bill, it expands something we already have, and we know how to pass bills and expand existing programs. It's concrete enough for people to get invested in and take seriously.
I'm saying it's not enough to criticize electoralism (in the way it's not enough to criticize existing U.S. healthcare). We need to present a concrete, realistic alternative (the way M4A is a concrete, realistic alternative to what we have now).
Cut the military. Retrain redundant soldiers to the building trades and use them and the money no longer spent on bombs and murder robots to build energy-efficient social housing.
This only works if the person we’re making the case to, especially a self avowed leftist, doesn’t say no when you tel them to read some theory. Because better minds than mine have already treaded this ground a thousand times over and having me write it out isn’t going to do anyone any better than just reading Lenin (or insert tendency preferred theorist here)
If people aren't going to read decades-old socialist texts en masse, do we give up? I would say no, which means we need to be able to make the case for socialism (which includes how we might get there) without tossing a book at someone. Especially if you've read some theory, you can do this! Like a lot of subjects, the fact that there's a deep literature on it does not mean that deep literature is necessary for understanding the core concepts.
Besides, Lenin didn't just tell people to read Marx. He rewrote the most important ideas in material directed at the specific context of 1910s Russia. Similarly, Mao didn't just tell people to read Marx and Lenin. He built off their work, but tailored it to his specific context. We have to do the same.
Fair enough, I believe we're discussing different issues. I absolutely agree when it comes to informing the non-radicalized. I was speaking more to the brand of online 'leftist' that refuses to abandon electoralism and refuses to do any research
This kind of sounds like a fast track to insular leftist reading groups.
On the list of barriers to socialism in the U.S., online leftists needing to read more theory is low. Our focus needs to be on creating more leftists first and foremost.
I think electoral politics offer at least as much to the socialist movement as any other tactic. I'm saying that if you disagree with that, "electoralism bad" -- by itself -- isn't going to accomplish anything. You have to present a solution along with your critiques or people will eventually tune you out.
Those Biden Bros couldn't convince me to vote for a racist old white man. We need female empowerment and demographic representation in this brave new century. That's why I rejected misogyny and voted for Gloria La Riva. #I'mWithHer
my blood-free hands when I've never voted for Biden, Trump, or Obungler 👐
I'm not sure why the American left decided abstentionism is, like, a good leftist position or whatever.
It's why I vote for leftist politicians and ignore parts of the ballot where that is not an option (or write someone in). Is La Riva perfect? No, but she's a hell of a lot better than Biden or Trump.
Yeah people forget that it doesn't matter if they get elected, getting votes helps both them and the rest of the country gauge support or dissatisfaction with other parties etc.
Exactly. And the more people that are exposed to it, the more people that come leftward
The problem is that it plays well in leftist circles, but looks ridiculous to any non-leftist who's politically active. Which is the more important audience?
And voting for Biden looks complicit. I use my non vote at presidential level and votes down ballot to signal where the bulk of my disaffection lies.
I get that strategy, but I'm already here. I don't see evidence that people who aren't already leftists are receiving the message you're sending.
Having any position at all on who to vote for is completely pointless. So just let people enjoy memes about abstaining from the sham elections lol
What?
Also no, you're not taking this seriously enough. There's more to politics than memes.
I'm not sure what you are saying either.
But this is not just memes. It's actually counterproductive if people decide "haha abstentionism is so cool and true". Abstaining does absolutely nothing. You don't have to vote for someone to win. Obviously people who are not expecting to win or even get a lot of votes are still running for a reason (although there is also people who are expecting to achieve that on a more local level). Even if someone is not even anywhere close to doing well, gathering votes is a decent way to gauge support or dissatisfaction with other candidates and the popularity of some positions, as well as a way to gain more visibility. Not to mention that the vast majority people just won't take your politics seriously at all if you just say "fuck elections haha", especially when you're not doing great at presenting a viable alternative for them.
So voting does matter, as does "electoralism" and they should be utilized because you just can't afford not to milk every last available avenue, especially when it is something as simple as just dropping a ballot in a box. Almost every major communist movement in the past has participated or tried to participate in elections of any kind etc whenever they were allowed to, regardless of their prospects of winning or the legitimacy of the process. There are reasons for that.
If you think voting actually accomplishes anything you are simply wrong. There's really not any more to it than that.
I made an entire post where I explained to you why yes, it does indeed matter. And if you don't believe me at least believe... Idk, the bulk of communist parties since forever.
I made an entire post where I explained to you why yes, it does indeed matter
Yeah, you made a post in which you were wrong a lot, and now you continue to be wrong.
I didn't ignore it. I read it. It was wrong. I saw no reason to engage with it.
your government is owned by bankers and arms contractors. the only "good" leftist position full-blown insurrection, last summer's rioting was a good start
I mean... if you think voting a certain way, or even electing Bernie, would have closed the camps, that's as much or more of a succdem take than AOC's.
I say let's all make a big festival but instead of a festival we all bring guns and storm one of those kamps
I wrote in Adam sessler from the hit g4 TV show "Lets play" and I do not regret my choice.
Or shit, was that the name of it? I really should bother to remember if I am going to make the joke.
Voting's useless, but i use it as an excuse to take a walk and get some air I guess
