Bonus genocide apologia from the comments:
To radlibs, supporting genocide is “well-reasoned logic”. You live in a horror story. Every person you walk past on the street could be a depraved ghoul who thinks torturing and murdering children is “well-reasoned logic”. Every person you walk past on the street could be a depraved ghoul who looks at the NSFL photos coming out of Gaza and calls that ”well-reasoned logic”. Just think about that for a minute. Just think about how many people you pass every day, people who can hold the door open for you, who can smile at you, who can line up at the coffee shop while browsing cute pictures of cats online, all while also happening to be depraved genocide supporters. Just think about how happy it makes them to support genocide. So incredibly happy yet so incredibly banal that the pleasure they derive from genocide becomes a fixer-upper like their morning cup of coffee. Tell me that isn’t a horror story.
we all joked that if bernie got elected we would hate him before his presidency ended. well now we all hate him despite him never being elected president. great job old man, Parenti was right all along.
my name is bernie sanders, and I'm adolf hitler...from the holocaust
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLNQEHbusSA
you'll have to add your own yellow filter but yes
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
It is confusing the way liberals will use a term like "well-reasoned logic" because they don't outline any of the steps of their logic to show their reasoning. They just state that it is "logical" and use that as proof that it is. Which is the opposite of logic. Words mean nothing to these people and it is incredibly frustrating trying to talk to them because they will arbitrarily decide what each word means completely based on whether it lets them "win" or not. There's 0 understanding or respect, yet they demand huge amounts of both.
I think "logical" for most libs (at least in Europe) just means "common-sense", i.e. propaganda.
This isn't an issue with some insane complexity that requires all of these 'thought exercises'.
We are talking about the second in command who is running for president, and who is part of an admin that is actively facilitating a genocide against the will of it's own voting base, the 'generous' interpretation being that their donor class wishes them to do so. Regardless, her base will continue to support her for a litany of reasons but they are supporting a candidate who is (and has stated she wishes to continue) facilitating a genocide.
Whatever twisted logic can be strung together will never undo that simple truth.
Donald Trump could literally be Adolf Hitler in a mask, and it still does not make this permissable; in fact, that should make it MORE galling then, that these people are actively sabotaging their own election chances vis a vis alienating their own base by killing people. Instead, liberal pundits and politicians have decided it is the fault of voters not being able to stomach the stench of death wafting off of their party, and the 'loyal' voters join them in condemning their own, rather than directing their righteous fury at their own politicians who are mocking them.
So unbelievably housebroken.
I’m not too versed on the subject on lesser-evil voting and the arguments against. Anyone willing to educate me and share resources about it please?
Disclaimer: I’m not american so don’t try to persuade me to vote or not vote in this election as I’m tired of having to explain to people that not everyone on the internet is from the USA.
It pretty simple in shitland u got two parties, one that is openly racist and fascist and the other that is also that but hides it.
The one that hides it will continuously point at the open one as a scare tactic so you vote for them.
People sometimes understand the situation and prefer to vote for the non-openly fascist one because it seems better than the other option.
There's a concept of an argument similar to the French "clothespin" election a decade ago, where the left argued voters should put pinch their nose with a clothespin (figuratively) and vote for the conservative candidate in order to prevent a win by fascist Le Pen. Of course, the difference is that in the French system multiple parties have a (relatively) fair shake in the first round of voting, so applying this logic to the US just means you will be voting for Democrats, forever, no matter what else happens or how genocidal the Democrats get.
Essentially, there are two parties in the USA. The fascist and liberal ones. But because the fascist one keeps drifting right, it means the liberal one can keep drifting right, too, ostensibly to capture the voters the other party is going too far right to leave behind. And because they pressure their voters to keep voting for them because they are in fact the lesser of evil, they don't actually have to do anything for them except rhetoric and maybe one or two good bills an administration. On the whole, though, the country still keeps drifting to the right over time.
Threatening the liberal party that you actually have to earn your vote shocks them out of their complacency, because a lot of them don't actually want fascism, they just want the same liberal bourgeois society they have now, but don't have the theory or historical knowledge that makes them realize their still making life worse with their strategies. A lot of their donor class on the other hand absolutely doesn't care which party wins, though, which is also important to understand, although a lot of the liberal voters themselves don't understand that.
At least that's how I've come to see it on my short time on hexbear.
The argument for: the only options are the polite fascists and the more aggressive fascists, so of the two the best choice is the polite fascists.
The argument against: if you vote for polite fascists you're still getting fascism.
I didn't vote for either fascist and I'm still getting fascism, this game needs a rebalance.
The late Glen Ford of BlackAgendaReport was calling Sanders a Dem Sheepdog when he rose to national prominence, he was absolutely correct!
OWS was the biggest Left movement in the USA in a long time, Saunders, whether willingly or not, basically led all the anger and frustration with the current system right back to the Dems. As always the Democratic Party is the graveyard of social movements.
I call them mom and dad. It fucking hurts, because I know them to be kind, loving, self-sacrificial people. I know it. But then they start talking about Israel and suddenly stop when I respond. It hurts everytime that they choose blindness. They turn away and I don't recognize them. 😥
