So, in that event, is the idea to just hope that a revolution will break out instead?
Yeah, yeah organize too, but revolution is ultimately the desired final conclusion from said organizing, is it not?
Call me a doomer or whatever, but odds are that ain't gonna happen any time in the foreseeable future, things are gonna have to get way, waaayyy worse before it's even a realistic possibility imo.
Not to say organizing should be completely abandoned in favor of electoralism either, of course not, it just feels foolish to me to give up on either lane.
To me, it feels like the best course of action would be to pursue both at the same time until one or both leads to success. To increase our chances/odds by pursuing 2 avenues instead of putting all of our metaphorical eggs in one basket.
Basically I'm saying we should keep both options open instead of limiting our scope, and chances of success with it.
I guess you could say I'm a big-brained centrist on this issue.
I'm curious how you feel in a situation with limited resources. I think the game gets funky at that point. What I mean is nobody is about to go door-to-door for Biden, right? The DNC is never going to run someone more left than Biden ever again, right? So electoralism would be trying to push new players through in my mind. Shahid Butar and people like him would be invaluable allies without question. But what if all that fundraising, door-to-door, and energy went to building leftist infrastructure like shelters, food banks, labor for the elderly, representation for arrested protestors, etc? Is there a point where a dollar put into public works and infrastructure is less valuable than a dollar spent trying to elect a leftist in the goal of creating socialism?