• Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    “My policies are not popular enough to win elections”

    No, again. Every time a third party candidate is proposed, the very fact that they are third party is used against them despite popular policy.

    Vote lesser evil until you have proven progressive candidates

    How are these progressive candidates getting to the federal election? Magic? No.

    In order to make it to the federal level, you must satisfy donors and wealthy Capitalists, and support their economic interests.

    “My policies are not popular enough to win elections”

    Again, no. You’re pretending fascism is an idea that magically sprouts out of thin air, rather than a known phenomenon as a reaction to Capitalist failure. For you, ideas drive history, rather than Material Conditions.

    You keep ignoring the very simple math: if you have enough support for revolution, you have enough support to elect progressives; if you don’t have enough support to elect progressives, you’re the clear minority and imposing your policies on the country is undemocratic. How in blazes do you expect to coordinate a revolution if you can’t coordinate a campaign?

    It’s one thing to refuse to read books, it’s another thing entirely to refuse to read my comments, lmao. Even if you could elect progressives, they still can’t enact change. The structure of the US is designed to uphold Capitalism, and as long as it is, it will act against any change to the status quo. The “democratic” apparatus is filtered and controlled by wealthy Capitalists, you yourself are arguing against progressive candidates in this election, pretending you’ll ever change your tone.

    You won’t. The DNC and GOP are going to continue moving to the right, and you’ll watch and support them, hoping for a magical candidate to somehow defy the entire electoral system as designed and bypass all checks and balances once elected to enact positive change.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      Every time a third party candidate is proposed, the very fact that they are third party is used against them despite popular policy.

      Proven, again, being the important distinction. Randos coming out of the woodwork every 4 years with swell official policies but no significant political administrative experience are not proven. Senators and governors are proven, they have a track record to look back on to see how effectively they actually implement their policies.

      And to get progressive senators and governors, we need progressive mayors, county commissioners, city councilors, etc to seed those higher offices with proven political administrators. These third party candidates are shooting too high too fast, and spoiling the vote in the process.

      In order to make it to the federal level, you must satisfy donors and wealthy Capitalists, and support their economic interests.

      And how exactly do you plan to implement revolution? A coordinated, distributed grassroots network of leftists supporting a cause? Maybe try that. Build unions, vote for pro-union candidates at every opportunity, draft referendums to empower unions. You want to coordinate the proletariat? Do it.

      You’re pretending fascism is an idea that magically sprouts out of thin air, rather than a known phenomenon as a reaction to Capitalist failure.

      No, I’m not addressing the source of fascism at all, I’m purely concerned with its popularity. You need to change material conditions, which requires power, which requires support. If you have majority support, you have the votes. If you don’t, the revolution wouldn’t work anyway.

      The way you combat lots of money is lots of people. If you have the apparatus to lead a successful revolution by the majority, you have the apparatus to elect progressives. If you don’t have it, you don’t have a revolution by the majority, you have a revolution of the minority.

      Even if you could elect progressives, they still can’t enact change. The structure of the US is designed to uphold Capitalism, and as long as it is, it will act against any change to the status quo. The “democratic” apparatus is filtered and controlled by wealthy Capitalists, you yourself are arguing against progressive candidates in this election, pretending you’ll ever change your tone.

      Again, the answer is to stop trying to skip the groundwork. Get as many progressives into as many offices as possible as soon as possible. When Congress starts shifting progressive, suddenly a progressive president isn’t so far fetched, and the general population is more likely to consider one. You can’t jump straight to President.

      Engage your community, flood your local community boards with progressives. Get the ones who do well elected to city council. Prove that your policies work in your city, then your county, then your state. The presidency is the highest administrative office in the country. I don’t consider anyone without experience at the level of at least governor to be a serious candidate.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        Proven, again, being the important distinction. Randos coming out of the woodwork every 4 years with swell official policies but no significant political administrative experience are not proven. Senators and governors are proven, they have a track record to look back on to see how effectively they actually implement their policies.

        And they will not be progressive.

        And to get progressive senators and governors, we need progressive mayors, county commissioners, city councilors, etc to seed those higher offices with proven political administrators. These third party candidates are shooting too high too fast, and spoiling the vote in the process.

        And they will not make it into the party full time. Just see how vilified the Squad is.

        And how exactly do you plan to implement revolution? A coordinated, distributed grassroots network of leftists supporting a cause? Maybe try that. Build unions, vote for pro-union candidates at every opportunity, draft referendums to empower unions. You want to coordinate the proletariat? Do it.

        Building up dual power by organizing in Communist Parties, yes. That’s what I recommend. Unions are nice, but are ultimately band-aids, so while I would take pro-Union over anti-Union, it won’t fix the problems with Capitalism. If Unions gain enough power, they will lose it, as is happening in the Nordics, unless they use that power to push for Revolution.

        No, I’m not addressing the source of fascism at all, I’m purely concerned with its popularity. You need to change material conditions, which requires power, which requires support. If you have majority support, you have the votes. If you don’t, the revolution wouldn’t work anyway.

        You’re confused on a few counts.

        -Fascism’s popularity coincides with the source, decaying Capitalism.

        -Material Conditions change regardless of power, nothing is static. Capitalist systems inevitably trend towards decay, which accelerates Fascism and Socialism.

        -You don’t stop fascism by voting it out, the conditions for it remain until Capitalism is overthrown.

        The way you combat lots of money is lots of people. If you have the apparatus to lead a successful revolution by the majority, you have the apparatus to elect progressives. If you don’t have it, you don’t have a revolution by the majority, you have a revolution of the minority.

        Again, even if everyone voted for PSL this election, they cannot beat the network of checks and balances. Capitalist States are designed against change. The State must be smashed and replaced by a State-as-non-state, ie an organization of workers units in a syndicate, otherwise change is outright stopped by the other branches of government as has historically happened.

        Again, the answer is to stop trying to skip the groundwork. Get as many progressives into as many offices as possible as soon as possible. When Congress starts shifting progressive, suddenly a progressive president isn’t so far fetched, and the general population is more likely to consider one. You can’t jump straight to President.

        The groundwork is organizing outside the bounds of Capitalist Electoralism, Congress will never shift progressive, you’re trying to rewrite history.

        Engage your community, flood your local community boards with progressives. Get the ones who do well elected to city council. Prove that your policies work in your city, then your county, then your state. The presidency is the highest administrative office in the country. I don’t consider anyone without experience at the level of at least governor to be a serious candidate.

        More magic and vibes, trying to beat the overhwhelming forces of Capital with hopes and dreams, rather than material efforts.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          And they will not be progressive.

          20% of House reps are in the Progressive Caucus, we’re not starting at zero here.

          And they will not make it into the party full time. Just see how vilified the Squad is.

          The Squad exists. The bigger they get, the harder they are to bully. Seat by seat.

          Building up dual power by organizing in Communist Parties, yes. That’s what I recommend.

          Which is it? Can progressive candidates get elected, or not?

          -You don’t stop fascism by voting it out, the conditions for it remain until Capitalism is overthrown.

          How, pray tell, does one overthrow Capitalism? If you lack the support and coordination to elect progressives, where are you finding support and coordination for the revolution? I feel like a broken record, you keep ignoring this.

          Again, even if everyone voted for PSL this election, they cannot beat the network of checks and balances. Capitalist States are designed against change.

          Again, the more pieces of those checks and balances you control, the looser their grip.

          The State must be smashed and replaced by a State-as-non-state, ie an organization of workers units in a syndicate

          Magic and vibes.

          The groundwork is organizing outside the bounds of Capitalist Electoralism, Congress will never shift progressive, you’re trying to rewrite history.

          If it’s impossible for Congress to shift progressive, progressives don’t deserve to win.

          More magic and vibes, trying to beat the overhwhelming forces of Capital with hopes and dreams, rather than material efforts.

          If democratizing your workplace and directly engaging your local elections to generate more viable progressive representatives aren’t “material efforts”, I don’t recognize your use of the term.

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          And they will not make it into the party full time. Just see how vilified the Squad is.

          Tbf the squad is where regular Dems used to be. We have no progressives in office.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 days ago

            Correct, it’s a factor of the system itself as designed. The base is reinforced by the superstructure, which reinforces the base. Capitalist parliamentarianism, especially in the US, is a deradicalization pit that silences radicals and pushes voices compatible with Empire to the top.