I’ve explained my reasoning in the other thread that we’re talking in. I believe that voting third party is the most effective way for leftists to exert influence to get the kinds of policies we need. If someone on the right agrees with me for completely opposite reasons, that’s not really relevant, I’m not going to abandon my reasoned positions just because someone shitty agrees with me. I could just as easily say, “So you agree with Dick Cheney on who should be the next president. I can’t even.” That’s not really a rational line of argument.
The only way to prevent leftists getting shot is to address the root issues that gave rise to Trump. Yes, it’s worth avoiding that, which is why I want to. Is it worth accepting that that’s definitely going to happen, in exchange for kicking the can down the road a bit? No, I don’t think so.
No, the only way to prevent leftists getting shot is to elect Kamala Harris so that trump isn’t in charge of the military a couple of months after the supreme court ruled that he can’t break the law with an official act and a couple of weeks after promising to shoot leftists.
I’m not going to support the mass murder of innocent people over fears about what might, potentially happen. The US is already involved in killing leftists, and rightists, and centrists, and queer people, and cishet people, and everyone else.
If Trump wins and your worst alarmist fears come true, then I’ll go to the grave knowing that I did what I could to stop it. Supporting genocide is not something I could do, as I’m not interested in tearing down other innocent people for my own preservation, like crabs in a bucket.
The only real chance of safety is through solidarity, including international solidarity. That solidarity is destroyed by selling out individual minority groups. What you’re saying about Palestinians today, you could just as easily be saying about trans people tomorrow. If democrats decide that not killing trans people is too much of an electoral liability, but the republicans want to kill trans people AND other people, then you’ll repeat the same lesser-evilist ideological nonsense to justify and make peace with it, and it will become an inevitably. No one is safe if anyone can be sold out.
If Trump wins and your worst alarmist fears come true, then I’ll go to the grave knowing that I did what I could to stop it.
By voting third party, allowing him to win?
Yeah, right.
That’s the opposite of stopping it.
That’s enabling it.
Trump warned you he would be a dictator on day one. His co-planners wrote down the agenda in project 2025. The supreme court ruled that he cannot face consequences. He warned you he would start shooting leftists. One thing can stop it: Kamala Harris winning.
You’re only pretending to care about Gaza, just like you’re pretending to be a leftist. If you really were a leftist you would care about the oncoming fascism, you would care about replacing McCarthyism with military execution of leftists. You claim to care so much about pushing the democratic party left, but everything you advocate encourages them to move right.
If supporting genocide is a prerequisite of being a leftist, then I guess I’m not a leftist and we’ll have to come up with a new name for supporting a bunch of leftist policies but also opposing genocide. But I’m pretty sure it would be more accurate to say that opposition to genocide is leftist and being willing to support genocide means you’re only pretending to be on the left.
Leftism doesn’t just mean you want the spoils of imperialism to be more equally divided, it means opposition to imperialism altogether. The former is just nationalism. We have more in common with ordinary people of other countries around the world (including the ones our politicians and media tell us to hate) than we do with the ruling class. People like Trump and Harris are the enemy, and if the enemy won’t come to the negotiating table, then the only thing to do is to oppose them by whatever limited means are available.
You liberals will write off the task of opposing them and treat the current way of doing things as eternal and unchangeable. If you were born under an absolute monarchy, where there were no rules at all to allow changes to the system, would you just give up and say that nothing can be done except to appease the king and hope he’s nice? Ridiculous. Things have changed before, even when they seemed impossible, and they can change again - so long as there’s a will, there’s a way. The problem is just that people like you don’t have the will to change it and so aren’t interested in looking for a way.
I’ve explained my reasoning in the other thread that we’re talking in. I believe that voting third party is the most effective way for leftists to exert influence to get the kinds of policies we need. If someone on the right agrees with me for completely opposite reasons, that’s not really relevant, I’m not going to abandon my reasoned positions just because someone shitty agrees with me. I could just as easily say, “So you agree with Dick Cheney on who should be the next president. I can’t even.” That’s not really a rational line of argument.
You don’t think shooting leftists is worth avoiding at all?
The only way to prevent leftists getting shot is to address the root issues that gave rise to Trump. Yes, it’s worth avoiding that, which is why I want to. Is it worth accepting that that’s definitely going to happen, in exchange for kicking the can down the road a bit? No, I don’t think so.
No, the only way to prevent leftists getting shot is to elect Kamala Harris so that trump isn’t in charge of the military a couple of months after the supreme court ruled that he can’t break the law with an official act and a couple of weeks after promising to shoot leftists.
I’m not going to support the mass murder of innocent people over fears about what might, potentially happen. The US is already involved in killing leftists, and rightists, and centrists, and queer people, and cishet people, and everyone else.
If Trump wins and your worst alarmist fears come true, then I’ll go to the grave knowing that I did what I could to stop it. Supporting genocide is not something I could do, as I’m not interested in tearing down other innocent people for my own preservation, like crabs in a bucket.
The only real chance of safety is through solidarity, including international solidarity. That solidarity is destroyed by selling out individual minority groups. What you’re saying about Palestinians today, you could just as easily be saying about trans people tomorrow. If democrats decide that not killing trans people is too much of an electoral liability, but the republicans want to kill trans people AND other people, then you’ll repeat the same lesser-evilist ideological nonsense to justify and make peace with it, and it will become an inevitably. No one is safe if anyone can be sold out.
By voting third party, allowing him to win?
Yeah, right.
That’s the opposite of stopping it.
That’s enabling it.
Trump warned you he would be a dictator on day one. His co-planners wrote down the agenda in project 2025. The supreme court ruled that he cannot face consequences. He warned you he would start shooting leftists. One thing can stop it: Kamala Harris winning.
Then there’s nothing I can do to stop it, period. Supporting genocide is completely off the table, not even considerable.
You’re only pretending to care about Gaza, just like you’re pretending to be a leftist. If you really were a leftist you would care about the oncoming fascism, you would care about replacing McCarthyism with military execution of leftists. You claim to care so much about pushing the democratic party left, but everything you advocate encourages them to move right.
If supporting genocide is a prerequisite of being a leftist, then I guess I’m not a leftist and we’ll have to come up with a new name for supporting a bunch of leftist policies but also opposing genocide. But I’m pretty sure it would be more accurate to say that opposition to genocide is leftist and being willing to support genocide means you’re only pretending to be on the left.
Leftism doesn’t just mean you want the spoils of imperialism to be more equally divided, it means opposition to imperialism altogether. The former is just nationalism. We have more in common with ordinary people of other countries around the world (including the ones our politicians and media tell us to hate) than we do with the ruling class. People like Trump and Harris are the enemy, and if the enemy won’t come to the negotiating table, then the only thing to do is to oppose them by whatever limited means are available.
You liberals will write off the task of opposing them and treat the current way of doing things as eternal and unchangeable. If you were born under an absolute monarchy, where there were no rules at all to allow changes to the system, would you just give up and say that nothing can be done except to appease the king and hope he’s nice? Ridiculous. Things have changed before, even when they seemed impossible, and they can change again - so long as there’s a will, there’s a way. The problem is just that people like you don’t have the will to change it and so aren’t interested in looking for a way.