• j_overgrens@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    I take great offense in you saying that tankies and socdems infight, lol. (I mean, I get it, they are both statists, but I feel on a emotional level most socdems feel more for anarchism than for leninism.)

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Well if meant to in the context of the occasional big tent movements. I don’t think most socdems think much about anarchists at all except when it comes time to scold us for not voting.

      • j_overgrens@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yes, and I think that when together in a big tent, socdems would associate more easily with anarchists than with leninists. Especially with syndicalists, for example.

      • snekmuffin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Was under the impression that most anarchists are aware that voting is still important. like it or not, we are still citizens of some state for the time being, but we can use that to promote useful change or to exercise damage control, as part of the overall praxis arsenal. especially with some organization within your local groups, it can be a good tool.

          • howrar@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            How does one then answer the question “If you think elections don’t work, then why do you participate?” by a non-anarchist?

            You’ve made plenty of good points throughout the article about the problems with the system. I don’t see why that can’t be your answer. There’s no contradiction in acknowledging major problems and still exerting what little influence you do have.

            But if they “work a little” for an anarchist, certainly they would work a lot for a non-anarchist.

            How does that logic follow? Assuming you both have the same values and are trying to achieve the same thing, then a solution that works for one person will work just as well for another. The difference in opinions is on which solution will work, not on what you’re trying to achieve.

            • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              There’s no contradiction in acknowledging major problems and still exerting what little influence you do have.

              I just disagree this is any sort of influence instead of a palliative.

              How does that logic follow? Assuming you both have the same values and are trying to achieve the same thing, then a solution that works for one person will work just as well for another.

              You are quoting a rhetorical question. The point I’m making here is that if someone isn’t an anarchist and therefore doesn’t do direct action, then seeing even anarchists take part in elections, reinforces to them the idea that elections work well enough.