That’s what they said back in '96 when I voted for Ralph Nader. Now we’re on the precipice of American democracy falling to fascism, if not now, then very likely in 2028. That doesn’t look to me anything like slowly getting better.
Some things have definitely improved in that time, e.g. the recognition of same-sex marriage, or the nascent resurgence of labor unions. Those things have been the result of slow, tough, hard work by the grassroots.
In that same time, though, the Democrats have been slowly helping to put the mechanisms of a fascist state in place, like the PATRIOT ACT, FISA, neutering the 4th Amendment, bolstering the Espionage Act, and setting up collaborative efforts between state police, Federal agencies, and the corporate sector to crush protest movements.
That said, the world is indeed shades of grey, and I voted for Biden in 2020 to stay fascism, if only for a little bit. It’s better to vote for the right-wing candidate versus the fascist candidate. I want to vote for him again, but there are some lines that must never be crossed, and I can’t in good conscience vote for a President enabling genocide. (The fact that both candidates do is madness.)
Maybe my calculus would be different if there were a reasonable chance that Democrats would do the things that are within their power to do to check the rise of fascism, but I have no confidence of that, as the track record shows otherwise.
Hey! So I know you are getting people being snarky and whatnot, but I have a legitimate question.
Could you address the question regarding how the Democrats are at least the party that are at least making slow progress, as opposed to not voting against the party that will turn the country into a Christian theocracy if given the chance?
Like I understand that you don’t like either candidate - neither do we - but realistically, we know the winner will be either a Republican or a Democrat. Why not support the one that at least won’t regress the country 500 years?
I’ve covered a lot of it in other replies, so to keep it brief by analogy: It’s like a survivor from a foundered ship clinging to a bit of flotsam (assuming there’s no chance of timely rescue) rather than swimming for land in the distance. The flotsam keeps him safe from drowning for the moment, but thirst or hypothermia will do him in within days at the outside. His only chance to survive long-term is to abandon it and set to swimming.
The Democrats in this analogy are the flotsam, if it wasn’t obvious. Bill Clinton got into office in 1992, after 12 years of Republican Presidents, and quickly made it clear that he represented the status quo, clinging-to-flotsam choice, rather than making things better. I believed that the long-term health of democracy required making the hard choice to swim for it. I wasn’t smart enough to predict the exact shape of the future back then, but here we are, on the edge of slipping below the waves. That’s the opposite outcome of making things better.
The Democrats don’t even understand the threat of right-wing populism, so they can’t counter it. (It’s not even clear that they would, if they did.) The way to save our democracy, therefore, is to fight for something better.
What is the plan to fight for something better? Like… I’m really not trying to be snarky, I swear, but voting for any party that is not R or D on election Day is never going to result in someone other than someone from one of those two parties being president. That just won’t happen. So unless there is an alternative path for change, I don’t see the point of voting for someone other than a democrat to at least mitigate the damage
Well, should everybody who lives in Alabama vote Republican, because there’s zero chance of anybody but a Republican winning? Do those people have a plan besides throwing their votes away? Or is voting about choosing the candidate that would represent your views, regardless of the odds of winning?
That would be great advice if we weren’t standing at the literal precipice of fascism. Fascism is a storm (pardon the unintentional pun towards QAnon) threatening to overtake us. If ever there was a time to suck it up and choose the “flotsam” to survive to fight another day, it’s now.
The Republicans, aka the Fascists, have a large and cohesive voting bloc, driven by propaganda and fear, that will vote for them just because they’re not Democrats, regardless of the fact that they are known criminals, grifters, and will vote for things that hurt them. This is not the time to divide into ideological factions and hope we make it.
It seemed to me back in the 1990’s that Republicans want to drive the car straight at the precipice at full speed, and Bill Clinton was content to simply lay off the accelerator and coast toward it. I’m not such a canny political analyst that I could predict the exact shape of the future back then, but here we are, at the precipice.
That’s what they said back in '96 when I voted for Ralph Nader. Now we’re on the precipice of American democracy falling to fascism, if not now, then very likely in 2028. That doesn’t look to me anything like slowly getting better.
Some things have definitely improved in that time, e.g. the recognition of same-sex marriage, or the nascent resurgence of labor unions. Those things have been the result of slow, tough, hard work by the grassroots.
In that same time, though, the Democrats have been slowly helping to put the mechanisms of a fascist state in place, like the PATRIOT ACT, FISA, neutering the 4th Amendment, bolstering the Espionage Act, and setting up collaborative efforts between state police, Federal agencies, and the corporate sector to crush protest movements.
That said, the world is indeed shades of grey, and I voted for Biden in 2020 to stay fascism, if only for a little bit. It’s better to vote for the right-wing candidate versus the fascist candidate. I want to vote for him again, but there are some lines that must never be crossed, and I can’t in good conscience vote for a President enabling genocide. (The fact that both candidates do is madness.)
Maybe my calculus would be different if there were a reasonable chance that Democrats would do the things that are within their power to do to check the rise of fascism, but I have no confidence of that, as the track record shows otherwise.
Edit: Auto-correct damage.
Hey! So I know you are getting people being snarky and whatnot, but I have a legitimate question.
Could you address the question regarding how the Democrats are at least the party that are at least making slow progress, as opposed to not voting against the party that will turn the country into a Christian theocracy if given the chance?
Like I understand that you don’t like either candidate - neither do we - but realistically, we know the winner will be either a Republican or a Democrat. Why not support the one that at least won’t regress the country 500 years?
Because incrementalism is how we got to this situation in the first place.
Damn, you’re way more succinct than I am.
I’ve covered a lot of it in other replies, so to keep it brief by analogy: It’s like a survivor from a foundered ship clinging to a bit of flotsam (assuming there’s no chance of timely rescue) rather than swimming for land in the distance. The flotsam keeps him safe from drowning for the moment, but thirst or hypothermia will do him in within days at the outside. His only chance to survive long-term is to abandon it and set to swimming.
The Democrats in this analogy are the flotsam, if it wasn’t obvious. Bill Clinton got into office in 1992, after 12 years of Republican Presidents, and quickly made it clear that he represented the status quo, clinging-to-flotsam choice, rather than making things better. I believed that the long-term health of democracy required making the hard choice to swim for it. I wasn’t smart enough to predict the exact shape of the future back then, but here we are, on the edge of slipping below the waves. That’s the opposite outcome of making things better.
The Democrats don’t even understand the threat of right-wing populism, so they can’t counter it. (It’s not even clear that they would, if they did.) The way to save our democracy, therefore, is to fight for something better.
What is the plan to fight for something better? Like… I’m really not trying to be snarky, I swear, but voting for any party that is not R or D on election Day is never going to result in someone other than someone from one of those two parties being president. That just won’t happen. So unless there is an alternative path for change, I don’t see the point of voting for someone other than a democrat to at least mitigate the damage
Well, should everybody who lives in Alabama vote Republican, because there’s zero chance of anybody but a Republican winning? Do those people have a plan besides throwing their votes away? Or is voting about choosing the candidate that would represent your views, regardless of the odds of winning?
That would be great advice if we weren’t standing at the literal precipice of fascism. Fascism is a storm (pardon the unintentional pun towards QAnon) threatening to overtake us. If ever there was a time to suck it up and choose the “flotsam” to survive to fight another day, it’s now.
The Republicans, aka the Fascists, have a large and cohesive voting bloc, driven by propaganda and fear, that will vote for them just because they’re not Democrats, regardless of the fact that they are known criminals, grifters, and will vote for things that hurt them. This is not the time to divide into ideological factions and hope we make it.
It seemed to me back in the 1990’s that Republicans want to drive the car straight at the precipice at full speed, and Bill Clinton was content to simply lay off the accelerator and coast toward it. I’m not such a canny political analyst that I could predict the exact shape of the future back then, but here we are, at the precipice.