• mozz@mbin.grits.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Be willing to put yourself in harms way (trump)

    There it is

    You understand that it’s not just me in harm’s way with Trump, right?

    That he’s far more pro genocide (including specifically in Palestine) than Biden is?

    I’m so confused because you do seem genuine but for some reason no matter how close I walk you to the conclusion you still somehow miss the point.

    Believe it or not, there is often more to a conversation than you just walking the person you’re talking to over to the point that you want to make and repeating it in different ways until they absorb your way of seeing it.

    I could be right or wrong; I’m just saying how I see things. But if your whole model for this is that your viewpoint is the correct one, and you need to persuade the person you’re talking to to see things exactly as you do and anything else is just a frustrating expenditure of bytes, then I think you’re gonna get limited benefit from any amount of time you spend online.

    • archomrade [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Im not telling to vote for Trump. I’m not even telling you to not vote for Biden. I’m telling you to fucking ask for something in exchange for the vote.

      There’s a separate argument about what the value democracy is if it can’t be expected not to support genocide, but I’m not even pressing that issue.

      Saying you aren’t going to vote if Biden doesn’t see reason doesn’t put Trump in the white house, it puts pressure on Biden. What you actually do on election day is different, but campaigning for Biden despite his genocidal complicity is so far from activism that it’s borderline complicit in the genocide in itself.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Im not telling to vote for Trump. I’m not even telling you to not vote for Biden. I’m telling you to fucking ask for something in exchange for the vote.

        There’s a separate argument about what the value democracy is if it can’t be expected not to support genocide, but I’m not even pressing that issue.

        Yeah, I feel you on that. Like I keep telling you, direct action or directly giving Biden a hard time on Gaza sounds great.

        Saying you aren’t going to vote if Biden doesn’t see reason doesn’t put Trump in the white house, it puts pressure on Biden. What you actually do on election day is different, but campaigning for Biden despite his genocidal complicity is so far from activism that it’s borderline complicit in the genocide in itself.

        And let me ask again: Would this logic also apply to refusing to support the SDP over the NSDAP in the 1932 elections? As a lot of the left did exactly that during the infighting that preceded Hitler’s ascendance.

        • archomrade [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          And let me ask again: Would this logic also apply to refusing to support the SDP over the NSDAP in the 1932 elections? As a lot of the left did exactly that during the infighting that preceded Hitler’s ascendance.

          That isn’t really an adequate comparison, is it? Germany was a parliamentary democracy at the time, are you asking if id have voted for the SDP or KDP? Are you suggesting having two parties split the NSDAP opposition vote is what lead to their accent to power? Or are you asking I’d be protesting Hindenburg to take more direct action against the NSDAP or more firmly address the crisis that lead to their growth?

          If anything I think the most apt comparison is between Biden and Hindenburg: they’re both staunchly centrist and both beholden to conservative interests. Personally, I think both Biden and Hindenburg legitimized reactionary concerns by playing into them, and I think there’s evidence that helped the NSDAP accent.

          But the thing that makes our situation so much different is that Biden isn’t splitting the vote with another party, he’s in command of the only opposition to Trump. Pushing his politics left to address the underlying concerns of the populists is probably the only thing within our power. He needs to solidify his coalition, not sit on the fence like Hindenburg did.

          • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Germany was a parliamentary democracy at the time, are you asking if id have voted for the SDP or KDP?

            Precisely yes (or not voted at all if you felt no party really was representative of you properly)

            Are you suggesting having two parties split the NSDAP opposition vote is what lead to their accent to power?

            Yes, in addition to splitting the political energy in general

            Or are you asking I’d be protesting Hindenburg to take more direct action against the NSDAP or more firmly address the crisis that lead to their growth?

            I’m suggesting that the communists spending energy opposing the SDP and Hindenburg for fairly valid reasons, when there were much more pressing threats to the safety and security of the entire world including themselves to spend that energy on, made their concerns about the establishment left (however valid) laughable in restrospect.

            But the thing that makes our situation so much different is that Biden isn’t splitting the vote with another party, he’s in command of the only opposition to Trump.

            It sounds to me like you’re saying that splitting the vote between Biden and nobody (by not voting) is a good thing to do, to push him to the left. I fail to see how that is a better idea than splitting the vote between the SDP and KDP, and I think the results can potentially be pretty similar.

            It sounds like you really, really don’t want to answer this question plainly. Would your logic also apply to refusing to support the SDP (or for that matter Hindenburg) against Hitler?

            • archomrade [he/him]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              I’m suggesting that the communists spending energy opposing the SDP and Hindenburg for fairly valid reasons, when there were much more pressing threats to the safety and security of the entire world including themselves to spend that energy on, made their concerns about the establishment left (however valid) laughable in restrospect

              This is where our disagreement is. I don’t think the rise of the NSDAP was a result of the SDP splitting the vote with the KDP, I think it was the failure of the SDP and Hindenburg to address the crisis that pushed the country into reactionary politics to begin with. You could just as easily blame the SDP for not joining the KDP instead, since the KDP was reacting to the same failures of government the voters of the NSDAP were.

              I especially don’t attribute blame to citizen voters supporting the KDP, because not only does that not matter as much in a parliamentary system, they’re also reacting to the same failures of government that the NSDAP were.

              So no, I don’t find that argument convincing, and I likely would not have supported the SDP given the availability of other options.

              Id also point out that it was Hindenburg who appointed Hitler as chancellor. That should be evidence enough that KDP voters were right to challenge his position in the presidential election in the lead up to the parliamentary election.

              • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                You could just as easily blame the SDP for not joining the KDP instead, since the KDP was reacting to the same failures of government the voters of the NSDAP were.

                Yes, absolutely. Responsibility can be shared; almost any big disaster is a result of multiple overlapping causes where any number of people could have taken action to make it less likely or prevent it.

                In fact, I think the Democrats are a lot more responsible for creating the conditions that led to the rise of Trump than the SDP. The SDP at least had genuine hardship imposed on their country from outside, whereas the establishment Democrats ever since the 1990s have simply been selling out the working class, in an economy that’s raking in money hand over fist, because they could and they assumed that nothing bad would ever come of it (to anyone that they thought mattered.)

                I especially don’t attribute blame to citizen voters supporting the KDP, because not only does that not matter as much in a parliamentary system, they’re also reacting to the same failures of government that the NSDAP were.

                So no, I don’t find that argument convincing, and I likely would not have supported the SDP given the availability of other options.

                Okay, that’s fair. But what if there weren’t other options? If we used a parliamentary system in the US, and we were talking about voting for the Democrats or else a genuine leftist party, I would be 100% in agreement with you about voting for the left instead of the Democrats.

                What if Germany used the FPTP system, and you were voting for Hindenburg or Hitler directly to lead the country? Do you think that someone in that hypothetical election who refused to vote for Hindenburg in 1932, because he hadn’t done enough to earn the vote, would still feel justified in that decision in 1945?

                (Biden isn’t Hindenburg; Hindenburg doesn’t have a direct analogue but he would be more someone like John McCain IMO, but that’s not directly relevant to the question I don’t think.)

                • archomrade [he/him]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Okay, that’s fair. But what if there weren’t other options? If we used a parliamentary system in the US, and we were talking about voting for the Democrats or else a genuine leftist party, I would be 100% in agreement with you about voting for the left instead of the Democrats.

                  What if Germany used the FPTP system, and you were voting for Hindenburg or Hitler directly to lead the country? Do you think that someone in that hypothetical election who refused to vote for Hindenburg in 1932, because he hadn’t done enough to earn the vote, would still feel justified in that decision in 1945?

                  I wouldn’t be committing to voting for Hindenburg 7 months before casting a ballot, especially if doing so not only doesn’t address the underlying problem that created the NSPD’s popularity but would also likely continue to contribute to those conditions.

                  You’re also assuming that Hindenburg would have won a second election against Hitler, and I don’t think that’s a given. Nor do I think Biden winning against Trump is a given either, when he’s still contributing to the conditions that brought popularity to Trump. He’s done quite a lot to undermine his own campaign message, and those of us telling him he’s gon a loose if he doesn’t reverse course are actually helping him, assuming he takes the opportunity he’s being given.

                  Protesting biden now wouldn’t be effective if we all -publicly- got in line and said “we’ll sure, he’s complicit in genocide but we’re all still voting for him anyway”. That would be quite a dumb way to protest and put pressure on him to get anything done, wouldn’t you say?

                  • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    I wouldn’t be committing to voting for Hindenburg 7 months before casting a ballot, especially if doing so not only doesn’t address the underlying problem that created the NSPD’s popularity but would also likely continue to contribute to those conditions.

                    Yeah, I feel you on this. I think we’re just looking at it from two different perspectives.

                    I don’t think Biden’s on Lemmy. I’m not looking at this like he’s going to read my messages and think “Okay I got mozz locked in, I don’t have to change my Gaza policy now.” I’m just saying my thought process out loud; I’m going to vote for Hindenburg instead of Hitler pretty much whatever else happens. I’m not trying to do some kind of bluff where I claim that I’m undecided as a way of putting pressure on, not explicitly telling the Biden campaign that I’m committed to him, so that he’ll be forced into different behavior patterns on Gaza.

                    But the other way does make sense to me. Like the “uncommitted” voters in the primary, or protests at his events because he’s abetting mass murder, that makes sense to me. If I were directly in contact with Biden, would I try to do this artifice of pretending I was undecided because of Gaza, that even though Trump is directly supportive of monsters who are 10 times worse and more powerful than Netanyahu, abetting Netanyahu is so bad that I might not vote for Biden? So as to put more pressure on him to change his policy? IDK, maybe. I am not a political specialist but it seems like maybe that’s a sensible way to do it.

                    Protesting biden now wouldn’t be effective if we all -publicly- got in line and said “we’ll sure, he’s complicit in genocide but we’re all still voting for him anyway”. That would be quite a dumb way to protest and put pressure on him to get anything done, wouldn’t you say?

                    Yeah, I get that. I do think that direct action on Gaza is probably more effective than just typing out on Lemmy that you’re uncommitted in your voting, and I think doing the latter (if it’s a bluff, which it would be in my case) runs a little bit of a risk of some other voter reading it and taking it seriously and being swayed to not vote for Biden and abetting mass murder much much worse than that in Gaza. But basically, the core of what you’re saying, it does make sense to me, yes.