As I was saying Mrs, your children were mauled by a bear, not a lion. They are very different animals, not even in the same family. Also this lion is racist.
They don’t have to be “literally the same” for controlled opposition to prevent meaningful change.
Actually I think people who try and paper over important problems with their own party are the ones preventing meaningful change.
We agree on that. I don’t, however, expect the US democratic party to represent me and my interests. They represent the ruling class just like nearly every major political party around the world. Electoral politics isn’t going to change that.
Electoral politics isn’t going to change that.
Yahtzee.
Do you think it’s some kind of gachya that I believe organizing workforces, community activism, and direct action will do more good for people than simply voting once every couple of years? Did I indicate to you at any point that people shouldn’t vote for the less fascist party/candidates? The point is not “Don’t vote”, it’s “Meaningful political change will never come if voting is people’s only method for enacting said change.”
Yea, I’m in agreement. Nowhere have I ever said ‘don’t vote’. I’ve repeatedly and very loudly said ‘voting is not half as important as agitation’
Liberals will constantly parade around polls showing progressive and leftist policies as being ‘not popular’, and then cry bloody murder when leftists try agitating for them. They’ll accuse us of ‘both sides’-ing when we point out democrats doing the same shit as republicans, they’ll accuse us of being controlled opposition when we protest against democrats supporting fascism abroad, they’ll even accuse us of supporting fascism ourselves for holding democrats to the same standard as we hold republicans.
No, it wasn’t a ‘gotcha’, it was ‘yahtzee’, as in, ‘the numbers have aligned and we’re somehow in agreement’.
Ahh. My miskate, apologies for misunderstanding you!
Edit: and extra apologies for my confrontational tone at your, in retrospect, very benign comment.
Have a great day!
This goes hand-in-hand with political stereotyping and is hard to avoid, annoyingly. (I am just as guilty of stereotyping, admittedly.)
But yeah, common views between parties should be a good thing. Sometimes those views absolutely are not “good”, but that is what it is.
Party line voting in Congress is disgusting and it’s not how governments should operate. On that note, bills shouldn’t be written for the purpose of antagonizing an opposing party. I don’t care who wrote it to begin with.
While there is a bit of truth in all politicians being the same, regardless of the party, it doesn’t (shouldn’t?) apply to ideologies as a whole. Unfortunately, it seems ideologies are dictated by the politicians and not the people, these days.
Ugh. What a twisted web we weave for ourselves…
I don’t think you can really get rid of party line voting. Most voters don’t want to or cannot spend much time researching politicians and mostly vote based on party preference. Elected representatives therefore need the support of their party for reelection, giving the party leverage.
I’d argue this only makes it more important to have a viable third party if not 4+. Comcast and AT&T both enjoy using their duopoly status to overcharge you. Doesn’t mean they’re the same. Does mean they’re both evil and don’t deserve a state sanctioned duopoly.
I’m all in favour of having viable third parties. Living in a country with viable third parties though, I can tell you that it won’t fix all problems. Just look at last weeks EU parliament elections.
