Discussion in 'New members introductions' started by Lady Red, Oct 22, 2018.
Who here votes?
I getcha. They're pushing voting so hard right now, especially with all of this advertising right now in Tennessee, it's getting ridiculous. No shit, yesterday the DNC of the state sent me a letter begging me to vote and it thanks me for voting in 2016, blah,blah,blah all that good shit. But in near the end, in its own little section it says "Remember, How you vote is private, but whether or not you vote is a matter of public record." What the fuck are you trying to say to me? Why would you end a letter on that sentence?
I vote in all elections now. I don't understand the ignorance of some punks (especially the ones that revere political bands) who relinquish the very little power they have. The reason right-wing crooks hold so much power in the US is mainly because people don't bother to vote. The easiest thing one can do is vote. You want to end patriarchy then cast a vote against the asshole in power. If you want to end fascists and smash Nazis then vote one of them out of office. If you want to end war then don't allow a chicken-hawk to gain power so easy. Demonstrations and marches in the streets protesting government decisions are somewhat ignored by those in power because they believe those dissenting are the minority. They surely must believe that their supporters who voted them in are larger in number. I used to believe decades ago the silliness of hard-liners who parrot political slogans like "Voting doesn't change anything" and "the lesser of two evils is still evil". Then I realized that the crooks in power and their supporters are only emboldened by the simple act of relinquishing my vote. You can see how extreme the right wing has become over the years.
I don't vote because I believe in self-governance by the people. I refuse to support this system and elect someone to take decisions in my name. Political parties are almost all the same, advocating for capitalism and neo-liberalism. The world we want will not come from politicians.
Yeah, because self-governance will totally happen by not voting. In reality politicians and their corporate owners will continue to make decisions that ultimately screw the poor and powerless, in your name or not. The point is to try to stop the worst of them from gaining power in the first place. I see you're from Canada, though. I wonder how Canadians would feel if they had a Bush/Cheney or Trump as prime minister.
Looking at history, self-governance never ever happened by electing a politician, it came through social struggle and revolution. No political party can bring self-governance, because the system is built around representative democracy. We are not communists, we don't want to elect a leader to give us self-governance, it can only come through a social revolution and a system change. Read some stuff about direct democracy and when you understand the concept you will know why it is incompatible with political parties. I understand that the situation is different in the USA, just like in Brazil right now and elsewhere. But seriously Hilary Clinton would have been one of the worst democrat president ever so yeah the slogan is still valid, the lesser evil of the 2 is still evil. Anyway, the strategic vote is a slightly different debate, but we were talking about an ideological vote here, and the Democrat Party platform will never represent our ideas even with a Bernie Sanders in power. The real change will only come when the power is given to the people.
You can say that because your status in the world isn't where your life will be terribly affected by the current administration's policies. Right now there are hundreds of children who are in concentration camps after being separated from their families seeking asylum. This isn't happening because of circumstance or accident but of deliberate malice by the government. You can say how evil Hillary Clinton is but there is no evidence had she been in office her administration would adopt this practice. Nor would there have been a Muslim ban. Nor would there be talks of repealing the 14th Amendment. Nor would there be the very real possibility of removing a women's right to choose. I could go on and on. When these things don't personally affect you I guess it is easy to be a hard-liner. I remember reading an interview a long time ago with someone from Crass (I think) on their position of non-violence and then ultimately realizing that people like the freedom fighters in South Africa do not have that luxury. They were the ones getting murdered by the apartheid government while Punk Rockers were waxing poetic in a relatively free country. I read that Canada legalized marijuana across the board. In the US, Attorney General Jeff Sessions wants to ramp up the war on drugs. This is the incremental change that is welcomed by minorities who have their lives destroyed and pretty much have their freedom taken away, but to others the lesser of two evils is still evil in their eyes. I'm not saying voting is the 'be-all end-all' that the corporate media and the system proclaims, but it is a start. Because things not only can get worse but have. "By any means necessary"; or is voting not one of those acceptable means?