I mean, that's a weird-ass AI prompt. But if fascism wins and you voted third party, yes - it's partly* your fault unless you're too stupid to understand how first past the post voting works.
*conditionals against massive fascist party majority states notwithstanding.
If your goal is to have a third option to vote for, the best way to help is to support independent candidates on the right as well. If the fascist vote is split (say between Trump and Liz Cheney) then a vote for (Cornell West for example) is less likely to be a vote for fascism.
Third party candidates will never be the answer. They exist only to dilute resistance. The answer is to raise awareness and outrage until it can’t be ignored.
While I agree third party candidates are not really the solution, what exactly is rage and outrage that can’t be ignored gonna do? How is that gonna change things? Do you think the lawmakers and people in power and gonna just gonna fix the system that put them in power just cause some people got mad? More importantly changing all that would take time, way more time than we have before the next election, so what do you recommend we are suppose to do right now?
Please be a bit more specific than “get mad”, cause trust me, a lot of people have been mad for a long time, just getting mad doesn’t fix anything
We were on the verge of forcing real change before the neolibs convinced the middle class that they won by electing Biden. The people in the streets fighting cops is always the beginning of change. Spreading information, and not accepting the premise that Biden is the solution is how we get people back in the streets.
If one is a leftist and wants a third party just so we’ll be represented at all, then supporting right wing independents could backfire. Their corrupt corporate moderates are costing the right just as much support as they cost us. There’s a lot of religious folks out there who - if united - would usher in the Handmaid’s Tale.
Ross Perot came very close to actually winning. In today’s climate, a far right candidate just might.
Just curious… In what way did Ross Perot come close to winning? I see that he got 8% of the popular vote in 1996 but I’m not seeing that he ever got an electoral vote.
Instead of complaining, get active at a local level. Start doing shit, instead of complaining that other people should do shit. Be a local activist. Run for office. Work in person to persuade people. Get backing. Shake hands, kiss babies, meet people. And then? Vote for the best choices that you have.
If you want shit to change, you can’t complain on-line, you have to get off your ass and do something.
I assume that you aren’t doing more because almost all of the people bitching about the Dems only aligning with 95% of their views and therefore don’t vote for the Dems because they’re just as bad are accelerationists; they just want to make the system function even less well than it already does so that the whole things crashes and burns. Or, worse, in the case of someone like Jill Stein, are actively working against the interests of the country. Best case scenario? They’re speaking to an in-group to harden people in a position so that they’re less likely to engage with political opponents.
If you really, truly want things to change, you gotta do that shit on a 1:1 basis, in person. If you’re serious about changing people and fixing shit, I’d suggest looking at techniques of street epistemology and reading David McRaney’s “How Minds Change”.
It’s one of the things I do. You don’t know anything else about me, but you seem to think you do. All I know about you is that you can turn any subject into a conversation about yourself.
You can. But you need to engage them one on one, and you need to find out what’s important to them, what frustrates them, and why. And then build on that. It takes empathy, and not faked empathy. It’s not a short conversation, like asking someone to donate to Greenpeace on a sidewalk in Brooklyn. It’s deep canvassing.
“A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its pants on.”
One-on-one might be effective, but it can’t scale. There’s no hope for the most heavily propagandized country on Earth that doesn’t start with an end to the incentive to lie for profit, I.E. Capitalism.
For the most part, people change based on relationships, not raw information. In general, you can’t counter a belief simply by presenting overwhelming information. (This is one of the only areas where Trump is a savant; he’s actively fostered a parasocial relationship with his cultists. They believe that they have a strong social relationship with him, so they’re inoculated against information that’s critical or negative of Trump.) What this means is that ideas can be contagious, and can spread through relationships. If you are able to use you relationship with your parents to help them understand why e.g. Trump is terrible for the country, then they can, in turn, spread that to their friends.
While I appreciate your desire to abolish capitalism, in the case of fascism, it’s not money, but power that’s at play. Even if you eliminated all profit motive, people would still shill for Trump because they think that they can get some kind of benefit that isn’t necessarily monetary.
Money and power are equivalent, hence my identification of the problem as Capitalism. Billionaire-owners who can afford to run a propaganda machine as a loss-leader are also to be abolished.
slrpnk.net
Active