anarchiddy

No, there should have been a primary.

Right, Harris was a good candidate, that's why her primary campaign lasted all the way to december of 2019.

Nothing but the thrill of riding a mechanical bull on the interstate going 70mph

America has its own interest in justifying its role in israel and silencing opposition to state objectives

and that attempting a revolution (which is a huge step up from bombing a few factories and assassinating a few CEOs) won’t go well if it’s not got broad popular support or police and military backing.

I don't know a single anarchist that has ever advocated for an organized revolution, i'm not sure why you're harping on that. Violent disruption of capitalist systems is the violence I'm talking about, and it requires far fewer people to pose that very real threat to liberal democracy than it does for "complete participation" in the democratic process (wtf does this even mean if not voting? if democracy fails if even a single person doesn't 'participate' then democracy itself is a failed concept). When the democratic system fails to produce representation for working-class interests, it is the only form of participation left.

The liberals here who keep saying shit like "well if everyone voted we wouldn't be in this situation" have completely missed the point. If the opposition party had offered any real representation of working class interests to begin with then you wouldn't have had to be here in the replies defending them at all.

It's fine, though. As always, civil activists will drag the democratic party kicking and screaming toward progress, regardless of the constant whinging from liberals.

I’m not saying that magically getting everyone to know who they should vote for and then show up to the polls is feasible, just that refusing to participate because the system’s ‘broken’ is what the system wants and how it makes sure it keeps doing the things it does

Making it difficult to vote is a reason it's designed to fail, but it's very possibly the least impactful.

Even if everyone participates, there are still dozens of ways in which capital restricts the options/neuters governance against the interests of the working class. Historically, it has almost never been turnout that drives progress, but dedicated, persistent, and quite often violent action by a relatively small number of actors. Nearly all of our basic labor rights came not from the working-class voter turnout but by armed protest and seizure of capital and infrastructure. Even when representation overwhelmingly 'supports' reform, the pressures of capital dis-incentivize regulation if they can avoid it (else they catch the blowback from unhappy capitalists, who quite literally control the nation's productive capacity and resources) - it isn't until the working class shows their willingness to disrupt the flow of profit that true progress is made.

I understood your whole comment, but my point isn't event just that our system is designed to prevent participation, it's also designed to prevent populist movements from making progress to begin with. "The system doesn't want you to participate" is only a very small part of the story - it also does not need to listen to the popular will unless it's backed by an implicit threat of violence.

I'm not even telling you not to vote, just that voting alone will never be enough, not even with total participation - especially when we have already reached the point in capitalist decay where fascism has taken control of governance. You cannot vote your way out of fascism, and the sooner people realize this the sooner people will stop being content with merely voting.

it’s designed to only function as advertised if there’s full participation

Uh, what? Are you forgetting that suffrage was originally limited to land-owning men?

It was never designed for full participation - universal suffrage has been repeatedly rejected in favor of 'compromised' exclusions since our founding.

Our system has been quite literally designed to prevent full participation, idk where this idea comes from that full participation is somehow the true spirit of american democracy.

Either way, it’s much easier to convince people to go out and vote than it is to convince them to take up arms in a revolution, kill their opponents, and risk being killed or imprisoned as a consequence

It's not an exaggeration to say that basically every bit of progress for labor and democratic rights in the US has been won by violent struggle, and it's never been by a 'majority' of voters.

Apathetic morons who don't realize that the president is only held accountable by the other branch of government

Maybe this was a typo, but there are actually 3 branches of government, and we're already in a constitutional crisis between the first and third

For retaking a chamber of congress to be significant in the fight against fascism it has to actually be functioning. If they were to impeach and convict (60 votes in the Senate and they currently only have 47), Trump could just say 'no' like he did to the SC. Even if they convicted and Trump didn't just say 'I ain't fucking leavin', a third of the country is still rabidly supportive of him. That'll impact who even can win seats in congress, and they would probably burn the national mall down this time

Libs need to get past their inability to see how the system has completely fallen apart.

History never ended, we should stop pretending like it did.

As someone with adhd reading this at 4 in the morning because he can't go back to sleep, i find this information personally assaulting

I also read somewhere that some govt agency (don't recall which, I think it was a health agency?)

Social Security Administration

Mr Beast is the quintessential example of someone who defines themselves by their unfathomable success, attributing it to their unique work-ethic and dedication, and then collapses under the weight of their impossibly large ego

I imagine the next deflection is something like 'but china has the second largest number of billionares', but as soon as you sort that list by per-capita it suddenly tells a very different story.