this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
1367 points (91.8% liked)
Memes
45550 readers
1605 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And you dont see how voting for the "lesser evil" allows both parties to move further and further right? I was actually taken aback by how blatant you were in your steps, most liberals dont state it so directly.
I'm gonna assume(hope) you think American foreign policy is bad real quick. Biden is complicit in a genocide, like an actual child killing, people starving, oppressor disguising bombs as canned food genocide. Sure trump is hypothetically worse, but by voting for biden you are showing the democratic party that you are willing to vote for someone who is actually genocidal. You are showing them that they can commit genocide when it benefits them and you'll still vote for them. Of course this isn't the only incredibly horrific thing the american establishment does that neither party budges on and the american populace just accepts. It's just the worst and most obvious at the moment.
Always remember that Germany voted for Hindenburg
Your mistake is thinking Trump would stop the war in Gaza, and not end the war in Ukraine in the worst possible manner, by giving Putin everything he needs to exterminate the Ukrainians.
You really need to pay better attention to what's going on. I'm embarrassed for you here.
I absolutely do not think that bro ๐
Why do you target Biden though? If you ever voted before, chances are the candidate you voted for had the same complicit stance with Isreal. Is this really how you fix it?
I haven't voted in a presidential election before (in my early 20s), however if i had i would wish that i didn't. I target biden becuase he is currently arming and aiding fascists.
As for fixing the israel issue; i'm hoping, praying that democrats see the threat of being unelectable due to their complicity as more important than aiding a genocide. If biden ended his support of israel i'd actually vote for him. I dont have much else i like about him, many things i really dislike about him even, but thats normal for US presidential candidates. Its the genocide that pushed me over the edge, i cant budge on that.
If you meant fixing US politics then I would say that is not possible without radical change of our current political system.
Doesn't this boil down to what-about-ism then, if we we denounce our state as fascist when in the case of our neighbors, while holding our grievance against state for the crimes against the population as a whole. Lesser or greater evil means our democratic voice is used against those that would lead us into darker times still rather than try to facilitate trust. I'm just saying it's a silly self-defeating manipulation acting out without regard to trust.
I see a lot of people who aren't voting using this logic and I don't really understand it.
If there are some number of candidates running, and the most left wing candidate wins each time, how does that push the country to the right?
The rich benefit most from politically right policies and the rich are our governing body. If you vote for the most left candidate no matter how far on the right they realistically are then they will just continue to move right because thats what benefits them. I imagine part of your problem is that maybe you view the democratic party as left? It is not, both american political parties are on the right, one is just a little more left than the other. Let me know if this makes sense, i did a lot of work today and my brain is a little fried so im not sure how well i explained that.
That doesn't really make sense, but I appreciate the honest effort.
Good luck, I hope you remember that one of Trump and Biden is going to be the next president whether you vote or not. Which one do you think is going to push the US farther to right? (That's a rhetorical question that you should answer for yourself, no one else's opinion really matters here)
Let me rephrase then now that im back home.
The American government as with all capitalist governments is run by and for the owning class. Notice how our elected officials are property owners and business owners. They typically have a lot of investments in large business etc etc. So it follows that they would run their government in a way that would protect or bolster their investments. Whats good for business is good for them. This is why the "economy" and GDP are so talked about in our politics, its incredibly important to our elected officials and our unelected officials such as CEOS that the businesses they have invested into continue to turn a profit. Businesses will lobby and bribe politicians for laws that work in their favor and our politicians do it because it is in their best interests to do so. This extends beyond just maintaining a low minimum wage, refusing to pass rent control laws, cutting welfare, keeping privatized healthcare, loosening child labor laws, bailing out failed businesses, and writing loopholes into our tax laws that allows the owning class to evade them. It is also the reason the US overthrows democratically elected governments, invades sovereign nations, and funds far right insurgencies. Ultimately every single decision the US makes can be boiled down to protecting the interests of the owning class.
So, both the Democratic and Republican party have essentially the same interests. The main difference being that the Democratic party gives a few more concessions to the working class because it needs to maintain a voting body and it knows that pushing workers to hard can cause a revolution. It wants to extract as much profit as possible without risking a loss of power. The Republican party just does a little more for the owning class and a lot less for the working class.
Voting for the left most party no matter how far right they actually are because the other party is worse shows them that they can maintain their power and capital while doing less and less for the working class. Why should the Democratic party give you free healthcare, free education, a better wage, less working hours, or better working conditions if you're gonna vote for them anyway. The far right republican is an incredibly useful tool for the Democratic party because it means they can maintain their position of power without actually doing the things you want them to do. Hell they even fund them. As for foreign policy, there's little difference between the parties. They both know they can get away with bombing millions of innocent people bc wtf are we gonna do about it? Vote harder? For who?
As for israel specifically, im hoping that the Democratic party is worried enough about losing their executive power that they stop comitting a genocide but I truly honestly doubt it will happen. AIPAC is a very powerful lobbying group and the ruling class who benefit from the existence of Israel know that they can get what they want regardless of who is elected.
Your logic is fucked.
Could you expand on that?
You've admitted that you are young and haven't been around for large scale issues and deep seated treaties and ally-ships that lead to the development of global political issues. It is incredibly understandable that given your age and experience you've summed up your decision into what you've currently seen in the news and perhaps the few bullet-point-history issues you've read up on.
The issues going on with Israel are enormously complex and are not as simple as who's land it is, who is keeping who away, and who is committing genocide. Yes, it is horrible, and it would be ideal if our political leader could step up and call out that country for those actions. The unfortunate reality from a geopolitical perspective and from the strategic perspective of being a world leader that needs to think many, many steps ahead is that the middle east is a very hostile area, and Israel is very strategically placed to not only have an ally, but also to keep key ports open - both for economic and military reasons.
Making a statement against the actions of Israel would have been detrimental to future global peace options. Instead, Biden can work with Netanyahu behind the scenes without making an official statement.
No, fuck you, there's no justification for aiding a genocide. It is absolutely as simple as who is committing a genocide, you should have zero tolerance for it. Would you give bullets to someone after watching them shoot a kid if it benefitted you? The US can survive without israel and the people of the middle east would be better off without both the US and Israel. American and its client state are a destabilizing force in the region and that is not an accident. Can you even name a time where US invention in that region helped the people who live there? I dont want biden to work out an agreement with natanyahu, i want netanyahu to face the fucking wall.
You are still being incredibly naive.
It has nothing to do with it benefiting me - or specifically the US as the case with Israel goes, or even the party or the politician. As I tried to describe in my original comment, it is a strategic move for GLOBAL PEACE - not just the US. This is not only about US intervention, which it is clear you have a lot of thoughts about, but also about the ports and access to resources both in and out for all of the countries in that region, and militaries of all countries. And destroying our only allyship in that region (not just us, but the other countries that have maintained their stance with Israel), maintains the ability to keep a foothold in that region.
If someone just shot a child in front of me, would I give them bullets? If they controlled the only access to all of the resources (oil, water, food, etc) that would cause my other allies to die without during times of crisis, I would absolutely consider it. That does not mean it would come without limitations.
For you to still think this way after it being explained to you shows how shortsighted and limited you are thinking.
From the rest of your comments, it's clear that you are very interested in politics and learning a lot, which is good! And you've gotten to a lot of topics, also good. But it seems like you have gotten to the surface level issues and become very passionate about them and it's that way or the highway instead of looking any deeper.
The US is not interested in global peace. It is not engaging in genocide for the peace. The idea that you can murder civilians for peace is ludicrous. I fully understand that the US and Israel control much of the resources in the region and regularly engage militarily. I am also aware that maintaining a foothold in that region is very important for the western ruling class. Im an not disagreeing with these facts. I am saying that these things are wrong and should not be done. I am saying the US, Israel, and numerous other western powers have done significantly more harm than good for the people within that region. I am also saying that no one should have that much control over those resources because it gives them the power to commit these sorts of atrocities.
Let me be clear, israel should not exist and before you lecture me on how nuanced and actually super complicated it is because theres been conflict in that region for 3000 years; i am well aware of the history. Everything before the establishment of the israeli state is nearly irrelevant to the current context. I fundamentally disagree with the existence of a settler colonial state.
The US and other western powers have no innate right to the resources of that land. Every single one of them can exist without israel. We should not have to pay for our resources in blood. Their influence in that area is not in the name of world peace and security but in the monetary interests of our ruling class. Western capitalists are a major cause of instability in that region.
Maybe if our current system of government requires the murder and systemic exploitation of hundreds of millions of people in order to provide for its citizens then it should not exist.
As for my anology, would you think differently if you had a gun too? The US has invaded and couped for with significantly less justification. It is not unreasonable to say that israel could be dismantled by force, it will likely have to be.
I think you're much too resigned to your current reality. Its easy to look the other way and pretend the horrors are justified because of some sort of complexity. Telling yourself there is good reason or that theres nothing that can be done is very surely very comforting.
Nowhere in my response did I say that anyone had a right to the land, and nowhere in my response did I say that it was Western powers that I was concerned about getting resources.
This is what happens when someone looks at the surface of issues and then becomes incredibly passionate about it.
You need to listen to people that have lived through many, many years of middle east conflicts. Talk with people who have been entrenched over there. Become friends with middle easterners who have moved over here during the 80s and 90s (as adults, not the children of those that came over) and started businesses and ask about their experiences.
You don't want to hear about how things are nuanced, but you look at things in such a black and white manner, which is typical of those in your age group becoming interested in politics.
Idk maybe it's cause I don't live in as much of a two party system as the US, but essentially still a two party system.
I think there's value in strategic voting. I don't know what the equivalent would be in the US but strategic voting for the lesser of two evils at a national level and then voting more true to your convictions at a municipal and provincial level is still valid.
Again my opinions probably don't work in the US electoral system, but voter apathy is a big part of how rights get eroded where I'm from. A party or political figure stays in power because of apathy and then they just keep getting away with shit. At least if you cast a vote it can be seen as you participating in the democracy.
I will say there is something to the act of not voting as being a part of democracy, but truly I think along with abstaining any functioning democracy needs a "none" option.
I think you are dead on. You do this to let the common voice speak.