American election
- This topic has 625 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 3 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Just remembered that a former member of our party wrote a book on this subject of why people vote, that was even turned into a play;
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263749343_How_Voters_Feel_by_Stephen_Coleman
… pathetic self-defeating lesser evil argument you peddle here. – robbo
Doubling down on your lunacy only makes you look more ridiculous, if that’s possible. With your attitude, Trump would be in power for another 4 years: no more health care for tens of millions, no green deal, no social services, no environmental protections whatsoever, etc … . Socialism would never come to fruition with your idea of radical, overnight change. In fact, your ideas make matters worse every election, which is the work of only fascists.
Out of interest does any of the SPGB members on this think there ever was, or hypothetically could be, a situation where the “lesser evil” actually is?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263749343_How_Voters_Feel_by_Stephen_Coleman
Yawn. Not another publication from a modern day intellectual who is more concerned about how something is said rather than what is said. This has become a common practice in academia today, a practice of intellectualizing common sense in which jargon and bafflegab displaces speaking plainly and clearly, more often than not to hide the fact of something we already know. After all, what does the expression “discourse of arid proceduralism” mean if not procedure and rules? And “saturnalian” if not inviting? Or how about “alternative facts” if not lies? I had a teacher in school who use to call the pencil sharpener “the implement system”. What happened to speaking plainly and clearly? All academics should read Voltaire’s Candide before they publish anything.
Out of interest does any of the SPGB members on this think there ever was, or hypothetically could be, a situation where the “lesser evil” actually is?
How about this for not doing that — that even if a lesser evil can be identified that is not a reason for voting for them since, as they will fail, this will provide a chance for the greater evil to win next time?
”The disillusionment that follows the election of a ‘lesser evil’ prepares fertile soil for the rise of the next populist demagogue. A vote for a ‘lesser evil’ is therefore – indirectly – also a vote for a ‘greater evil.’“
Or as Robbo just out it:
”Lesser evils ALWAYS prepare the ground for greater evils to emerge in due course and vice versa. That is the nature of capitalist politics: it is cyclical. That is because all capitalist politicians will inevitably fail to serve the interests of the working class and will inevitably disillusion and disenchant their supporters. You can’t operate capitalism in any other way.”
“All academics should read Voltaire’s Candide before they publish anything.“
At least we’re can agree on one thing.
I’d like those who subscribe to the belief that not voting leads to social change to provide an example of a country where this has worked in the last century anywhere in the world. Because I can provide countless examples of social change that have come about through voting.
The two arguments above don’t sound to me like there actually against a “lesser evil” at all, more like arguments for people who think they are voting for a “good”. If you think something is a “lesser evil” then you must also think it is an “evil” and presumably you won’t be surprised when it does “evil” things.
Do you not think there are marginal (and sometimes not so marginal) differences between how competing parties can / or would manage capitalism? And do you not think that marginal differences can actually be quite significant, especially to those on the margins?
I prefered Stephen Shenfield’s article to ALJO’s, I think it’s better to have a self-reflective discussion rather than always wheeling out the party line.
If the members on this site have not realized that the practice of not voting is exactly what the far right what you to do, you will always be ruled by them. In fact, the 2020 election is a glaring example that went well beyond discouraging voters to vote: Trump and the GOP did everything to SUPPRESS the vote and is continuing to do it in the courts as we speak. How blind can some of us be?
Do you not think there are marginal (and sometimes not so marginal) differences between how competing parties can / or would manage capitalism? And do you not think that marginal differences can actually be quite significant, especially to those on the margins?
Indeed, but you’re talking to a group of fascists, libertarians, anarchists and pseudo-socialists. Socialists know that social change comes incrementally through the ballot box. By not voting, we are empowering the far right. The US is an example of this.
“How about this: everything can be construed as evil; therefore, you should never vote?”
It’s capitalism that is the “evil” ( if you want to put it that way) as it can’t be refiorned to work in the interest of the majority class of wage workers. Choosing which group of professional politicians is to run its administrative side is a side show as none of them can make capitalism work other than as a profit-making system that puts profits before satisfy needs and has to. Because that’s the only way it can. The politicians fail not because they are insincere or incompetent or nasty but because what they have promised or been mandated to do is impossible.
Basically, the only relevant issue in any election is capitalism or socialism? If you vote for any politician or group of politicians on the grounds that they are the lesser evil what you are doing is legitimising the rule of the capitalist class.
Conclusion; if capitalism is the “evil” you should never vote for it. You should only vote for socialism as the common ownership of the means of production, with production directly to satisfy people’s needs and distribution on the basis of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.”
Basically, the only relevant issue in any election is capitalism or socialism? If you vote for any politician or group of politicians on the grounds that they are the lesser evil what you are doing is legitimising the rule of the capitalist class.
There is one fatal flaw in your argument: there is no such country that is purely capitalist. Countries are blends of market and planned economies, some less, some more.
Conclusion; if capitalism is the “evil” you should never vote for it. You should only vote for socialism as the common ownership of the means of production, with production directly to satisfy people’s needs and distribution on the basis of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.”
Where has that worked, to repeat my question from above?
“If the members on this site have not realized that the practice of not voting is exactly what the far right what you to do, you will always be ruled by them.”
But that’s not your argument, is it? You are not saying that people should simply vote for whoever they want, You are saying that people should vote for the candidate with the best chance of beating the “greater evil”. In other words, that they should vote for some professional politician rather than, say, for the Greens or some other minority party— or even a genuine socialist party candidate.
We don’t say that people shouldn’t vote but that they shouldn’t vote for any candidate who stands for capitalism. If there’s a genuine socialist candidate standing they should for that candidate.
True, if there is no such candidate standing we do say that it is better not to vote than to vote for a candidate that stands for capitalism. As that amounts to voting for capitalism to continue and to legitimise capitalist rule.
“Conclusion; if capitalism is the “evil” you should never vote for it. You should only vote for socialism as the common ownership of the means of production, with production directly to satisfy people’s needs and distribution on the basis of “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.”
But this only makes sense if there’s already a mass movement of socialists for socialism. We don’t live in that world. I think voting (and politics) isn’t just about expressing your ideals, it’s about trying to effect a change (however limited) in the here and now. Engaging in the real world means you have to get your hands dirty from time to time.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.