968
Praxis
(lemmy.nz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2026
968 points (98.3% liked)
Microblog Memes
12335 readers
3966 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
RULES:
- Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
- Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
- You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
- Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
- Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If an image is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
- Absolutely no NSFL content.
- Be nice. Don't take anything personally. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements & arguments to private messages.
- No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.
RELATED COMMUNITIES:
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It's also funny how they pretend that the two actions are mutually exclusive, as if the rules of the universe won't allow you to firebomb Walmarts the minute you cast a vote. It's almost like discouraging people from voting is the actual purpose.
This is it. You can do harm reduction in voting for the least-worst feasible candidate, while organising/protesting on issues you disagree with them on.
E.g. In the UK, Labour is often poor on queer rights issues, but comparatively massively better than the tories/reform would be, not to mention economic and welfare policies. So I vote Labour, and attend pro-trans rights protests and criticise Labour and their stance on this issue.
The research does not support this thesis. Policy is largely independent of popularity.
Average .ml user
Yeah, things like the Democratic party supporting gay marriage after it gained critical mass in popularity are a total coincidence. The policies are just random. Same thing with the the Republican party morphing overnight into a white nationalist cult who doesn’t care about deficit spending anymore. You never know where the parties are headed, and it has nothing to do with the desires of the base and who they vote for.
I'm confused by the sarcasm. Do you think these are recent?
No, politics is not random, politics is what economic elites want. That’s why Marxist would say it’s a “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie”.
Here a direct quote from the famous 2014 study by Martin Gilens & Benjamin Page:
Disclaimer: There are sources that say this study has some oversimplifications and claim that at least “limited leverage” is possible.
But we shouldn’t settle for just limited leverage as people. Unfortunately, neither voting nor individual arson attacks will change that.
Instead we should see voting and (the limited effect it has on politics) as our tool to make more and more people realize that big business ruling everything isn’t an error in the system, but its core function. It always existed to protect the interest of the economic elites. We need to understand that the system has to be replaced not fixed.
Okay, but that quote doesn't support the conclusion that engaging in harm-reduction via voting is instead a bad thing. In fact, it doesn't even argue that your vote doesn't matter. The only thing it suggests - and I can't even say "proves" here, as your own disclaimer brings the validity of this study's conclusions into question - is that mass voting doesn't result in policy change from the major parties.
Voting for the party that is going to bomb brown people, rather than the one that is going to bomb brown people, round up locals who look too brown, and de-legitimize LGBTQ+ peoples of all demographics, is harm reduction worth engaging in.
I eagerly await the total failure of capitalism as much as the next socialist, but I am not condemning local minorities just to win some form of imagined moral high ground.
I just don't think the Ds actually do harm reduction. Biden and his DOJ had the Epstein files and they did literally nothing with them. And that's just the clearest example of the enabling they do. Obama and Biden expanded ICE into what it is today and created the policy framework that Trump is using, but Biden did nothing to address it when he was president. He just opted not to use it, knowing full well what the Republicans would do because they were literally publishing treatises on what they would do. The Democrats are harm reduction like the Good Cop has your best interests at heart.
I have had a read through that study, and I would consider the following points striking:
To give a counter example to this study: consider the exit to the gilded age. We have a period comparable to now, where political power was bought and sold; corruption reigned. However, the government of Teddy Roosevelt made a number of moves counter to corporate interests, breaking up monopolies, reserving vast swathes of national parks, legislation protecting food and drug adulteration (note: not an unequivocal fan of TR — I am not in favour of his gunboat diplomacy).
A more recent example: under the Biden administration, there was a significant uplift in antitrust efforts. Lina Khan was appointed to the FTC, and who knows what she could have accomplished given more time. In a UK-based example, we are (finally, thank fucking god) renationalising our public services. It is absurd to think this would have happened under the opposition.
TLDR: democratic socialism is possible; your study is a snapshot of conservative administrations in America and — no shit — they aligned with corporate interests.
That is not at all the TLDR. Your entire argument is that outside the US voting can influence policy. No one is arguing against that, but that in no way supports the thesis that democratic socialism is possible. All of history shows that democratic socialism has never happened. There is no known path to democratic socialism at all.
You hate democratic socialism because it doesn't kill enough people like Stalin's National Socialism
I mean that’s ridiculous — Brexit for one is an example of a massive change to the British political landscape that doesn’t happen without the public voting for it.
Shut the fuck up. If you don't want to vote, then don't vote. But you have no reason to try and stop others from voting.
His reason is that he thinks anything that hurts the west is good. Because his simply brain can only understand black and white binary arguments one time when he was 14 he discovered the USA are the bad guys.
Do you think the 250 year old country founded on genocide and slavery that has only not been at war for 20 years of its history is the good guy?
Hey man I see you joined a week ago and literally all you do is argue with people.
This isnt a healthy way to spend your time. I recommend taking up a hobby like reading or knitting
Lmao, please Adress the contents of my comment.
I’ll do that! The contents of your comment are garbage, baby-brained bullshit. Next!
I don’t think a 250 year old country is a “guy”, good or bad.
Yuuup. Recently called out a post for discouraging voting, but the author was a mod so they removed my comment. Called them out on that and they removed that comment and banned me from the sub.
gonna take a wild guess and say latestagecapitalism or progressivepolitics
But everyone is so corrupt anyway right?
/s