So you recognize that our voting system features heavy disenfranchisement, but you use that as a reason for why it works?
The lesson here isn’t that voting alone is all that significant; it’s that the bourgeois will claw away even the most insignificant crumb they can get, and that’s precisely why democracy does not work under capitalism. The difference in that distinction is that; rather than fighting many small one-step-behind fights in the name of voting, in hopes we get to vote for some of the change that our people need 10 years down the road; we organize and build our capacity to directly fight the big fight for our people.
This is one of the many contradictions of capitalism; democracy is how the system maintains its legitimacy, but democracy itself is a threat to capital interests. Too much and too little democracy are both against ruling class interests. Too much, and the working class can influence politics in a way that threatens the ruling class and their power. Too little, and the system loses legitimacy, opening itself to the possibility of revolt.
The ruling class maintains the balance by minimizing the possibility of a coordinated working-class resistance; guaranteeing only the minimum amount of democracy, only for as long as they recognize the working class’s ability to organize and overthrow them. Making a show of what little faux democracy we have is a tactic to that end; the carrot hanging from the stick. It sows division, keeps us occupied, keeps our attention in one predictable place, and attempts to convince us of the system’s legitimacy; all of these being obstacles in organizing an effective resistance against the guy holding the stick.
plenty, but to be honest I doubt it would be of any use to either of us. You are absolutely wedded to the idea that the US systems, culture and frankly insane abnormalities are somehow a global axiom. Something embedded in our species. And when this concept is challenged, the rejective meltdown is frankly impressive, but of very little use outside of spectacle.
So you recognize that our voting system features heavy disenfranchisement, but you use that as a reason for why it works?
The lesson here isn’t that voting alone is all that significant; it’s that the bourgeois will claw away even the most insignificant crumb they can get, and that’s precisely why democracy does not work under capitalism. The difference in that distinction is that; rather than fighting many small one-step-behind fights in the name of voting, in hopes we get to vote for some of the change that our people need 10 years down the road; we organize and build our capacity to directly fight the big fight for our people.
This is one of the many contradictions of capitalism; democracy is how the system maintains its legitimacy, but democracy itself is a threat to capital interests. Too much and too little democracy are both against ruling class interests. Too much, and the working class can influence politics in a way that threatens the ruling class and their power. Too little, and the system loses legitimacy, opening itself to the possibility of revolt.
The ruling class maintains the balance by minimizing the possibility of a coordinated working-class resistance; guaranteeing only the minimum amount of democracy, only for as long as they recognize the working class’s ability to organize and overthrow them. Making a show of what little faux democracy we have is a tactic to that end; the carrot hanging from the stick. It sows division, keeps us occupied, keeps our attention in one predictable place, and attempts to convince us of the system’s legitimacy; all of these being obstacles in organizing an effective resistance against the guy holding the stick.
Man, the US brainrot is incredible
do you have anything of substance to add?
plenty, but to be honest I doubt it would be of any use to either of us. You are absolutely wedded to the idea that the US systems, culture and frankly insane abnormalities are somehow a global axiom. Something embedded in our species. And when this concept is challenged, the rejective meltdown is frankly impressive, but of very little use outside of spectacle.