No. In fact one of Trump’s campaign promises was that he wouldn’t start foreign wars, and it polled as highly popular. Anyone that wasn’t an idiot knew that was a lie, but at least he had the decency to lie about it. Democrats couldn’t even muster up that much courage.
Hello, I am a politician running on a proud history of supporting every war the US has been engaged in within my lifetime, as well as most of those outside of it. I would like to thank you for your vote, and please tell me - was your vote for me because of my warmongering or in spite of it? I sincerely await your answer, as it will mean a lot to what sort of policy I pursue <- How you seem to imagine it works when people vote for a warhawk despite their hawkishness.
So here, you say it’s the practical effects of my vote (electing a warhawk) that matters, not the ideals behind it that wish for a different outcome (foreign wars are often harmful and unnecessary). But when I’m voting in the general, suddenly those ideals (voting third party) would be more important than the practical effect (getting a republican elected)? Is there a reason for this difference?
Okay, I can see why that’s how some people read it.
It don’t think people consciously support wars, or at least I hope they don’t?
The behavior I find offensive is how when people point out flaws with the Democrats or the US electorial system they are accused of being as bad at the Republicans and wanting the Republicans to win. That’s what I mean about defending the child crushing machine. I’d say the same thing about people doing this with Liberal/Conservative parties in Canada too, by the way.
They jump to the conclusion that criticism is telling people not to vote, even when voting isn’t mentioned. That’s such a jump that feels like it’s rooted in preserving the two party system because it shuts down any “what if?” or organizing around the specific criticisms.
To an outsider it feels like they think the US system is so precious and special and that anyone who criticizes it must hate freedom. It feels like they take the criticism personally which is confusing. I don’t get defensive when people talk shit about the country I live in and it’s government. I don’t need to chime in. I’m not proud of everything I’ve done in my life so it’s not like I don’t mind because I’ve got nothing to be ashamed of. I just don’t need to make it about me, you know?
There are lots of countries that do imperialism but I think the two party system is unique in that the Dems hold the country hostage by saying “Vote for us or the bad guys will win!” and won’t be convinced to be a little less shit themselves. That seems like something they should be talking about more, especially when the Dems position themselves as being progressive and then either quietly support some heinous shit or walk it back when it comes to election time to appeal to more people. There is a constant bombardment of news, busy people might not be aware of just how awful they are if they only see the election ads and don’t hear about the voting records etc.
I also think opening deciding what the lesser evil is online is awful. Talking about these things like abstract concepts when there are people who are actively being harmed by the choices reading it and then pushing back on the people who point that out is wild. It makes it sound like it’s harder on them to have to vote for the lesser evil than to get bombed or starved by sanctions. I regret using the term child crushing machine myself because it’s so flippant. It was not something I should have participated in.
To be clear, I’m not saying they need to prove they are “doing something about it”. I’m not interested in interrogating people in a purity test to see if they meet my moral bar because who the hell am I? I’m also an abolitionist and I’m not interested in labeling fellow working class people as good or bad because I think we are more than our worst days. Don’t read that as I think harmful behavior is okay and should be ignored. True community and caring is holding people accountable and working to undo harms not just throwing people away when they fuck up. These people are not my community.
Do you seriously think most people support foreign wars?
What most people want is not and has never been a going concern in the bourgeois neo-aristocracy of Amerika
Correct
No. In fact one of Trump’s campaign promises was that he wouldn’t start foreign wars, and it polled as highly popular. Anyone that wasn’t an idiot knew that was a lie, but at least he had the decency to lie about it. Democrats couldn’t even muster up that much courage.
Hello, I am a politician running on a proud history of supporting every war the US has been engaged in within my lifetime, as well as most of those outside of it. I would like to thank you for your vote, and please tell me - was your vote for me because of my warmongering or in spite of it? I sincerely await your answer, as it will mean a lot to what sort of policy I pursue <- How you seem to imagine it works when people vote for a warhawk despite their hawkishness.
So here, you say it’s the practical effects of my vote (electing a warhawk) that matters, not the ideals behind it that wish for a different outcome (foreign wars are often harmful and unnecessary). But when I’m voting in the general, suddenly those ideals (voting third party) would be more important than the practical effect (getting a republican elected)? Is there a reason for this difference?
I do not think this. Why do you ask?
You said they were defending the child crushing online. If you didn’t mean you think they support foreign wars, what did you mean?
Okay, I can see why that’s how some people read it.
It don’t think people consciously support wars, or at least I hope they don’t?
The behavior I find offensive is how when people point out flaws with the Democrats or the US electorial system they are accused of being as bad at the Republicans and wanting the Republicans to win. That’s what I mean about defending the child crushing machine. I’d say the same thing about people doing this with Liberal/Conservative parties in Canada too, by the way.
They jump to the conclusion that criticism is telling people not to vote, even when voting isn’t mentioned. That’s such a jump that feels like it’s rooted in preserving the two party system because it shuts down any “what if?” or organizing around the specific criticisms.
To an outsider it feels like they think the US system is so precious and special and that anyone who criticizes it must hate freedom. It feels like they take the criticism personally which is confusing. I don’t get defensive when people talk shit about the country I live in and it’s government. I don’t need to chime in. I’m not proud of everything I’ve done in my life so it’s not like I don’t mind because I’ve got nothing to be ashamed of. I just don’t need to make it about me, you know?
There are lots of countries that do imperialism but I think the two party system is unique in that the Dems hold the country hostage by saying “Vote for us or the bad guys will win!” and won’t be convinced to be a little less shit themselves. That seems like something they should be talking about more, especially when the Dems position themselves as being progressive and then either quietly support some heinous shit or walk it back when it comes to election time to appeal to more people. There is a constant bombardment of news, busy people might not be aware of just how awful they are if they only see the election ads and don’t hear about the voting records etc.
I also think opening deciding what the lesser evil is online is awful. Talking about these things like abstract concepts when there are people who are actively being harmed by the choices reading it and then pushing back on the people who point that out is wild. It makes it sound like it’s harder on them to have to vote for the lesser evil than to get bombed or starved by sanctions. I regret using the term child crushing machine myself because it’s so flippant. It was not something I should have participated in.
To be clear, I’m not saying they need to prove they are “doing something about it”. I’m not interested in interrogating people in a purity test to see if they meet my moral bar because who the hell am I? I’m also an abolitionist and I’m not interested in labeling fellow working class people as good or bad because I think we are more than our worst days. Don’t read that as I think harmful behavior is okay and should be ignored. True community and caring is holding people accountable and working to undo harms not just throwing people away when they fuck up. These people are not my community.
I hope that helped clarify my meaning.