kind of a version 0.9 beta rant

[solarbird]

I keep working on variations of something. The reaction the last two days has really shown it all again.

I don't think I have it yet, but I think I'm in the neighbourhood.

Republicans get mad about shit they make up to get mad about, then hurt people.

Democrats get mad about things Republicans do. Sometimes they fix it.

Leftists get mad about things Republicans do, blame Democrats, and oppose voting because Democrats didn't stop the Republicans.

I got some fuckin' news, Twitter Left.

The only "glorious revolution" this country might see is fascist. Your de facto accelerationist takes help them get there.

Yeah. Some of the left have guns. The right have more guns, the cops, and the military.

What does that leave as actual working options on the ground?

(Or doesn't that matter?)

1. The fascists of the GOP
2. Literally the only other party that can win elections under our system at the moment.

That's it.

Yeah, some of you are all "fuck voting, opt out, work on the ground, anarchy is now"

The people the GOP want dead? We don't have that option. You don't get to opt out of being criminalised for existing. You don't get to opt out of beatdowns.

ASK ME HOW I KNOW.

You want actual options?

You either

1. Work as an insurgency within the Democratic Party - it's worked quite well for the fascists taking over the GOP, and yet you continue to reject it

OR

2. You make ranked-choice voting happen at the state level.

WHILE

working your ass off to beat the existing Democrats into action

BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE ONLY TOOLS ACTUALLY AVAILABLE.

Conveniently, that WHILE? That's part of Actual Option 1.

I don't care if you don't like it, I don't care if you don't think it's fair, or good enough.

Because the other options are LITERAL FANTASYLAND.

These are the actually existing options.

I don't like it either. I really don't. I really don't.

I also know that shit doesn't matter. "What I like" doesn't define "What is real," and if you can't deal with something you hate being real nonetheless being real, then you're just COVID-deniers with a different jam.

And that is the actual reality on the ground.

You can either acknowledge the actual reality and try to deal with it

Or you can pretend there are other options that don't actually exist and demand people do nothing else.

In which case all I can say is enjoy that ivermectin.

(Honestly I think "Can you name one thing that you hate being real and yet which you acknowledge is still real" should be some kind of qualifier for politics. If you can't acknowledge the problem, you can't bloody well fix it.)

Comments

[dewline]

I am still uninterested in helping "acceleration" in any way. So I will continue to vote. I'm unsure of who to vote for right now because of that concern about enabling accelerationists, but I am certain that I will vote. And I will keep speaking for what I want from political life.

Maybe being an "Orange Liberal" in Canada will be useful, and not just for my own health and safety. We'll see.

One thing I like about the Canadian right-wing? They seem to be almost ready to eat each other right now. Factions: Conservative, "People's Party", Wexit/Maverick, Nationalist, even the now-parasitised Bloc Québecois at the moment. If we're careful, if we're bold at the right moment(s) and if we're lucky...

And with that out of the way...

[dewline]

...this is a good set of points.

[solarbird]

Despite first-past-the-post, Canada is different thanks to regionalisation still being more of a thing, right? But you still end up with majority governments getting 33% of the vote so you also need ranked choice voting.

That said, it's still different because political culture does matter.

[dewline]

We certainly need ranked-choice balloting up here. That's a project we have to keep pursuing in order to avert traps like you're also facing.

[gingicat]

One thing I hate being real but is still real: Not having money nor time to go and beat on the Democrats.

(I make up for this by working as an election clerk in my little city, because then I'm doing a civic duty *and* not really allowed to talk about politics. Which is good, because I can identify nearly every Trumpist who came into my polling place last year just based on their voter registration, and a good memory for which "unenrolled" voters requested R ballots in the primary.)

You're right.

[kathmandu]

My state tried for ranked-choice voting last year. It didn't pass, but maybe with a few more tries.

We do need to deal with the facts on the ground, and work for the best achievable result. I've been aiming my support partly according to who has actual practical plans, vs well-intended slogans with no plan.

[kevin_standlee]

Well said. You have to play the game under the rules we actually have, not the rules you'd like. And the rules we actually have include ways to change the rules, including getting RCV/IRV. As it happens, the Democratic party effectively used RCV/IRV here in Nevada for the presidential primary process, because they had a hybrid system where you could either show up on caucus day or vote in advance, expressing up to four preferences, which were then combined with the in-person votes to determine how many delegates went to the county (and then state, and then national) conventions pledged for each candidate.

I didn't get my way -- my early preferences didn't make any of the cuts, and Biden was my fourth-place choice, but that doesn't mean I didn't vote for him in the general election! As long as the main elections are first-past-the-post, you have to vote for someone who has a chance of winning, not your pie-in-the-sky candidate.

I've tried to tell conservatives who reject RCV/IRV that it would let them vote their first preferences for the even more extreme candidates that many of them want to select, but I don't think math is their strong suit.

[sistawendy]

Well spake. I've looked around at some of the leftists I've seen spoiling for a fight. They're going to get one, and they're not going to like the result.

[marahmarie]

You want actual options?

You either

1. Work as an insurgency within the Democratic Party - it's worked quite well for the fascists taking over the GOP, and yet you continue to reject it

Ok, but...Nancy Pelosi, let's discuss her for a hot minute. She's what's stopping the insurgency from....insurging. Yes, she's a one-woman firewall. Love her to death for how she stood up to L'Orange when she did but...a) she didn't do it quite early on nor often enough to stop the trainwreck, slowing it down only infinitesimally and...yes, one woman firewall.

I'm not saying she's old, old-guard, just gotta go or anything else. I *am* saying she's what's jamming up the pipes. Otoh, on the right you had Speakers like Paul Ryan whom my cat could mow over in his sleep. The guy has...no backbone. Nancy is nothing but backbone.

The GOP insurgency did not happen without guys like Ryan getting flattened without even trying to put up a fight (Bohner was not much better *ugh Tea Party*). So give our insurgency some credit...I think they know exactly where our firewall is.