I’m envious of the way the French protest their government. They’re literally setting things on fire because their schools aren’t adequate. Because the government tried to raise the retirement age. Because their politicians are shitbags.
I think the biggest obstacle to organizing in the US is the sheer distance. It takes 40 solid hours of driving to get from one side to the other. That’s not counting any breaks. France takes about 14 hours. Doable in a day or so if you push it.
Anyway, I’d sign up for a Revolution if there was a serious contender.
The distance is for sure a thing, but I believe it’s also a huge reason we dont have universal healthcare.
If I didn’t need a job to help subsidize my outrageously expensive health insurance that doesn’t cover shit, i’d be able to be more motley.
That said, at this point i’m about to go fucking French regardless
The biggest obstacle is the American people. Lol y’all are a bunch of coddled little girls. Way too many Americans, including left wing ones, fall for the American exceptionalism myth hook line and sinker. The fact that anyone with a head on their shoulders thinks there is going to be a return to the status quo after Trump is very very cute!
It’s crazy how you are all just watching your democratic devolve into chaos, poverty, and conflict with the rest of the world and you just… Make communist memes about it on social media… Protest on Saturdays… Act like you are the only country where it’s expensive to live and there are large distances…
Maybe stop being such little bitches!
By the person who’s biggest protest was probably the greens on their plate.
False dichotomy. There are many things to do between “do nothing but vote for evil” and “revolution”.
I don’t want to write the whole thing again, so I’ll just leave this here.
The problem is nobody on the left is actually doing those things. It’s almost like bitching about people on the internet has taken the place of actual activisim.
I want to have things like Universal Healthcare and a living wage and/or UBI before I die. That stuff isn’t going to happen by not voting. If “the left” were capable of achieving these things by not voting then we’d have them already.People removed on the internet way too often, for sure. But I’m very involved in my local organizing scene, and people are always doing something, and a lot of great things have been accomplished in my region, as a result
In the USA (which was the focus of OP) I would argue there is virtually no left in the first place. Outliers excluded even their left-most people are still centrists, at best. Note that nowhere I said people should stop voting, it’s kind of crazy how that’s always a knee-jerk assumption. Obviously you still ought to choose the lesser evil - but that must come with doing the other parts. Otherwise, again, you’re just choosing evil.
That being said: If you live in the USA and you want that to happen, you need to step up. Not say “nobody else is doing it”. You need to do it. If you already are: Congrats! Next you need to accept that you can do everything right and still lose. That’s just life.
I think that’s the first reply I’ve seen with an actual action item and not just diverting from actual criticisms of the “don’t vote” mentality. The revolution doesn’t have to be violence. A cultural revolution can also affect change. Dr. King’s civil rights movement was famously non-violent.
My point is the nay-sayers here say “don’t vote”, but offer no alternatives.
You say join a union? I say hell yeah, sign me up! Can I join yours?
Dr. King’s civil rights movement was famously non-violent.
Just one small facet of the civil rights movement; Dr. King is the “public face” selected by the government to admire because he was so unoffensive.
On his own, he would have accomplished nothing. Black Panthers are not as widely admired by the public, because they’re only taught about Rosa Parks and MLK, not about the BP patrols and Death Angels.
Revolutions need a widespread diversity of tactics, with a spectrum of action; everything from refusing to sit in your assigned seating all the way to openly fighting the police.
The key is action, so think about what you’re doing and how you can contribute. What are your strengths?
I’m one of these.
My point is the nay-sayers here say “don’t vote”, but offer no alternatives.
I’m a nay-sayer (to doing no more than perpetually voting for the lesser of two evils), and I’ve offered alternatives. I’m also not alone in this, I’ve seen about as many people, proportionally speaking, advocate for the same things in past posts about this here on Lemmy as there are on Reddit. Might this be a bubble issue on your end?
You say join a union? I say hell yeah, sign me up! Can I join yours?
Feel free to come to Germany and join one of our unions. The one primarily responsible for negotiating the collective agreement currently determining my salary is ver.di.
Whole bunch of pussy ass accelerationists on this platform. I enjoy calling out their pussy ass behavior.
Vote or die.
And I suggest voting for a candidate that isn’t guaranteed to lose if you want anything other than fascism to happen.
Ranked choice voting makes it easier to vote for the best candidate AND one that won’t lose, if two states can do it so can more.
But I’d rather sit around and critique the system while allowing the candidate that is objectively worse to win. It makes me feel superior as I sniff my own farts.
The problem in the U.S. is, unfortunately, that everybody is too comfy and they’re just hoping somebody else does it. A person could go and end a prominent politician while shouting “THIS IS THE REVOLUTION! TO ARMS, FELLOW AMERICANS!,” and everybody else would just watch the fallout on TV.
I think it has more to do with being a police state that imprisons more people per capita than any other nation on the globe. Peaceful protesting is too easy to ignore, and we all know the cops would just love a good excuse to beat our asses before locking us up for as long as they can find an excuse to.
The thing about the French, or specifically Parisians, is that it’s hard to stay inside and mind your business when everything requires you to walk. Meanwhile every American isolates at home and then in their vehicle. There’s a physical structural advantage.
Been seeing this sentiment lately, and it’s silly. At least in the decades I’ve been around, people only vote the lesser evil about half the time. What we get is the “lesser” evil fixing and/or improving things, then the other party wins and undoes it all, rinse and repeat. You’d only actually have a point if it was consistently people voting the lesser which they’re not. This is just propaganda to demotivate folks from voting and making them feel like it’s hopeless so nothing changes for the folks that don’t want it to.
What we get is the “lesser” evil fixing and/or improving things
Or maybe you look at what you want and close your eyes to the things that need fixing and they leave alone or make actively worse.
Want an example? ICE budget under Biden. Everyone saw under Trump 1 that he was pushing ICE to be his militarized Gestapo, and rang all the alarm bells, telling Democrats to shut them down. What they did instead under Biden is boost their budget and scope. ICE is what it is today because Democrats voted to make it that way when they had the power to kill it. Because ICE is immigration, and borders MUST be secured at all cost, don’t you know
What we get is the “lesser” evil fixing and/or improving things
No, they don’t. Both parties actively make things worse, one wants to move to the right faster but they both want to move to the right. Things get worse regardless of which party is in power, neither party actually fixes or improves things.
There is a bipartisan consensus on ICE, the Patriot Act, spending as much on the military as the next 9 countries combined, getting involved in foreign wars, opposing Medicare for all, etc. Biden increased military spending to an all time high and bypassed congress to send more weapons to Israel.
“If you stick a knife in my back nine inches and pull it out six inches, there’s no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that’s not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made. And they haven’t even begun to pull the knife out, much less heal the wound… They won’t even admit the knife is there.”
The knife is in 9 inches, and one party wants to shove it another 6 while the other wants to plunge it in another 3. Both parties want to make it illegal to even talk about pulling the knife out.
Both parties actively make things worse
Provably false to anyone that pays any attention at all and literally the type of shitstain garbage sentiment the post is warning about.
With the last Democrat administration we got the biggest infrastructure bill of our lifetimes, the Inflation Reduction Act, the Safer Communities Act, the CHIPS act, same sex and interracial marriage was codified, prescription drug price reforms, student loan forgiveness for MILLIONS, and more.
The Dems have a voting history PROVING they regularly vote in favor of the middle/lower classes and stats PROVE they are better for our economy.
These are all objectively good things that make things better, not worse. Maybe what you mean to say is that one party actively makes things worse and the other just doesn’t do everything YOU want them to do on YOUR timeline.
The bottom line is there is a stupid decision and a smart decision every time you fill out a ballot, but you’re wasting your time telling others that no option is a good option.
Stop wasting our time and spreading this shit sentiment. The situation is far too serious for that garbage.
I’ve discussed things with you before and know that you’re a diehard party loyalist, so there’s little point in trying to reason with you. As I recall, you explicitly told me you consider American lives more valuable than the lives of non-Americans, so I don’t respect your opinion whatsoever. Your assessment of the party is based on fascist values and beliefs that are completely incompatible with my own.
At the end of the day, as someone who believes in the principle that all people are created equal, I’ll never vote for a party that supports mass murder, even if it’s targeted at “lesser” foreigners. And you and your party can make the choice of whether that’s an unreasonable condition to being part of their coalition. If you don’t need people who believe in equality, then don’t whine about how we vote. If you do need us, give us our demands and stop supporting mass murder. Doesn’t make a lick of difference to me if you think I’m being “unreasonable” or “wasting my vote” or whatever else. And I’m not going to stop voicing my opinion or advocating against genocide, no matter what you say.
I’ve discussed things with you before and know that you’re a diehard party loyalist
I’m not a diehard party loyalist. That’s just what you frame me as because you don’t do your homework and have no good arguments, so you deflect to using demeaning labels against your opponent. I talk shit about Dems all the time. And I also give them credit where credit is due, something you are incapable of doing.
You know nothing about me, other than that I pay more attention than you to current affairs and know what actually gets accomplished and by who.
As I recall, you explicitly told me you consider American lives more valuable than the lives of non-Americans
No shit, Sherlock. Your own affairs in your own nation absolutely take precedence over the affairs of others in other parts of the world. How can you effectively help anyone anywhere else if you aren’t keeping your own house in order and it starts to collapse (descend into fascism)? You made this comment like some kind of “gotcha” but it’s just common sense, something you appear to be extremely short on.
You spend all your time on this platform whining like a baby, providing no facts, calling everyone genocide supporters, and accomplishing exactly nothing, other than maybe convincing others through your incessant whining to not vote or vote for candidates that cannot, under any circumstances, win.
You are less than worthless and provide nothing of value to the conversation.
Don’t care, didn’t read your fascist bullshit. Already said all I have to say to you.
Tonight @ 10: Loser Continues Losing
Just to confirm. First I was a genocide supporter, then a loyalist, now a fascist. Every time you open your mouth, you lose credibility.
I guess go somewhere else where someone might actually listen to your whiny bullshit. So long.
You’re all of those things at once. I only “lose credibility” in the eyes of genocide supporting, fascist party loyalists like yourself. The sort of people who view foreigners as inherently lesser beings because of where they happened to be born. I don’t want to have credibility in your eyes, I’m glad that you hate me. Hate me more, fascist. You’ll have to if you want to catch up for how much I hate you.
We know you read it. You just have nothing of value to add to the discourse. “muh both parties bad the cOntRoLeD duOpoLy”. Just insane out of touch privileged takes
Lmao. Yes, I care so much about what a fascist who views foreigners as lesser beings thinks, that I couldn’t help but read it! And his beliefs in the inherent superiority of Americans is just so compelling and persuasive, I just couldn’t think of any possible counterargument!
No. I don’t lie. I dismiss everything he says out of hand because he is a fascist. And if you agree with him, then you are too.
If you reject the very notion of equality, why on God’s green earth would I give a rat’s ass what you think?
It’s utterly insane for you to call me “privileged” for believing in equality! If you reject equality, then by that logic what the fuck would it matter if I’m “privileged?” By your logic, that just means I’m better than you. Because fuck equality, right? Don’t try to co-opt left-wing language while rejecting the fundamental premises of leftism.
The sitting president in his second term was never the lesser of two evils.
deleted by creator
I need anti-voting leftists to understand that to the eyes of average civilians they’re basically rapture people
Anti voting leftists are a tool of the Right.
Anyone that doesn’t vote is at the bottom of the societal ladder, as far as I’m concerned. Not even on the ladder. In the gutter getting peed on by stray cats. They’re trash.
French protesters have been putting even most other European protesters to shame, yet France is pretty far from being the most socialdemocratic European country.
Knowing little of the matter: French protest a lot but seem to achieve fairly little. The Yellow Jackets wreaked havoc of the country for a couple of months… got nothing. Current protests don’t have a real political agenda other than “this is not okay” and I haven’t heard of a political response other than wait-it-out.
this is completely wrong, institutions and companies respond most to protests, then they have to invest additional effort to pretend as if the protests did not work, so that people will not protest as much
French have more rights than Americans and institutions and corporations fear more taking them away from them.
I think France should rather compare itself to its less protest-happy peers, not some third-world shithole.
I haven’t heard of a political response other than wait-it-out.
This is generally how it’s done here in Germany, too. Seems like the state understood at some point that protests don’t actually do anything, and the more radical activity that might actually make a difference is generally only a pretty low amount of people - this part seems to be bigger in France, but far from big enough.
But the have the lowest retirement age of Europe, that’s all worth it!
According to Wikipedia, that’s actually Ukraine at 60 years, 2-7 years lower than France. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_in_Europe.
As far as I understand, in France you can retire early (possibly as early as 62) if you worked for 43 years, otherwise you retire at up to 67 years. And nowadays it’s pretty common to lose your job in your 50s and spend the rest of your time before retirement underemployed, which is going to make it rather difficult for a lot of people to retire at 62.
Asking for a friend, how does one lead a revolution? I’ve always assumed it was more about the universe lining up, right place/right time sort of thing and someone/someone’s are just there at the time, not that anyone really ever set out to “lead the revolution” as a job
Same. If there was a pipeline I’d surely be in it by now.
I can’t answer, but I can tell you that if your revolutionary group is online (Discord, Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp), you already have a watcher in your midst.
They can’t watch everywhere, but bots can, and the owners of these companies are certainly on the lookout for certain words and phrases. It’s not even vaguely secure.
Given that, I don’t think that revolutionary groups like the Black Panthers, Minutemen, et al are a viable option today. Whatever your online group is, it must be able to withstand discovery and observation. Only small cells with in-person meetings can avoid detection. Unions, churches, and organizations are all virtually public.
People ask “why aren’t they doing anything”, meanwhile there are hundreds of arrests all over the country with regularity. They’re getting arrested shortly after organizing… and the full extent is not going to be openly reported. So you see hints here and there about “plots” with a mention of “informer” at best. (likely the company that was used to communicate).
So, in my opinion, all that’s left is spontaneous eruption. It could be someone setting themselves on fire, an assassination, war, food shortage, economic collapse, and so on. It won’t be because it was lead by a Robert the Bruce
Most protesters don’t drive 14 hours for a protest. Cities usually have people around.
Every permutation of LateStageCapitalism I’ve ever seen acts like a gop honeypot to keep people from voting.
LateStageCapitalism on Lemmy is almost assuredly exactly that. It is run by a single crybaby mod (Godless Commie) that non-stop espouses quitter bullshit and deletes comments and bans anyone that disagrees with his shitstain opinions. No one should be visiting that sub. If it isn’t a honeypot, it may as well be.
LSC will also ban you for telling people that they are a honeypot to get people to stop voting.
I wear my ban from that shitstain sub with beaming pride.
“Prepare for revolution!” exclaims your friend; “is that possible?
Yes. Not only is it possible but absolutely necessary.
“Do you refer to secret preparations, armed bands, and men to lead the fight?” you ask.
No, my friend, not that at all.
If the social revolution meant only street battles and barricades, then the preparations you have in mind would be the thing. But revolution does not signify that; at least the fighting phase of it is the smallest and least important part.
The truth is, in modern times revolution does not mean barricades any more. These belong to the past. The social revolution is a far different and more essential matter: it involves the reorganization of the entire life of society. You will agree that this is certainly not to be accomplished by mere fighting.
Of course, the obstacles in the path of the social reconstruction have to be removed. That is to say the means of that reconstruction must be secured by the masses. Those means are at present in the hands of government and capitalism, and these will resist every effort to deprive them of their power and possessions. That resistance will involve a fight. But remember that the fight is not the main thing, is not the object, not the revolution. It is only the preface, the preliminary to it.
It is very necessary that you get this straight. Most people have very confused notions about revolution. To them it means just fighting, smashing things, destroying. It is the same as if rolling up your sleeves for work should be considered as the work itself that you have to do. The fighting part of revolution is merely the rolling up of your sleeves. The real, actual task is ahead.
What is that task?
“The destruction of the existing conditions,” you reply.
True. But conditions are not destroyed by breaking and smashing things. You can’t destroy wage slavery by wrecking the machinery in mills and factories, can you? You won’t destroy government by setting fire to the White House.
To think of revolution in terms of violence and destruction is to misinterpret and falsify the whole idea of it. In practical application such a conception is bound to lead to disastrous results.
When a great thinker, like the famous Anarchist Bakunin, speaks of revolution as destruction, he has in mind the ideas of authority and obedience which are to be destroyed. It is for this reason that he said that destruction means construction, for to destroy a false belief is indeed most constructive work.
But the average man, and too often even the revolutionist, thoughtlessly talks of revolution as being exclusively destructive in the physical sense of the word. That is a wrong and dangerous view. The sooner we get rid of it the better.
Revolution, and particularly the social revolution, is not destruction but construction. This cannot be sufficiently emphasized, and unless we clearly realize it, revolution will remain only destructive and thereby always a failure. Naturally revolution is accompanied by violence, but you might as well say that building a new house in place of an old one is destructive because you have first to tear down the old one. Revolution is the culminating point of a certain evolutionary process: it begins with a violent upheaval. It is the rolling up of your sleeves preparatory to starting the actual work.
Indeed, consider what the social revolution is to do, what it is to accomplish, and you will perceive that it comes not to destroy but to build.
What, really, is there to destroy?
The wealth of the rich? Nay, that is something we want the whole of society to enjoy.
The land, the fields, the coal mines, the railroads, factories, mills, and shops? These we want not to destroy but to make useful to the entire people.
The telegraphs, telephones, the means of communication and distribution — do we want to destroy them? No, we want them to serve the needs of all.
What, then, is the social revolution to destroy? It is to take over things for the general benefit, not to destroy them. It is to reorganize conditions for the public welfare.
Not to destroy is the aim of the revolution, but to reconstruct and rebuild.
From Now and After by Alexander Berkman. Chapter 26: Preparation. Written in the 1920s.
Available to read or download in multiple formats, for free, here: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-berkman-what-is-communist-anarchism#toc28
Where do I sign up?
