I didn’t say accelerationism. Accelerationism is a fascist position.
I’m saying that the issue here is people not realizing that,
as an analogy,
Being threatened with a gun to the head vs being threatened with a dart containing deadly radioactive oncogenic particles should be treated the same. The problem is optimism and hope, it’s what allows conservatives to play the long game.
And in terms of the strategy you hold dear, understand that capitalists and their fascist pets will bring down the whole biosphere.
Essentially, the ethics of this aren’t about “lesser evil”, they’re about how willing are you to burden the youngest generations and soon to be born with an exponentially more difficult (deadly) challenge, so you can live your life in the “normal” way and keep your head down.
When you’re talking about the merits of the greater evil, i.e. speeding towards fascism so people are more likely to take direct revolutionary action, you’re talking about accelerationism. However you try to justify it to yourself, that’s what you’re promoting. And it’s fundamentally a gamble, you’re hoping that it leads to a regime that can be deposed, and a populace willing and able to depose it. The gamble could very easily just lead to enduring fascism.
I use the tools at my disposal. Voting for the lesser evil buys time and fosters a slightly, but distinctly, more favorable political landscape. That gives people the opportunity to organize, to spread their message, to build campaigns for representatives that represent them, and elevate those representatives to higher offices.
how willing are you to burden the youngest generations and soon to be born with an exponentially more difficult (deadly) challenge, so you can live your life in the “normal” way and keep your head down.
The irony is palpable. This is precisely the outcome of your strategy: give the young generations a despotic fascist regime they’ll have to overthrow with chaos and bloodshed, rather than a functioning democracy that they can push to the left.
Yes, our system is dominated by capitalists and fascists, but that’s precisely because 30+% of people refuse to use their vote. The system has within it the mechanisms for meaningful change, fantasies about a popular uprising against a despotic government are childish and irresponsible.
“The hard way” being you not having to articulate any coherent or effective praxis? Your strategy makes no sense for your goals. That kind of dramatic idealism gets innocent people killed, and doesn’t even yield the results you want. Real life isn’t a dystopian YA novel.
I’m not being idealistic, you are. That’s idealism, it’s just extremely mediocre. You’re suffering from the belief that you can make incremental progress when you can’t. For example, if you’re American, check your rights with regards to family planning. How’s that going?
The problem is that you’re not radical enough, and the future now can only be radical, there is no more room for “middle of the road” incrementalism.
“I know you are but what am I?” is neither coherent nor effective praxis.
Our rights with family planning were demolished because fascists vote, and idealists like you don’t. Why would you think this supports your opinion? We’re suffering from your belief that incremental progress isn’t worth it.
Why don’t you focus on whether you’re going to choose your childhood friend or the dreamy bad boy in your dystopian revolution fantasy, and leave political discourse to the grownups. Fewer innocent people will die that way.
I didn’t say accelerationism. Accelerationism is a fascist position.
I’m saying that the issue here is people not realizing that,
as an analogy,
Being threatened with a gun to the head vs being threatened with a dart containing deadly radioactive oncogenic particles should be treated the same. The problem is optimism and hope, it’s what allows conservatives to play the long game.
And in terms of the strategy you hold dear, understand that capitalists and their fascist pets will bring down the whole biosphere.
Essentially, the ethics of this aren’t about “lesser evil”, they’re about how willing are you to burden the youngest generations and soon to be born with an exponentially more difficult (deadly) challenge, so you can live your life in the “normal” way and keep your head down.
When you’re talking about the merits of the greater evil, i.e. speeding towards fascism so people are more likely to take direct revolutionary action, you’re talking about accelerationism. However you try to justify it to yourself, that’s what you’re promoting. And it’s fundamentally a gamble, you’re hoping that it leads to a regime that can be deposed, and a populace willing and able to depose it. The gamble could very easily just lead to enduring fascism.
I use the tools at my disposal. Voting for the lesser evil buys time and fosters a slightly, but distinctly, more favorable political landscape. That gives people the opportunity to organize, to spread their message, to build campaigns for representatives that represent them, and elevate those representatives to higher offices.
The irony is palpable. This is precisely the outcome of your strategy: give the young generations a despotic fascist regime they’ll have to overthrow with chaos and bloodshed, rather than a functioning democracy that they can push to the left.
Yes, our system is dominated by capitalists and fascists, but that’s precisely because 30+% of people refuse to use their vote. The system has within it the mechanisms for meaningful change, fantasies about a popular uprising against a despotic government are childish and irresponsible.
I guess you’ll learn the hard way.
Learn what, exactly?
How you are wrong
“The hard way” being you not having to articulate any coherent or effective praxis? Your strategy makes no sense for your goals. That kind of dramatic idealism gets innocent people killed, and doesn’t even yield the results you want. Real life isn’t a dystopian YA novel.
I’m not being idealistic, you are. That’s idealism, it’s just extremely mediocre. You’re suffering from the belief that you can make incremental progress when you can’t. For example, if you’re American, check your rights with regards to family planning. How’s that going?
The problem is that you’re not radical enough, and the future now can only be radical, there is no more room for “middle of the road” incrementalism.
“I know you are but what am I?” is neither coherent nor effective praxis.
Our rights with family planning were demolished because fascists vote, and idealists like you don’t. Why would you think this supports your opinion? We’re suffering from your belief that incremental progress isn’t worth it.
Why don’t you focus on whether you’re going to choose your childhood friend or the dreamy bad boy in your dystopian revolution fantasy, and leave political discourse to the grownups. Fewer innocent people will die that way.