I was surprised no one else was calling for a presidential vote boycott. Thank you! I used to live in “blue” NY, now I am in “red” OH. Since our respective states are pretty much decided already by electorial college, boycott may be the most effective way to send a message of dissent to their botched system of representation. Bravo👏
I did the same in our last election: I didn't vote. The left's only strenght is to remember that the current government has roots in fascism. But the left had its opportunities and wasted them. Where's the left?
Identitarian politics is another form of bourgeois politics. Those whose skin color is the same shade of the majority should not be cowed by those brandishing fashionable ideologies forged in elite circles for the purpose of division and the dismantling of the possibility of collective action. The longer this knee-jerk reaction to race persists the longer black and brown folks will continue to wait for the solution which can only come in the only true form of race-blindness, the collective action of the multiracial working class. Until then, we will have to do our best to call out the weak tea defenses of those who have yet to understand that identity politics is ruling class ideology.
That you would in any way extract an interpretation from my reply a belief in anything coming from the right indicates to me that you are not sufficiently informed about the meaning of solidarity and collective action, both concepts which are firmly rooted in left political discourse. You may continue to try to reduce my beliefs as mere symptoms of racial privilege but that does nothing to address the thesis which I have proposed. The only thing you have accomplished so far is telling me that you think white people are not allowed to boycott an election because their skin color blinds them to their responsibility to vote for Kamala Harris which strikes me as an unserious argument.
You are allowed to boycott whatever you want, and I will never try to stop you. However, identitarianism is a far-right movement rooted in Nationalism. Your "thesis" proves nothing. Stop trying to hide behind a bunch of $4 words. You are misusing half of them.
I welcome disagreement with my statements on this forum but not the kind of aggressive and provocative combativeness your posts have so far displayed. I didn't say "Identitariansim" which is the movement you're talking about, but "identitarian politics," though I admit I should have said "identity politics." However, even though I basically corrected myself at the end of my initial post and even though it is abundantly clear what I am trying to say, you nonetheless are choosing to exploit typographical errors and some frustration with your ability to consult a dictionary as supposed gotchas, which they aren't. Get over my word usage and start actually rebutting what I've said. You've now added another thought, that my thesis proves nothing, to your first thought about my supposed responsibility to vote for Kamala Harris. Is that the extent of your reply? If so, I can try to respond to such a meager rejoinder, but if not, do tell me what your response is to my post and don't be shy about telling me what you really believe in, rather than looking for gotchas. I'm not here for them and if that's all you're interested in, it's been nice chatting.
When you misuse words, it makes your argument muddled. It sounds like you are reappropriating phrases like, "identity politics" and "race blindness" to fit a narrative that you want to argue about. Categorizing race as "identity politics" dismisses the cultural bases of power and critical race theory.
No one said you have a responsibility to vote for anyone. You're projecting.
I've been following that candidacy. Like with many other formations on the left there is great value in simply being able to hear alternative messaging loud and clear, which that party is certainly doing. But I'm concerned that, also like with many other formations, that it is really just another NGO storefront. My thinking on the Palestine question has undergone a similar reconsideration, not in the sense of looking for a different result, but rather in the sense of looking for a sphere of influence that is closer to my politics: the fact is that the pro-Pal movement in the US, such as it is, has been captured by the NGO sector and therefore become a subtle Dem Party recruitment organ. You can see an extension of this in Al-Jazeera's coverage. They are unequivocal when it comes to Gaza, but then all of a sudden, on other matters, such as Ukraine, they are essentially regurgitating Deep State Dem Party propaganda. This tells you that something very conspicuous is happening with regard to the pro-Pal movement, that, like with the DSA a decade ago, it is actually a way of ushering back upwardly mobile college-age radicals back into the Dem Party fold. I can't help but detect a whiff of this sort of NGO-ification of the left in the la Cruz ticket. I have no illusions about the Greens' commitment to the struggle for socialism which is to say I know that working class politics is not their forte. However, out of all of the possible options, to me, they constitute the least damaging vote I could cast. They aren't at all connected to the Dems and they are large enough to cause upsets and to register large discontent. I want to be part of it.
I think the Democratic Party has made its stance on Palestine very clear - they are actually pro-Zionist. Having engaged with people from different groups at rallies and teach-ins, it certainly doesn’t look like there’s any move for Dem recruitment at pro-Palestine events, at least not in the Boston area. While I totally see what you mean wrt Al-Jazeera’s coverage, I have to disagree with you about PSL being “just another NGO storefront.” Unlike DSA, which refuses to break with the Dems despite being fully aware of (and speaking out about) all the rot in the Dem Party, PSL actually walks the walk - from tenant organizing to union work to this. They are also working with the Green Party. Stein has told people to vote for de la Cruz and vice versa in states where one is on the ballot but not the other. I’m heartened by your closing sentence, though. It sounds like you might vote after all. I applaud you doing so even though I am planning to vote for a different party & candidate. And I look forward to hearing about your future endeavors in organizing and agitating through the Green Party.
I miss our debates! I'm glad you're on here. I'm thinking about starting a leftist discussion group on here. I hope you'd consider participating!
To reply to your post: I doubt I'll do much organizing for the Green Party. Still waiting for an authentic Labor Party to emerge. But I will vote for Stein because it's my belief that it is the loudest way I can register discontent at the ballot box.
I see what you mean about PSL and agree with you. I'll look into it further to see if my theory pans out or not.
Of course the Dems are pro-Zionist. They're a capitalist party and so they have to support capital flows which means supporting Israel whatever they do which means supporting Zionism. But this doesn't mean that they don't know how to capture radical discontent. Organizations like Democracy Now for example are experts at this: they make you feel like you're speaking truth to power and then they pull the rug on you with pro-establishment Trump Derangement Syndrome boilerplate propaganda, basically insuring that, no matter how many pro-Pal protests you went to, the guilt will be too much for you at the ballot box and you'll pull that lever for the Dems.
Why weren't there any pro-Pal protests outside the MSG rally? Or at any Trump rally, for that matter? Because they know no one is going to pay lip service there, whereas the Dems will. But lip service is not enough and all of those organizers, all the Madea Benjamins of the world, know exactly that all they're getting, and all anyone else who wants to see change is getting, is lip service.
Hah! I was afraid you’d think, “oh no! Here’s this pain in the ass again!” I’m no longer active on Twitter, but I saw you say neither are you. That type of forum takes a mental toll. This feels less charged and more like a conversation. Yes, please count me in for a leftist discussion group.
I will admit the Democracy Now guilt machine has worked on me. Like a typical recovering Catholic, a little guilt goes a long way on me. My protest will be not voting for my state representative, Katherine Clark, due to her refusal to meet with Palestinian families in her district. I’m writing in “Not Another Bomb” instead. But for the presidential vote, I am trying to heed Cori Bush’s words and “vote strategically” accepting that voting with my conscience wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans anyway. Or at least that’s how I’m justifying it - the mental gymnastics, I know…. Regardless of who wins, however, we will keep protesting for a ceasefire. The ugly truth is that one side will continue to beat and arrest protesters; the other will kill them. The protests of 2020 are proof of that.
Yeah, Twitter brought out a very ugly side of me and I haven't looked back.
Well, I'm a lapsed Catholic so I wonder what that says about me vis a vis the guilt machine!
I've recently been very moved by a group of Marxists called Sublation Media. There's nowhere online that explores right action on the left like them. They are extremely critical of anti-imperialism and construe it as a rout towards depoliticizing the left. Pro-Pal protests, social justice, "ceasefire now" they all speak out against it as a distraction from the proper work of focussing on organizing the domestic working class. At first I truly recoiled from this line of thinking, but the more I hear it getting fleshed out the more I begin to come around to it.
I wrote in my piece that lesser-evilsim is a form of voting your conscience so I don't think there's any need to call it anything other than voting in a way that you believe matters. No one gets to say what one's purpose in voting is. Clearly, you believe this is the most important rationale for your vote so that sounds like voting your conscience to me.
I mean, I'm voting strategically too, the way I see it. So I see that as another way of employing Bush's words.
That said, I still am incredibly interested in geopolitics. Are you familiar with John Mearshimer? He's someone that I always listen to. His realist views on Ukraine and Israel are incontrovertible as far as I'm concerned. He predicted what would be happening in Ukraine in 2014!
Glad you're interested in the discussion group. I'll keep you posted. It's still in the brainstorming phase . . . .
The US is so strongly ahold of the media that sometimes I feel more implicated in your politics than in mine. I am from the DR, and notice how similar our systems and parties work. I agree with you on everything. I loathe the so-called 'democracy' as it is just a game of play pretend which gives us a sense of collective power over a leitmotiv that is (mostly) rigged and steadfast. Online, everything *feels* apocalyptic, making it hard to know if the end of America is proximal or if people are just extrapolating their insecurities into politics, with a fair responsiveness to do so, because it seems like a showcase of incertitude and fear.
On the last local elections I too decided to use my right by not voting, and millions of people didn't. There are only two parties which are antagonists of one another--as stupid as it sounds--with the current one having the job of keeping the other out of office; there is no true salvation if the only party who I and others believe could really turn things around, won't have the slight possibility of the major vote likely ever.
I empathize on why Americans are scared and disheartened, the circumstances seem astronomical and the state of the country that is being proposed if Trump wins is inhumane for a lot of minorities. I can't express much other than an opinion, since I'm merely an expectator, but, in the big scheme of things, we do live under the same stars, and I feel for you and the effects that the next government will have on the collective. God bless.
Thank you so much for your sympathy and your reply. It was good to hear about a person from DR's perspective and how it can be similar to mine. For me, my adoption of Marxist-Leninist beliefs cured me of my belief in my government's insufferable solicitation for their bullshit stories about which president is better than the other. The system is rigged, electoralism is an insufficient strategy, change comes from below, from collective action against corporate oligarchy. There's no other way.
I thoroughly understand and agree with everything you said. My two sons and I were having this same discussion last week before we all voted for Kamala. We do want to effect change and wanted to vote for Jill, but the fear of losing the right to vote, forever, due to Trump winning drove us to vote for Kamala against Trump. I will not loose hope that next time I will feel safe voting for the one whose beliefs align best with my own, for now I have to do all I can to ensure all citizens are allowed to vote in future elections.
How voting for Trump is going to be "antiestablishment" when Trump is being part of that elite who belongs to the establishment? Trump used to donate for Democrats like the Clintons and locally (NY) for a Republican like Giuliani.
So nope Trump is not the pill against the establishment. Both are ruling for the same owner.
You are both right and wrong. You are right that Trump is part of the elite and that, at the end of the day, the same owner prevails. You are wrong in that Trump still constitutes a legitimate antiestablishment response. In End Times Peter Turchin writes about political disintegration happening through a battle between elites and counter-elites. Trump is just such a "counter-elite" who is using antiestablishment sentiment to gain political control. As such he will actually bring real antiestablishment efforts to the government should he win.
I was surprised no one else was calling for a presidential vote boycott. Thank you! I used to live in “blue” NY, now I am in “red” OH. Since our respective states are pretty much decided already by electorial college, boycott may be the most effective way to send a message of dissent to their botched system of representation. Bravo👏
I did the same in our last election: I didn't vote. The left's only strenght is to remember that the current government has roots in fascism. But the left had its opportunities and wasted them. Where's the left?
I loved this essay. It's easy to get caught up in the "Trump or Kamala?" debate but you offered a perspective that was refreshing. Thank you.
I guess it is easy for white men to sit this election out. Nothing changes for them.
Identitarian politics is another form of bourgeois politics. Those whose skin color is the same shade of the majority should not be cowed by those brandishing fashionable ideologies forged in elite circles for the purpose of division and the dismantling of the possibility of collective action. The longer this knee-jerk reaction to race persists the longer black and brown folks will continue to wait for the solution which can only come in the only true form of race-blindness, the collective action of the multiracial working class. Until then, we will have to do our best to call out the weak tea defenses of those who have yet to understand that identity politics is ruling class ideology.
Are you seriously quoting far-right political ideology? Spoken like a person who has never had to deal with systemic oppression.
That you would in any way extract an interpretation from my reply a belief in anything coming from the right indicates to me that you are not sufficiently informed about the meaning of solidarity and collective action, both concepts which are firmly rooted in left political discourse. You may continue to try to reduce my beliefs as mere symptoms of racial privilege but that does nothing to address the thesis which I have proposed. The only thing you have accomplished so far is telling me that you think white people are not allowed to boycott an election because their skin color blinds them to their responsibility to vote for Kamala Harris which strikes me as an unserious argument.
You are allowed to boycott whatever you want, and I will never try to stop you. However, identitarianism is a far-right movement rooted in Nationalism. Your "thesis" proves nothing. Stop trying to hide behind a bunch of $4 words. You are misusing half of them.
I welcome disagreement with my statements on this forum but not the kind of aggressive and provocative combativeness your posts have so far displayed. I didn't say "Identitariansim" which is the movement you're talking about, but "identitarian politics," though I admit I should have said "identity politics." However, even though I basically corrected myself at the end of my initial post and even though it is abundantly clear what I am trying to say, you nonetheless are choosing to exploit typographical errors and some frustration with your ability to consult a dictionary as supposed gotchas, which they aren't. Get over my word usage and start actually rebutting what I've said. You've now added another thought, that my thesis proves nothing, to your first thought about my supposed responsibility to vote for Kamala Harris. Is that the extent of your reply? If so, I can try to respond to such a meager rejoinder, but if not, do tell me what your response is to my post and don't be shy about telling me what you really believe in, rather than looking for gotchas. I'm not here for them and if that's all you're interested in, it's been nice chatting.
When you misuse words, it makes your argument muddled. It sounds like you are reappropriating phrases like, "identity politics" and "race blindness" to fit a narrative that you want to argue about. Categorizing race as "identity politics" dismisses the cultural bases of power and critical race theory.
No one said you have a responsibility to vote for anyone. You're projecting.
You might want to consider voting for the socialist candidate, Claudia de la Cruz.
I've been following that candidacy. Like with many other formations on the left there is great value in simply being able to hear alternative messaging loud and clear, which that party is certainly doing. But I'm concerned that, also like with many other formations, that it is really just another NGO storefront. My thinking on the Palestine question has undergone a similar reconsideration, not in the sense of looking for a different result, but rather in the sense of looking for a sphere of influence that is closer to my politics: the fact is that the pro-Pal movement in the US, such as it is, has been captured by the NGO sector and therefore become a subtle Dem Party recruitment organ. You can see an extension of this in Al-Jazeera's coverage. They are unequivocal when it comes to Gaza, but then all of a sudden, on other matters, such as Ukraine, they are essentially regurgitating Deep State Dem Party propaganda. This tells you that something very conspicuous is happening with regard to the pro-Pal movement, that, like with the DSA a decade ago, it is actually a way of ushering back upwardly mobile college-age radicals back into the Dem Party fold. I can't help but detect a whiff of this sort of NGO-ification of the left in the la Cruz ticket. I have no illusions about the Greens' commitment to the struggle for socialism which is to say I know that working class politics is not their forte. However, out of all of the possible options, to me, they constitute the least damaging vote I could cast. They aren't at all connected to the Dems and they are large enough to cause upsets and to register large discontent. I want to be part of it.
I think the Democratic Party has made its stance on Palestine very clear - they are actually pro-Zionist. Having engaged with people from different groups at rallies and teach-ins, it certainly doesn’t look like there’s any move for Dem recruitment at pro-Palestine events, at least not in the Boston area. While I totally see what you mean wrt Al-Jazeera’s coverage, I have to disagree with you about PSL being “just another NGO storefront.” Unlike DSA, which refuses to break with the Dems despite being fully aware of (and speaking out about) all the rot in the Dem Party, PSL actually walks the walk - from tenant organizing to union work to this. They are also working with the Green Party. Stein has told people to vote for de la Cruz and vice versa in states where one is on the ballot but not the other. I’m heartened by your closing sentence, though. It sounds like you might vote after all. I applaud you doing so even though I am planning to vote for a different party & candidate. And I look forward to hearing about your future endeavors in organizing and agitating through the Green Party.
I miss our debates! I'm glad you're on here. I'm thinking about starting a leftist discussion group on here. I hope you'd consider participating!
To reply to your post: I doubt I'll do much organizing for the Green Party. Still waiting for an authentic Labor Party to emerge. But I will vote for Stein because it's my belief that it is the loudest way I can register discontent at the ballot box.
I see what you mean about PSL and agree with you. I'll look into it further to see if my theory pans out or not.
Of course the Dems are pro-Zionist. They're a capitalist party and so they have to support capital flows which means supporting Israel whatever they do which means supporting Zionism. But this doesn't mean that they don't know how to capture radical discontent. Organizations like Democracy Now for example are experts at this: they make you feel like you're speaking truth to power and then they pull the rug on you with pro-establishment Trump Derangement Syndrome boilerplate propaganda, basically insuring that, no matter how many pro-Pal protests you went to, the guilt will be too much for you at the ballot box and you'll pull that lever for the Dems.
Why weren't there any pro-Pal protests outside the MSG rally? Or at any Trump rally, for that matter? Because they know no one is going to pay lip service there, whereas the Dems will. But lip service is not enough and all of those organizers, all the Madea Benjamins of the world, know exactly that all they're getting, and all anyone else who wants to see change is getting, is lip service.
Hah! I was afraid you’d think, “oh no! Here’s this pain in the ass again!” I’m no longer active on Twitter, but I saw you say neither are you. That type of forum takes a mental toll. This feels less charged and more like a conversation. Yes, please count me in for a leftist discussion group.
I will admit the Democracy Now guilt machine has worked on me. Like a typical recovering Catholic, a little guilt goes a long way on me. My protest will be not voting for my state representative, Katherine Clark, due to her refusal to meet with Palestinian families in her district. I’m writing in “Not Another Bomb” instead. But for the presidential vote, I am trying to heed Cori Bush’s words and “vote strategically” accepting that voting with my conscience wouldn’t amount to a hill of beans anyway. Or at least that’s how I’m justifying it - the mental gymnastics, I know…. Regardless of who wins, however, we will keep protesting for a ceasefire. The ugly truth is that one side will continue to beat and arrest protesters; the other will kill them. The protests of 2020 are proof of that.
Yeah, Twitter brought out a very ugly side of me and I haven't looked back.
Well, I'm a lapsed Catholic so I wonder what that says about me vis a vis the guilt machine!
I've recently been very moved by a group of Marxists called Sublation Media. There's nowhere online that explores right action on the left like them. They are extremely critical of anti-imperialism and construe it as a rout towards depoliticizing the left. Pro-Pal protests, social justice, "ceasefire now" they all speak out against it as a distraction from the proper work of focussing on organizing the domestic working class. At first I truly recoiled from this line of thinking, but the more I hear it getting fleshed out the more I begin to come around to it.
I wrote in my piece that lesser-evilsim is a form of voting your conscience so I don't think there's any need to call it anything other than voting in a way that you believe matters. No one gets to say what one's purpose in voting is. Clearly, you believe this is the most important rationale for your vote so that sounds like voting your conscience to me.
I mean, I'm voting strategically too, the way I see it. So I see that as another way of employing Bush's words.
That said, I still am incredibly interested in geopolitics. Are you familiar with John Mearshimer? He's someone that I always listen to. His realist views on Ukraine and Israel are incontrovertible as far as I'm concerned. He predicted what would be happening in Ukraine in 2014!
Glad you're interested in the discussion group. I'll keep you posted. It's still in the brainstorming phase . . . .
The US is so strongly ahold of the media that sometimes I feel more implicated in your politics than in mine. I am from the DR, and notice how similar our systems and parties work. I agree with you on everything. I loathe the so-called 'democracy' as it is just a game of play pretend which gives us a sense of collective power over a leitmotiv that is (mostly) rigged and steadfast. Online, everything *feels* apocalyptic, making it hard to know if the end of America is proximal or if people are just extrapolating their insecurities into politics, with a fair responsiveness to do so, because it seems like a showcase of incertitude and fear.
On the last local elections I too decided to use my right by not voting, and millions of people didn't. There are only two parties which are antagonists of one another--as stupid as it sounds--with the current one having the job of keeping the other out of office; there is no true salvation if the only party who I and others believe could really turn things around, won't have the slight possibility of the major vote likely ever.
I empathize on why Americans are scared and disheartened, the circumstances seem astronomical and the state of the country that is being proposed if Trump wins is inhumane for a lot of minorities. I can't express much other than an opinion, since I'm merely an expectator, but, in the big scheme of things, we do live under the same stars, and I feel for you and the effects that the next government will have on the collective. God bless.
Thank you so much for your sympathy and your reply. It was good to hear about a person from DR's perspective and how it can be similar to mine. For me, my adoption of Marxist-Leninist beliefs cured me of my belief in my government's insufferable solicitation for their bullshit stories about which president is better than the other. The system is rigged, electoralism is an insufficient strategy, change comes from below, from collective action against corporate oligarchy. There's no other way.
I thoroughly understand and agree with everything you said. My two sons and I were having this same discussion last week before we all voted for Kamala. We do want to effect change and wanted to vote for Jill, but the fear of losing the right to vote, forever, due to Trump winning drove us to vote for Kamala against Trump. I will not loose hope that next time I will feel safe voting for the one whose beliefs align best with my own, for now I have to do all I can to ensure all citizens are allowed to vote in future elections.
Thank you
How voting for Trump is going to be "antiestablishment" when Trump is being part of that elite who belongs to the establishment? Trump used to donate for Democrats like the Clintons and locally (NY) for a Republican like Giuliani.
So nope Trump is not the pill against the establishment. Both are ruling for the same owner.
You are both right and wrong. You are right that Trump is part of the elite and that, at the end of the day, the same owner prevails. You are wrong in that Trump still constitutes a legitimate antiestablishment response. In End Times Peter Turchin writes about political disintegration happening through a battle between elites and counter-elites. Trump is just such a "counter-elite" who is using antiestablishment sentiment to gain political control. As such he will actually bring real antiestablishment efforts to the government should he win.