What the US 2024 “Election” Will Resolve:

[Holy_Seduction]

War? Inequality? Dictatorship?

This glorious “election” resolves nothing.

Not one crisis. Nothing.

As the article states..

“The level of uncertainty and menace that surrounds the election process reflects the extent of the breakdown of American democracy.”

We put two spiders in a jar, make them fight.

Agree, disagree, and why.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

War? Inequality? Dictatorship?

This glorious “election” resolves nothing.

Not one crisis. Nothing.

As the article states..

“The level of uncertainty and menace that surrounds the election process reflects the extent of the breakdown of American democracy.”

We put two spiders in a jar, make them fight.

Agree, disagree, and why.

This election is about whether democracy will prevail in the United States or whether we will be ruled by oligarchs.

 

[ll74]

Duplicate thread

 

[Wat_Tyler]

WSWS is often interesting, and in this case, they have a good point. We've been proper-fucked for awhile now, and it was sneaky and hard to determine when started. My current best guess is Bush I as VP from Election 1980. It's been generally downhill from there. All those cunts are in on it.

 

[Politruk]

This election is about whether democracy will prevail in the United States or whether we will be ruled by oligarchs.

We'll still be ruled by the plutocrats either way. Nevertheless, the choice matters -- it is only the Dems who offer any hope at all, in the very long run, of defeating the plutocracy.

 

[Bn2f]

WSWS is often interesting, and in this case, they have a good point. We've been proper-fucked for awhile now, and it was sneaky and hard to determine when started. My current best guess is Bush I as VP from Election 1980. It's been generally downhill from there. All those cunts are in on it.

This person is too lazy to vote.
Too unpatriotic.
He’s a nobody. Invisible.
Even reading his post, he says nothing of substance.
Everyone should skip over his opinions.

 

[Politruk]

War? Inequality? Dictatorship?

This glorious “election” resolves nothing.

Not one crisis. Nothing.

As the article states..

“The level of uncertainty and menace that surrounds the election process reflects the extent of the breakdown of American democracy.”

We put two spiders in a jar, make them fight.

Agree, disagree, and why.

What is this "Fourth International"? Something Trotskyist?

 

[MajorRewrite]

This glorious “election” resolves nothing.

Putting “election” in quotes implies the election isn’t real. It is real. Millions have already voted.

I hope that helps.

 

[Politruk]

Putting “election” in quotes implies the election isn’t real. It is real. Millions have already voted.

I hope that helps.

The point, I suppose, is that it is a sham, because we only ever get to choose between candidates acceptable to the plutocracy.

 

[MajorRewrite]

The point, I suppose, is that it is a sham, because we only ever get to choose between candidates acceptable to the plutocracy.

You may be sane-washing the original post.

 

[butters]

it will resolve whether or not the USA populace will kick trump to the damned curb like they did 4 years ago... if they do, he'll not be back: too old, too extreme to get the backing for a future bid.

if they don't, if trump wins this by the landslide he predicts, then democracy has been sold out to the likes of musk and the other billionaires determined to see trump in place for their own benefit and fuck the country.

this election is HUGELY important.

vote!

 

[Holy_Seduction]

whether democracy … or whether we will be ruled by oligarchs.

In context of the article cited, said “election” is about oligarchy [as you state], economic crisis and social inequality; World War III [we are in its opening stages now], and its inevitable escalation to thermonuclear apocalypse; fascism and the threat of military police dictatorship, ongoing pandemic and environmental collapse.

The article continues by saying that :

“The political system in the United States is thoroughly sclerotic and undemocratic. Every aspect of its structure—from ballot access laws aimed at third parties, to the domination of money, to the role of the corporate media—is designed to systematically exclude any genuine expression of the interests of the working class.”

I said that no crisis bestriding the US regime will be resolved. Why? I’ve not found these issues addressed in any thorough manner. There is neither consensus nor support for such policies. The hard work of preparing the public for such solutions is absent. Nor can I see that the policies which OUGHT to advance them have even been prepared!

Were I asked for idiotic remarks, or generic, all purpose replies repeated to all questions, talking points, “gotcha moments,” etc., that I could do. But any sober, scientifically-grounded, principled and multidisciplinary analysis of the crises named? Mechanisms to address and ameliorate them? WHERE!

I don’t see them.

In the absence of the same, I refuse to besmirch democracy by referencing as an election what is more accurately designated a national beauty pageant. As I see it, you run on well defined, clearly articulated and nationally debated policies, or forget it.

So-called elections that offer no interaction on national and global crises are neither fair nor ‘democratic.’ As I see it, however they meet some formal requirements, they do not constitute a legitimate contract which binds the population to their masters’ will.

The issue therefore is not ‘voter fraud;’ it is that elections themselves became the fraud. To the extent that the system creates ‘consent’ and manufacturers a mandate APART FROM the population, that is not genuine consent or a mandate from the people.

 

[adrina]

Let's not forget about women.

Are we breeding vessels who are property of whichever state we live in which will face a nationwide abortion ban or do we own our bodies?

 

[Politruk]

What is this "Fourth International"?

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

In context of the article cited, said “election” is about oligarchy [as you state], economic crisis and social inequality; World War III [we are in its opening stages now], and its inevitable escalation to thermonuclear apocalypse; fascism and the threat of military police dictatorship, ongoing pandemic and environmental collapse.

The article continues by saying that :

“The political system in the United States is thoroughly sclerotic and undemocratic. Every aspect of its structure—from ballot access laws aimed at third parties, to the domination of money, to the role of the corporate media—is designed to systematically exclude any genuine expression of the interests of the working class.”

I said that no crisis bestriding the US regime will be resolved. Why? I’ve not found these issues addressed in any thorough manner. There is neither consensus nor support for such policies. The hard work of preparing the public for such solutions is absent. Nor can I see that the policies which OUGHT to advance them have even been prepared!

Were I asked for idiotic remarks, or generic, all purpose replies repeated to all questions, talking points, “gotcha moments,” etc., that I could do. But any sober, scientifically-grounded, principled and multidisciplinary analysis of the crises named? Mechanisms to address and ameliorate them? WHERE!

I don’t see them.

In the absence of the same, I refuse to besmirch democracy by referencing as an election what is more accurately designated a national beauty pageant. As I see it, you run on well defined, clearly articulated and nationally debated policies, or forget it.

So-called elections that offer no interaction on national and global crises are neither fair nor ‘democratic.’ As I see it, however they meet some formal requirements, they do not constitute a legitimate contract which binds the population to their masters’ will.

The issue therefore is not ‘voter fraud;’ it is that elections themselves became the fraud. To the extent that the system creates ‘consent’ and manufacturers a mandate APART FROM the population, that is not genuine consent or a mandate from the people.

I reject the entire premise of the article in the OP. Elections do matter, as we discovered in 2016. There are concrete differences between electing Democrats and Republicans.

 

[coati]

There are always assholes who come in right before the Presidential election and state that electing either candidate will lead to disaster. The implication is that there is no purpose in voting.

Bullshit. If Harris is elected with coattails down-ballot, women's healthcare rights can be restored immediately.

Then, the problems with the election process itself can start to be addressed. Citizens United must be overturned. Limits must be placed on contributions to candidates and the amount of video advertising allowed. Mandatory debates with fact-checking must be held for Presidential candidates. Improving and shortening the Presidential election process will help to address many scare-tactic problems associated with the way politics currently affects foreign and domestic policies.

VOTE the MAGAts out of office. Don't listen to these lazy conspiracy assholes who say it's all fucked up so either stay at home or vote for Jill Stein. Don't listen to the jerks who are itching to use their guns.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

I reject the entire premise of the article…

Identity politics? Certainly!

As for war, thermonuclear holocaust, etc. — not so much.

You have every right to hold the line you do. But as for disagreement? That part is more evident to you than me.

Kudos.

 

[Politruk]

World War III [we are in its opening stages now], and its inevitable escalation to thermonuclear apocalypse;

Who vs. whom?

 

[Holy_Seduction]

This person is too lazy to vote.
Too unpatriotic.
He’s a nobody. Invisible.
Even reading his post, he says nothing of substance.
Everyone should skip over his opinions.

You can say ‘unpatriotic’ and I’ll not rebuke you. I don’t agree, but I won’t call you for saying it either.

You can say ‘a nobody,’ and I’ll let that pass also. In this great lordly kakistocracy [look it up], the ‘nobodies’ amount to 90% of the population.

You can also say ‘nothing of substance’ because … I don’t much interact with partisan talking points.

But ‘lazy’ crosses the line. But I warn you — it may upset you to read further. People tend not to like the loss of manipulative influence over others. Still reading?

The problem isn’t laziness.

There was a well framed if terse reply to a league of voters communique threatening to expose my proudly abysmal record to my neighbors. My reply, sent by registered mail, indicated my response to the “Campagne de diffamation.

I then distributed that reply, together with a copy of the leagues’ censorious screed to my neighbors in advance of the election!

Nor was I too lazy to go to the County Board of Elections and secure the removal of my name from the voters’ registry.

You see, Bn2f, the problem with me isn’t laziness. It is my activism. One last example.

The second Gulf War. The Foreign Minister [obviously another NATO country] whined that this time, countries just weren’t getting on the militarist bandwagon.

Shortly thereafter, that person received a registered letter containing a broadsheet of decidedly offsetting points on that conflict … together with a list of the foreign embassies to which my communication had gone — PLUS the explanation that this was done as partial retribution for a position taken by said Foreign Minister on a completely different matter.

You should probably be glad that I’m not much more active than I am. Believe me when I tell you — regime officials don’t like it when I launch one of my campaigns.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Identity politics? Certainly!

As for war, thermonuclear holocaust, etc. — not so much.

You have every right to hold the line you do. But as for disagreement? That part is more evident to you than me.

Kudos.

If you care about rights for women, black people, brown people, immigrants, or workers the Democrats are better than the Republicans.

If you care about public education, public health, or public infrastructure the Democrats are better than the Republicans.

If you care about global warming, or gun control, the Democrats are better than the Republicans.

Pretending the two parties are the same only provides cover for exploitation of the masses by the elite.

 

[Politruk]

Who will be the combatants in WWIII?

 

[ADIDAS00]

When you say elite…there are way more billionaires supporting Kamala than Trump. That’s a literal fact. I’m not a Trump fan but the majority of elites are on the blue side. There are soooo many billionaires supporting her and not supporting Trump. You have to ask yourself a question….who is she working for? It seems suspicious

 

[Holy_Seduction]

Pretending the two parties are the same only provides cover for exploitation of the masses by the elite.

Trump runs to establish a fascistic dictatorship. Harris runs for more war on Russia, risking even nuclear annihilation.

The US, working class rejects both agendas.

But democrats and republicans take two, intersecting and complementary paths to barbarism. In the interlocking logic of their complementary agenda, fascist dictatorship prepares the ground for war, even as brutal assaults on workers' living conditions creates the necessity of fascist dictatorship.

Our binary system allows both parties to achieve their worst objectives together, when neither could be accomplished alone while cynically claiming “democratic” cover.

One candidate offers dictatorship and war, and the other offers war and dictatorship.

No matter how many vote, and whomever is elected, such elections are not to be seen as legally binding on citizens, and genuine opposition must be organized from day 1.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

Who will be the combatants in WWIII?

Politruk:

You did see the abbreviation for World War.

I’ll assume that you possess the native intelligence to work that out for yourself.

I’ll also leave it to you to work out where conflict currently unfolds, where it is expanding, and to extrapolate from that what happens as conflicts begin merging into an ever-greater conflagration.

Now if you don’t believe that, say do. Because if you really can’t do as I’ve suggested, I doubt I can much help you.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Trump runs to establish a fascistic dictatorship. Harris runs for more war on Russia, risking even nuclear annihilation.

The US, working class rejects both agendas.

But democrats and republicans take two, intersecting and complementary paths to barbarism. In the interlocking logic of their complementary agenda, fascist dictatorship prepares the ground for war, even as brutal assaults on workers' living conditions creates the necessity of fascist dictatorship.

Our binary system allows both parties to achieve their worst objectives together, when neither could be accomplished alone while cynically claiming “democratic” cover.

One candidate offers dictatorship and war, and the other offers war and dictatorship.

No matter how many vote, and whomever is elected, such elections are not to be seen as legally binding on citizens, and genuine opposition must be organized from day 1.

Russia chose to attack Ukraine. Harris supporting Ukraine doesn’t lead to more war between the U.S. and Russia, it means Russia will be forced to back down and leave Ukraine alone.