Repeal Taft-Hartley and pass the PRO Act while we’re at it

Everyone in the US is complicit. Everyone in NATO member countries is complicit. Everyone not fighting to overthrow their imperialist government is complicit. Again, not the point.

Ok so how does not voting help with this?

You are complicit by living in the US and paying taxes which fund military aid to Israel. Not voting does not absolve you. And in the case of this election, it makes you slightly more complicit because one of the war criminals who is running is slightly worse than the other.

The idea that not voting is some form of protest that has material consequences for the ruling class is ahistorical. It took centuries of struggle to attain universal suffrage. The people in power are perfectly happy to have only a small fraction of the demos exerting any political power at all; in fact this is how most civilizations have functioned for the past few thousand years.

deleted by creator

Listen how can I get a quart of milk from the store without also taking two chairs, a loveseat, a sound system, my heater and air conditioning unit, some steel armor plating, and a storage unit?

The issue is with what they are actually able to accomplish, not what they say they’ll do. And that goes for every Democrat since Carter.

Not enough data for language scrape

My local is great but I don’t have any others to compare to so it’s a pretty vapid description. There’s a PSL here too and they come to a lot of our events. It’s always interesting to hear from the more radical formation.

The thing with DSA “party discipline” is that it’s not a political party. It’s basically a nonprofit with local chapters that all have their own agendas, some of which run candidates. So I’m interested to see what happens with a more centralized (as far as I understand it anyway) structure like PSL.

In terms of labor organizing I do think the political climate matters. The rail strike is an example of national scale union busting, but on more local levels (Starbucks, Amazon, Cemex…) that the NLRB actually matters. Here’s an article about it.

https://www.laborpolitics.com/p/how-bidens-nlrb-has-boosted-bottom

Right. If democrats want those votes then Biden needs to make significant progress on ending the genocide now. The threat from third parties exerts an outsize pressure on the Democrats to actually do something. But of course they likely won’t, and instead Trump will take advantage of this.

Yeah, I’m just wondering why they’re launching a national presidential campaign rather than trying to win locally first. See for example DSA’s (the veil falls lol) cadre candidates like Zohran Mamdani.

It seems to me like PSL is skipping this step and going straight to national, with the net result of devoting a lot of energy that could be spent on worker organizing on a campaign that everyone knows is not going to win.

This also bears the risk of helping Trump win by siphoning off votes from Harris, and a Trump victory will have damaging effects on the NLRB, an organization which in its current state is making it a lot easier for workers to unionize.

So I’m just not seeing how any third party presidential run ties into building worker power, but maybe I am missing something.

Again, not understanding where the anger is coming from. I’m not even supporting a specific candidate. I’m pointing out that 3d parties that take a stand against US imperialism will always have support, because neither major party can be trusted in this regard. And again, for some people, this is a line they won’t cross. I’ll stop now because clearly this is unproductive.

My mistake, thanks

The other thing I don’t understand is all the anger and vitriol from you guys. Everyone who lives in the US and contributes tax dollars to the federal government supports genocide. The US has been supporting Israel unconditionally for decades. Do you really think Kamala Harris is sincere about stopping this, given how Biden’s administration has handled the situation? Or any other Democrat or Republican since Carter?

I think you’re suggesting Trump would be worse than Harris for the cause. But my point is that a lot of people feel that voting for either is sanctioning genocide, and Stein fills that niche by condemning it. It’s pretty low-hanging fruit for a politician.

I’m legitimately curious as to how college protestors could be hurting the cause.

I have a question about PSL. My organizational background is in labor mostly, though I have done some door knocking for critical elections.

How is your candidate getting however many votes (feel free to estimate) going to help the working class? Or alternatively, how does your electoral campaign help PSL? Is this ultimately a recruitment drive?

I don’t understand how a genocide can be taken so lightly. Some people have trouble casting a vote for any political party that sponsors one.

Maybe vote count is instructive:

Nader 2000: 2,882,955

Cobb 2004: 119,859

McKinney 2008: 161,797

Stein 2012: 469,501

Stein 2016: 1,457,216

Hawkins 2020: 407,068

I don’t think the party would collapse without Stein. They have been around for decades and they have a cadre of oranizers who will continue to show up regardless of results. Stein is just the most famous person they can use for a presidential election, and you can see from the above results what happens when they run someone nobody has heard of.

I think they genuinely believe in their core values, and it’s unfortunate that Stein is their only viable candidate. They won’t ever be a real political party until they start winning local/state elections, but they’re looking to secure more federal funding by getting enough votes. If Stein disappeared then they would keep doing this but they’d never breach half a million votes. Maybe a progressive democrat in the House would smell an opportunity and break ranks to run for president with the Greens. That could maybe get them a million or two votes again.

Or maybe it absolutely does not matter who they run and they just get a lot of votes when the Democrats run particularly shitty candidates for president.

It’s a reduction based on the history of regimes that call themselves communist… You don’t see a problem here? Maybe I’m just being pedantic but Marxian communism doesn’t have anything in common with any form of government in history. It’s more of an idealized state (state meaning condition, not polity). Nobody, apart from so-called primitive communist societies, can claim to be communist.