General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy one of my people refused to vote:
Here's a Facebook exchange with one of my millennials who sat out:
THEM: The exact opposite is true. The electoral system is the illusion of democracy, and by voting all we're doing is reinforcing the legitimacy of that illusion. Given that the corporate elite own both major parties and the entire political establishment, who you vote for doesn't matter. The same elite class retains power regardless of who wins the elections that are set up as a distraction; the illusion that we as individuals have a say in the government. Voting is surrender. The only effective way of influencing change is the building of mass movements.
ME: Whatever system you might set up will not work, if nobody votes. Fact is that the ruling elites rule tightens when fewer people go to the poles.
THEM: Again, the opposite is true. The power of the ruling elite is strengthened when you DO vote, because you're playing their little game they set up to distract everyone from the fact that their class is running the show regardless. Instead of voting, we need to be figuring out how to remove that class from power, and you can't do that while participating in their fictional elections. Just look at what happened with Obama. He was one of the most liberal members of the senate, and once he took power under this system he became just like Bush, or even worse in some ways. Voting means nothing if the system is fraudulent. And given that the system is fraudulent, voting actually makes it more difficult to create positive change, because by voting you're giving credibility to the clown show that's designed to distract everyone from the truth. Rebellion is the only answer, and you can't rebel against a system you're actively participating in and legitimizing.
Think of it like a game of Monopoly. The game board is the system. And since the capitalist elite invented the game, they start off with 5x as much money as you, and every time they pass Go they get 5x as much money as you. Also, because they own the system, they already have hotels on 90% of the board at the start of the game. And they say to you... "If you want some control over the system you have to play this game I invented." But the game is rigged. You can't win. Within a few moves you're bankrupt and the elite are just richer and more powerful than they were before. In a situation like that Monopoly game the only logical solution is to refuse to play, and flip the board over so you can establish a fair game; a game that isn't rigged by the corporate elite.
ME: This ballot initiative is on the Cali ballot this year: "CISS Proposition 47 Criminal Trials - Reduces the classification of most nonviolent crimes from a felony to a misdemeanor".
In my view, that's a positive step forward if it passes
Now vote!
THEM: Laws that pass can always be undone in time. Just look at how the civil rights act is currently being gutted. Voting isn't the answer. The answer is a new system of government. We can't reform our way out of this.
ME: I suppose you prefer Cannabis users be imprisoned too... because that's how cannabis laws have been reformed - by people voting!
And then there is the minimum wage - republicans want to eliminate it, Democrats are trying to increase it!
THEM: yes, there are some differences between the parties, but the system is totally owned and controlled by the corporate elite. To them it's just plan A or plan B, and they're fine with either one. And they want us to think it's so important to choose between the parties because that's how they retain power over us. It's like, if you're in jail and they institute some kind of prisoner election to determine the conditions inside the prison. They don't really care about the results as long as we stay behind bars. What I want is to escape, to get out of prison entirely, not to focus on tiny reforms that keep us distracted just enough to prevent us from breaking out. We can't be free if we keep playing their rigged game that keeps us imprisoned. What we need to be doing is planning a jail break.
ME: I understand your point. But you not voting is exactly what they want you to do. Watch this short clip from 1980:
Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo)
Paul Weyrich, "father" of the right-wing movement and...
THEM: That argument is ridiculous on the face of itself, because it assumes that there is some sort of substantial moral difference between the parties. My position is that there isn't. And, again, the exact opposite of this argument is actually true. VOTING is what the establishment WANTS you to do, because it keeps you invested in the system, rather than working to undermine and oppose the system. Voting gives the system the credibility and legitimacy that it NEEDS to maintain its power. If we all stopped voting because we realized that it was doing nothing for us, then the establishment capitalist elite would freak the heck out, because their system would be in danger of losing its "right" to rule over us. Again, you can not oppose a system if you're busy supporting it.
ME: If voting is so unimportant , then why are the Koch brothers spending billions to elect candidates that want to eliminate the minimum wage, social security, and Medicare?
And there's more than just candidates at stake, there are ballot issues that will legalize cannabis, raise the minimum wage, force insurance companies to lower rates, and reduce non-violent felonies to misdemeanors at stake.
THEM: The Koch brothers are part of the elite ruling class. Their class will retain power regardless of who wins the elections. They just happen to have a strong preference between Plan A and Plan A1. Others in their class might be more willing to make some small economic concessions to the poor, but that isn't really a major factor to the overall economic system. What I mean is, yes, raising the minimum wage would help poor people somewhat, but it doesn't change the fact that we live under a system in which the rich exploit the poor for profit. I want an end to that exploitation altogether, not just institute some kind of essentially irreverent reform that doesn't fundamentally change anything.
Well, that's the gist of it.
What I get from it is that people stayed home because they could not see a clear difference between the parties.
This is why centrist, third-way policies are a disaster.
Let me say, this is from a highly intelligent, well educated millennial with a good, upper middle class income, who works at a company that is a household name to us all.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Historic NY
(37,983 posts)they flirt with the libertarian hyperbole that promise you can have it all against the masses. In the end they get nothing.
Bandit
(21,475 posts)
Historic NY
(37,983 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)A party that fought to extend unemployment benefits. A party, that for the most part, ended one war. A party that actually helped NYers out after a hurricane instead of playing guitar and eating cake. A party that is fighting for and advancing civil rights.
Those are just over the last couple of years. That is what our vote has gotten us recently.
mahatmakanejeeves
(61,339 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)According to Forest Gump's mother..
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)that is stupid to the nth degree...and GTFO of here with that "Third Way Bullshit"....
stupid and lazy is my read...
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and tell him he has no right to complain about the result...
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I don't care what your hypothetical friends do...
His little Hissy fit at not getting HIS way.....will cost all of us....
Screw those that did this.....they get what they deserve.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Its because people like you make the good the enemy of the perfect.....You stomp and bash Democrats all day long for the entire Presidency and make us all look like losers...
Fuck that noise...
United we stand Divided......we look like a bunch of losers....and THAT made the Republicans look like "winners" so the mushy middle fell for their bullshit AGAIN!
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)capable of this.....I have been saying it for some time.....STOP IT!!!
You make us look like fools......you rant and rail against the Democrats....you do the work of the Republicans for them....and THEN hypocritically vote FOR the very candidates you ridiculed!....and THEN play innocent when shit goes sour!!!
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)he could simply have put on his walking shoes and gone to Wisconsin. How hard would that have been?
Oh yeah, he could have simply done nothing and the Bush tax cuts would have expired.
He could charge torturers with torture.
Your middle ground is losing us ground, IMHO.
Chained CPI??????? WTF! You've got to be freakin kidding me!!!!
You're being unrealistic when you think that policies don't get our voters to the poles.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)as though that's the whole picture.
The nation, the environment, retirees, etc will not rise or fall on any one of these compromises you think are so horrible. Or even several of them. Besides, there is that possibility that you could even be wrong about, say, the TPP.
And the chained CPI might cost me to lose about three bucks out of the next SS increase. If that much. I'm a lot more interested in my cable and electric bills going up by 30 bucks a month. What's the great liberal position on that?
Democrats, as they are today, aren't in a position to get you your wish list. They may never be in a position to, but the other side waits patiently for things like, say, abortion to be made illegal while not throwing out wholesale the ones who haven't done so yet.
In every thread like this someone makes the comment about the perfect being the enemy of the good. In this case, it's not even perfect.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)You won't get our vote with that stance.
Do you understand why?
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)All we have to do is follow VR's strategy of being belligerent assholes and all the voters will come running to our side!
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Your friend isn't alone. Neither are you on trying to figure out how to bring them back into the fold. I agree our candidates need to get back to the partys core principals. I really just stopped by to say sorry for the exchange between you and this other person. You are asking for common sense ideas and got nothing short of unbridled anger. I really hope this person doesn't do any communications work with the party.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
Xyzse
(8,217 posts)One thing that struck me as wrong immediately from his statement is that "Just look at what happened with Obama. He was one of the most liberal members of the senate, and once he took power under this system he became just like Bush, or even worse in some ways."
Obama was NEVER a liberal. Even in his college years what he did was figure out what the Republicans wanted, promoted what could be agreed upon by looking immediately at the middle then getting things done.
I consider myself at the center at one point, but Obama is much further to the right of me.
Now, here's the thing I have for voting.
Thinking that they would create a groundswell and take away the legitimacy of the electoral process I doubt will ever happen, unless things get so much worse. Do they really want to get to the point of hopelessness first?
That is pretty ridiculous and makes a hell of a lot of assumptions about people reacting the way they want.
People are dumb, and we are slowly being boiled and they don't jump or do anything since it is slow enough that people get acclimated to how bad things are.
Whiskeytide
(4,512 posts)... and I think right on just about all of the analysis offered. But "them's" solution - forcing change essentially by rebellion against the "game" - assumes that the entire populace is of like mind, education and insight, and is prepared to quit the game too. They're not. They will continue to participate. He might be able to quit his own "game" with the overlords, but he can't quit the game for everyone else. He's not playing in a vacuum. That makes his position altruistic, maybe, but completely unrealistic.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Whiskeytide
(4,512 posts)... basic sentiment in 2008. She was fed up. I told her to imagine what the last 8 years would have been like if Gore had been president instead of W. "Isn't that difference worth getting in line to cast a vote"? She ended up voting (or at least she told me she did) - but I don't think she was as invested in her position as your friend seems to be. He may be too far gone.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Or do the results of the election stand whether or not someone decides it's more important to sit it out because nobody's going to change the system he hates (and that, presumably, right quick)?
cry baby
(6,779 posts)or sick.
Niko
(97 posts)And no offense, but your millennial is a total fucking idiot.
You know why the Democrats lost last night? It's not because more people in your country are Republican. It's because more Republicans VOTED last night.
Now, a lot of this blame goes to the Democratic politicians themselves. It was absolutely sickening to see them not answer the question "Did you vote for Obama?", as if they ought to have been ashamed of it or something. They pandered to the racist assholes and they lost because those racist assholes still voted Republican.
But with a turnout rate of 50% or less, Democrats could easily win every single election if Democrats would just get the fuck off their asses and vote for Democrats. Even in states with a majority Republican population, only a minority of them bother to vote. If EVERY SINGLE FUCKING DEMOCRAT voted, Democrats would win, period.
Now, as to your idiot millennial saying how "they're both the same" - to a certain extent that's true. They are both bought and paid for by the corporations. Except that one of these two parties is bought and paid for and also BATSHIT FUCKING INSANE, while the other is simply bought and paid for.
By the way, I have no skin in this game. I'm Canadian. Let me just say this: Democrats may be scumbag conservatives, but they're NOT CRAZY. This is coming from an outsider looking in. We love Obama up here, but only because we know what the alternative will bring. He'd NEVER get elected here if he ran against our liberals. You may not get truly liberal policies out of Democrats, but you also won't get the psychopathic insanity that was George W. Bush.
wryter2000
(47,552 posts)Awesome post 
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)And the Dems will continue to lose so long as they run away from Democratic principles.
Our Trojan Horse Third Wayers want us to get along and support shit like Keystone, permanent tax cuts for the rich, letting financial criminals walk, NSA spying, and talking about chained CPI. Republican positions one and all, and losing propositions when our so-called Dems say "Me Too!" to all of them.
Stand up strongly and proudly for Democratic principles or get rolled by the crazy ass Repubs.
Spazito
(54,725 posts)this is a millennial who thinks they are going to one of the 1%, one who couldn't give a shit about anyone but themselves, imo.
"Let me say, this is from a highly intelligent, well educated millennial with a good, upper middle class income, who works at a company that is a household name to us all."
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)so these are people who are giving up on the present structure, and they make some logical arguments. They are absolutely right in insisting that it is a rigged game. And how long can you tolerate a rigged game?
This is not so much as voting as about calling for a better vision for government than what we are currently dealing with.
polichick
(37,626 posts)imo there is a lot of truth in it - though I still vote, believing that it's possible to look for a way to create a new system while voting for the lesser of evils.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Yes, people will die but they do now, it's just not reported. The game is rigged. Whatever candidate you get, except in rare instances, is still a product of corrupt system. Dems are less a problem, but they lack any backbone whatsoever.
Better a bullet to the head of the system then death by a thousand slow paper cuts.
polichick
(37,626 posts)Seems better to come up with a new system before that.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)No Americans rule by crisis. It would take the system collapsing for anything real to happen. So its just a waiting game to see what Republican takes the presidency.
polichick
(37,626 posts)The middle class has collapsed for sure.
How do you imagine the final collapse will happen? What will it look like?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)It seems too many think that a magical perfect system will arise naturally, without any effort involved.
polichick
(37,626 posts)be in such bad shape they'll barely be able to exist. They won't have time and energy to rebuild.
That said, I fully agree with their take on the rigged and deceptive game.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)villager
(26,001 posts)Or decades before that, the outright slaughter of Wobblies, or anyone else who was actually trying to change the structure...
JI7
(90,757 posts)Corporation and are upper income ?
What does a low income person like me know?
treestar
(82,383 posts)If only they would.
And they do think the elected Rs are too liberal. I've actually heard that from some of them.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
surrealAmerican
(11,496 posts)... the only way it could is if everybody boycotted. This will not happen. "Them" has just made a statement that nobody will hear.
Voting does not mean you can't protest in other ways.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)work if voters of BOTH parties are game. As we've seen in the last election, Republicans whine, criticize, rant and rave, but come election day, they're smart enough to fall in line and vote - and that's why Republicans now control both chambers of Congress and we're OUT.
Now those very same disenchanted Millennials who sat on their arses pouting when they should've been voting, have to depend on the very person they so loathe and distrust - Obama - to bail this country out of the Koch Bros strategy to destroy this country. Now, of course, those same petulant Millennials have made it that much harder for President Obama to stop Keystone XL, stop the gutting of our meager social safety net, stop the defunding of public jobs and schools, privatizing everything, and stop the escalating cries by the warmongers in the GOP for full out war.
Thanks for nothing, Millennials.
0rganism
(24,723 posts)that's not the beginning of a meaningful rebellion in any sense, more like the end of a failed one.
what has your friend done to promote revolution and reform in lieu of voting?
i generally agree with your conclusion though -- Democrats are not different enough from Republicans for it to be unquestionably obvious to the young and idealistic, and the ways Democrats are significantly different tend to be downplayed by Democrats and outright ignored by the MSM, which has an agenda of service to the rich and powerful.
merrily
(45,251 posts)If there were some kind of movement, publicity, etc. around it, I might look at it differently. But low voter turnout, standing alone, IMO, doesn't disturb the Kochs or any plutocrat one bit. Also, it can be spun any way anyone wants. Republicans can say Obama and Democrats discouraged everyone. Obama and Democrats can say Republican gridlock did it.
At the very least, show up and write in "None of the above." At least they can't chalk up your absence to laziness or apathy.
Better yet, see if you can get lots of "stay homers" to do that. Better yet, start a movement to get "None of the Above as an option on your state ballot. Look up how to write a bill in your state, write one and submit it. (If your only other plan is to stay home. I am not advocating this!)
Did you happen to catch the discussion/debate between Russell Brand and Lawrence O'Donnell? That was a good one on this subject, too. I posted it a while back in the video forum.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)judgmental.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Who cares what they want? They opted out. The rest of us will govern.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)I at least voted.
Geez.
If the other party is in power and it's because these idiots didn't vote, then why should I have to cajole them? They opted out and they decided to allow whoever won to govern them, and it makes no difference to them whether it is Republicans or Democrats.
Even people so dumb as to think the Ds and Rs are the same ought to vote. There are options, Greens or Libertarians, etc., and if they get some votes, it will show something to the other candidates, even if they are unlikely to win.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
aquart
(69,014 posts)Little snot dooesn't want to be bothered with hard decision-making. That's for CEOs who get the big bucks. This minion just wants to click heels and follow orders.
Democracy is not for the faint of heart. It involves taking other people's idiot opinions into sincere consideration. It involves heartbreaking compromise. It involves cheering for small, incremental victories instead of holding out for the whole enchilada. It involves taking responsibility for voting for the least bad candidate as opposed to the most perfect one.
Little corporate snotnose doesn't have the guts for democracy. But real good at crap pontification.
aikoaiko
(34,204 posts)They realized their principles fucked us over and they weren't ok with it after that and started voting.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)student loan bankruptcy, or ending the war in Iraq.
Any ideas how I can convince them to vote in 2016???
aikoaiko
(34,204 posts)I think you (and others) are right that there needs to something to done to alleviate student loan burden. I'm not sure bankruptcy is the right. I'm not even sure the Iraq war resonates anymore.
And no I don't have any ideas. Some things just need time to settle in.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Translation: All our love made it happen!!!
Orangepeel
(13,970 posts)Yeah, that'll work. 
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)By the way, it's not all that surprising that the nonvoting millennial has a "good, upper middle class income" and is therefore presumably not on Medicaid. Medicaid was one of the issues I highlighted in a post elsewhere, answering this "no difference between the parties" argument. If I may quote myself:
This isn't a strictly partisan thing. The map at http://medicaidexpansion.com/medicaid-expansion-state-decisions/ shows that some Republican governors, like Christie, have gone along with expansion, however grudgingly. In general, though, Medicaid has been expanded in states with Democratic leadership and has not been expanded in states with Republican leadership.
Well, what do I care, I don't live in Maine or Wisconsin, or in any of the other states that have gone that route. But there are millions of people who ARE affected. Some of them will die as a result.
I'm not speaking metaphorically. Some of them will literally die. Physicians for a National Health Program did a piece at http://www.pnhp.org/news/2014/january/more-than-7100-deaths-likely-from-states-rejection-of-medicaid-expansion-%C2%A0health-a reporting on research on the subject:
The decision by 25 states to reject the expansion of Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act will result in between 7,115 and 17,104 more deaths than had all states opted in, according to researchers at Harvard Medical School and the City University of New York.
. . . .
In addition to the thousands of excess deaths associated with that lack of coverage, the rejection of the Medicaid expansion will have the following likely impacts:
* 712,037 more persons diagnosed with depression
* 240,700 more persons suffering catastrophic medical expenses
* 422,533 fewer diabetics receiving medication
* 195,492 fewer women receiving mammograms and
* 443,677 fewer women receiving pap smears
Thousands of people dying and hundreds of thousands of people suffering is either a preventable human catastrophe or "certain details separating the two major parties," depending on your perspective.
So, while I agree with you that centrist, third-way policies are a disaster, there is already enough evidence, even with the Democrats being far too conservative, that there are major differences between the parties. You call your friend intelligent, but it's hard for me to find anything in those posts except willful blindness.
I particularly note this sentence: "Instead of voting, we need to be figuring out how to remove that class from power, and you can't do that while participating in their fictional elections." Uh, because if you walk down to the local school and cast a vote, that disempowers you from the arduous plotting of revolution? Not that I think your friend is actually doing anything toward removing that class from power anyway -- but to the extent s/he is, one ought to be able to think about how to upend the system while walking to the polls and waiting on line. This whole thing is just a copout.
MineralMan
(147,855 posts)I'm curious about that usage. Are these your children? Your employees? How are they "your people?" I'm confused about this possessive pronoun you used. Can you explain?
tkmorris
(11,138 posts)In fact the only reason I'm reading this thread is to find an answer to that question. The arguments put forth in the OP are rehashed every election year in college dorm rooms across the country.
MineralMan
(147,855 posts)That kind of statement implies some sort of "ownership" role. I'd like some clarification.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Here's some suggestions:
Medicare for all
End the perpetual war for profit machine
Jail banksters
Tax the hoarding class
Increase social security
GMO labeling
NO FREAKING TPP!
no Keystone XL
Subsidize wind & solar instead of big oil
End homelessness and povery
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Is it? What do you do?
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)But we do get 44 days paid vacation!
So should everybody.
Who's gonna fight for that???
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)I would suggest to your friend that he should be doing something proactive. Simply not voting is inaction, and inaction drives no sort of progress, certainly does not make revolution. So for 'not voting' to be a revolutionary act, it needs to come along with some actual visible action. Otherwise it is just apathy with lots of snappy sounding poly sci student rhetoric attached. It is a verbose note from home, excusing Johnny from taking part in society.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)was not being provided. It was never going to be 'provided'. No one invited us to take part either, we invited ourselves. Every damn candidate I have every voted for for President has at one time openly spoken against my own personal rights. Compare the LGBT story to that of African American voters in this country and ours looks like a walk in the park. So when some affluent, partially educated privilege addict starts whining that enough has not been 'provided' to him for him to so much as vote, excuse me if I think he looks petty, craven and evasive of his basic duties to society.
I have no idea where this poor abused affluent white straight male lives. So I don't know who he had to vote for. He's a free man, and lives where he lives by his own damn choice. His refusal to take part in his State's political process is nothing but a vote for the status quo so while his rhetoric is about change, his actions create stasis.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
Orsino
(37,428 posts)If you don't, well, let's just call it staying home to watch cartoons in your underwear.
BarackTheVote
(938 posts)I agree with a lot of the sentiment, but it's just intellectual masturbation if you don't have a practical end-game in mind. The system will never be "delegitimized" by not voting. You don't need a quorum of the electorate to vote to legitimize an election (maybe that's something to work toward). Millennials need to get this through their heads: You don't trust anyone running for office? Run yourself. You don't like the person who won the party nomination? Don't vote less, vote MORE, vote in the primaries, support the candidate of YOUR choosing with blood, sweat, and tears.
There IS a way to defeat big money in this country, but it ain't by not voting. It's by tuning out the paid-for air-time and actually looking at candidate's records. MONEY DOESN'T HAVE TO MATTER. They spend their money on ads, radio and TV, and fliers, and travel for stump speeches and to pay for the ground game--passive shit, which you're by no means required or impelled to consume. The people who vote tend to eat that stuff up, while the disillusioned don't show up. As was said up-thread, if all the progressives turned up, there would never be another Republican in office (except in horrifically gerrymandered House races, of course).
I know this was a little bit word salady, but the thing that frustrates me most is that these are intelligent people, they just don't come up with the right answers. BTW, the end game is a crashed system, not just a protest. A lot of millennials I know legit want to see something apocalyptic happen to reboot the nation. We entered the race way in the back because of how badly the silent generation fucked us before we were even born. We look around us and don't see any new frontier to run to to get away from debt and start fresh. So they want to manufacture a new frontier. Ever wondered why zombie movies, TV shows, and comics are so popular with Millennials? That's why. A lot of us don't see any hope in the present rigged system. But don't worry, they won't actively pursue any of this; they'll do it through passive aggression.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)BarackTheVote
(938 posts)There's a lot of anger against the establishment and big business. Appeal to that, for starters; send a message that you're not gonna play nice or kowtow to corporations. You need people with fire and the courage of conviction.
louis-t
(23,742 posts)
BarackTheVote
(938 posts)You seriously want to know what could appeal to Millennials? A grass-roots viral campaign that speaks directly to this tech savvy generation. A campaign that cuts ties to all the traditional methods of campaigning and encourages the active participation of its supporters. I'm talking YouTube instead of TV, and Kickstarter instead of other forms of funding. And you need a personality that Millennials can identify with, someone with humor, a disregard for traditional forms of decorum, someone who speaks frankly, isn't afraid to drop some "F" bombs, and will get in the face of their opponent and call them out on their lies and hypocrisy. People in my generation subscribe to some truly esoteric YouTube channels, over a million subs for VSauce and Crash Course... each of these videos are over ten minutes long, intensely researched, and present complex ideas in full context. They are the antithesis of the soundbite, so stop talking in soundbites for the benefit of traditional media--we know Fox and CNN are bought and paid for, so fuck 'em.
There are ways of reaching Millennials, but you have to energize them by speaking to them with voices they find appealing. That's why Obama did so well. He's full of charisma, doesn't talk down to you, doesn't treat you like you're stupid, talks like he needs YOU, personally; when campaigning, he's confrontational, uses slang, and drops jokes. He's entertaining, but intellectual. That's a winning candidate, and you need to find more people like him. Hopefully ones who are less willing to compromise to the old guard when elected, though.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Just fyi. Probably some other similar platform that allows politics but I'm not sure.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)to take responsibility for anything happening in the political arena.
"Them" will happily avoid responsibility for the limited chance that anything good will happen in order to avoid it for what will certainly be bad things happening. Everything will always be the fault of our ruling masters, never of our own.
It's just lazy bullshit justifying inaction.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
DemocraticWing
(1,290 posts)Maybe they want to undermine the economic system so something more friendly to their bourgeois lifestyle comes about. Working people without much on the line are forced to stand with the one party that stands for us and against the rich because we don't have much choice.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)strong policy positions to vote for (say ending NAFTA), then we win elections.
Give them perpetual war, TPP, Chained CPI, and we lose.
It's not about them. It's about us.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)But unless we finally get to the point where it's completely obvious to everyone that 'representational' government is a sham to control rather than to represent, we can't dissolve that control and escape it. I think to an extent, we have to 'play', although in such a way that we focus on changing the rules in ways that weaken that grip of control. We still have referendums in most places, and we need to start using them far more often, in ways that weaken the control of the parties on the will of the people. 'Play' the rarely used rules to alter the dynamics.
Make it easier for referendums to be brought forward, find ways to end partisan redistricting, to allow more candidates than just the two 'biggest gorillas', to get rid of the anachronistic 'electoral college'. In every way, to change the rules to make democracy more direct, and remove the power of middlemen who do not actually represent the people.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
frazzled
(18,402 posts)Does it make a sound?
A: Not one that anyone can hear. That is to say, not one that matters.
That is the answer to anyone who thinks they are making a statement by not voting. Whatever they think they are protesting, they're not. Nobody knows the reason a vote wasn't cast. It may be thought that it's laziness or lack of concern or any number of things. Unless there is a public call for a voting boycott (which happens in some countries) and that call is affirmatively joined by millions, there is no point to not voting.
Plus: Voting—it's not about YOU. This is another excuse for not voting (or voting for obscure, unelectable candidates) that makes me crazy. People say they must vote their conscience. That attitude makes you NOT a liberal. Liberals understand government and democracy as making choices for the common good. Not choices to assuage your own ego or conscience. That's a libertarian stance.
Too many young people think they are "left" or "progressive" but in reality are merely selfishly libertarian. It's always about themselves.
We vote for whatever will benefit society more. And even if you think Ds and Rs represent no difference (on which you would be wrong) ... even if it's one little thing that will be better for poor people, or women, or immigrants ... then if you don't vote (or vote for some impossible candidate), you have not done the liberal thing.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)I disagree with him about the not voting part and, instead of admonishing him to "just vote!" I would add that the grassroots could get completely immersed in recruiting good candidates so there would be someone to vote for.