That’s your belief and that’s fine, but attacking people who believe the actual harm reduction is not supporting either major party since they’re seen as the same level of harmful and votes for third party candidates along with progressive third party options at local elections (something I just did yesterday since my town just had our local elections and I only voted for those that never showcased support for either party even on their personal social media accounts) is just being the guy on the right.
That’s your belief and that’s fine, but attacking people who believe the actual harm reduction is not supporting either major party since they’re seen as the same level of harmful and votes for third party candidates along with progressive third party options at local elections (something I just did yesterday since my town just had our local elections and I only voted for those that never showcased support for either party even on their personal social media accounts) is just being the guy on the right.
That presumes that the requirement to not be the guy on the right is to endorse all actions, even ones which directly undermine one’s own cause or directly assist fascism, as equally valid. That’s not what the meme is saying. This isn’t about asspatting people for enabling Nazis. I said that already.
People’s views of what enables fascists are different. If you view the DNC as another fascist party, then voting for them is a fascist choice. A lesser fascist is still a fascist after all, whether you view them as lesser or equal is up to you.
People’s views of what enables fascists are different. If you view the DNC as another fascist party, then voting for them is a fascist choice. A lesser fascist is still a fascist after all, whether you view them as lesser or equal is up to you.
So you don’t actually understand what ‘harm reduction’ means despite using the term. Got it.
Harm reduction to me is no harm being caused (unless it’s to a member of the bourgeoisie class cause it’s always open season on them) aka reducing harm to 0. Some view it as stopping 1% of harm which works for them. Both want the same end goal, but disagree on how to go about it and get passionately argumentative and sometimes hostile about it.
So you don’t actually understand what ‘harm reduction’ means despite using the term. Got it.
In any case, this is an argument over the validity a method, which is not what the meme is about. The meme isn’t saying “Don’t argue with other leftists when your positions clash!”, it’s saying "Remember that there is broad room for cooperation and allyship, and that a different kind of leftist is not automatically your enemy just because they have different end-goals."
But that’s what I’m saying. Working together towards the same goal of defeating capitalists is what matters. Yelling at each other over how to achieve it cause one believes it undermines the other is bad. Like the political party I do volunteer work with works with a variety of leftists to the point of of us refers to the party as “marxist-non-denominational”. They’ve acknowledged having problems with some in the past like anarchists, but never shut them out if they want to help. The end goal is all that matters.
But that’s what I’m saying. Working together towards the same goal of defeating capitalists is what matters.
Sure.
Yelling at each other over how to achieve it cause one believes it undermines the other is bad.
Fuck no.
If you believed my work was undermining the end goal of overthrowing capitalism, why the ever-loving fuck would you stay quiet about that?
If someone believed that helping Nazis genocide the Jews was going to help the Allies win WW2, would that not be a point one should object to for reasons both moral and strategic, regardless of the fact that the end goal of defeating the Nazis is the same?
Thing is my belief isn’t the only one that matters. If I think it’s bad, but others on our side see it as good, then who am I to tell you to stop doing it? Sure I can suggest my preferred way of doing things, but that’s just it. My way of wanting to get things done is my way and possibly the way of others that agree with me. Just like your way is how you’d prefer to get things done and people that agree with you will join and help. We both can amase a community built “army” (or whatever term you’d use) to achieve the end goal. Mine can support third party candidates at every level from local to national along with working to convince people in a deep red midwest state to do the same. Yours can support the Dem candidates at every level and work to primary out corporate Dems while holding your nose for the “lesser evil”. Neither hurts the other, even if you want to believe getting people to vote for a non-Dem candidate hurts your goal even with plenty of other work being done at the community level.
That’s your belief and that’s fine, but attacking people who believe the actual harm reduction is not supporting either major party since they’re seen as the same level of harmful and votes for third party candidates along with progressive third party options at local elections (something I just did yesterday since my town just had our local elections and I only voted for those that never showcased support for either party even on their personal social media accounts) is just being the guy on the right.
That presumes that the requirement to not be the guy on the right is to endorse all actions, even ones which directly undermine one’s own cause or directly assist fascism, as equally valid. That’s not what the meme is saying. This isn’t about asspatting people for enabling Nazis. I said that already.
People’s views of what enables fascists are different. If you view the DNC as another fascist party, then voting for them is a fascist choice. A lesser fascist is still a fascist after all, whether you view them as lesser or equal is up to you.
So you don’t actually understand what ‘harm reduction’ means despite using the term. Got it.
Harm reduction to me is no harm being caused (unless it’s to a member of the bourgeoisie class cause it’s always open season on them) aka reducing harm to 0. Some view it as stopping 1% of harm which works for them. Both want the same end goal, but disagree on how to go about it and get passionately argumentative and sometimes hostile about it.
In any case, this is an argument over the validity a method, which is not what the meme is about. The meme isn’t saying “Don’t argue with other leftists when your positions clash!”, it’s saying "Remember that there is broad room for cooperation and allyship, and that a different kind of leftist is not automatically your enemy just because they have different end-goals."
But that’s what I’m saying. Working together towards the same goal of defeating capitalists is what matters. Yelling at each other over how to achieve it cause one believes it undermines the other is bad. Like the political party I do volunteer work with works with a variety of leftists to the point of of us refers to the party as “marxist-non-denominational”. They’ve acknowledged having problems with some in the past like anarchists, but never shut them out if they want to help. The end goal is all that matters.
Sure.
Fuck no.
If you believed my work was undermining the end goal of overthrowing capitalism, why the ever-loving fuck would you stay quiet about that?
If someone believed that helping Nazis genocide the Jews was going to help the Allies win WW2, would that not be a point one should object to for reasons both moral and strategic, regardless of the fact that the end goal of defeating the Nazis is the same?
Thing is my belief isn’t the only one that matters. If I think it’s bad, but others on our side see it as good, then who am I to tell you to stop doing it? Sure I can suggest my preferred way of doing things, but that’s just it. My way of wanting to get things done is my way and possibly the way of others that agree with me. Just like your way is how you’d prefer to get things done and people that agree with you will join and help. We both can amase a community built “army” (or whatever term you’d use) to achieve the end goal. Mine can support third party candidates at every level from local to national along with working to convince people in a deep red midwest state to do the same. Yours can support the Dem candidates at every level and work to primary out corporate Dems while holding your nose for the “lesser evil”. Neither hurts the other, even if you want to believe getting people to vote for a non-Dem candidate hurts your goal even with plenty of other work being done at the community level.