this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2024
561 points (97.3% liked)

Late Stage Capitalism

619 readers
17 users here now

A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.

A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.

RULES:

1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.

2 No Trolling

3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.

4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.

5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.

6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc.

founded 4 months ago
MODERATORS
561
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by K1nsey6 to c/latestagecapitalism
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] K1nsey6 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We don't have a democracy, we have the illusion of a democracy.

Studies from Princeton and Cambridge show politicians listen to the rich, not us.

[–] homesweethomeMrL -5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

We don't have a democracy, we have the illusion of a democracy.

Well, that's patently not true. We vote, the winner takes office. What's so hard about understanding that? You see that that happens, right?

Studies from Princeton and Cambridge show politicians listen to the rich, not us.

Oh no a Study from Princeton! Dearie me, well I guess that's the end of that debate then innit.

Does public opinion affect the political process? Gilens & Page found that the number of Americans for or against any idea has no impact on the likelihood that Congress will make it law.

Did they. Well that's fascinating. So by their logic no one of any political leaning has any influence. Which means laws are prepared, lobbied, and passed by . . . well, aliens, I guess. Or computers maybe. Still I have the nagging feeling that maybe that's a huge crock of shit. But then again they are from Princeton, and that's a good brand, I've heard of that. So maybe they're "right".

[–] K1nsey6 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We vote, the winner takes office.

Vote based on their hand picked candidates. Your choices are manufactured for their benefit. We saw how quickly the oligarchy shifted policy when the candidate they didn't want won the WH with Carter. We saw how they responded when their power was under threat with Bernie. We see how they subvert the process by keeping 3rd party options off the ballots. When 1 billionaire has more political influence than millions of voters your vote means nothing.

They will occasionally throw a few stale bread crumbs out to quiet the masses, but that's all they are, stale bread crumbs.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think the idea here is that even if one votes, it does not significantly change the outcome for the better.

For example, voting for Harris would mean capitalism/oligarchy would still reign and there therefore we arrive at the same outcome as Trump. Why vote then?

You’re certainly not wrong that participation would behoove us all in a democratic republic - however, you are not understanding there is a lack of real choice anymore, and that means participation is near moot.

[–] homesweethomeMrL -5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I strongly disagree, and to prove my point, for the next four years trump will create chaos and dysfunction the likes of which your genetic progeny will feel.

It did not have to go that way, but because people didn’t vote against him, it will. And that’s infuriating and disgusting.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Okay, keep voting the lesser of two evils. The thing here is that there needs to be a massive change and it doesn’t happen by propping up a broken system with shortsighted hopes. Personally, I hope the next four years do enrage people to the point that we actually get up and react.

[–] homesweethomeMrL -3 points 3 weeks ago

Four years is a very long time. On a planet with maybe not that many left to go. It's an enormous waste, and incredibly short-sighted.

Accelerationism depends on people suffering, which, again - wasn't necessary.