Drivebyhaiku

joined 1 year ago
[–] Drivebyhaiku 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

There's a hidden usage of "hon" from the history of the toxic trans communities message boards to mean "trans women who don't pass" and is used condescendingly. That usage is basically dead in the water and barely known outside of a pretty narrow sliver of the queer community but it can still get you a side eye in some places.

[–] Drivebyhaiku 2 points 1 month ago

I feel like I have watched in real time as Y'all has gained usage up in the Canadian Queer community.

I am old enough to still regard "hon" as demi hostile but "dude" seems to be drifting more and more gender neutral. At heart we may all just be ninja turtles all the way down

[–] Drivebyhaiku 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Honestly... You were voting for a Hitler that would destroy protections and target vulnerable people on your home soil as scapegoats or a group who can be counted on at least to uphold the freedoms you and vulnerable groups have as a citizen on paper. Those were the only two choices you had. You can rail about how sub par your choice was but in the end you had two... and you didn't fear the one you needed to enough in my opinion.

You can continue to beat your fists about how shit the Democrats were but if you wanted more options then that was not your moment to demand them. As one who is LGBTQIA+ in Canada with a lot of American friends I know so many people who are now scared for their lives and livelyhoods who are abandoning marriage plans in favour of courthouse weddings and are scrambling to try and get visas. I know the realities of them finding long term safety here is a shit shoot and I am trying to do what I can. I am seeing the cost of people I know upending their lives because they no longer feel safe. I was here for months beforehand listening to so many people looking at this two choice system and treating the election like a game of chicken. I am so personally angry because so many of you might as well have said "Well that's a rainbow colored sacrifice I'm willing to make."

I might not be the one to try and justify how Democrats were not good enough for you because that wasn't the question you were being asked.

[–] Drivebyhaiku 2 points 1 month ago

I mean, I am Canadian and have been writing my MPs for literally years now and doing what rabble rousing I can but it really is a ridiculously hard system to crack. It was everybody's election promise 10 years ago back when Trudeau was first elected and I am a part of a group of people whose rage has been simmering like the surface of the sun for decades.

Getting people to actually UNDERSTAND first past the post as a systemic weakness it is and to buy into electoral reform is grassroots hell. One thing you have going for you is that essentially the entire system is breaking down and is cause for immediate genuine alarm which if you do this right should light a fire under your asses to actually march and DEMAND change.

[–] Drivebyhaiku 9 points 1 month ago (5 children)

They didn't vote for Trump - they misunderstood the system that was in place.

Republican citizen groups have been going over the rolls in key states and removing by challenge registered Democrats who had any small errors on their registration sowing confusion and making otherwise eligible people ineligible.

Republican resources were used to amplify third party candidates who never had a hope of success due to the nature of construction of the system to create spoiler effects. If you thought Jill Stein was a real electable option you can look back at prior elections.

The concept of moral abstention from this election removed people who otherwise would have voted Democrat as the lesser of two possible evils from the system.

Basically since First past the post is a winner take all system Even if 70 percent of the public hates the Republican platform all they have to do is win a majority voting share, that doesn't mean they have to win your vote. They just have to mean that they have to remove your vote from supporting their main competition. They can do that via sowing apathy or divison or by changing the structure of the voting process through gerrymandering and other tactics that any dedicated volunteer can do if they are willing to slog under the assumption that what they are doing is ethically sound "payback". The fact is that these voting systems do not support the will of a majority and both established parties have benefited from that historically... But Republicans stopped playing by the rules awhile ago and they are marketing masters.

Since Republicans have basically outlined their goals to destroy the checks and balances of the system of government basically all they needed was to keep up the ruse that the system somehow rewards people who act outside of the two party choice the system was designed to deliver. Democrats, hoping to play the long game couldn't out the system they have benefitted from as being a rigged game if they wanted it to continue ... So anything but a vote for a Democratic candidate was basically automatically an increase in share to the Republicans by virtue of subtraction hence why a lot of us are unhappy...particularly those of us who tried to explain this shit beforehand and were told we were scum for supporting genocidal regimes. I don't like Democrats but they at least support the Laissez-faire systems that allow leftists to utilize their power as private citizens to support foreign intervention. I don't give a snowball's chance in hell that the support people have managed to give Palestinian interests thusfar will be able to continue at all under the Republicans.

[–] Drivebyhaiku 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It's not just that.

One thing that the Republicans got real good at was piping the idea of election fraud into their base. Part of what they've been doing is getting devoted citizens to target individuals they suspect to be democrat friendly and pouring over their registration paperwork. If they find anything amiss they report it which has made it nessisary to show up and defend one's right to vote to the administrative bodies on a schedule.

https://youtu.be/CkK3W0lOKcc?si=OT4mOCnlZosTGbld

It's meant that relatively small wildcat groups of citizens have managed to target literal tens of thousands of voters in swing states to cause confusion and delegitimize voters based on minute errors.

They find new ways to rig the game because they believe that they are owed this.

[–] Drivebyhaiku 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes I do. Because The situation in Gaza was not an election issue for Biden. There was a fantastic amount of campaigning, a lot of it bought and paid for, that turned that genocide into a single issue vote with tis holier than thou reaction of withdrawal from the entire system toted as the answer. It is political suicide to run a mainstream Pro-Palistine presidential campaign in the US. A candidate of one of the two main parties need unilateral support from their donation streams and encumbant systems and the Republicans knew that. They know that's the devil's bargain every DNC candidate has to sign to even get a shot.

Republican money supported Jill Stein to serve as a spoiler candidate to engage those with a naive veiw of the system but still wanted to vote and then they helped pipe that message through all manner of socials that if enough people withold their vote then Kamala would have shift her position... Because they knew how enticing that is. The idea that you don't have to compromise your integrity and that that will be rewarded. They turned this into a single issue campaign for so many people knowing that they didn't need to shift their position even a little. They could let their Red capped demogogues talk about literally beheading people and those high on this intoxication of absolute righteousness would ONLY care about an issue that Republicans can flaunt their support in favor of.

It was misplaced moral superiority in part that got us here because if you were lulled into not voting or voting third party because one candidate wasn't "leftist enough" when the alternative is someone popular with an entrenched imobile base of support who wants to make sure leftistism dies dead then you failed to get the assignment.

[–] Drivebyhaiku -1 points 1 month ago (7 children)

It wasn't 'voter apathy' it was a misplaced sense of voter moral superiority. It's the thing leftist rhetoric has been weak to for a very long time. That love of withholding support except for perfection. The idea that compromise or chosing a lesser evil from two bad options dirties you. It doesn't matter what you lost if you personally took "the high ground".

This cutting of our noses to spite our face was exploited all to shit this election. They lulled people by appealing to the same zeal of righteousness that they know divides us fundamentally knowing that when push comes to shove people will turn up their noses on principle of not being personally catered to and forget that their ability to help at all is contingent on the freedoms that one party was explicitly putting on the chopping block.

It will be a while before people can admit that they were duped and there's a lot of fault to go around, particularly in those funded astroturf campaigns designed to bait the hook... The right have been watching us for the past decade they knew how to divide us and it is on US that so many of us fell for it.

[–] Drivebyhaiku 7 points 1 month ago

Hey, cis normative passing trans person here (in my case my long time partner has a phenotype preference and I chose him rather than physical transition) you are not betraying anybody. It is a hard road any of us walk and your decision, whatever it's reason, is valid. We are going to need solidarity like never before and that doesn't mean pointing fingers at ourselves or others and lamenting that our sacrifices don't look the same. It means being kind to ourselves too. We are all going to need each other.

[–] Drivebyhaiku 6 points 1 month ago

Oh, it's worse than that for Canada. Trump during his last term tanked entire sectors of our economy with executive orders he spat out like tweets. Those "deals" were all taken apart in International court filings but the damage was already done.

Remember we are a very big landmass staffed by only a sliver more people than exist in the state of California. If the US goes under we will be ripped apart as no more than collateral damage.

[–] Drivebyhaiku -2 points 1 month ago

Uh huh. I hope that continues to feel worth it.

[–] Drivebyhaiku -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

And that's great on a personal level, but what did it do in terms of this choice where Gaza was not featured but the possibility of a second genocide on your doorstep or the death of the democratic process that protects your right to protest and send that aid at all was being happily speculated on?

view more: ‹ prev next ›