> [WS:] That is not the point. The point is that splinter vote of the leftos
> who voted their individualistic conscience while loosing the bigger picture
> of social costs of that behavior led to Bush victory in 2000, stolen or not.
> The ACT UP act in question is just an exemplification of that approach to
> politics.
ACT-UP did the right thing.
If I ever have a chance to make a decision concerning a protest that screws the Democrats, I will always opt for anything that hurts the Democrats.
Fuck the Democrats.
I am an anarchist. I don't covertly see the Democrats as being the lesser of two evils. Look at their foot-dragging on the war now that they have power. What's their fucking excuse? Are they already dancing around trying to position themselves to win the next election?
> Now, a rational goal-oriented person should know what kind of game he/she is
> entering and what strategy will or will not work in that game. At the very
> least, he/she should know whether he is playing with a weak hand or a strong
> hand, and play accordingly. Adopting a strong hand strategy while having a
> weak hand is a sure recipe for defeat and every card player, save the most
> novice or obtuse one, understands that. Bluffing may only work when every
> player has a weak hand, but if some players have a really strong hand and
> know it, bluffing is suicidal.
Hypothetical card games aside, some of us have experience playing the game of political power. I got a good taste of that during the height of the anti-globalization movement. Power is scary. It's scary when you are making decisions that could affect many people. It's scary when the truly rich and powerful train their eye on you and start interfering with your life in secret and covert ways. This is why political power needs to be decentralized as much as possible.
> Unfortunately, 2.73% of the lefties did not understand that basic strategy
> obvious to every card player, and voted their individual conscience (oh, how
> WASPy that was!) instead of looking at the broader picture and the
> distribution of power in society. Only 0.79% of the right wing voters made
> error http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/
> The remaining 1.94 percent handed the victory to Bush.
There are many different ways to look at the 2000 election. There is evidence that the Republicans rigged the system in Florida. On the other hand, the Democrats ran a boring, uncharismatic candidate. Then they did this again in 2004.
I haven't voted in an election since 1992, so I'm kind of pissed at people who lecture leftists about elections and then proceed to support the stupidity of the system.
> The
> point is, and should be repeated clearly and loudly, that the grandstanding
> and voting their individual consciousness left (not even Nader but those who
> voted for him) fucked it up by its splinter knee-jerk reaction and gave us
> eight years of Bush with all the accoutrements from tax cuts for the rich to
> the war in Iraq.
I'm going to be 42 in a few months. I'm no longer tired by 27 years of Reagan-Bush-Clinton-Bush, in sofar as I laugh at the idiocy of the American system and the pinheads who just continue to participate in it.
Sometimes I wonder what younger people think who have only known an American system dominated by right-wing fascists. Progressives have been urging other leftists to vote for the lesser of evils for as long as I remember. I got off that train in 1985, after seeing through the pathetic bullshit that was "Mondale-Ferraro."
I'm not getting any younger. I want my dreamy better society today. That is not going to happen by voting for Hilary Obama to thwart the conservatives. The Democrats are conservatives.
> Disclaimer: I participated in a "Nader-trader" to maximize Gore's chances
> outside MD, which was Gore-safe. Of course, how I pulled the lever did not
> really matter as long as the other party to the agreement (someone in MI, if
> memory serves) pulled it for Gore, but I was honest and kept my end of the
> bargain. Gore carried MD anyway. I support Democrats not because I like
> their politics but because November is NOT the time to voice my political
> conscience. It is the time to make a move that maximizes my political
> benefits, even if that means only thwarting the Right.
I'm more interested is undermining both the Democrats and Republicans, so that we can fight for a better society. That ain't going to happen through participation in a corrupt system that is already rejected by half of Americans.
Now I'm trying to go back to my personal goal of not discussing American electoral politics for the rest of 2007.
Chuck