Remote View
Electoral politics doesn't get the job done
Electoral politics doesn't get the job done
You're viewing a single thread.
105 comments
-
electoral politics DOES get the job done, just not to the same standard as the popular vote.
The problem is that the people who WANT things to change for some reason, don't seem to vote.
-
Never be deceived that the rich will allow you to vote away their wealth.
Lucy Parsons
Not a single one of our rights has ever been won via electoral politics, they have been won with a great deal of violence against the state and capitalism.
-
violence just happens to be alongside most of the electoral politics, i'm pretty sure we still voted for shit like, womens suffrage, and civil rights. Shit like gay rights as well.
Activism is an important part of politics no doubt, but to say that not voting and killing people will magically make legislation get passed is just fucking mentally deranged.
-
Women suffrage, civil rights, gay rights, labor rights, all of them had many acts of violence before anything meaningful came of it. Rights are never given, they are fought for with blood, sweat, and tears.
Violence is the only language the state understands, and unless people speak to them in their language they dont hear a thing. Violence is not just physical, its also mental and economical
-
that's only part of it, you can't just start killing people and expect something to change, you'll get killed or executed by the government instead. Just look at the recent unitedhealth thing.
Violence is the only language the state understands, and unless people speak to them in their language they dont hear a thing. Violence is not just physical, its also mental and economical
they also understand legislation, it's literally their entire fucking job. If you don't believe me, go look at the 27th amendment.
-
Violence isn't just killing, it's physical, mental, and economic. The most significant power we hold is economic violence.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence
thats uh, an interesting way to define "non violence"
Perhaps you should try some other word like uh, non compliance.
-
Your own source defines physical, mental and economic as violence.
-
mental violence isn't a thing, it's only referenced in passing twice, once is the footnotes (might i add this is actually an incorrectly found variation) so more accurately, once. Mental violence in that case is almost certainly referring to what most people would consider "abuse" not violence, mental abuse can technically be violent, but that's usually because it's physically violent. Economic violence is technically a thing, but it's a separate defined category of it's own. Most often related to violence, not strictly related to physical violence per se, but depriving someone of food they require to survive, i think is deemed "violent" by most people. And in some capacity, is physically violent.
And yes, it defines physical violence as physical violence, i think that was literally my entire point.
There are technically abstracted concepts of violence like structural or cultural violence (economic violence is one of these btw) but these aren't actually a direct engagement of violence, merely a collective trend among a group of people, in relation to violence.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
105 comments