• undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    If only there was some kind of proven road map where countries who has been dominated by their ruling elite using the two party trick went on to form a kind of labour movement that forced a third choice on the ruling class…

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      glances at the current state of the UK Labour party

      It’s been known to work for a bit, but its also been known to collapse right back into the old two-party dichotomy. I think the hysteria around third parties baked into every election since the Bush Era SCOTUS-powered election theft in Florida is overblown, particularly when so much of the electorate lives in one-party dominant states. But I’ve also noticed successful outsider parties - the German Greens, France’s En March, the UK Liberal Dems - seem to embrace Corporationism as quickly as any of their German Christian Democrat / French Socialist / UK Tory peers.

      And then there’s always this specter of fascism floating on the edge of the political establishment. Your Alternative for Germany, your National Front, and your UKIP create this existential crisis for liberal voters, such that they’re persistently terrorized into voting the “safe” centrist candidates in while ostracizing any candidate actually running on the things they say they want.

      The Ruling Elite have the effective roadmap to keep the proles in line. Continuously finance a paper tiger on the right-flank of the election cycle. Make immigration a boogeyman issue that mobilizes the reactionaries within the state to turn out in droves. Then dangle a weak liberal as a release valve - a Starmer or Biden or Macron or Olaf Schultz - that nobody particularly likes, but the liberal-leaning base are told is “electable” because they can win the support of the conservative national media.

      People are bombarded with this false choice - weak liberal or strongman conservative - decade after decade, all the way around the edge of the Atlantic, until the institutions these weak liberals are supposed to support are falling apart and the strongman conservatives can easily take over.

      Its a doomed system.

      • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        The labour party is certainly flawed but you have to remember all they’ve given the people of the UK, in the brief times they’ve been in power (relatively speaking).

        I’m not claiming it will fix everything but I would argue that the UK and just about every country thats had a labour movement that got into power benefited from it. Well, the 99% did.

        Unless you know when the revolution is coming, it might be better to make alternative arrangements. Short of running to the hills and joining a commune, we’re quite deliberately not given any other option than to vote for better oppression.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          The labour party is certainly flawed but you have to remember all they’ve given the people of the UK

          You’re going to have to fill me in, because it seems Keir took office and immediately declared that there is no money left in the banana stand.

          They couldn’t even restore funding to the H2 connection from Manchester to London, and that’s shit that was already paid for.

          • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 days ago

            True or not, it would take something very special for the new Labour government to have already of given things to the people of the UK, seeing as Parliaments only been back for 2 weeks, don’t you think?

            I mean, I have moderate expectations at best. I hope they don’t make things worse but, at the same time, I also think they’ll fall well short of achieving time travel.

            Were you expecting time travel? I think you might be disappointed, if so.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 days ago

              I also think they’ll fall well short of achieving time travel.

              It’s crazy when something as simple as rejecting the Cass Report and ending the instructional abuse of Trans People is equated with SciFi tiers of impossibility.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Smaller elections. Get state representatives, win a few seats in the house, a few senators… When your party actually contributes to governing then you can discuss running for president. Until then you won’t beat Nader or Perot

    • zeppo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Not by voting for people in elections they can’t win. Vote at the local and state level or in primaries for people who will enact voting reform.

    • chaogomu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Changing the voting system so that third parties are actually possible.

      You need a cardinal voting system, otherwise you’ll fall prey to Durverger’s Law and Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem.

      I favor STAR, it’s the best system designed to date.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        The problem is that these systems are way more complex and have edge cases where someone unpopular gets elected. Making major changes to a system that has worked for 248 years seems like a recipe for disaster.

        • helenslunch@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          and have edge cases where someone unpopular gets elected

          As opposed to the current system, where someone unpopular always gets elected?

          Making major changes to a system that has worked for 248 years

          It hasn’t worked. It’s deeply flawed and we currently use the worst-possible process, rooted in ancient history.

      • helenslunch@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        Changing the voting system so that third parties are actually possible.

        And why would anyone do that when everyone takes time out of their day to express their approval for the existing 2 parties?

  • ano_ba_to@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Progress is slow. Start with killing the popularity of the second party/party you absolutely don’t align with/party that will move the needle away from your party first.

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    I’ve never voted for a major party presidential candidate in my life. It has never cost anyone anything, because I used to live in a deep red state and now live in a deep blue state. There’s a better chance of helping a candidate hit thresholds that would qualify them for things like campaign funding, then there is of Tennessee or Illinois being the pivotal swing state. The vast majority of Americans are in similar situations, there’s only a handful of states where your presidential vote matters at all.

    Despite this, and the fact that I’ve voted for Democrats down ballot, liberals hate me, and are always trying to fight me over it. Why? Because the presidential race is the only thing anybody cares about. For all the countless, identical debates over the presidential race, I’ve seen virtually no discussion on here of other elections. Culturally, your take on the presidential race is how your political identity is defined. That cultural tendency is so powerful that it can even bleed into foreign countries.

    The more people focus on my presidential voting behavior, which has no potential to affect anything, the more it reaffirms that such behavior is important. The reason that people care so much about my vote is not because they care about the outcome, it’s because they want me to display a sign of loyalty, to bend the knee, to conform to their norms. But if everyone’s going to treat it as an expression of identity, then, all else being equal regarding the outcome, it would be better to define myself according to what I actually believe. The fact that people get big mad over someone voting third party even in an extremely solid red or blue state is all the more reason to do it. My vote doesn’t affect your life at all since it’s totally irrelevant to the outcome, so stop obsessing over what amounts to a personal decision.

    • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      There are multiple people just in this post alone advising people to vote in local and primary elections. What are you talking about?

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        “Advising people to vote in” is not the same as “caring about” or “paying attention to.”

        Is there any mention of specific candidates? Any passionate arguments over the details of specific races? Any discussion of political theory or historical precedent or anything like that in that context? Has anybody called someone a Nazi because of how they’re voting for down ballot?

        No. Because what people care about and pay attention to is the presidential race, unless you’re some kind of weird nerd or responsible citizen or something.

        • papertowels@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          How active is your local Lemmy community? Mines is pretty dead but voting for the specifics you call for is still mentioned.

          Of course people aren’t going to be discussing the specifics of local races in the general politics community. It’s entirely disingenuous to argue that’s an indicator that nobody cares about local races.

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            I don’t agree that that’s an “of course.” There should be discussion of specific local races in a general politics community. Like I said, presidential votes only matter in a handful of states. If you add up the populations of swing states, I’m sure it’s higher than any individual state, but there are still some pretty big states where millions of people live that that aren’t included in that. And yeah, everyone is affected by the presidential race, but everyone is affected by congressional races too. If you want to say, let’s say 90% of the content should be on the race that’s relevant to people living in Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and maybe North Carolina that’s fine, but if the rest of us have to see their content all the time, then they shouldn’t mind if they have to see like 10% of the content relevant to the people who live in some of the other 44 states.

            And to be clear, this isn’t something I’m saying about Lemmy in particular. Go anywhere in America, from the deepest red state to the deepest blue state, and ask about the latest story-of-the-week about the presidential race, and people will know about it and have an opinion on it and care about it. Ask them about local races, and they’ll be far less knowledgeable far less invested, and will probably try to fit it into a framework based on the one race they actually care about, even if they can’t affect it in any way.

            There would be so much more potential to cut through battle lines if people would go like, “OK, fine, you don’t like either candidate, you don’t have to vote for them. But do you mind if I ask what state you live in? Maybe there’s someone running for congress or governor who’s more to your tastes. I’d be happy to look into who’s running and discuss them with you.”

            But nobody wants that shit. We want the battle lines, we want the group identity, the team sports. We don’t want to do research about boring shit nobody cares about, we want a constant stream of engaging news stories and hot takes that we can all experience together, as a culture.

        • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          “no one talks about X”.
          Is shown that many people talk about X.
          “No, not like that!”

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Misinterprets what I said to create a strawman

            Is explained to that that’s not what was meant

            Repeats strawman.

                • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 days ago

                  You’re the one coming in here and asking why anyone cares who wins an election that’s not even in your country.

                  You can rightly fuck off. Most of us care very deeply who wins.

                  Not surprised you and the other people downplaying the election are from .ml

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          I shill voting 3p at every level as tactic to clown the two party regime.

          But nothing stops people from getting into the weeds in local elections though.

          But yeah the whole vibe… If you don’t want my guy, you lack empathy OR you just don’t care about hurting people is very 🤡 approach to essentially shame people into compliance.

          The shaming campaign from the DNC has been very strong recently.

          This entire discussion is only happening BC it was posted in a sub that is not controlled by the group who runs news and politics subs on Lemmy world

  • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    You’d need to grow the third party / greens by having them become a viable party in local elections and state elections first. The greens have failed to do that. Which means they have no chance except to spoil the election.

    • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Big money donors will never allow green candidates to get into significant office. Money runs politics and billionaires own entire state houses these days

      • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        True. I think about it now as a kind of physics problem. You have political energy measured in dollars on each side. Volunteers to help bring the political message across for free can be converted into dollars too. There are a lot of people concerned or outright scared out of their minds about environmental concerns like climate change. One sight has multiple orders of magnitude more political energy to spend. For example on counter measures, or boosting extreme vegan voices to cause disruption, advertising or media stories or think tanks or lobbyists. And the “technology” to manage this political energy is rapidly advancing too. So no amount of “this is the right / wrong choice” argument is going to change anything. There is only power.

  • merthyr1831@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Insane levels of cope from the party that’s suing states to remove the “unviable” third parties to protect their genocide candidate’s chances at beating someone who is literally incapable of forming basic sentences

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    I dunno about this analogy. I think the doctor proved that with enough time, anything can become a door.

  • a9cx34udP4ZZ0@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    “Why would I vote for a primary party candidate who supports ranked choice voting when I can just throw my vote away on a third-party candidate that will never be elected? I’ve got principles!”

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Ranked choice voting seems like a great way to create huge political instability. Let’s take the system that has worked decent for 248 years and completely replace it with something less well tested. We already have uncertainty we don’t need to mess with the system more.

      • Acamon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        You don’t want to mess about with that democracy nonsense. We’ve had a monarchy that has worked decent for a millennium, and you want it replace it with some untested, newfangled system?

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Voting for either side is just accepting the status quo.

      Third party vote today is just laying ground work for a generational fight. There is no other way to get the attention from the politicians.

      They rule on behalf of donors and two party system ensures they ways win, they just take turns.

      • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        There is no other way to get the attention from the politicians.

        And if those politicians are so keen on ignoring you, why would they listen to this? Oh, you voted for Cornel West because you’re “unsatisfied,” literally who cares? The status quo wins again, goodbye. Say hello to the camps.

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          Say hello to the camps.

          is the new DNC FUD we get for voting third party?

          yes please put me into fema camp staffed by obama death panel, my DNC komissar 🤡

            • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 days ago

              I stated my position on this issue all over this thread.

              But for you here again dear:

              This tactic will only work if peasants are able to upset the regime sufficiently. a constant 3-5 percent every election, they will have to take notice. double digits they will have to start planning around it.

              This is a generational tactic, it will take several cycles to get the message across IF AND ONLY IF we can get 2-10% of voters of to go third choice every single election across all elections.

              This is a guerilla, asymmetric tactic. No doubt about it.

              But it very low cost from personal perspective but can be easily scaled if public sentiment turns.

              Once, we got the regime asking questions we can start getting proper 3p candidates in places. Or people can start now on them… but everybody can start denying the regime legitimacy today.

  • Sibbo@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    You mean in the USA? I guess the more viable path is to campaign to fix their democracy from within the democratic party. And then make new parties.

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Why do you care if the person you voted for wins?

    Outside of “not letting the other person win”, you should vote for who you align with, or who represents you best.

    If more people stopped caring about voting for “the viable candidate”, we’d probably see a third party in American politics…

    • booly@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Why do you care if the person you voted for wins?

      Because it’s an election with consequences, not an online fandom.

      • EnderMB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        All elections have consequences. I know that Americans like to be dramatic (especially on Lemmy, Reddit is far more tame in this regard), but voting for someone that wants to promote policies that you support is how those policies are promoted.

        I say this time and time again on here, but America isn’t special. Many countries have two main parties, but while third parties don’t always see power, they maintain Influence everywhere. Hell, you can argue that the Tea Party, Brexit, Irish Unification, MAGA, Immigration reform in Germany, all of this is due to influence outside of the main parties.

  • Westdragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    Want to build a viable third party for presidential elections? Start small at the city/county level and eventually you will have candidates at the state/federal level. Today’s city council is tomorrow’s senator/president. Does it really surprise anyone that a relatively unknown and unproven candidate outside of the two major parties doesn’t get any traction in a federal election?

    • MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      That takes money, lots of it and the 2 main parties have huge corporate donors who will never give money to an environmental party

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      we aint getting elected viable third party until the two party regime is denied legitimacy which does by not voting for either party. deny them engagement by voting third party, anyone really.

      • Westdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        So you don’t agree that starting from the ground up won’t work? Why not? Too much effort or takes too much time?

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          If you are talking about viable third party candidate, then my position is: current political stage has no room for one hence why i shill more a narrower scope goal of “deny the two-party regime legitimacy”

          Something that people can get behind, act upon individually and directly while avoiding getting sucked into political left/right circle jerk.

          Bigger picture would obviously involve a proper 3 third party candidates to upset the duopoly. Either by winning outright or forcing the two parties to provide concessions to the voters instead of current “get fucked peasants, I am serving my corpo daddies”

          These 3p candidates need for voting public set the stage for them by making third vote a viable path for a politician/movement.

          My original thesis enables this while not getting into the political weeds but it does not stop others from building on it. If people got their 3p, then they should shill it! Even if every person votes for their own guy but sufficient amount of people do it, then it would still lead to awkward situation why are there 9% of voters who did not chose “regime”