(no subject)
Sep. 10th, 2004 03:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pearwaldorfNow that Nader has somehow made his way onto the Oregon ballot, despite proven signature fraud, I have a rant.
If you voted for Nader in 2000, you made a mistake. If you vote for Nader in 2004, particularly in a battleground state, you're a dupe and an idiot.
I'd go farther than Jesse and say if you vote for Nader, you might as well be a traitor, because you're handing over your vote to a man who has decided to fuck over the country for the sake of his own ego. And for what reason? Because the Democrats aren't left enough? That's a problem, yes, but why don't we work on not backsliding before moving forward? Because you have to hold your nose and vote for a party you don't completely agree with? Well, tough shit. You're never going to agree with 100% of your party platform, whether you're a member of the Democratic, Republican, or Free Love party. If you do, either your party's too fucking small to make a difference or you're a slavering party zombie.
Politics is not an ideological purity contest. Get that through your head right now. No goddamn revolution of the proletariat is going to come from another four years under Bush. The proletariat (and probably some of the petty bourgeosie at this point) is going to be fucked over something awful, and if you don't vote for somebody who is actually committed to staunching the damage this administration has done, you're only helping it along.
If you voted for Nader in 2000, you made a mistake. If you vote for Nader in 2004, particularly in a battleground state, you're a dupe and an idiot.
I'd go farther than Jesse and say if you vote for Nader, you might as well be a traitor, because you're handing over your vote to a man who has decided to fuck over the country for the sake of his own ego. And for what reason? Because the Democrats aren't left enough? That's a problem, yes, but why don't we work on not backsliding before moving forward? Because you have to hold your nose and vote for a party you don't completely agree with? Well, tough shit. You're never going to agree with 100% of your party platform, whether you're a member of the Democratic, Republican, or Free Love party. If you do, either your party's too fucking small to make a difference or you're a slavering party zombie.
Politics is not an ideological purity contest. Get that through your head right now. No goddamn revolution of the proletariat is going to come from another four years under Bush. The proletariat (and probably some of the petty bourgeosie at this point) is going to be fucked over something awful, and if you don't vote for somebody who is actually committed to staunching the damage this administration has done, you're only helping it along.
Re: Nader does in fact suck
Date: 2004-09-12 01:35 pm (UTC)He's going on the Leninist model of "If it gets to the breaking point, the people will get all revolutionary and overthrow the evil tyrannical government." Which is bullshit, but some people believe it. Of course, most of the people I know who believe it are living in their own little progressive lala land.
why are Greens, who are supposed to be EVEN MORE LIBERAL, willing to hand Bush the election on a silver platter?
The problem therein lies in the perception the Naderites/Greens have of Bush and Kerry. They see them as part of the same fucked-up mess that is beholden to corporate interests and party politics, which is fair enough. So, to them, Bush and Kerry pretty much are one and the same. The thing is, the Naderites are so far to the left anything other than radical systemic change is unacceptable to them. They don't believe there can be real, substantitative change until the two party system is broken up. And they have a point there as well, but I don't think this is the time to go mucking about with the system.
As an independent who leans Democrat, I don't think that they're making too big a deal out of Bush's sheer incompetency in the White House, but then again, I'm biased.