#1
Post rating: ~

If Obama was able to make significant achievement towards tangential issues and by 2012 the U.S. ends up with no more Don't Ask Don't Tell, decriminalized marijuana (legalized in some states), normalized relations with Cuba, some stuff about fighting global warming and something about net neutrality

would it be worth it to you?

Spoiler!



http://rameznaam.com/2014/12/21/2014-was-a-good-year-better-than-you-remember/

Edited by vampirarchist ()

#2
chickeon
Post rating: +
#3
[account deactivated]
#4
Post rating: ~
lol its Shut Up and Eat Your Peas, the article
#5
hi
Post rating: +
we've already had this debate (in re: voting) and it's kind of pointless.

some people think that minuscule amounts of progress on relatively unimportant issues and a somewhat slower dismantling of the welfare state makes voting for the so-called "lesser evil" worth it. others think that the de-motivation and co-opting of the left and legitimization of the system voting for a mainstream party involves makes it an objectively evil act.

IIRC most here think it doesn't really matter. marking off the name of your preferred candidate on a piece of paper & putting it in box doesn't change shit except to make you feel good about doing nothing. but it's not worth getting sectarian over.
#6
Post rating: ~
you can still laugh at historic irony, though
#7
UNUSUALY COOL
Post rating: +
vampirechrist
#8
Post rating: +
I also think it's worth arguing against electoral politics even from a practical perspective.

When we allow it to be understood that 'oh well at least liberal politicians will screw us over a little bit less than the conservatives' it cedes the power to effect change to politicians instead of realizing that that power resides with the people.

for example, liberals in the u.s. will point to obamacare as being 'better than nothing' and a concrete example of the the efficacy of picking the 'lesser of two evils'. But had Obama lost in 08, I think it's probable that we still would have had a similar policy put in place, or possibly an even more inclusive one.

Reforming the healthcare system was a huge issue with so many people behind it that the ruling class was going to have to address it one way or the other. Realizng the strength of the popular movement to finally institute universal health care, Obama even used his more 'left' position on the issue as the primary way to differentiate himself policy-wise from Clinton.

Given that what we eventually got was essentially a heritage foundation authored 'market based' plan based on Romney's initiative in Massachusetts, chances are we would have gotten basically the same thing with mccain in office. Or, maybe even something better as the democrats would probably have opportunistically used the moment to try to push the republican plan a few inches more to the left.

The point is that things didn't get marginally better because Obama used his president powers to bestow his gifts upon the waiting people, but that there was any change at all because there were so many people demanding it that whoever ended up in the big chair was going to have to do something to appease them.
#9
Post rating: ~

postposting posted:

maybe even something better as the democrats would probably have opportunistically used the moment to try to push the republican plan a few inches more to the left.


this seems pretty out of place in a post about how the elected government is all beholden to the interests of capital.

#10
Post rating: +
yeah there's some bad shit but were one year closer to being transhuman
#11
Post rating: ~
yeah that's just the argument i use on liberals when they wanna talk about all the Good Things obama has done and how the evil republicans would have been So Much Worse.