How does it feel to be an entitled supporter of genocide? How’s your sleep? Do you need someone to talk to?

However I understand the importance of this election and I understand how our system works.

your actions say otherwise. you understand what you want to avoid. but you don’t know how to actually avoid it.

Voting 3rd party does nothing but pull votes from Democrats.

does it? i’ve never seen evidence of this. I’ve seen 3rd party candidate pull enough votes that if they were applied to democrats they would have won. But there is no evidence those votes would have gone to the democrat if the third party was absent. This is a fiction you’ve made up in your head to appease your ego and to place blame on others.

What really is happening here is you’re upset that your candidate lost and you want to blame others instead of the candidate for being a horrible human. Harris can fix her genocidal chains, she won’t, but she could. And worse if she does lose then the entire basis of you voting for the lesser evil is proven ineffectual further damaging your self image because now not only did the evil you wish to prevent succeeded, but you compromised your morals and enabled a genocide.

Its a shame really the lies we tell ourselves.

I love watching you work @TheOubliette@lemmy.ml. note taking

Welcome to the brotherhood of being a human being, though I suspect you’ve been here for some time. we respect your choice to vote for harris.

When? Im not an Oracle. May take decades. May get worse before it gets better in certain areas. The USSR took a generation to collapse.

Im hoping harris move to the right enough and manages it. So we can split the dem party finally.

Wow i never knew! Thanks! 🤯

Poor feefees. You clearly don’t care about facts and logic.

Because facts and logic would lead you to the realization that only Harris can fix her appeal to voters, and that 3rd party voters dont effect the election outcome for president. If someone is voting 3rd party they have good reasons for it. And no amount of bitching at them will change those reasons.

You not agreeing with those reasons is a you problem not a them problem. If harris is the more popular candidate she’ll win thats how it works. If shes not she wont. these are decisions only harris can make about ber campaign.

Fun fact: many 3rd party voters are also Republicans who wouldn’t have voted for harris anyways. Are they also helping trump?

It amuses me how rational you think you are while simultaneously missing the point. The gop will collapse, and then the dems will be the right wing party that they want to be. And the fight will begin anew. Harris shift to the right is a fine demonstration of this.

They were joking. Also CGP grey didnt cover things like how fptp is influenced by there being multiple branches of government, having the electoral college in the mix, etc.

While it’s a great video its overly simplistic to apply to america. While i believe fptp has to go. You absolutely can vote third party safely without risking trump if the conditions are right and they often are in the us there are few battle ground states where it’s higher risk

Edit: sorry you seemed to have gotten two responses meant for other people. Suspect an off by one bug in lemmy reply page

I simply pointed out the logical flaws in your thought process. If that insults you 🤷. Lifes rough, find a better use of your time solving the problems with the process than bitching at people who think your ideology is shit and then being surprised when they tell you so.

Removed by mod

Seek help. And an education.

yawn and thats their decision. Candidates are not entitled to a person vote, they need to earn it. If you wabt your candidate to win those votes then get them to adopt the policies that caused those voters to not vote for them.

Trump’s case: being a corrupt authorian, racist, and all around shit human. Harris: a genocidal corporate lapdog.

Trump is unfixable along with the people who vote for him. Harris might be able to stop being a genocidal ass.🤷

Yes and central planning is inherently unstable and inefficient. So you’re back to my original points that he doesn’t know what hes talking about.

Again you dont understand the implications of his system because you dont even know what metrics to use to advocate for it. Personally any system that optimizes for gdp or manipulated approval ratings as a measure of a healthy and fluroishing society design has lost the thread and doesnt know how to live.

As i told you earlier you want to convince me tell what you want to accomplish with your government and then we can discuss the metrics youd use. But so far you’ve demonstrated either: you’re absolutely clueless about how systems fail/get corrupted, what the metrics you’re using actually measure, and how they translate into behavior of the people living under those systems.

Essentially you’ve demonstrated you want to live in an authoritarian dictatorship. Hard pass.

Sorry hit submit prematurely;) its all there now. And i dont need to read your drivel because your premises are faulty.

I dont need to put my hand in shit to know its shit. The smell was more than enough.

Edit: also you think you need numbers oi. Fun fact once you understand how systems work you dont need the measurements to know if they’ll work. The measurements are just to prove the system works as intended.

First you need to identify what your goals are for the system. The fact your spouting gdp and manipulated approval rates were sufficient indicators that you have nfc what you’re talking about or your goals are not compitable with mine for society.

I mean thats a you goal. I have no issue with harris winning she just wont get my support until she commits to enforcing leahy or keeping kahn. Which the biden/harris admin blinked yesterday on israel. Give it a few more days maybe send your own letter in support of arms embargo to your reps and help get them to do the right thing eh?

Your response shows you may have read things but you dont understand them or systems. The fact your think PRC actually has that level approval invalidate literally anything you said. I dont bother reading the drivel you spouted after that. I may glance over it in the future.

Things you need to understand before you step on to the stage with me: metrics and measurements are only meaningful if you understand how they were measured. Which you clearly dont if you’re spouting gdp and prc approval rates as a proof points.

As i said originally marx didnt understand systems or people. His conclusion that its easier to seize centralized systems is 100% correct but he also advocates for such a system to replace the system he identifies as unstable. Which is logically hilarious foolish and in no way ensures a better outcome for workers. As the chinese im sure would tell you if they were not petrified of saying anything negative about the prc.

Like i said it takes months of effort to deprogram someone like youself and frankly its not worth the effort. Carry on soldier. Ill have the bandages ready when you invariably get bloodied.

Sigh. if you’re going to be so insistent. first lets start with tossing out GDP as a metric its useless. it measures production not happiness/societal fullfillment. those two things are very different. If you want to use china as a pillar of socialist utopia… well, sorry thats not going to fly.

secondly: at least use comparable countries. comparing the USSR to the UK and on top of it using percentages. my god. did anyone teach you anything about maths?

(the problem is in what 0% represents as a baseline the higher the baseline is the less room it has to grow, and the USSR and the UK didn’t start out at the same baseline)

third: cite your sources if you want to play the numbers game.

fourth: you and I clearly have different definitions of central planning, you have a particular definition and mine is a general ‘small number of people making the calls’ both late stage capitalism and what you’re article you linked to are the same thing in all but how those individuals are selected. to me there is no difference there. they’re both equally bad ideas.

You’re foolish because you think marx had the answers to the problem of the class war. he didn’t… You’re never going to convenience people to risk dramatic upheaval. Most people are not wired that way. hence marxist ideas and in particular the revolutionary followers such as yourself dont understand human nature. The US is not at that point yet, it has to get significantly worse for such triggers to be effective.

re central planning: late stage capitalism and you’re marxist idea of public property are the same levels of centralized planning. the fact you don’t realize that is… sad. again you also don’t need such a system. it limits diversity in ideas and development. even if you take over the means of production in a capitalist economy, who says you’re going to do any better than the current crop of oligarchs? fundamentally I don’t believe you will.

also the very same weakness of capitalism you hope to exploit are the same weakness your society will have because its just as centralized. I really hope you realize this.

As for the PRC… its not even 100 years old yet; and has a fair amount of problems; primarily the fact its run by a dictator. the USSR didn’t last a 100 years. so lets just say if those are your examples for thriving socialist countries I’ll pass on your vision.

Essentially my fundamental point is you need to figure out how to build the system without centralized planning and organization and a robust immune system to bad actors; and marxist from everything i’ve seen/been shown isnt that.

how to clarify the two adjectives I used for marxism and yourself mmmm… I’ll try but these are things I usually spend months on deprogramming people like yourself.

idealistic: thinking you can just wrest away control from capitalists without broad support, which you certainly don’t have, and the naive assumption your central planners will be better than the current catch we already have. No thanks winni I’ll pass.

inflexible: soon as your centralize anything in a system you make it harder to experiment or course correct. why? because everything that depends on that centralize system needs to be changed in order to support the changes. lets take something as simple as deciding to build a park. if public spaces are centrally planned then who decides what kind of park it is? me? my neighbor? my town? my state? what about what gets researched? who gets the supplies to do their research? what if the individual doing the resource allocation is corrupt or doesn’t understand the new ideas? what if they find a particular approach like fetal stem cells objectionable?

and the personal attack is because you’re as inflexible as marx was in his thinking you think he had the answers and you rely on him as an authority and puritan authority. sorry but appeals to authority don’t matter to me. You shouldn’t need to appeal to marxism to demonstrate the validity of your ideas. tell me what particular bits you plan on changing and how. the good thing about living in a democracy is you can effect these things at a local level. the PSL is doomed from the start because it doesn’t understand the problems or the people its trying to convince and as a result it doesn’t understand how to manipulate systems and there isn’t wide spread repression (yet) to get people angry enough to be supportive.

Now I’ve spent enough time corresponding with you and I’m going back to fiddling with my mushrooms they’re far more interesting than talking to a soldier tripping over their own firearm in their enthusiasm. but I suggest you research into using random processes and their effects on creating robust systems, there are examples in compute science, biology, law, governance, maybe it’ll enlighten you the the power of distributed systems over centralized. 👋

because I dont give a shit about marxist. its mostly nonsense. he identified the root problem but failed to understand human nature or how to build robust economies/systems. just because you’re blinded doesn’t mean every socialist is as foolish. centralized planning is what we have today in late stage capitalism, and its what caused communist societies to collapse under the corruption they foster. like i said good luck in your idealistic vision it’ll never work because its inflexible and misses the point.

edit: now i was a little terse there sorry. anyways I dont need you to give me an expose on marxism. its strictly unnecessary. is where the PSL is claiming to require a planned economy. which is a bad idea and thats what I was reacting to; its what we have today and its ripe for corruption. any socialist movement is going to have to learn to reject centralized structures beyond a certain size.

if the goal is to prevent wealth accumulation/ensure the needs of the workers are met, there are other methods to do so that dont require a planned economy.

now I suggest you go spend your efforts on another individual, theres no more play here for you. but again I recommend PSL spend its effort on state level efforts and show their model can work. there is some okayish ideas there they just need to prove them first but there is also a lot of things we already have available.