I voted for Biden in 2020. This was despite the fact that he is one of the main architects of modern American slavery through his crime bill which made the US the nation with the highest proportion of its own citizens imprisoned by far, who are quite literally slaves according to our constitution. This was despite him participating in the lies which caused us to murder hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis in our pursuit of blowing up Halliburtonā€™s stock value and taking control of large parts of the oil trade. This was despite his support of the neoliberal consensus which has lead to the deterioration of the economic, social, and physical health of the average American while the wealthiestā€™s share of the economy continues to grow meaninglessly. In fact, it was relatively easy for me to vote for Biden because the person he was running against was Trump who demonstrated worse tendencies on all of the above (while actually softening some prison laws, still fostered the increased social acceptability of acting according to blatant racism so I canā€™t even give him credit here) and more. According to my utilitarian principles, the evil choice I made was morally superior to the evil choice I did not make. Recent events have me re-considering this motivation.

To be clear, my opinion of Trump has not changed. Under Trump, I am sure I will be more likely to lose my loved ones or even my own life, although I am personally less at risk than his main targets. I am also sure that his influence would at least maintain if not increase the atrocities committed by the Likud-lead Isreali government with whom he has a strong relationship. Christian Nationalism is extraordinarily dangerous and if some of their desires are pushed through thereā€™s really no telling the extent of future horrors we may have to deal with. If Project 2025 has a certain degree of success we may consider any pretense of democracy to be nullified. If I were only considering the immediate consequences of my decision, I would still support Genocide Joe.

I phrased that last sentence like that intentionally and it is the inspiration for this essay. The lesser of two evils in this case is now facilitating a genocide and I think thatā€™s significant. In 2020 I didnā€™t think I had a red line which would cause me to allow a greater evil, and within the last few months Iā€™m coming to find that I do have a red line I have to consider in and of itself and that line is genocide.

This is what I find particularly frustrating when I try to engage this topic in good faith, even among Biden supporters who are lucid about recognizing what is clearly happening before their eyes with their implicit support. Yes, they tell me, there is a lot they donā€™t like about Biden but he is the better choice. There is some equivalence implied here. Biden is guilty of a lot of things like union busting, failure to support a public option despite promises, the continuation of many unfair border policies, and oh yeah genocide too. I really want to emphasize that we are talking about the categorization and systematic elimination of a group of people from their homes which could not be happening as it is now happening without the economic and political support of the Biden administration. This is now among the issues we are telling Democrats we are ok with or not ok with via the use of the only political currency left to us being our votes.

ā€œVote Blue No Matter Whoā€ is a phrase that made me sick the first time I heard it and I have only grown to detest it more, especially since I acted according to it it through my actions in 2020. Recently I realized that this is less of a call to action and more of a threat. More explicitly, this phrase can be understood as ā€œVote for our candidate or the Republicans will fuck you up.ā€ We better pay up or they canā€™t be responsible for what happens to us. Like other organizations who make threats like this, by paying up we are supporting them in what they do even if itā€™s under duress. As long as their heavy, the Republican party, is out there fucking people up the Democrats have license do anything as long as itā€™s not as bad. The DNC made a hard right-wing shift with Clinton and have been moving right since then, just not as far as the Republicans have. This is where damage control has gotten us. Democrats have pushed through so many boundaries and now weā€™re at genocide. Now the promise is, ā€œYou better support our genocide, or the Republicans will make it worse and fuck you up too.ā€

What is going to happen if we tell the Democrats that even though they are facilitating a genocide, weā€™re still going to pay up? What is the message the DNC will read from that? What precedent is going to be set? Are we going to be safer now that genocide will be seen as something we can compromise on? Do we really believe that Trump is the worst threat they can make, or that the lesser of two evils couldnā€™t eventually be worse than Trump? Do we really think by making this compromise here, on top of all the compromises weā€™ve made over the last few decades, that after this time everything will suddenly change and we can start talking about making average peoplesā€™ lives better for once?

I canā€™t responsibly ask these questions without recognizing that the threat is very real. I am not an accelerationist and I do not desire the further deterioration of our society in hopes of a positive outcome through violent revolution. I do not want to have to risk imprisonment and death to resist government persecution. I recognize that a breakdown of democracy and subsequent shift to political violence would only advantage those most equipped for and skilled in the use of violence, whose society of nails would be governed by hammers.

It seems to me that failing to support the Democrats this cycle puts us at greater immediate risk of the above, and that is shocking enough to bring most reasonable people under control. The thing is though, I think that by leaving genocide on the table for anyone across the Overton window of elected officials to consider as a socially acceptable tool is a far greater risk in the long term.

I think that by making genocide just another issue of managing how much we can tolerate among the two sides, making it something that is tolerable under some circumstances, or especially encouraging the thinking that the charge of genocide is conditional on the political expediency of it victims, we are ultimately normalizing the general idea that genocide is an acceptable tool for elected officials across our ā€œpolitical spectrumā€ of right wing and big tent(right wing, centrist, some left wing) to support or even employ in the worst case as long as they call it something else regardless of international law. If this is ok, what is the next boundary the Democrats will push? I want to stop digging the hole weā€™re in now, suffer the consequences, and deal with Democrats who at least understand they will not get elected if they facilitate genocide. Honestly Iā€™d like one day to not have to make the least evil choice and have the opportunity to support something after the DNC primary, and it doesnā€™t seem like damage control is leading us in that direction at all but away from it.

In practical immediate terms, Trump is hated outside of his base and has demonstrated that his endorsement is poison to politicians who are not himself more often than not. He is dangerous, but inspires so much more opposition to himself and his ideas than any other candidate I can think of. I even think that Trumpā€™s genocide is going to be received very differently than Bidenā€™s genocide since Trump will be far less tactful and far more honest about his motivations. The worst case scenario is possible under Trump and I donā€™t think itā€™s ok to dismiss that, but it is by no means a guarantee that Trump is the one to lead average Americans into fascism. It is a fucking frightening risk allowing a greater evil through inaction, but I think itā€™s the actual least bad option this time.

Iā€™m open to being challenged on or discuss anything Iā€™ve said here in good faith. Iā€™m also open to rage-induced teardowns of the ideas Iā€™ve proposed here as long as those teardowns are against my ideas and not against me as a person or others who are sympathetic to these ideas. I understand that this is an extremely charged topic and would like to encourage honest conversation as long as it doesnā€™t bleed into abuse which wonā€™t help anyone.

Edit: Whew, that was some important discussion. I hope it was clear that my intention was to clarify my thinking and explore different perspectives on my argument rather than me judging others for coming to different conclusions or trying to convince everyone I am sure I am absolutely correct. Importantly, I realized this entire argument is secondary. What is important now is direct action. Depending on the degree of success we have with disrupting this sick order, this whole conversation could become moot and that is my strongest desire. See yā€™all on the street.

  • averyminya@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    Ā·
    10 months ago

    : i am just not sympathetic to the idea that voting for Biden constitutes blood on your hands in a meaningful way. i think if you accept this line of argumentation, you would ultimately have to bite the bullet that this could also be said of paying taxes[1]ā€“and i certainly donā€™t begrudge people for paying their taxes even as this lines the pocket of the war machine, so then why should judge them for voting?

    This is such an important perspective that often seems ignored in these discussions. There is such a wide nuance to being an American and our participation, be it taxes or voting. Itā€™s always seemed clear to me that at bare minimum voting for the lesser evil is the first step down the path of doing the right thing as a citizen. However I also would say that I do somewhat feel this to Trump voters, but I would say thatā€™s more about the intent. I would hazard the assumption that if youā€™re voting for Trump again itā€™s likely because you have been pushed to have hate in your heart, not because his foreign policy is just so stellar. Whereas if youā€™re voting for Biden the intent is likely to not have the other guy.

    OPā€™s post is a very good conversation of exactly this. ā€œI wonā€™t support a genocide, so I wonā€™t vote!ā€ Thatā€™s awesome, but by not participating you are inherently accepting to the default winner - your bare minimum participation of voting could have had an affect which you abstained from. In a hypothetical landslide of 1 vote for Trump, suddenly voting has a lot of power. By the way, some of our votes in the last 8 years have been down to barely triple digit breaks - legitimately 1 small town voting could have swayed the results in that towns favor. Voting matters quite a bit.

    Given our current circumstances, in regards to deciding a vote for the lesser evil, I personally see a former president who placed as many restrictions as possible on specific citizens while relieving as many restrictions as possible on (mostly specific) corporations, and who had been all too happy to engage with the wrong sorts of International Relations, belligerently ignoring allies and goading more dangerous countries. I also see a current President who is historically known for not making the best decisions for the people, while also having a lot of policy that specifically is (or at least tries toā€¦ or at bare minimum says heā€™ll try to even if he wonā€™t which should go without saying for sooo many Presidents).

    Which by the way, yes, I would rather have a President who says he is for ____ rights but maybe doesnā€™t always have policies that fully align with that. As opposed to a president who says he is actively against those same rights, and actively promotes harm to certain demographicsā€¦ Damn right. Send yourself back in time 10-15 years, try to remember the general public perception from 2008 to 2014. We were calmer citizens because we had a rational leader who wasnā€™t spewing hate speech at every turn. Of course other factors had an effect, media exacerbation and whatever else, but that wouldnā€™t have been the case had we had literally any other President.

    And thatā€™s the whole thing of it - if you donā€™t vote, the voter has no power (giving it to the rest of the voters). If you do vote, the voter has very little power. At. Bare. Minimum. If you are a voter who canvases in your area, you have made a much larger difference - you have gone above and beyond the bare minimum. And who knows, maybe you just happened to live in the town that changed your swing states results. The thing is, the bare minimum should be much more than just voting. Just voting is how we got here in the first place. Just voting isnā€™t ever going to change anything, because just voting alone doesnā€™t rally people together under a united ideal.

    All this to say - I personally do not think that it is wrong to take what power you have to vote for ā€œfascism in 50 yearsā€ as some have recently started to say about Democrats. Itā€™s not wrong to vote this way when the alternative is fascism in 4 years. Futhermore, I think itā€™s also admitting that doing the absolute bare minimum just isnā€™t entirely effective.

    As U.S. citizens, voting is what we have to do at the bare minimum. We should all be out actively campaigning in our local elections specifically to encourage, inform, and expand our collective understanding of politics. This works two-fold, because as we become more engaged @Kwakigra@beehaw.org we become much more observant. As you say, if Dems are on a path to evil, isnā€™t the solution for all of us to get as possibly involved as we can? At a certain point, we would be the Dems playing the game.

    I say this as someone who has written to my California representatives about many things and having gotten response letters basically calling me an idiot for me expressing my wishes for him to reconsider his position, and why the evil things heā€™s supporting are actually a good thing. Itā€™s obviously not easy, weā€™re fighting against 2 generations of propaganda and a media mogul. Some say that we are too far gone, though I donā€™t believe in that sort of defeatism.

    We have many steps that we need to take in order to be set on the right path again. It should start with revitalizing the nations public education system, with a stronger focus on a healthy life-work balance. The fact that basic things about the U.S. system arenā€™t taught anymore has been a huge setback. Iā€™m young, I didnā€™t have any sort of homeroom or home ec, it took until my senior year in High School to even learn about how we do our taxes (and it did nothing). These classes were supplemented with ā€œextra critical thinkingā€, which has clearly failed, something that can be seen by reading just about any comment about a piece of media online. Home Economics, Time Management, and Critical Thinking all meld to make life at home manageable and enjoyable. From working with schools itā€™s been clear to see what I went through growing up has gotten even worse, especially with Covid putting all of the students on screens and a significant portion of them hardly even learning during that time at all.

    Catch up our nations students and weā€™ll be well on our way back to civility. Fighting against the anti-education crowd and having homeschooling be far, far, far more rigorous than it currently is - state dependent Iā€™m certain but the 3 Iā€™ve lived in, CA, OR, and WI, holy shit they are awful. Homeschoolings seems to have almost become co-opted by the anti- crowds, Iā€™ve regrettably only had 1 good encounter over the last 10 years and it was because the school remained open during Covid, to which the parents said screw that weā€™re homeschooling. As opposed to homeschooling because theyā€™d have to get a vaccine otherwise, or because the schools ā€œagendaā€ā€¦

    Anyway, Iā€™ve said far too much and gotten pretty off topic. Itā€™s been a while since Iā€™ve gotten to say anything about this and itā€™s clearly been pent up, otherwise Iā€™d have wrapped this up many paragraphs ago.