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.

  • nurple@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    Ā·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Given your edit I feel compelled to point out that two things are true simultaneously:

    • Direct action is effective and necessary

    but also

    • Direct action is not mutually exclusive with voting in any way.

    Voting takes a couple of hours per year (at most) and is a tremendously effective way of keeping fascists out of power and reducing overall harm while we concurrently pursue direct action and systemic change.

    I believe it is our moral obligation each day to do what we (reasonably) can, within the circumstances and powers weā€™re given, to ease suffering in our community and our world. On most days thatā€™s direct action. On election days itā€™s spending an hour voting for harm reduction. Participating in our shitty electoral system is not an endorsement of it any more than paying taxes is an endorsement of military funding or having a credit score is an endorsement of Equifax. Itā€™s simply the reality of having to live within a system we did not create and have limited control over. Refusing to engage with the realities we live under doesnā€™t make them go away - it just means more people get hurt.

    Iā€™ve ruminated and ruminated and ruminated on all of this and I canā€™t find any compelling philosophical or moral argument for allowing the greater evil to take hold, unless there is an imminent, likely possibility of a more just outcome following soon behind. If there was a groundswell of support in the US for a left revolution then perhaps a fascist victory could be the spark to push us towards structural change. But as it stands a plurality of Americans want (or are fine with) fascism, and theyā€™re armed to the teeth. The most likely outcome of fascists winning the election is that fascists take over and keep power, and that will cause unfathomable harm far beyond the disgusting shortfalls of our current administration.

    Itā€™s a trolley problem, essentially. The trolley is coming down the tracks and all we can do is pull the lever to have less people die. I find that a lot of modern discourse around this in left-leaning spaces essentially comes down to ā€œwell I donā€™t like either optionā€ or ā€œthere shouldnā€™t be a trolley!ā€ or things like that. You know what? I agree. I donā€™t like either option, and there shouldnā€™t be a trolley. I hope we can take more direct action so there are less trolleys and less people tied to the tracks in the future. But here we are, right now, and the trolley is heading down the tracks, and we cannot stop it. It doesnā€™t matter that there shouldnā€™t be a trolley. Itā€™s here. Not pulling the lever doesnā€™t make it go away, it just means that more people get hurt.

    So please, by all means, prioritize direct action. Get those trolleys off those tracks. But once weā€™re barrelling down the hill it is our moral obligation to spend an hour pulling the lever in whatever direction necessary to minimize harm.

    • Wahots
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      Ā·
      9 months ago

      Thank you for this nuanced comment. Itā€™s really refreshing to see. All too often, I feel a dreaded undertow among lefty friends because thereā€™s so much apathy around harm reduction via voting, which fills me with dread about where we are going. A number throw their votes or simply donā€™t vote.

      Voting is all we have. Protests can be helpful. But voting is the way to really show your neighbors (and our allies, like the Canadians, the French, Spanish, etc) that there are still cleareyed Americans out there.