Platner and The Purity Trap
-
@mastodonmigration The intention here is to believe women and take their humanity as seriously as we take our own.
An 'op' that reveals true information about a person that reflects poorly on their comparison is an 'op' I do not care about, I care about the information, the person and their victims.
Understood. You think that the tactic is justified given the nature of the vulnerability.
-
@FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration And then they blamed 'the left' for Kamala's loss. We told them what to do, we told them to end this genocide and US support for an Apartheid state. They refused and then blamed the consequences of that choice on the people with principles.
-
Understood. You think that the tactic is justified given the nature of the vulnerability.
@mastodonmigration I think that women are fully human and their humanity is a baseline value that any party I support must uphold. This is especially true in an era where women's rights and autonomy are massively eroding.
You are complaining about the tactic and looking past the information because it is inconvenient to your political goals, and you are willing to sacrifice women to win elections.
-
@badtux @mastodonmigration If we vote in people who are a bit racist, sexist, transphobic, etc all we have accomplished is making our government more racist, sexist, transphobic, etc. To win elections.
In other words, we aren't actually the better alternative. We are conceding that sexism, racism, transphobia, etc are valid tactics to gain power. Just like the fascists.
So would you hand power to the fascists who are much worse in every way, rather than compromise on these lofty principles? This is the essence of the purity trap.
Your arguments against voting for the flawed Democrat sound great, but there are only two choices.
So what are you advocating to do?
Vote for the fascist party? Or, not vote?
There are no other options.
-
So would you hand power to the fascists who are much worse in every way, rather than compromise on these lofty principles? This is the essence of the purity trap.
Your arguments against voting for the flawed Democrat sound great, but there are only two choices.
So what are you advocating to do?
Vote for the fascist party? Or, not vote?
There are no other options.
@mastodonmigration @badtux Women being treated as human is a 'lofty principle' to you. Got it.
-
@mastodonmigration @badtux Women being treated as human is a 'lofty principle' to you. Got it.
-
@mastodonmigration @badtux Attempt to replace him. If we cannot, stop supporting him and focus our efforts elsewhere.
Supporting an abuser is always wrong.
-
@mastodonmigration @badtux Attempt to replace him. If we cannot, stop supporting him and focus our efforts elsewhere.
Supporting an abuser is always wrong.
So, effectively not vote, and hand power to the fascist party.
Again, this is the essence of the purity trap.
-
@mastodonmigration @badtux Do you understand how utterly offensive it is to keep labeling refusing to support abusers a 'purity trap'?
This shit is why we lose elections we should win. Nobody believes our rhetoric because we claim moral superiority and then abandon it the moment it *may* cost us an election.
If you don't live in Maine he isn't on your ticket. You have hundreds of important races across the country. You could focus on the ones not running abusers.
-
@FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration And then they blamed 'the left' for Kamala's loss. We told them what to do, we told them to end this genocide and US support for an Apartheid state. They refused and then blamed the consequences of that choice on the people with principles.
@reflex @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration IMO if both presidential candidates are genocidal, it's in everyone's interest to vote for the less genocidal candidate. It is disgusting, but also utterly true.
The same goes for sex pests, self-dealers, and all of it. You don't have to like it. None of us do.
-
@reflex @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration IMO if both presidential candidates are genocidal, it's in everyone's interest to vote for the less genocidal candidate. It is disgusting, but also utterly true.
The same goes for sex pests, self-dealers, and all of it. You don't have to like it. None of us do.
@liquor_american @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration No change comes from this tactic, we just send the message that these things are okay and continue the slide to the right we've been in since Clinton.
And losing elections, we do a LOT of that. Nobody believes in us anymore.
-
@mastodonmigration @badtux Do you understand how utterly offensive it is to keep labeling refusing to support abusers a 'purity trap'?
This shit is why we lose elections we should win. Nobody believes our rhetoric because we claim moral superiority and then abandon it the moment it *may* cost us an election.
If you don't live in Maine he isn't on your ticket. You have hundreds of important races across the country. You could focus on the ones not running abusers.
Unfortunately, every race matters and the Maine Senate race is absolutely crucial because control of the majority hangs in the balance. Harris losing the presidency certainly was a catastrophe. Unfortunately we don't have the luxury of just moving on when the choices are both bad. That's what politics almost always is. The least bad of two bad choices.
So choosing to move on, to not vote, is a choice. And one with consequences.
-
@liquor_american @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration No change comes from this tactic, we just send the message that these things are okay and continue the slide to the right we've been in since Clinton.
And losing elections, we do a LOT of that. Nobody believes in us anymore.
@reflex @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration There's another front to fight this war on, and it's within the party.
We're stuck in a two party system. So until we take ownership of one of those parties, we have the same shitty choices. It's actually pretty simple if you look past how frustrating it is.
-
Unfortunately, every race matters and the Maine Senate race is absolutely crucial because control of the majority hangs in the balance. Harris losing the presidency certainly was a catastrophe. Unfortunately we don't have the luxury of just moving on when the choices are both bad. That's what politics almost always is. The least bad of two bad choices.
So choosing to move on, to not vote, is a choice. And one with consequences.
@mastodonmigration @badtux We did this dance in 2018 and 2020. The end result was 2 years of tenuous control, Dems who could not even pass a voting rights act, and who empowered a genocide, and a loss of congress and the return to power of the fascists.
Doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results is idiotic. We either establish who we are, JUST AS THE REPUBLICANS HAVE, or we get at best, very temporary gains.
-
@reflex @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration There's another front to fight this war on, and it's within the party.
We're stuck in a two party system. So until we take ownership of one of those parties, we have the same shitty choices. It's actually pretty simple if you look past how frustrating it is.
@liquor_american @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration I absolutely agree with this. In WA state where I was a chair and vice chair for six years, I worked with other new leaders to gut the Dems, removing every 'broken stair' from the county and LD orgs. Once we had eliminated the abusers, volunteers more than doubled. We ran candidates to the left, always and ended up taking more seats than ever before in the county, even in red areas.
My friend Shasti Conrad took over the state party afterwards.
-
@mastodonmigration @badtux We did this dance in 2018 and 2020. The end result was 2 years of tenuous control, Dems who could not even pass a voting rights act, and who empowered a genocide, and a loss of congress and the return to power of the fascists.
Doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results is idiotic. We either establish who we are, JUST AS THE REPUBLICANS HAVE, or we get at best, very temporary gains.
This line of argument is effectively that it is better let the fascists win than compromise on principles, and we see very clearly the result of that.
-
@liquor_american @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration I absolutely agree with this. In WA state where I was a chair and vice chair for six years, I worked with other new leaders to gut the Dems, removing every 'broken stair' from the county and LD orgs. Once we had eliminated the abusers, volunteers more than doubled. We ran candidates to the left, always and ended up taking more seats than ever before in the county, even in red areas.
My friend Shasti Conrad took over the state party afterwards.
@liquor_american @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration Her run as state party chair has led to a supermajority in the legislature and Dems in every single statewide office. And turned out more votes for Kamala in 2024 than for Biden in 2020.
To do this we boxed out and removed 'visionary' and 'inspirational' and 'need this questionable person to win this purple district' candidates regardless of short term consequences.
But it won us the state, and continues to do so.
-
@mastodonmigration @badtux My position is we must actually BE better to win elections sustainably. Compromising our principles for short term gain costs us in the long run, and the past 30 years are proof of that. If we don't rebuild now our losses will only become more catastrophic.
Continuing to pretend we can hold back the tide while compromising on our values increases the cost of doing the real work needed for a sustainable party.
-
@liquor_american @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration Her run as state party chair has led to a supermajority in the legislature and Dems in every single statewide office. And turned out more votes for Kamala in 2024 than for Biden in 2020.
To do this we boxed out and removed 'visionary' and 'inspirational' and 'need this questionable person to win this purple district' candidates regardless of short term consequences.
But it won us the state, and continues to do so.
@reflex @FIAR_Light @mastodonmigration That's really awesome, and I think you should tell that story every chance you get, especially in settings like this where a lot of like-minded people might not have a unified vision of how to succeed within this messy system.
-
@mastodonmigration @badtux My position is we must actually BE better to win elections sustainably. Compromising our principles for short term gain costs us in the long run, and the past 30 years are proof of that. If we don't rebuild now our losses will only become more catastrophic.
Continuing to pretend we can hold back the tide while compromising on our values increases the cost of doing the real work needed for a sustainable party.
Right, so for you it is better to lose than compromise your principles, even if the opponent is worse. That is a logically consistent position.
