You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Clusterfuck
We are peers, and our societal mechanisms should be designed to effect our ends without creating artificially superpowered parties.
Now, wouldn't that be nice..? I agree with all you're saying here @valued-customer, which is why Sanders is the only choice here; he'll be on top of an institutional hierarchy, but as a human he exhumes modesty and a willingness to fight for his peers, all other humans.
I appreciate your intellectual grasp of my point, but note the latter part of your reply simply restates your intention of supporting the extant system.
Our ability to undertake rational systems of social function are only possible insofar as we do not expend our effort otherwise. Support for any Great Leader is support for the extant system, and opposes the natural functioning society we are responsible for.
I do encourage you to end that support for demonstrably harmful social mechanisms, and to act to effect rational and endemic social modalities.
Thanks!
I'm a dreamer myself and dream often about a communist anarchy (which is just communism as communism is a stateless society without money). All I'm saying is we're not there yet, not by a long shot. Until then we work with what we've got. And every other election, when there isn't someone like Sanders on the ballot, I hold your position and refuse to support the system.In The Netherlands, where I live, there's no one even close to Bernie, so I do not vote here, just to give an example. If those lucky Americans didn't have Sanders, all my posts would be about refusing the vote, as I've written often in the past. Here's a chance, even if it's a small one, to change things a little closer to what we want; a more equal distribution of power.
I do appreciate your call to inaction though; it's the principled position to hold, without doubt.
I myself did the same thing regarding Ron Paul, which today I would not do for the above reasons, so I appreciate your position.
Thanks!