this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2026
486 points (85.5% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
3856 readers
217 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, anti-communism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc. This includes instance shaming.
Introduction to Socialism (external links)
Marxism-Leninism Study Guide: Basic Course
Marxism-Leninism Study Guide: Advanced Course
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Intrinsic to this sentiment is the classic false dichotomy logical fallacy. Saving yourself and voting for less destructive leaders (who aren't starting new wars, and threatening your allies) are not mutually exclusive acts. So while you're busy saving yourself, you should still be doing what you can to reduce the harm of the current system.
In the words of James Baldwin, "how much time do you want for your progress?"
Well done on the downvote, and a very mature response. You think you've got a revolution organised before the next elections, do you?
What a whiny baby
voting for Kamala didn't reduce any harm
Because she didn't win. Had she, we wouldn't be reading headlines about your dumb fuck president trying to rename the Pacific, rolling back EPA pollution limits, paying Russia to invade the Ukraine through petrochemical purchases, chucking tantrums about not getting a Nobel Peace Prize, and every other stupid thing, every fucking day. Lots of people protested against Democrats and didn't vote for them, which would have been fine except the US has bugger-all preferential voting, so it put Republicans in power. It's not complicated.
counterfactuals can't be proven.
It's laughable that you think that's a rational response, implying the Democrats were just as likely to rack up as many transgressions.
I can't prove that my drinking glasses won't break spontaneously by leaving them on the kitchen bench, but that's no reason to throw them on the floor to ensure that they do.
it's laughable that you can't build a case on facts and need to reach for fictional worlds
> Provides a factual response.
'You're not using facts!'
> Add an analogy to help you understand it.
Fail to understand it.
Have a nice life, mate. It's clearly not going to be an easy one for you, having to muddle through with such poor comprehension skills.
there is no world in which Kamala won. that's the fantasy.
Waaaah, waaaah