this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
296 points (83.8% liked)

Memes

52635 readers
737 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Saymaz@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 28 minutes ago

Ah Capitalism! The system got such a huge political range. At its peak, it transforms into imperialism. And at its decay, it transforms into fascism.

[–] OmegaLemmy@discuss.online 7 points 8 hours ago

voooting works, just look at how Europe is (not) supporting Palestine!

[–] ByteJunk@lemmy.world 9 points 12 hours ago

But whose turn is it?

[–] deaf_fish@midwest.social -1 points 6 hours ago

Until voting doesn't count, this is a fed post.

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 47 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Some more context for anyone wandering over from an anti-communist / pro-capitalist space:


Socialists view democracy under capitalism to be impossible. Most current-day systems are better labeled as Bourgeois Democracy, or democracy for the rich only, which socialists contrast with proletarian democracy. Under capitalism, political parties, representatives, infrastructure, and the media are controlled by capitalists, who place restrictions on the choices given to workers, limit their representative options to vetted capitalist puppets, and limit the scope of public debate to pro-capitalist views.

Bourgeois democracies are in reality Capitalist Dictatorships, resulting in legislation favorable to the wealthy, regardless of the population's actual preferences. The Princeton Study, conducted in the US in 2014, found that the preferences of the average US citizen exert a near-zero influence on legislation, making the US system of elections and campaigning little more than political theater. Multi-party, Parliamentary / representative democracy has proven to be the safest shell for capitalist rule, regardless of voting methods or differing political structures, for countries as diverse as Australia, Japan, Sweden, the UK, the US, South Korea, or Brazil.

Ancient Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle more accurately defined Democracy as rule by the poor, and they considered states based on elections to be anti-democratic Aristocracies, since only the wealthy and ruling families have the resources to finance elections. They contrasted this with random selection / sortition, and citizen's assemblies, as being the defining features of democracy, both of which are non-existent in the countries listed above. Today, liberal / parliamentary "democracies" are dominated by wealthy candidates, and entrenched political families, with Capitalists standing above political power.

This system of sham elections acts as a distracting theatre piece, giving the illusion of democracy, whilst in reality it serves to platform capitalist views, make them appear more popular than they are, and manufacture consent for the system itself.

Some more resources:

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone -1 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

If it didn't count, disenfranchisement would be such a heavily wielded tactic

[–] Saymaz@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 27 minutes ago

You are so close to getting it.

[–] causepix@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

So you recognize that our voting system features heavy disenfranchisement, but you use that as a reason for why it works?

The lesson here isn't that voting alone is all that significant; it's that the bourgeois will claw away even the most insignificant crumb they can get, and that's precisely why democracy does not work under capitalism. The difference in that distinction is that; rather than fighting many small one-step-behind fights in the name of voting, in hopes we get to vote for some of the change that our people need 10 years down the road; we organize and build our capacity to directly fight the big fight for our people.

This is one of the many contradictions of capitalism; democracy is how the system maintains its legitimacy, but democracy itself is a threat to capital interests. Too much and too little democracy are both against ruling class interests. Too much, and the working class can influence politics in a way that threatens the ruling class and their power. Too little, and the system loses legitimacy, opening itself to the possibility of revolt.

The ruling class maintains the balance by minimizing the possibility of a coordinated working-class resistance; guaranteeing only the minimum amount of democracy, only for as long as they recognize the working class's ability to organize and overthrow them. Making a show of what little faux democracy we have is a tactic to that end; the carrot hanging from the stick. It sows division, keeps us occupied, keeps our attention in one predictable place, and attempts to convince us of the system's legitimacy; all of these being obstacles in organizing an effective resistance against the guy holding the stick.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 16 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

The Nepalese figured out how to make their votes count….using this one weird trick

[–] limer@lemmy.ml 40 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I’ve think voting in the USA is a faith driven social event, mixed with a mentality of watching sports.

It’s like a purification ritual , and is a descendant of the big tent Christian rivivals seen in the 1800s.

“Have you been saved” and “have you voted” are inflected the same ways in speech patterns.

Edit typo

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 26 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

100%. Its about identifying with "the team", and declaring your allegience to the US system, not about substantive democracy.

[–] limer@lemmy.ml 7 points 22 hours ago

In states that do not use counting methods approved by the United Nations, voting provides legitimacy to ongoing multi-decade scams.

If the vote counting is illegitimate, should one vote for the better candidate anyway? This is an intensely debated thing over history in many countries.

Solving that, then voting is like you describe.

There are many layers to just how wrong voting is in the USA. And many of these scams, and the toleration of them, definitely affects reforms in unrelated areas other than the direct elections

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 day ago

fwiw: it's adherence is like a faith driven event in that a very large percentage don't even engage but pretend that they do.

[–] thatradomguy@lemmy.world 7 points 19 hours ago

Vooooooooting

[–] redparadise@lemmygrad.ml 21 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Plot twist: The liberal has a +4 and gets to win a verbal acknowledgement before the cycle resumes.

load more comments
view more: next ›