;

Author Topic: D&D - What are the practical effects of liberal voter apathy/disillusionment?  (Read 1796 times)

woulduliketonomoar

  • Domestic Threat
  • ***
  • Posts: 160
    • Awards
There is surprisingly one actual accurate analysis which is of course completely ignored in favor of Obama cocksucking.

Quote from: Sergg" post="406965754
I've been talking to a number of friends who are self-described liberals who claim they will not be voting in 2012.  They're very disillusioned by Obama's administration and there's a lot of "just as bad as Bush" or "both sides are evil/bought by corporations".

On the other hand, if voting for a liberal third party will cause the Democrats to co-opt those votes and move further left, then maybe 3rd party voting is the way to go. 


Quote from: Uglycat" post="406969817
I think this is where the 'war on women' narrative goes.  There are a lot of conservatives that assume, by default, that Any Republican would be better than Obama.  But those conservatives are embarrassed by comments about 'legitimate rape' and so on. 

Yes.  This is only ever found in conservatives.  Dems are far too enlightened for that - nigger in background bussed to polls by niggerpocalypse organization mindlessly hammering the "all Dem" lever while comitting voter fraud so they can gets theys 40oz and lottery ticket.


Quote from: Quidam Viator" post="406970203
Am I just Chicken Littling this whole thing? The Republicans have shown a clear trend in playing meaner and meaner every year. What will it do to their already spun-out, fragile psyche if they lose hardcore again? What happens to all the Teapartiers? We know facts don't matter. I know the dumbshit local gun store had an Obama sale when he was elected in 2008, and it closed the whole town as every person scrambled to get their guns and ammo while they still can. How itchy are those trigger fingers after 4 years?

 :allears:


Incoming faggotry bomb!

Quote from: Uglycat" post="406971153
The rhetoric I hear from Obama seems more sound, economically, than what I hear from the Right.  Nonetheless, Obama doesn't really have a plan for getting out of the recession - he just recognizes the need to fund entitlements and welfare in the meantime, while hoping the invisible hand turns things around.  He understands that the solution must be bottom-up, and that our tax structures are holding us back.

I get the impression he just doesn't feel he has the political capital to really go on the offensive.  A strong turnout and a landslide victory would be taken as a mandate, giving him the go-ahead to pursue his aims more aggressively. Democratic wins in key senate and congressional races would have a knock-on effect there too.  But that would simply enable him to pursue the plan he's laid out - and it doesn't seem like a coherent path to prosperity.

I personally feel this is the time to use quantitative easing to drive a controlled inflation, but no candidate will publicly endorse inflation as a strategy for fighting wealth inequality and reducing debt (relative to earnings).  I do recognize that there would be a significant gap between the rise of prices and the rise of wages, as unemployment slowly falls, and we need social programs to keep people above water while the process happens.  Borrowing money makes sense right now, as it is very cheap to do so, but unsophisticated minds are strongly opposed because our national debt IS outrageous and a real problem (and they don't grasp the relationship between inflation and debt).

Massive investment needs to be made in infrastructure, and we need to work to ensure education is free to anybody who wants one.  People who are out of work should have the means to be fed, clothed, have a roof over their head, and be encouraged to spend their otherwise idle time receiving an education (without taking on an absurd debt burden).

We need to provide affordable access to the internet to everyone, and encourage open-source projects.  Intellectual Property Law needs to be re-examined and, in my view, abolished.  We need to embrace transparency and protect whistle-blowers.  We need to develop new techniques for farming the Cognitive Surplus, and innovative ways to compensate people for productive use of time online.

We need to significantly scale back the military.  We need to re-invent our understanding of both criminality and mental illness. We need to legalize marijuana.  We need to legalize gay marriage.  And we need immigration reform that offers amnesty to the tens of millions living in this nation, and does not turn people away at the border.

We need to focus on sustainability, and energy infrastructure in that context.  We need to encourage urbanization and beat the suburbs back.  We need an emphasis on public transportation, working to ensure that a majority of Americans have no /need/ for a car.  We need to re-examine our agriculture, shifting to a diet where meat is regarded as a condiment, not a main course, and embracing sustainable farming techniques.  We need to embrace our role as the bread basket to the world, and work to maximize our grain surplus so we can help feed the world.

Obama hits the mark MUCH closer than Romney.  I'm sure Obama could be more bold, if he felt he had a mandate and sufficient political capital.  I see room for optimism.  But I also see Obama pouring unnecessary resources into defending old systems that I feel hurt the economy and hold back progress (the war on drugs, the war on whistleblowers, an emphasis on secrecy and projection of force as necessary elements of homeland security, etc).

I myself will be voting for Obama.  The optimist is doing so with the belief he will do better, if he feels he has a mandate.  The pessimist in me is doing so out of fear - not of a Romney presidency, but of the unrest and (potentially) revolution that would follow from it.  But I can understand people who feel disillusioned about voting.  The question is, if we give up on voting - what next?  Apathy?  Or is there a series of steps we ought to take to make things better, even after abandoning our present democratic system?
Kill yourself


And the one actual worthwhile post.
Quote from: 2banks1swap.avi" post="406983965
When someone re brands "it's okay to look out for yourself and other people who work for a living" it's going to be hilarious to see how the edgy, well read, better than thou hipsters of the left with DINK lifestyles handle the influx of mundane people, who just might have kids, and who don't use the word "space" every other sentence. At least if it's in our lifetime it would be hilarious.

The element of ideological purity above all and the "Things take time... which is why here and now we're gonna do jack squat since we're comfortable enough to get away with being obtuse at best to the average person who doesn't know our neologisms from sociology and critical theory"-thing the left seems to be cultivating certainly doesn't help them reach the people who need to be reached. The "fuck you if you're not enough like me"-thing everyone does to the point of cutting ties with people they know over it also isn't helping.

Until people are doing with the echo-chamber-seeking mentality in general things are only going to continue getting worse. Then again, shutting down the whining and acrimony and getting consensus, or at least impetus to vote and muster candidates, is going to go directly against groups screaming that any outside force seeking to band groups together is appropriation or the hallmark of a trotskyist takeover, or whatever the fuck is going to come out of it.

Seems to be a lot of this apathy and disillusionment comes from the fact that everyone is too busy shrieking at each other over bullshit and carving up little ideological fiefdoms to actually get shit done except blog a lot and engage in hedonist acts spurned on by ennui between bouts of navel gazing or finger taps on their iThings. Until an able, willing person comes who is able to galvanize the left and put something unified out there, this won't change. Astroturfing has killed the grass roots, and a bunch of libertarian nerds or street living anarchists who can't even see eye to eye with each other certainly won't get the masses to muster.

This is somehow both  :myecred: and  :reagan: at the same time

BubbaCat

  • Cishet White Male
  • Fagmin
  • *
  • Posts: 1607
  • Machiavellian House Negro
  • Awards old Anonymous Sasstronaut Goon or Ex-Goon TNE Veteran Something Wonderful
    • Awards
Oh my  :myecred:.  I scored a 33 on the ACT, and I had to look up no less that 10 words/principles.  Do they write on purpose like that to front that they are intelligent; or does that come from immersing yourself in obscure, snotty lib arts books. 
 :smug:
In other words, is that last guy the same as a music snob, where they purposefully make references to obscure bands and bootlegs, knowing that theiris references will only further cloud and confuse with more pointless shit to prove his supreme-awesomeness over his audience?  In other words, will 2banks1swap.avi change his political ideologies once someone shares the same ideologies, because they are no longer cool and cutting edge?

wimpb

  • Guest
Oh my  :myecred:.  I scored a 33 on the ACT, and I had to look up no less that 10 words/principles.  Do they write on purpose like that to front that they are intelligent; or does that come from immersing yourself in obscure, snotty lib arts books. 
 :smug:
In other words, is that last guy the same as a music snob, where they purposefully make references to obscure bands and bootlegs, knowing that theiris references will only further cloud and confuse with more pointless shit to prove his supreme-awesomeness over his audience?  In other words, will 2banks1swap.avi change his political ideologies once someone shares the same ideologies, because they are no longer cool and cutting edge?

I think both. Here's an excerpt from Zizek's wiki. Zizek is a bit of a favorite of the far left (he's a marxist)
Quote
Žižek's ontology: materialism, subjectivity, & incompleteness

Žižek uses various ontologies from other thinkers as critical tools for his investigations, often combining them in provocative ways. Some critique these radical uses as misinterpretations. For example, Žižek employs the Cartesian subject, engages with traditional German idealism, and uses terminology from Lacan—but does so in a way that puts these old ideas to new use.

Žižek's adds political theory to traditional views on the subject. Žižek argues that hegemonic regimes function by interpellating individuals into roles and mandates; therefore, we cannot understand how power functions without understanding the psychology of political subjects. Secondly, Žižek contends, following Lacan, that subjectivity corresponds to a lack (manque), resisting full inscription into these mandates.

Žižek criticizes Marx's concept of ideology (as described in The German Ideology). Marx argues that people under capitalism are dupes, victims of false consciousness that prevents them from seeing how things really are. Žižek argues that false consciousness has become irrelevant in a period of unprecedented reflexivity and cynicism about authority (see The Sublime Object of Ideology). Žižek insists that a Lacanian model of the barred or split subject, because of it stipulates that people's deepest motives are unconscious, can demonstrate that ideology has not become irrelevant today but instead revealed its deeper truth (see Matthew Sharpe, Slavoj Žižek.)
In a contentious extension of the meaning of "ideology" as a term, Žižek maintains that dominant ideologies wholly structure the subject's senses of reality. (However, The Real is not equivalent to the reality experienced by the subjects as a meaningfully ordered totality. For Žižek, the Real names points within the ontological fabric knitted by the hegemonic systems of representation and reproduction that nevertheless resist full inscription into its terms, and which may as such attempt to generate sites of active political resistance.)

Remember, this is the summary on the wiki. It's actually been edited recently, it used to be much worse.

nerdsdelendisunt

  • Citizen In Good Standing
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • Awards
No surprise that the real talk is completely ignored.

BubbaCat

  • Cishet White Male
  • Fagmin
  • *
  • Posts: 1607
  • Machiavellian House Negro
  • Awards old Anonymous Sasstronaut Goon or Ex-Goon TNE Veteran Something Wonderful
    • Awards
I think both. Here's an excerpt from Zizek's wiki. Zizek is a bit of a favorite of the far left (he's a marxist)
Quote
Žižek's ontology: materialism, subjectivity, & incompleteness

Žižek uses various ontologies from other thinkers as critical tools for his investigations, often combining them in provocative ways. Some critique these radical uses as misinterpretations. For example, Žižek employs the Cartesian subject, engages with traditional German idealism, and uses terminology from Lacan—but does so in a way that puts these old ideas to new use.

I got as far as I quoted above before I could no longer absorb/process meaningful information.  On the brightside, it means that people like this can only communicate with people like themselves.  It cannot bleed into anything else.

Rocket

  • 5000 Posters Club
  • Cosmonauts
  • *
  • Posts: 12148
  • Don't call me a lawyer; I'll call my own!
  • Awards Fucked a lesbian You're Great...No, YOU'RE Great! old cold, dead hands Something Wonderful Prepper The Gentry For Dixie's land we'll take our stand! Libertarian TNE Veteran Goon or Ex-Goon Sasstronaut Wounded in the line of posting. Motorcyclist
    • Awards
I can understand all of that, but it is written so poorly and in such a self-gratifying manner I don't want to.

The fun part is that it is difficult to write that way and NObody reads it.
Yes, that is me in court with my enormous penis.


Spokker

  • Cishet White Male
  • ******
  • Posts: 1193
    • Awards
Even if you don't vote in the presidential contest, there are a lot of local contests that are way more important than the president. In California we have three separate tax increase proposals that need to be voted down, for example.