i am going to chew my way through the bathroom tile
October 20, 2020 5:09 AM Subscribe
Voting ContraPoints engages in a 20-minute dialogue with herself about why even communist revolutionary Twitter should get out and vote for Biden.
includes some interesting discussion re: "revolutionary ideation", and this bit:
includes some interesting discussion re: "revolutionary ideation", and this bit:
a riot is the language of the unheard, but what kind of language is it? what is the point of speaking through a riot, or a protest, or a strike? is it just emotional expression, like an angry diary entry? or is the point not just to speak, but to be heard?Natalie Wynn, previously on MF: 1 2 3
heard by whomst? who are you trying to persuade, the Globglogabgalab? no! you want to be heard by the people with the power to change things -- so it matters whether the people with power are likely to listen.
She does literally have a conversation with her own leftie cat girl persona. I respect that she seems to want to find the nuance and do her normal thorough disassembly and comprehension of the arguments - so I guess even if it is just for herself, I appreciate that her leftie self probably isn't the only one that she reaches.
I also appreciate a good escalating keyboard-mash gag no matter where it shows up.
posted by abulafa at 6:11 AM on October 20, 2020 [10 favorites]
I also appreciate a good escalating keyboard-mash gag no matter where it shows up.
posted by abulafa at 6:11 AM on October 20, 2020 [10 favorites]
Neat, was wondering if Contra still thought queer people more radical than here were a contemptible punchline.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:37 AM on October 20, 2020 [5 favorites]
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:37 AM on October 20, 2020 [5 favorites]
Well, she's right, but the success of Bernie Sanders seems to have made folks forget forget about dual power.
Would love her to unpack the USA's obsession with the vote as a individualist moral choice, or a consumer brand identity, rather than the numbers game, the collective action problem it is.
This has some excellent twitter math. Too bad most of the USA still watches TV.
posted by eustatic at 6:39 AM on October 20, 2020 [7 favorites]
Would love her to unpack the USA's obsession with the vote as a individualist moral choice, or a consumer brand identity, rather than the numbers game, the collective action problem it is.
This has some excellent twitter math. Too bad most of the USA still watches TV.
posted by eustatic at 6:39 AM on October 20, 2020 [7 favorites]
Pope Guilty: As someone who uses she or they pronouns, I don't see the Tabby character as punchline. At least not for her queerness.
posted by SansPoint at 6:46 AM on October 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
posted by SansPoint at 6:46 AM on October 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
The Tabitha character seems identified as a part of Natalie, and not a third-party punching bag.
Yes, it's the id, the first/worst impulses, but Natalie isn't saying that Tabby (or others) are *wrong*, per se, just misguided.
I suppose you could still make hay out of Natalie personifying her id as that sort of character when there are folks out there who resemble that, but at least in this video she's portraying it as a battle within herself.
Her "main" Contrapoints character is not exactly ever portrayed as "right," either, as she's decadent and slothful to a fault, and fully identifies that she's an influencer/youtuber with no right to the outsize fame that society affords her.
posted by explosion at 6:56 AM on October 20, 2020 [21 favorites]
Yes, it's the id, the first/worst impulses, but Natalie isn't saying that Tabby (or others) are *wrong*, per se, just misguided.
I suppose you could still make hay out of Natalie personifying her id as that sort of character when there are folks out there who resemble that, but at least in this video she's portraying it as a battle within herself.
Her "main" Contrapoints character is not exactly ever portrayed as "right," either, as she's decadent and slothful to a fault, and fully identifies that she's an influencer/youtuber with no right to the outsize fame that society affords her.
posted by explosion at 6:56 AM on October 20, 2020 [21 favorites]
explosion: Nailed it. Part of Contra's appeal is that her videos are strong, sincere, and factual leftist social commentary with a candy coating of irony and cynicism straight off of 4chan. It reminds me of the work of the band DEVO, which hid trenchant social commentary and rage at a society that embraces violence and authoritarianism under goofy costumes and pop hooks.
posted by SansPoint at 7:02 AM on October 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
posted by SansPoint at 7:02 AM on October 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
Also, I mean, in this video Nat basically starts by agreeing in principle with every single point Tabby makes.
It feels in poor faith to interpret what she’s doing here as mockery rather than honest introspection + dialogue.
posted by Kybard at 7:08 AM on October 20, 2020 [14 favorites]
It feels in poor faith to interpret what she’s doing here as mockery rather than honest introspection + dialogue.
posted by Kybard at 7:08 AM on October 20, 2020 [14 favorites]
Oh god, the sense of relief at having it only be 20 minutes! She works so much better in the shorter format. And I loved this. Drawing a distinction between fascist intent and leftist ideation is a nice antidote to spending too much time on left twitter!
posted by mittens at 7:53 AM on October 20, 2020 [11 favorites]
posted by mittens at 7:53 AM on October 20, 2020 [11 favorites]
Mod note: A few comments removed. let's keep things focused on the content and less on the video length. thanks!
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 8:19 AM on October 20, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 8:19 AM on October 20, 2020 [1 favorite]
At one point he asks himself 'who is the audience for this video? is it just for me?', and I couldn't shake the feeling the same dynamic is at work with Natalie.
well, we're here discussing it and (at last look) ten people had marked it as "favorite" so I guess it's already a larger audience than "just for me".
posted by philip-random at 8:46 AM on October 20, 2020 [3 favorites]
well, we're here discussing it and (at last look) ten people had marked it as "favorite" so I guess it's already a larger audience than "just for me".
posted by philip-random at 8:46 AM on October 20, 2020 [3 favorites]
phillip-random: In my case, at least, she's absolutely speaking to the choir, but she's doing it in a compelling and entertaining way.
posted by SansPoint at 8:51 AM on October 20, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by SansPoint at 8:51 AM on October 20, 2020 [1 favorite]
Her "main" Contrapoints character is not exactly ever portrayed as "right," either, as she's decadent and slothful to a fault
The character is decadent and slothful to a virtue, like Oscar Wilde but moreso.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 8:54 AM on October 20, 2020 [5 favorites]
The character is decadent and slothful to a virtue, like Oscar Wilde but moreso.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 8:54 AM on October 20, 2020 [5 favorites]
I liked her video, assuming there really is an audience for it. I'm frankly too old and out of touch to know if there really is a new group of young 20-somethings who angrily denounce all voting with the various strawman arguments she stands up. The young activists I know are all much more practical and investing in a long term struggle, particularly when it comes to climate change.
I did like her section on revolutionary ideation though, particularly calling out the rhetoric of "smash the state" extremists who think a communist revolution in the US is right around the corner. As she says, if anyone is prepared to actually violently overthrow the US government it's the scary right wing groups. The armed ones, the ones that train as play soldiers.
Plenty of her other videos construct a more realistic set of revolutionary and socialist actions and positions that would actually make sense in the United States. She's kind of veered off the economic criticism in the last couple of years and I'm kind of hoping she returns to it. I'm certain within six months she'll be part of the anti-Biden resistance. Part of the shtick with Contra is that Tabby is part of her, just as she is part of all of us. We can both be that persona and laugh at the excesses of it.
posted by Nelson at 8:58 AM on October 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
I did like her section on revolutionary ideation though, particularly calling out the rhetoric of "smash the state" extremists who think a communist revolution in the US is right around the corner. As she says, if anyone is prepared to actually violently overthrow the US government it's the scary right wing groups. The armed ones, the ones that train as play soldiers.
Plenty of her other videos construct a more realistic set of revolutionary and socialist actions and positions that would actually make sense in the United States. She's kind of veered off the economic criticism in the last couple of years and I'm kind of hoping she returns to it. I'm certain within six months she'll be part of the anti-Biden resistance. Part of the shtick with Contra is that Tabby is part of her, just as she is part of all of us. We can both be that persona and laugh at the excesses of it.
posted by Nelson at 8:58 AM on October 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
I remember a lot of Kodos v Kang talk before 2000 that went away after Bush's win. Early twenty-somethings are the right age to not remember that, so I'd believe there's an audience for this.
TBH, I probably just like ContraPoints videos because I'm a sad middle-aged man who likes it when a pretty girl calls me gorge.
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 9:17 AM on October 20, 2020 [11 favorites]
TBH, I probably just like ContraPoints videos because I'm a sad middle-aged man who likes it when a pretty girl calls me gorge.
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 9:17 AM on October 20, 2020 [11 favorites]
rhamphorhynchus: I actually posted the other night that I'd been working my way through the various Treehouse of Horror episodes, and noted how poorly "Citizen Kang" aged.
Certainly, "Both sides are the same" has been a thing since the birth of parties in Western politics, but the cultural force of The Simpsons in 1996 probably had a huge impact in perpetuating this idea into my generation of Xennials. As The Simpsons is still a powerful cultural force, and that even younger fans prefer the classic era that specific Treehouse of Horror segment falls within, I have to think that it's probably still impacting how young people look at politics. Those who say "Biden won't stop global warming either," may as well just quote "Either way your planet is doomed! Doomed!"
posted by SansPoint at 9:31 AM on October 20, 2020 [7 favorites]
Certainly, "Both sides are the same" has been a thing since the birth of parties in Western politics, but the cultural force of The Simpsons in 1996 probably had a huge impact in perpetuating this idea into my generation of Xennials. As The Simpsons is still a powerful cultural force, and that even younger fans prefer the classic era that specific Treehouse of Horror segment falls within, I have to think that it's probably still impacting how young people look at politics. Those who say "Biden won't stop global warming either," may as well just quote "Either way your planet is doomed! Doomed!"
posted by SansPoint at 9:31 AM on October 20, 2020 [7 favorites]
Those who say "Biden won't stop global warming either," may as well just quote "Either way your planet is doomed! Doomed!"
And funnily enough, they wouldn't be wrong.
posted by deadaluspark at 9:33 AM on October 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
And funnily enough, they wouldn't be wrong.
posted by deadaluspark at 9:33 AM on October 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
I've watched about half of this, and have enjoyed it thus far. But if anything, I think she's giving Tabitha's notional arguments a bit too much credit. E.g.: I track energy and environmental policy on a fairly granular level as part of my day job, and the differences between the Dems and the GOP on these issues are staggeringly vast and stark. Lefties who cynically assert that Biden will be no different from Trump on climate change, mass extinction, etc., aren't just overstating things -- they're astoundingly wrong. When I see people making those glib equivalencies, I want to grab them and shake them and tell them to take a good hard look at the last dozen years of federal court decisions, federal agency regulatory rollbacks, and the shifts in decisionmaking by federal appointees. But that stuff is a lot harder to fit into a tweet than "Both parties suck."
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 9:39 AM on October 20, 2020 [23 favorites]
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 9:39 AM on October 20, 2020 [23 favorites]
I feel like a lot of the heat Contrapoints gets comes from people who misread the content as presenting personifications of different points of view so that one of the characters can become the True Winner Over All instead of different facets of the same person's mind with the totality representing that internal conversation.
posted by Scattercat at 10:44 AM on October 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
posted by Scattercat at 10:44 AM on October 20, 2020 [8 favorites]
TBH, I probably just like ContraPoints videos because I'm a sad middle-aged man who likes it when a pretty girl calls me gorge.
It us. We're the audience. I feel seen.
posted by klanawa at 11:53 AM on October 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
It us. We're the audience. I feel seen.
posted by klanawa at 11:53 AM on October 20, 2020 [4 favorites]
Gently and cautiously going to introduce the idea that most of the criticism of ContraPoints is because of her collaborations with Buck Angel (an enbyphobic trans man), Jesse Singal (noted professional transphobe and stalker), the UBC Free Speech club (actual Nazis) and...more, plus a pattern of doubling down on statements that are in the most charitable reads at least problematic and and immersion in/affiliation with 4chan/alt-right culture... plus cis people holding her up as both The Trans Whisperer and The Leftist Whisperer despite her having multiple takes very much at odds with general consensus in trans and leftist spaces.
There is a lot of pretty ugly history there. The backlash did not come out of nowhere. It is beyond the scope of this thread to get into, but it is there if you want to dig into it. That being said, yes, vote. I have been getting into fights with internet anarchists who are too pure for electoralism over this one. There is a generational split among leftists over electoralism that is really coming to the fore now. A lot of younger leftists have a fairly practical approach, while a lot of older leftists have a fairly puritanical approach. You can probably guess which one I align with based on my characterization, but it is frustrating to deal with and the conversations we're having now are long overdue.
posted by Lonnrot at 12:41 PM on October 20, 2020 [16 favorites]
There is a lot of pretty ugly history there. The backlash did not come out of nowhere. It is beyond the scope of this thread to get into, but it is there if you want to dig into it. That being said, yes, vote. I have been getting into fights with internet anarchists who are too pure for electoralism over this one. There is a generational split among leftists over electoralism that is really coming to the fore now. A lot of younger leftists have a fairly practical approach, while a lot of older leftists have a fairly puritanical approach. You can probably guess which one I align with based on my characterization, but it is frustrating to deal with and the conversations we're having now are long overdue.
posted by Lonnrot at 12:41 PM on October 20, 2020 [16 favorites]
I'm frankly too old and out of touch to know if there really is a new group of young 20-somethings who angrily denounce all voting with the various strawman arguments she stands up.
There is absolutely a vocal group of Extremely Online people who will unironcally call Natalie, Cody, and even Noam-fucking-Chomsky shitlibs for arguing that people should vote for Biden, and they're by no means all young.
posted by um at 3:56 PM on October 20, 2020
There is absolutely a vocal group of Extremely Online people who will unironcally call Natalie, Cody, and even Noam-fucking-Chomsky shitlibs for arguing that people should vote for Biden, and they're by no means all young.
posted by um at 3:56 PM on October 20, 2020
Buck Angel (an enbyphobic trans man)
Buck Angel is also controversial in transmasculine circles for other reasons, too.
I don't particularly care if Contrapoints thinks I should vote. Or not vote. I mean, she already thinks I'm being trans wrong and bringing her into ill-repute. I do care that Metafilter is happy to say all sorts of snide things when a cis person actually spoke up and said "Hey, I hear that she's kind of controversial in trans circles". Some trans people love her. Some people don't give a shit. But treat us with enough dignity to believe some of us really wished cis people would stop acting like she speaks for us.
posted by hoyland at 4:11 PM on October 20, 2020 [12 favorites]
Buck Angel is also controversial in transmasculine circles for other reasons, too.
I don't particularly care if Contrapoints thinks I should vote. Or not vote. I mean, she already thinks I'm being trans wrong and bringing her into ill-repute. I do care that Metafilter is happy to say all sorts of snide things when a cis person actually spoke up and said "Hey, I hear that she's kind of controversial in trans circles". Some trans people love her. Some people don't give a shit. But treat us with enough dignity to believe some of us really wished cis people would stop acting like she speaks for us.
posted by hoyland at 4:11 PM on October 20, 2020 [12 favorites]
I'm kind of surprised that the video doesn't touch on what I think of as the most important argument in favor of voting: this isn't just about you, for all values of "you." Even modestly better leadership is likely to prevent tens of thousands of COVID deaths, which is not to mention the even greater numbers of people who could avoid permanent physical damage. A different administration might not be great on immigration, but it's unlikely to rip children out of the arms of their parents, put them in miserable detention centers, and fail to reunite hundreds of them with their families. It might even dial back the nonstop persecution of immigrants, documented and not. ICE certainly seems to think so based on the way they've ramped up their dirty work these past few weeks. This election will have very real, grave, life-and-deaths consequences, and they will affect some people more than others.
Voting isn't enough and it might not work out, but a whole lot of people have gone and are going through hell and can't wait around for a hypothetical revolution. We should be doing whatever we can to stem the bleeding, and for most people, ticking a box is a low-cost activity that doesn't detract from many simultaneous efforts that are struggling to get us from where we are to where we need to be in terms of health care, climate change, economic inequality, mutual aid, ending mass incarceration, and fighting white supremacy.
I am not a fan of the Democratic establishment. My city is the liberal poster child for unpunished financial crimes, moneyed interests getting their way, increasing segregation, and mind-boggling economic and social inequality. The local Democratic machine is corrupt and complacent as hell. I am sympathetic to the frustration that people feel when someone tosses voting around as a catchphrase or one-shot panacea. I can understand why people who have been systematically disenfranchised and underserved by the government do not want to stand in the rain for eight hours to tick a box for, say, a local kleptocrat who's running unopposed, or for some rich white progressive who will immediately turn his back on people and stan a brutal and racist police department, all while a self-satisfied DCCC licks its chops and takes another nap. I can especially understand it if that disenfranchised person lives in a state where the outcome of the election is all but predetermined.
Even so, I think it's incumbent upon us—especially the cozier of us—to do not just something, but everything. The least we can do is throw shit at the wall and hope something sticks. Liberals with "VOTE" tote bags can feel frustratingly out of touch because they fail to see how our political system doesn't exactly serve other people the same way it serves them. Ironically, they have that in common with armchair revolutionaries who will face few if any consequences of a second Trump administration. Maybe that doesn't describe you, in which case, carry on. Otherwise, please do not be that guy.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 6:45 PM on October 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
Voting isn't enough and it might not work out, but a whole lot of people have gone and are going through hell and can't wait around for a hypothetical revolution. We should be doing whatever we can to stem the bleeding, and for most people, ticking a box is a low-cost activity that doesn't detract from many simultaneous efforts that are struggling to get us from where we are to where we need to be in terms of health care, climate change, economic inequality, mutual aid, ending mass incarceration, and fighting white supremacy.
I am not a fan of the Democratic establishment. My city is the liberal poster child for unpunished financial crimes, moneyed interests getting their way, increasing segregation, and mind-boggling economic and social inequality. The local Democratic machine is corrupt and complacent as hell. I am sympathetic to the frustration that people feel when someone tosses voting around as a catchphrase or one-shot panacea. I can understand why people who have been systematically disenfranchised and underserved by the government do not want to stand in the rain for eight hours to tick a box for, say, a local kleptocrat who's running unopposed, or for some rich white progressive who will immediately turn his back on people and stan a brutal and racist police department, all while a self-satisfied DCCC licks its chops and takes another nap. I can especially understand it if that disenfranchised person lives in a state where the outcome of the election is all but predetermined.
Even so, I think it's incumbent upon us—especially the cozier of us—to do not just something, but everything. The least we can do is throw shit at the wall and hope something sticks. Liberals with "VOTE" tote bags can feel frustratingly out of touch because they fail to see how our political system doesn't exactly serve other people the same way it serves them. Ironically, they have that in common with armchair revolutionaries who will face few if any consequences of a second Trump administration. Maybe that doesn't describe you, in which case, carry on. Otherwise, please do not be that guy.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 6:45 PM on October 20, 2020 [6 favorites]
First off I am pausing to appreciate that the Mormon Tabernacle Choir is the backing music at 1'20". Not anywhere near the first trans/mormon mashup but nevertheless satisfying.
Second I sure like Natalie for a lot of reasons, including the one on display here where she works hard at connecting ideals with practice.
Finally... I actually want to vote for Joe Biden. I don't actually *need* to love him, I can vote like I'm making a boring deposit in my bougie 401k or like I'm taking out the garbage. I don't love him as much as I had a full-on crush on Elizabeth Warren, he isn't the symbol that Bernie is, but I like Joe Biden, I like where his platform has gone, and I like that my country might get to not be fascists and figure out what to do next.
It's a start. Every change needs one.
posted by wildblueyonder at 7:28 PM on October 20, 2020 [1 favorite]
Second I sure like Natalie for a lot of reasons, including the one on display here where she works hard at connecting ideals with practice.
Finally... I actually want to vote for Joe Biden. I don't actually *need* to love him, I can vote like I'm making a boring deposit in my bougie 401k or like I'm taking out the garbage. I don't love him as much as I had a full-on crush on Elizabeth Warren, he isn't the symbol that Bernie is, but I like Joe Biden, I like where his platform has gone, and I like that my country might get to not be fascists and figure out what to do next.
It's a start. Every change needs one.
posted by wildblueyonder at 7:28 PM on October 20, 2020 [1 favorite]
The whole schtick of "both parties are the same" vs "vote the lesser of two evils" is basically the same utilitarianism vs deontology thunder dome that's been debated since Thales wondered if perhaps the gods might not be responsible for everything.
She pretty much nails it with the contrarian types. The types that want to be the smartest fucking people in the room by doing absolutely nothing at all. There are people who have no resources, no power, and very little hope depending on the orange chucklefuck being booted from office. Check your god damn privilege and vote for the not fascist so we can protest said not fascist's administration and try to start making things better.
Also, she hits it right on the head with revolutionary ideation. There is no practical way to revolution our way into not-capitalism in the US. The only way we're going to achieve it is to do exactly what the right has been doing for the last 40 years: Stick the frog in the cold pot and boil it slowly.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:01 PM on October 20, 2020 [9 favorites]
She pretty much nails it with the contrarian types. The types that want to be the smartest fucking people in the room by doing absolutely nothing at all. There are people who have no resources, no power, and very little hope depending on the orange chucklefuck being booted from office. Check your god damn privilege and vote for the not fascist so we can protest said not fascist's administration and try to start making things better.
Also, she hits it right on the head with revolutionary ideation. There is no practical way to revolution our way into not-capitalism in the US. The only way we're going to achieve it is to do exactly what the right has been doing for the last 40 years: Stick the frog in the cold pot and boil it slowly.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 9:01 PM on October 20, 2020 [9 favorites]
I'm kind of surprised that the video doesn't touch on what I think of as the most important argument in favor of voting: this isn't just about you, for all values of "you."
I think this is a function of the format -- she's speaking to a particular part of herself/type of person for whom that argument isn't interesting, or at least would be quickly countered by one of the other arguments re: revolution solves more than voting (see for reference I suppose that recent argument between Chomsky and the Bad Faith podcast hosts).
But treat us with enough dignity to believe some of us really wished cis people would stop acting like she speaks for us.
as the creator of this post and a cis folk, I just want to be clear that I don't think ContraPoints is a monolith speaking on behalf of All Trans Persons (I don't think she thinks that at all, either, but that's a different conversation). personally, I try to pay attention as much as I can to each backlash to one of her videos, because I'm frequently ignorant of background/context from the broader trans community. Nat's not the only trans voice I listen to, but I am necessarily an outsider with limited scope on the full range of those voices, and no matter where my own feelings lie at the end of the road, it is always good to listen more
posted by Kybard at 6:05 AM on October 21, 2020 [2 favorites]
I think this is a function of the format -- she's speaking to a particular part of herself/type of person for whom that argument isn't interesting, or at least would be quickly countered by one of the other arguments re: revolution solves more than voting (see for reference I suppose that recent argument between Chomsky and the Bad Faith podcast hosts).
But treat us with enough dignity to believe some of us really wished cis people would stop acting like she speaks for us.
as the creator of this post and a cis folk, I just want to be clear that I don't think ContraPoints is a monolith speaking on behalf of All Trans Persons (I don't think she thinks that at all, either, but that's a different conversation). personally, I try to pay attention as much as I can to each backlash to one of her videos, because I'm frequently ignorant of background/context from the broader trans community. Nat's not the only trans voice I listen to, but I am necessarily an outsider with limited scope on the full range of those voices, and no matter where my own feelings lie at the end of the road, it is always good to listen more
posted by Kybard at 6:05 AM on October 21, 2020 [2 favorites]
I don't think this will persuade anyone on the far left - its audience mainly seems to be Democratic voters eager to reaffirm their prejudices that they're the "reasonable left". It's even unclear why it exists - if the left is as numerically minuscule as she says, then their votes generally won't have much influence the election - she'd be better off talking to some other, larger, demographic and persuading them instead.
The whole video is shot through with this kind of contradiction - we're in the middle of the largest (left-wing) protest movement in US history but also the left is meaninglessly small and just disproportionately noisy but also they're big enough to matter electorally so get out and vote.
I think overall she comes across as condescending and unable to engage with anything other than a strawman version of the left's arguments, and she covers for the weaknesses of her case by adopting a chiding tone that conveys a political savviness and sophistication that Wynn mostly hasn't shown in practice.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 8:56 AM on October 21, 2020 [2 favorites]
The whole video is shot through with this kind of contradiction - we're in the middle of the largest (left-wing) protest movement in US history but also the left is meaninglessly small and just disproportionately noisy but also they're big enough to matter electorally so get out and vote.
I think overall she comes across as condescending and unable to engage with anything other than a strawman version of the left's arguments, and she covers for the weaknesses of her case by adopting a chiding tone that conveys a political savviness and sophistication that Wynn mostly hasn't shown in practice.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 8:56 AM on October 21, 2020 [2 favorites]
I don't think this will persuade anyone on the far left - its audience mainly seems to be Democratic voters eager to reaffirm their prejudices that they're the "reasonable left". It's even unclear why it exists - if the left is as numerically minuscule as she says, then their votes generally won't have much influence the election - she'd be better off talking to some other, larger, demographic and persuading them instead.
1) There have been two major elections so far in my adult lifetime where the Democratic candidate's margin of victory in the tipping point states was smaller than the green vote. The contrarian left are just as responsible and culpable for the very Iraq War that they protested against. Maybe they'll actually listen this time and not throw the election?
The whole video is shot through with this kind of contradiction - we're in the middle of the largest (left-wing) protest movement in US history but also the left is meaninglessly small and just disproportionately noisy but also they're big enough to matter electorally so get out and vote.
2) If the Left wants a seat at the table it needs to show up which is clearly the thesis statement for the piece. When you got skin in the game, you stay in the game but you don't get a win unless you play in the game. Oh, you get love for it. You get hate for it. You get nothing if you wait for it, wait for it, wait.
If they come correct, get local election wins for leftists political faction under their belt, seize some of the institutional reins of power, and just play the game a little we could do far more than any revolutionary ideation ever could. We're so mesmerized on how badly the system is broken when all that means is just pick a fucking spot, work to fix it, and you can probably make some forward progress.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 3:37 PM on October 21, 2020 [6 favorites]
1) There have been two major elections so far in my adult lifetime where the Democratic candidate's margin of victory in the tipping point states was smaller than the green vote. The contrarian left are just as responsible and culpable for the very Iraq War that they protested against. Maybe they'll actually listen this time and not throw the election?
The whole video is shot through with this kind of contradiction - we're in the middle of the largest (left-wing) protest movement in US history but also the left is meaninglessly small and just disproportionately noisy but also they're big enough to matter electorally so get out and vote.
2) If the Left wants a seat at the table it needs to show up which is clearly the thesis statement for the piece. When you got skin in the game, you stay in the game but you don't get a win unless you play in the game. Oh, you get love for it. You get hate for it. You get nothing if you wait for it, wait for it, wait.
If they come correct, get local election wins for leftists political faction under their belt, seize some of the institutional reins of power, and just play the game a little we could do far more than any revolutionary ideation ever could. We're so mesmerized on how badly the system is broken when all that means is just pick a fucking spot, work to fix it, and you can probably make some forward progress.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 3:37 PM on October 21, 2020 [6 favorites]
There is absolutely a vocal group of Extremely Online people who will unironcally call Natalie, Cody, and even Noam-fucking-Chomsky shitlibs for arguing that people should vote for Biden, and they're by no means all young.
Or voters. I remember in 2016 there was a bunch of people on left-leaning social media arguing against voting, using pretty much the same arguments I'm seeing currently. I very much recall the one who confessed to being Canadian right before saying "I don't care about the Supreme Court, nobody cares about it."
After the election a lot of them abruptly stopped posting. At the time I thought well, maybe they're too horrified over the results. Now, I'm not nearly as charitable. I really should go check and see if those accounts are posting again after a 3+ year gap.
Anyway, as far as any good she's doing, she's acting as a counter to propaganda telling people they shouldn't vote. And for that much she's doing good work.
posted by happyroach at 3:45 PM on October 21, 2020 [8 favorites]
Or voters. I remember in 2016 there was a bunch of people on left-leaning social media arguing against voting, using pretty much the same arguments I'm seeing currently. I very much recall the one who confessed to being Canadian right before saying "I don't care about the Supreme Court, nobody cares about it."
After the election a lot of them abruptly stopped posting. At the time I thought well, maybe they're too horrified over the results. Now, I'm not nearly as charitable. I really should go check and see if those accounts are posting again after a 3+ year gap.
Anyway, as far as any good she's doing, she's acting as a counter to propaganda telling people they shouldn't vote. And for that much she's doing good work.
posted by happyroach at 3:45 PM on October 21, 2020 [8 favorites]
There have been two major elections so far in my adult lifetime where the Democratic candidate's margin of victory in the tipping point states was smaller than the green vote.
The Green vote is smaller than the number of people who simply do not vote. So why isn't Natalie targeting them? They're a much larger group.
The contrarian left are just as responsible and culpable for the very Iraq War that they protested against. Maybe they'll actually listen this time and not throw the election?
See, this is the kind of stuff that's unpersuasive, especially when Joe "I voted for the Iraq War" is supposed to be the "good" candidate this time. It assumes a paradigm in which electoral politics is, and should be, the paramount form of political activity, which is not something the left holds. Wynn does this similarly, and it's one of the big reasons her arguments fail. She tries to foreclose nonelectoral possibilities, but then has to point out that the biggest (left-wing) protest movement in US history is going on, so it's not clear why the modern left must rely on electoral successes.
If the Left wants a seat at the table it needs to show up which is clearly the thesis statement for the piece. When you got skin in the game, you stay in the game but you don't get a win unless you play in the game.
I don't know how to explain this more clearly than to say that the Left does not want a "seat at the table" but to overturn the table, and abolish that kind of "table". I think you share this misunderstanding with Wynn as well, and that's why I say this video is directed at Democrats who think of themselves as on the "left" but not really the left itself.
Wynn would have been more persuasive if she had simply argued "Biden will be easier to fight than Trump. Therefore, we should make the minimal effort of voting to see if we can score the easier opponent." But she does not - she instead tries to argue that from a left-wing perspective there are substantive reasons to prefer Biden's policy platform and that Biden will be more open to left-wing persuasion. Both are doubtful from a left-wing perspective.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 5:35 AM on October 22, 2020 [1 favorite]
The Green vote is smaller than the number of people who simply do not vote. So why isn't Natalie targeting them? They're a much larger group.
The contrarian left are just as responsible and culpable for the very Iraq War that they protested against. Maybe they'll actually listen this time and not throw the election?
See, this is the kind of stuff that's unpersuasive, especially when Joe "I voted for the Iraq War" is supposed to be the "good" candidate this time. It assumes a paradigm in which electoral politics is, and should be, the paramount form of political activity, which is not something the left holds. Wynn does this similarly, and it's one of the big reasons her arguments fail. She tries to foreclose nonelectoral possibilities, but then has to point out that the biggest (left-wing) protest movement in US history is going on, so it's not clear why the modern left must rely on electoral successes.
If the Left wants a seat at the table it needs to show up which is clearly the thesis statement for the piece. When you got skin in the game, you stay in the game but you don't get a win unless you play in the game.
I don't know how to explain this more clearly than to say that the Left does not want a "seat at the table" but to overturn the table, and abolish that kind of "table". I think you share this misunderstanding with Wynn as well, and that's why I say this video is directed at Democrats who think of themselves as on the "left" but not really the left itself.
Wynn would have been more persuasive if she had simply argued "Biden will be easier to fight than Trump. Therefore, we should make the minimal effort of voting to see if we can score the easier opponent." But she does not - she instead tries to argue that from a left-wing perspective there are substantive reasons to prefer Biden's policy platform and that Biden will be more open to left-wing persuasion. Both are doubtful from a left-wing perspective.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 5:35 AM on October 22, 2020 [1 favorite]
Pseudoephedrine: You can't overturn the table until you get a seat at it.
posted by SansPoint at 6:23 AM on October 22, 2020
posted by SansPoint at 6:23 AM on October 22, 2020
I don't know how to explain this more clearly than to say that the Left does not want a "seat at the table" but to overturn the table, and abolish that kind of "table". I think you share this misunderstanding with Wynn as well, and that's why I say this video is directed at Democrats who think of themselves as on the "left" but not really the left itself.
Be that as it may, it's helpful to vote for the party that isn't setting fire to the building the table is in.
posted by Pryde at 6:26 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
Be that as it may, it's helpful to vote for the party that isn't setting fire to the building the table is in.
posted by Pryde at 6:26 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
Be that as it may, it's helpful to vote for the party that isn't setting fire to the building the table is in.
Exactly. This is what I don't get. What do contrarian lefties think the fascists will do if they achieve totally unaccountable control? That they'll respect our cherished traditions of freedom of speech? Being some white academic well versed in communist theory is going to see you disappear in the middle of the night and if asked about it Herr Orange will remark "This guy was a communist criminal, and the US marshals killed him. And I’ll tell you something — that’s the way it has to be."
Like, motherfucker, being white and educated will no longer be a shield of protection if they get the mandate they're looking for. You may think after Trump, our turn but they're not going to play nice. You're not going to be around to take your turn. So fucking vote if only to be there in the future.
Just game theory this out for thirty fucking seconds past "well the masses have to truly desperate and without hope for a communist revolution to emerge".
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:20 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
Exactly. This is what I don't get. What do contrarian lefties think the fascists will do if they achieve totally unaccountable control? That they'll respect our cherished traditions of freedom of speech? Being some white academic well versed in communist theory is going to see you disappear in the middle of the night and if asked about it Herr Orange will remark "This guy was a communist criminal, and the US marshals killed him. And I’ll tell you something — that’s the way it has to be."
Like, motherfucker, being white and educated will no longer be a shield of protection if they get the mandate they're looking for. You may think after Trump, our turn but they're not going to play nice. You're not going to be around to take your turn. So fucking vote if only to be there in the future.
Just game theory this out for thirty fucking seconds past "well the masses have to truly desperate and without hope for a communist revolution to emerge".
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 8:20 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
You can't overturn the table until you get a seat at it.
That's a misleading extension of a metaphor. Breaking from the metaphor, it seems pretty straightforward that revolutionary movements do not have to strive for (or even prioritise) access to existing institutions to eventually seize and wield power. I think the metaphor hides that unstated assumption, which is where the actual controversy is, so it's not very useful or persuasive.
What do contrarian lefties think the fascists will do if they achieve totally unaccountable control?
This is a profound misunderstanding of the far left's position.
The far left would generally hold that the fascists or crypto-fascists or semi-fascists or whatever you want to call the American radical right have already achieved totally unaccountable control of the American government and that people are already disappeared, murdered by police, thrown in concentration camps, etc.
You're threatening them with what you see as the probable future occurrence of things that they believe are already going on. I don't think this is very persuasive. Even a simple inversion of it "Biden is a chance to alleviate the ongoing fascistic domination of American politics" - which I think is both untrue and improbable - is at least more potentially persuasive since it starts by acknowledging the world as the far left sees it.
In general, your approach replicates the same problem as Wynn's video does, which is that it mostly tries to chide, shame, and bluster at people to support Biden, and does so from a framework that does not acknowledge or show deep understanding of the intellectual and strategic framework the far left is working from. I think her video was a waste of time and a failure insofar as its goal was to persuade the radical left because of that, and if you are interested in persuading radical left-wingers to vote for Biden, I would similarly suggest a radical change in your approach.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 9:33 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
That's a misleading extension of a metaphor. Breaking from the metaphor, it seems pretty straightforward that revolutionary movements do not have to strive for (or even prioritise) access to existing institutions to eventually seize and wield power. I think the metaphor hides that unstated assumption, which is where the actual controversy is, so it's not very useful or persuasive.
What do contrarian lefties think the fascists will do if they achieve totally unaccountable control?
This is a profound misunderstanding of the far left's position.
The far left would generally hold that the fascists or crypto-fascists or semi-fascists or whatever you want to call the American radical right have already achieved totally unaccountable control of the American government and that people are already disappeared, murdered by police, thrown in concentration camps, etc.
You're threatening them with what you see as the probable future occurrence of things that they believe are already going on. I don't think this is very persuasive. Even a simple inversion of it "Biden is a chance to alleviate the ongoing fascistic domination of American politics" - which I think is both untrue and improbable - is at least more potentially persuasive since it starts by acknowledging the world as the far left sees it.
In general, your approach replicates the same problem as Wynn's video does, which is that it mostly tries to chide, shame, and bluster at people to support Biden, and does so from a framework that does not acknowledge or show deep understanding of the intellectual and strategic framework the far left is working from. I think her video was a waste of time and a failure insofar as its goal was to persuade the radical left because of that, and if you are interested in persuading radical left-wingers to vote for Biden, I would similarly suggest a radical change in your approach.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 9:33 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
There’s a strategy? Will it work before every living American dies from old age?
posted by Huffy Puffy at 9:41 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
posted by Huffy Puffy at 9:41 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
if you are interested in persuading radical left-wingers to vote for Biden, I would similarly suggest a radical change in your approach.
Oh don't be coy; what do you suggest?
posted by Nelson at 10:10 AM on October 22, 2020 [1 favorite]
Oh don't be coy; what do you suggest?
posted by Nelson at 10:10 AM on October 22, 2020 [1 favorite]
I'd say 50-60% of the radical left folks I know (myself included) are voting for Biden, noses held firmly shut, because there's a serious concern that a Trump reelection may not be survivable.
To be frank, the hectoring and smug condescension liberals aim at the left on this issue aren't the way you talk to somebody you want to persuade to do something- they're the way you talk to somebody you understand to be beneath you and who owes you something and is being recalcitrant about giving it to you. Centrist liberals don't talk to the Republicans they're counting on defecting from Trump like this, out of a desire not to alienate them, but they do talk to the left this way, because they don't respect us, aren't worried about alienating us, and believe us voting Democratic is a natural thing they're owed and not something we need to be persuaded to do.
And part of the reason it's the left that gets talked to this way, instead of the dozens of millions of nonvoters, is because it's really about establishing that the narrative will be that we don't vote for Dems (regardless of whether or not we actually do), so that after the election the usual logic can be applied:
2021-2024 if the Democrats win: "Ah hah, we won by appealing to the center! You see, feckless lefty children, you are irrelevant and your failure to vote for us doesn't matter, so we owe you nothing. Sit down and shut up."
2021-2024 if the Democrats win: "How could you fail to vote for us!? This is all your fault! Every bit of suffering that happens with half or more of Congressional Dems voting for it is all YOUR fault!"
We literally can't win because it's a dishonest double-bind; if we vote Dem we get no credit, and if we don't we get blame. I'm voting Biden, but given the way the Dems talk to the left (and especially given that they've nominated somebody who is both personally responsible for an immense amount of immiseration among younger people and openly rejects the idea of having any empathy for the harm he's done) I have a hard time shitting on people who are terminally alienated, particularly given the company I'd be joining in so doing.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:29 AM on October 22, 2020 [9 favorites]
To be frank, the hectoring and smug condescension liberals aim at the left on this issue aren't the way you talk to somebody you want to persuade to do something- they're the way you talk to somebody you understand to be beneath you and who owes you something and is being recalcitrant about giving it to you. Centrist liberals don't talk to the Republicans they're counting on defecting from Trump like this, out of a desire not to alienate them, but they do talk to the left this way, because they don't respect us, aren't worried about alienating us, and believe us voting Democratic is a natural thing they're owed and not something we need to be persuaded to do.
And part of the reason it's the left that gets talked to this way, instead of the dozens of millions of nonvoters, is because it's really about establishing that the narrative will be that we don't vote for Dems (regardless of whether or not we actually do), so that after the election the usual logic can be applied:
2021-2024 if the Democrats win: "Ah hah, we won by appealing to the center! You see, feckless lefty children, you are irrelevant and your failure to vote for us doesn't matter, so we owe you nothing. Sit down and shut up."
2021-2024 if the Democrats win: "How could you fail to vote for us!? This is all your fault! Every bit of suffering that happens with half or more of Congressional Dems voting for it is all YOUR fault!"
We literally can't win because it's a dishonest double-bind; if we vote Dem we get no credit, and if we don't we get blame. I'm voting Biden, but given the way the Dems talk to the left (and especially given that they've nominated somebody who is both personally responsible for an immense amount of immiseration among younger people and openly rejects the idea of having any empathy for the harm he's done) I have a hard time shitting on people who are terminally alienated, particularly given the company I'd be joining in so doing.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:29 AM on October 22, 2020 [9 favorites]
Oh don't be coy; what do you suggest?
I suggested one in my prior comment: To position voting as a low-effort attempt to pick one's enemies supplemented by the idea that it will be easier to fight the Biden regime than to fight the Trump regime.
This straightforwardly acknowledges that the far left will be antagonistic to whatever government is in place, and positions choosing to vote for Biden as a low-cost contribution to achieving the larger strategic goals of most far left groups - the radical transformation of American society through extra-electoral political activity. It is based on understanding the worldview and goals of the far left, and then explaining how a desire activity might help them to accomplish it.
This would require liberals to adopt a rhetorical strategy other than condescending blustering based on ignorance, so it's unlikely, but it's a perfectly good position, and as a member of the far left talking to other members of the far left, it's one I've used in a few electoral campaigns where I thought it was true of one of the candidates.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 10:33 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
I suggested one in my prior comment: To position voting as a low-effort attempt to pick one's enemies supplemented by the idea that it will be easier to fight the Biden regime than to fight the Trump regime.
This straightforwardly acknowledges that the far left will be antagonistic to whatever government is in place, and positions choosing to vote for Biden as a low-cost contribution to achieving the larger strategic goals of most far left groups - the radical transformation of American society through extra-electoral political activity. It is based on understanding the worldview and goals of the far left, and then explaining how a desire activity might help them to accomplish it.
This would require liberals to adopt a rhetorical strategy other than condescending blustering based on ignorance, so it's unlikely, but it's a perfectly good position, and as a member of the far left talking to other members of the far left, it's one I've used in a few electoral campaigns where I thought it was true of one of the candidates.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 10:33 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
Why are people hectoring third party voters rather than non-voters?
Probably because a huge chunk of non-voters are DISENFRANCHISED.
The nation's not full of lazy folks who just couldn't be bothered to walk down the street one block and pull the lever. It's full of well-meaning people who don't get time off of work to wait in a five-hour line only to be told that they can't vote because their voter registration says "Joseph Smith Jr." while their driver's license says "Joseph Smith II".
posted by explosion at 11:30 AM on October 22, 2020 [6 favorites]
Probably because a huge chunk of non-voters are DISENFRANCHISED.
The nation's not full of lazy folks who just couldn't be bothered to walk down the street one block and pull the lever. It's full of well-meaning people who don't get time off of work to wait in a five-hour line only to be told that they can't vote because their voter registration says "Joseph Smith Jr." while their driver's license says "Joseph Smith II".
posted by explosion at 11:30 AM on October 22, 2020 [6 favorites]
Why are people hectoring third party voters rather than non-voters?
She isn't "people," she's her, with her actual audience and whatever she happens to really believe about her audience. She's talking to her audience, and not to people who aren't her audience.
Pretty sure the biggest reason she isn't talking directly to tired, middle-aged Black church ladies or out-of-work oil roughnecks is because not many of them watch her.
"Hey! Media personality with an audience! You shouldn't talk to your audience, you should talk to people who you know don't want to see you because they consistent choose not to see you!" seems a pretty silly argument to me.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 11:44 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
She isn't "people," she's her, with her actual audience and whatever she happens to really believe about her audience. She's talking to her audience, and not to people who aren't her audience.
Pretty sure the biggest reason she isn't talking directly to tired, middle-aged Black church ladies or out-of-work oil roughnecks is because not many of them watch her.
"Hey! Media personality with an audience! You shouldn't talk to your audience, you should talk to people who you know don't want to see you because they consistent choose not to see you!" seems a pretty silly argument to me.
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 11:44 AM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
Cool, you picked out a single line you can feel good about to respond to and ignored the rest.
The nation's not full of lazy folks who just couldn't be bothered to walk down the street one block and pull the lever. It's full of well-meaning people who don't get time off of work to wait in a five-hour line only to be told that they can't vote because their voter registration says "Joseph Smith Jr." while their driver's license says "Joseph Smith II".
After Feinstein's absolutely appalling behavior during the ACB hearings, a horrifyingly irresponsible shitshow that was followed by a double-digit increase in approval for confirming Barrett, I don't think Democrats get to treat that voter suppression as some natural fact that they had nothing to do with and couldn't possibly have helped. And with conservatives nationally figuring out that Barrett is going to help them undermine every voter protection the Dems pass, maybe the Democrats should take some responsibility for actually fighting the GOP instead of chumming up to them and screaming at the left whenever they lose.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:59 AM on October 22, 2020 [6 favorites]
The nation's not full of lazy folks who just couldn't be bothered to walk down the street one block and pull the lever. It's full of well-meaning people who don't get time off of work to wait in a five-hour line only to be told that they can't vote because their voter registration says "Joseph Smith Jr." while their driver's license says "Joseph Smith II".
After Feinstein's absolutely appalling behavior during the ACB hearings, a horrifyingly irresponsible shitshow that was followed by a double-digit increase in approval for confirming Barrett, I don't think Democrats get to treat that voter suppression as some natural fact that they had nothing to do with and couldn't possibly have helped. And with conservatives nationally figuring out that Barrett is going to help them undermine every voter protection the Dems pass, maybe the Democrats should take some responsibility for actually fighting the GOP instead of chumming up to them and screaming at the left whenever they lose.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:59 AM on October 22, 2020 [6 favorites]
I mean in all seriousness when my point is "you shit on the left because you feel entitled to have our votes but also want to use us as your excuse whenever you lose and you don't talk to anybody, even the people implementing literal fascism, the way you talk to us", and your objection is that well nonvoters can't vote and I'm an asshole for saying the Dems should be trying to help that? You are doing the thing that I am saying you are doing and you are doing it because you think I'm beneath you and failing to know my place.
posted by Pope Guilty at 12:02 PM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
posted by Pope Guilty at 12:02 PM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
Pope Guilty, perhaps I should have quoted Pseudeoephedrine to be more clear, because I was responding to the question of why to target e.g. Green party voters rather than non-voters:
The Green vote is smaller than the number of people who simply do not vote. So why isn't Natalie targeting them? They're a much larger group.
I was not responding to you.
posted by explosion at 1:10 PM on October 22, 2020
The Green vote is smaller than the number of people who simply do not vote. So why isn't Natalie targeting them? They're a much larger group.
I was not responding to you.
posted by explosion at 1:10 PM on October 22, 2020
It's very fair to lay a tendency to hippie-punching at the feet of many people in the Democratic party, especially the electeds and other people in power. There are far too many Liberal who do shit on the left. But this is not a fair reading of what GCU said, which was not an attack on you and in no way said or implied that you're an asshole.
I consider myself to be a socialist. I will also happily label myself a capial-D Democrat. I'm committed to the Democratic party as one of the available levers to make things less shitty, while being fully aware that they are also responsible for much of the shitty things in the world.
I've sometimes contributed to the tone you're talking about, and you're right that I don't talk to republicans that way. I mean, I generally don't talk to republicans at all, but if/when I do the conversation is very different because republicans are, in fact, assholes. When I talk with anti-voting leftists, I don't feel contempt, I feel frustration. It's because here's some who is already Not An Asshole. If you're on the left, our values and basic understanding of the world are compatible. Please understand that I am well informed about the values and understanding of the revolutionary left when I say that.
So for me, the choice to engage at least minimally with the electoral system we have, and to be a consistent voter for Democratic candidates whenever there's not a viable third-party candidate to the left (which does happen locally) is a no-brainer. And it is somewhere between frustrating to baffling when someone who is already on team "make the world better instead of worse" doesn't see it the same way.
Now of course there's a few different reasons why Leftists don't. Accelerationism is one, which comes in a variety of flavors, and I understand the reasoning but think they're dead wrong and I have little time for them. There's strategic concerns that withholding votes in the general will encourage the party to move left. I do not think this is realistic for a variety of reasons, but there's a conversation that can be had there which would be a lot easier if the stakes weren't as high as they are.
Then there's equivalence, and this is the argument I have the hardest time with. When someone doesn't vote because they earnestly believe that the Democrats are 100% as bad as the Republicans in all dimensions... I've got nothing. Are they bad? Yeah. And there's lots of areas where they are just as bad, but there's lots of areas where it's night and day (in my view). So if someone already shares my values but doesn't see that, it can be difficult to have a constructive conversation there.
Anyway, I think you're discounting the fact that a large amount of captial-L Leftists are already backing the Democratic party. Are they "entitled" to my vote? I think that's a really weird way to think of it.
posted by vibratory manner of working at 1:53 PM on October 22, 2020 [4 favorites]
I consider myself to be a socialist. I will also happily label myself a capial-D Democrat. I'm committed to the Democratic party as one of the available levers to make things less shitty, while being fully aware that they are also responsible for much of the shitty things in the world.
I've sometimes contributed to the tone you're talking about, and you're right that I don't talk to republicans that way. I mean, I generally don't talk to republicans at all, but if/when I do the conversation is very different because republicans are, in fact, assholes. When I talk with anti-voting leftists, I don't feel contempt, I feel frustration. It's because here's some who is already Not An Asshole. If you're on the left, our values and basic understanding of the world are compatible. Please understand that I am well informed about the values and understanding of the revolutionary left when I say that.
So for me, the choice to engage at least minimally with the electoral system we have, and to be a consistent voter for Democratic candidates whenever there's not a viable third-party candidate to the left (which does happen locally) is a no-brainer. And it is somewhere between frustrating to baffling when someone who is already on team "make the world better instead of worse" doesn't see it the same way.
Now of course there's a few different reasons why Leftists don't. Accelerationism is one, which comes in a variety of flavors, and I understand the reasoning but think they're dead wrong and I have little time for them. There's strategic concerns that withholding votes in the general will encourage the party to move left. I do not think this is realistic for a variety of reasons, but there's a conversation that can be had there which would be a lot easier if the stakes weren't as high as they are.
Then there's equivalence, and this is the argument I have the hardest time with. When someone doesn't vote because they earnestly believe that the Democrats are 100% as bad as the Republicans in all dimensions... I've got nothing. Are they bad? Yeah. And there's lots of areas where they are just as bad, but there's lots of areas where it's night and day (in my view). So if someone already shares my values but doesn't see that, it can be difficult to have a constructive conversation there.
Anyway, I think you're discounting the fact that a large amount of captial-L Leftists are already backing the Democratic party. Are they "entitled" to my vote? I think that's a really weird way to think of it.
posted by vibratory manner of working at 1:53 PM on October 22, 2020 [4 favorites]
There’s a strategy? Will it work before every living American dies from old age?
Of course not. The most important part of the strategy is that it can't eventually be proven wrong. That way you can just sit on the sidelines guilt free while everyone else tries to make things better.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 2:06 PM on October 22, 2020 [4 favorites]
Of course not. The most important part of the strategy is that it can't eventually be proven wrong. That way you can just sit on the sidelines guilt free while everyone else tries to make things better.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 2:06 PM on October 22, 2020 [4 favorites]
This would require liberals to adopt a rhetorical strategy other than condescending blustering based on ignorance, so it's unlikely, but it's a perfectly good position, and as a member of the far left talking to other members of the far left, it's one I've used in a few electoral campaigns where I thought it was true of one of the candidates.
How is that any different from leftists demanding politically impossible things from Democrats and then taking their ball and going home when things don't go 100% their way.
I will never forgive my leftist brethren for 2010. So many careers of liberal Democratic politicians died on the best fucking healthcare hill they could. What did they get from the left? Abandonment and derision. A voting coalition just up and fucking vanished. Allowing through a Republican gerrymandering project that a decade later we're still stuck in the fucking middle of.
No. You tell me why the fuck a liberal Democrat wouldn't want to do anything but berate that useless sack of a faction until the end of time? These Democrats weren't just sitting on the sidelines like some leftist calling everything shit. More than a few of them sacrificed their entire political careers to make things just a little bit better for a lot of people. They got fucking routed while the leftists were just sitting on the hill next to the battle going "YOU'RE ALL SHIT FOR MAKING THINGS ONLY SLIGHTLY BETTER!"
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 2:15 PM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
How is that any different from leftists demanding politically impossible things from Democrats and then taking their ball and going home when things don't go 100% their way.
I will never forgive my leftist brethren for 2010. So many careers of liberal Democratic politicians died on the best fucking healthcare hill they could. What did they get from the left? Abandonment and derision. A voting coalition just up and fucking vanished. Allowing through a Republican gerrymandering project that a decade later we're still stuck in the fucking middle of.
No. You tell me why the fuck a liberal Democrat wouldn't want to do anything but berate that useless sack of a faction until the end of time? These Democrats weren't just sitting on the sidelines like some leftist calling everything shit. More than a few of them sacrificed their entire political careers to make things just a little bit better for a lot of people. They got fucking routed while the leftists were just sitting on the hill next to the battle going "YOU'RE ALL SHIT FOR MAKING THINGS ONLY SLIGHTLY BETTER!"
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 2:15 PM on October 22, 2020 [3 favorites]
Your Childhood Pet Rock: You're nailing something that I think a lot of people don't get—and it ties into a comment I made in the Biden climate plan thread. I'm still hashing these thoughts out, but when it comes to health care, private insurance isn't something we can abolish and replace with a federally funded single payer program overnight. Private Health Insurance has become a load bearing member of the economy. (Well, maybe less of a load-bearing member, and more of a load-bearing poster) If you shut it down, a lot of people are going to be out of work, and a lot of shareholders are going to be out of a lot of money. (And normally, I'd be all like "fuck the shareholders," but a significant portion of stocks are held by things like pension funds for municipal employees, or in 401ks for other working people.)
In other words, as much as I'd like to wake up one morning and have a socialized healthcare system and never deal with private insurance again, as much as I want to see the CEOs of health insurers placed in the stockades and pelted with rotten vegetables, and as much as I want to never think about how I'm going to get my medications if I lose my job... I'd rather it be done in a gradual process that causes the least amount of harm to people who are being held up by this extremely dumb and poorly placed load bearing element of the US economy we call Private Health Insurance.
posted by SansPoint at 2:31 PM on October 22, 2020
In other words, as much as I'd like to wake up one morning and have a socialized healthcare system and never deal with private insurance again, as much as I want to see the CEOs of health insurers placed in the stockades and pelted with rotten vegetables, and as much as I want to never think about how I'm going to get my medications if I lose my job... I'd rather it be done in a gradual process that causes the least amount of harm to people who are being held up by this extremely dumb and poorly placed load bearing element of the US economy we call Private Health Insurance.
posted by SansPoint at 2:31 PM on October 22, 2020
But the thing is, we can't be all passively waiting for someone to be heroic and burn their careers for modest improvements. Those things just don't happen very often in the political world.
The flip side that a lot of liberals don't get is that a lot of people can't "just wait" because "it's coming". For a lot of people the promise of "it's coming" has been decades. "It's coming" for healthcare was the promise of the 1993 healthcare bill only being partially fulfilled over 15 years later! All while people continue to suffer and die, their blood lubricating the very gears of capitalist healthcare.
We can't continue to wait on Democratic Party members to have their CTJ on police and the criminal justice system being a god damned meat grinder.
The thing is the left can be a very important part of politics. What we on the left can (and need to) do is hold feet to the fire. We have the bodies. 50% of the population make less than the average wage by definition. That's 160 million people ready to be politically aligned on class interests over the next generation of activism.
The flip side is that we also not abandon those that are trying, even if we don't like the results of our own pet cause. We can primary the fuck out of people who are indifferent or uncommitted to what we value highly, that's part of the democratic process and I highly recommend it, but when all is said and done, we need to come together and votez escroc, pas facho.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 2:54 PM on October 22, 2020 [1 favorite]
The flip side that a lot of liberals don't get is that a lot of people can't "just wait" because "it's coming". For a lot of people the promise of "it's coming" has been decades. "It's coming" for healthcare was the promise of the 1993 healthcare bill only being partially fulfilled over 15 years later! All while people continue to suffer and die, their blood lubricating the very gears of capitalist healthcare.
We can't continue to wait on Democratic Party members to have their CTJ on police and the criminal justice system being a god damned meat grinder.
The thing is the left can be a very important part of politics. What we on the left can (and need to) do is hold feet to the fire. We have the bodies. 50% of the population make less than the average wage by definition. That's 160 million people ready to be politically aligned on class interests over the next generation of activism.
The flip side is that we also not abandon those that are trying, even if we don't like the results of our own pet cause. We can primary the fuck out of people who are indifferent or uncommitted to what we value highly, that's part of the democratic process and I highly recommend it, but when all is said and done, we need to come together and votez escroc, pas facho.
posted by Your Childhood Pet Rock at 2:54 PM on October 22, 2020 [1 favorite]
To be frank, the hectoring and smug condescension liberals aim at the left on this issue aren't the way you talk to somebody you want to persuade to do something- they're the way you talk to somebody you understand to be beneath you and who owes you something and is being recalcitrant about giving it to you.
In some cases definitely yes. In many other cases it's the reaction of desperate and terrified people in a sinking lifeboat trying to get you to help them bail it out instead of hypothesizing about the better lifeboat you could build out of the planks of the current one.
There's no point haranguing the Right to help with bailing because they're the ones drilling holes in the hull. We already know they're trying to kill everyone. Their survival plan involves them hoarding lifejackets and standing on people's shoulders once the boat is gone. There's too many of them to kill so we just have to hope the bailers outnumber the drillers.
posted by um at 3:48 PM on October 22, 2020
In some cases definitely yes. In many other cases it's the reaction of desperate and terrified people in a sinking lifeboat trying to get you to help them bail it out instead of hypothesizing about the better lifeboat you could build out of the planks of the current one.
There's no point haranguing the Right to help with bailing because they're the ones drilling holes in the hull. We already know they're trying to kill everyone. Their survival plan involves them hoarding lifejackets and standing on people's shoulders once the boat is gone. There's too many of them to kill so we just have to hope the bailers outnumber the drillers.
posted by um at 3:48 PM on October 22, 2020
So many careers of liberal Democratic politicians died on the best fucking healthcare hill they could.
Speaking as someone who had medical issues while uninsured and was later on the ACA: this might characterize some Democratic politicians, but it omits a whole lot of electeds who had no interest in getting to a better hill because they travel in moneyed circles, take large donations from insurers and pharmaceutical lobbies, and are kind of fine with the status quo as it doesn't affect them. A whole lot of capital-D democrats weren't acting in good faith at the time and aren't doing so now.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 12:56 AM on October 23, 2020
Speaking as someone who had medical issues while uninsured and was later on the ACA: this might characterize some Democratic politicians, but it omits a whole lot of electeds who had no interest in getting to a better hill because they travel in moneyed circles, take large donations from insurers and pharmaceutical lobbies, and are kind of fine with the status quo as it doesn't affect them. A whole lot of capital-D democrats weren't acting in good faith at the time and aren't doing so now.
posted by evidenceofabsence at 12:56 AM on October 23, 2020
Here is a group of people pursuing the strategy I suggested, rather than the one advocated for by Dems in this thread, or enacted in Wynn's video. Thank goodness they have a rhetorical strategy built on something other than grievances about the career opportunities of Democratic politicians.
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 7:50 AM on October 23, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by Pseudoephedrine at 7:50 AM on October 23, 2020 [1 favorite]
Late to the party but after all the discussion of who her audience might be I thought I'd point out that Wynn kind of describes them in the OP video:
posted by XMLicious at 1:35 AM on October 24, 2020
(sorry if this was already mentioned; I didn't see it)...Facebook moms who ask ignorant questions like ‘What's Indigenous Peoples Day?’ and who think that Kamala Harris making sassy faces is the height of praxis, and who probably watch ContraPoints—how embarrassing!
posted by XMLicious at 1:35 AM on October 24, 2020
« Older A Whole New Level of Parasocial | Why the Alt-Right’s Most Famous Woman Disappeared Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by um at 5:44 AM on October 20, 2020 [2 favorites]