Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Vote or not to vote...
Revolution will happen slowly and hardly, but on my point of vue certainly not by voting through parlementarism and electoral aristocracy. In a way you're right when you believe that voting for nader will change something (let's imagine that 5% of US people vote for Nader: it will put the pressure on capitalists and republicrats).But non-electoral anarchists are right also when denouncing parlementarism. Firstly because they (and I) want to dismantle the myth of "delegation". Secondly there's the question of making revolution in the activist praxis.
Revolution will happen slowly and hardly, but on my point of vue certainly not by voting through parlementarism and
electoral aristocracy.
In a way you\'re right when you believe that voting for nader will change something (let\'s imagine that 5% of US people vote for Nader: it will put the pressure on capitalists and republicrats).
But non-electoral anarchists are right also when denouncing parlementarism. Firstly because they (and I) want to dismantle the myth of \"delegation\".
Secondly there\'s the question of making revolution in the
activist praxis (in many aspects: authoritarian attitude, sexism etc.), this is crucial and a political, electoral party is probably not a structure for this kind of progress.
As many anarchist friends are saying: \"be realistic, revolution is not for tomorrow...it is today and the day after tomorrow\" ;-)
On the other hand a few \"riot US activists\" (I respect them anyway) believe that riot will bring a kind of spontaneous revolution. I think this way of thinking is the consequence of the ideological terror that dominated the US and the destruction of labour identities. It forced progressive forces and among them anarchist to be isolated and they survived and created through counter-culture (so they should be respected for their contribution).
If you need to believe that vote will bring change why not.
But there\'s many alternatives beetween parlementarist
activism and dream of spontaneous uprising: strikes and
labour unions (mainstream, anarcosyndicalist...), all kinds of direct actions such as occupations (of boss office by workers, of local politicians offices by \"citizens\" defending local issues, occupation of non-used buildings by poor families organised in various collectives and using medias to prevent police actions and to put pressure on capitalists), demos of course, popular education, lobbyist strategies, student activism, non-monetary micro-structures, symbolic destruction of capitalism etc. (for example this is what did Jos
electoral aristocracy.
In a way you\'re right when you believe that voting for nader will change something (let\'s imagine that 5% of US people vote for Nader: it will put the pressure on capitalists and republicrats).
But non-electoral anarchists are right also when denouncing parlementarism. Firstly because they (and I) want to dismantle the myth of \"delegation\".
Secondly there\'s the question of making revolution in the
activist praxis (in many aspects: authoritarian attitude, sexism etc.), this is crucial and a political, electoral party is probably not a structure for this kind of progress.
As many anarchist friends are saying: \"be realistic, revolution is not for tomorrow...it is today and the day after tomorrow\" ;-)
On the other hand a few \"riot US activists\" (I respect them anyway) believe that riot will bring a kind of spontaneous revolution. I think this way of thinking is the consequence of the ideological terror that dominated the US and the destruction of labour identities. It forced progressive forces and among them anarchist to be isolated and they survived and created through counter-culture (so they should be respected for their contribution).
If you need to believe that vote will bring change why not.
But there\'s many alternatives beetween parlementarist
activism and dream of spontaneous uprising: strikes and
labour unions (mainstream, anarcosyndicalist...), all kinds of direct actions such as occupations (of boss office by workers, of local politicians offices by \"citizens\" defending local issues, occupation of non-used buildings by poor families organised in various collectives and using medias to prevent police actions and to put pressure on capitalists), demos of course, popular education, lobbyist strategies, student activism, non-monetary micro-structures, symbolic destruction of capitalism etc. (for example this is what did Jos
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$210.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
And the quality of your answer shows that your "argumentation" is exactly the contrary (a road to naivete paved with nothing), thanks, you're so clever and open-minded! :-)))))))))))))
It seems to me that the only way to actually show your dissatisfaction with the system is to vote the way they don't want you to: third party.