You just have a romantic view of electoral politics. The things both parties agree on (like gutting the public sector and arming Israel for their genocide) you can’t vote for at the ballot box. When you say they’re both the same we agree on this front. It’s not one of the choices offered at the election and we have to act outside of the political system (protests, unions, strikes, arson, whatever…) to get those done.
However that doesn’t mean that nothing is at stake during the election. We have to think of everyone in Canadian society and vote for the practical option which will have the best outcome for the most people in solidarity with the most vulnerable. Just because liberals and conservatives are both pieces of shit doesn’t mean there aren’t differences between them. And just because you take an hour to vote every 4 years doesn’t mean you can’t pursue whatever leftists, anarchist, revolutionary or other political goals you would like to act on the rest of the time.
You’re not compromising your values when you vote you’re just acting in good solidarity with the marginalised people for whom there is a difference between parties.
Thank you for the link, I’ll take a look. But I don’t agree that my view on electoral politics is in any way “romantic” — I’m saying (probably elsewhere in this overall godforsaken discussion) that elections are only a small part of how the people can influence government. Which means I actually believe, in this case — and hear me out — that a Poilievre government would have been better than a Carney government, because the same people saying “LOL I bet Poilievre is annoyed” would be in the streets protesting this event if it were Poilievre hosting it. Poilievre simply would not have the societal permission structure to do any of the heinous shit Carney is doing!
The same goes for almost everything Carney has done, from cuts to the public sector to eviscerating climate goals. People would be up in arms about ALL of it if the person doing it was wearing the blue team’s shirt. Instead, half the country is like “welp, better than the other guy so can’t complain” instead of DOING something about what the guy IN POWER is doing. This is why I continually describe what’s happening as cult-like behaviour.
You just have a romantic view of electoral politics. The things both parties agree on (like gutting the public sector and arming Israel for their genocide) you can’t vote for at the ballot box. When you say they’re both the same we agree on this front. It’s not one of the choices offered at the election and we have to act outside of the political system (protests, unions, strikes, arson, whatever…) to get those done.
However that doesn’t mean that nothing is at stake during the election. We have to think of everyone in Canadian society and vote for the practical option which will have the best outcome for the most people in solidarity with the most vulnerable. Just because liberals and conservatives are both pieces of shit doesn’t mean there aren’t differences between them. And just because you take an hour to vote every 4 years doesn’t mean you can’t pursue whatever leftists, anarchist, revolutionary or other political goals you would like to act on the rest of the time.
You’re not compromising your values when you vote you’re just acting in good solidarity with the marginalised people for whom there is a difference between parties.
Here is pp on trans rights https://thetyee.ca/News/2025/01/27/Poilievre-Scored-Political-Points-Trans-Rights/
He’s also routinely seen with far right, white supremacist, and nationalist organisations such as diagolon and their leaders.
Thank you for the link, I’ll take a look. But I don’t agree that my view on electoral politics is in any way “romantic” — I’m saying (probably elsewhere in this overall godforsaken discussion) that elections are only a small part of how the people can influence government. Which means I actually believe, in this case — and hear me out — that a Poilievre government would have been better than a Carney government, because the same people saying “LOL I bet Poilievre is annoyed” would be in the streets protesting this event if it were Poilievre hosting it. Poilievre simply would not have the societal permission structure to do any of the heinous shit Carney is doing!
The same goes for almost everything Carney has done, from cuts to the public sector to eviscerating climate goals. People would be up in arms about ALL of it if the person doing it was wearing the blue team’s shirt. Instead, half the country is like “welp, better than the other guy so can’t complain” instead of DOING something about what the guy IN POWER is doing. This is why I continually describe what’s happening as cult-like behaviour.