Electionstrut 2024



Blastman said:



klezmer electro-thug beats said:

I don't pretend to comprehend each and every voter's muddle of intentions, but historically shit like this happens when a country is in what you might call terminal decline. I don't really want to know what the terminal decline of a stronger superpower than history has ever seen with 750 military bases around the world looks like but I suspect I will find out




Idk how I didn't even see you said this, but what does "shit like this mean"? i'm just not sure exactly what you mean



I guess I was talking about the election result, but more broadly:
Incoherent political movements toward punishing scapegoats over any kind of vision of the future. Nothing will get better for anyone, but your purple haired grandson you hate, or the immigrants in your neighborhood, or just women generally, will have it worse than you. The ideology behind Trump has completely abandoned the idea that political power can be wielded to improve any voter or regular person's life (no one can remember the last time that happened. Maybe the COVID checks, but that's it). And honestly the alternative from the Dems is not far from this - they don't promise to imprison and persecute enemies as much (though they damn well tried re:immigration this time around), but their offering is that things will get worse less rapidly under their watch. Not that things will get better. No more money in your pocket, not improvement in services from the collective wealth of the richest nation ever to exist in all of history, no baseline of dignity to everyone's existence that no one need fear falling below, no peace, no progress toward a world where there won't be 2 billion climate refugees in a handful of years, no feeling that you have a form of group power of self-determination within your community, whether that's your home, neighborhood, workplace or whatever. Certainly not your nation, or your world.
Politics play out strictly as an aesthetic, a consumer choice you use to signal the kind of person you are. Absolutely no promise to wield the levers of power toward a specific end. Everything is mystified, automatic, behind a curtain - you can't possibly understand what we do here in the halls of power. The function of government and the ends it works toward categorically cannot be as simple as giving the people what they want. And no one can explain why the choice was between two parties that do not reflect in any way what their voters want when polled on "issues" or specific political ends. No one can explain why even the people who "win" are miserable and will continue to be so, with their only satisfaction from having won being that they get to witness others' suffering. Older generations especially: thinking, voting and acting politically as if the world will be sucked into a black hole when they die. Nothing matters beyond them, not even their own children. Zero vision of a world after their existence ends, zero concern for it. The fact that the crypto and AI bubbles that are now powerful lobbies in government are literally mortgaging the suffering of children born today via climate disaster, mass displacement and the terrifying actions you can imagine governments like this will manifest in response to those things: war, exploitation, imprisonment or abuse of refugees, genocide? And it's all for a bunch of temporary wealth for a handful of sociopaths. Even dangling stories of temporary wealth for a few is enough to send many millions of people onto the bandwagon, chasing that ludicrous simulacrum of "wealth" - which in its true form is personal dignity, peace, stability, community, self-determination (in the form of freedom to move, time to oneself to develop one's own person, freedom to decide how to live), a lot of things that generally money alone doesn't give you; a lot of things that depend on the people around you having roughly the same material "wealth" as you, not you having the most.This level of deep, deep dysfunction of a society - what is supposed to be a collaborative project to protect and share amongst one another - has come about for a few historical reasons. The profit margin for capital is getting thinner everywhere. Or everywhere real. Tech bubble products don't collect your garbage or make your tap water not give you cholera. Maybe the US was able to stave off this dissolution for so long because of the national wealth it was able to gain through being first a genocidal takeover of an entire resource-rich continent, and then after that, a military superpower, dictating the terms of global trade, industry and investment. But it's starting to feel in a collective subconscious way that it's not hanging onto that status forever. So they look for internal enemies, they give up on anything getting better because the real way you could improve things for yourself is to improve things for the parts of the world you've traditionally exploited and stomped on. You can't build a wall big enough to keep out the sun, the seas, the clouds. Or refugees from the parts of the world you've made hell.
When you had it big, and you lose it, it does very weird things to people's self-regard as a nation. Look at the UK crying its eyes out every time it doesn't win a world cup, a sport a billion+ people play, of which 60 million are British. Why SHOULD they be world class? Why are they paying the United States to basically lease nuclear weapons so they can feel really big and strong, like a real global player? Because a hundred years ago they had colonies in every time zone, and they built a couple of pretty stone colonnaded city centres with the ill-gotten money from that network of global exploitation. They can go it alone! Vote Brexit! It's like society-scale dementia. And it's coming for the States, where it will play out differently. And the States has enough nuclear weapons to kill every human on the planet a hundred times over.Sorry this isn't super coherent. I'm not VI Lenin I'm just some guy.
 


klezmer electro-thug beats said:Incoherent political movements toward punishing scapegoats over any kind of vision of the future. Nothing will get better for anyone, but your purple haired grandson you hate, or the immigrants in your neighborhood, or just women generally, will have it worse than you. The ideology behind Trump has completely abandoned the idea that political power can be wielded to improve any voter or regular person's life (no one can remember the last time that happened. Maybe the COVID checks, but that's it). And honestly the alternative from the Dems is not far from this - they don't promise to imprison and persecute enemies as much (though they damn well tried re:immigration this time around), but their offering is that things will get worse less rapidly under their watch. Not that things will get better. No more money in your pocket, not improvement in services from the collective wealth of the richest nation ever to exist in all of history, no baseline of dignity to everyone's existence that no one need fear falling below, no peace, no progress toward a world where there won't be 2 billion climate refugees in a handful of years, no feeling that you have a form of group power of self-determination within your community, whether that's your home, neighborhood, workplace or whatever. Certainly not your nation, or your world.Sorry this isn't super coherent. I'm not VI Lenin I'm just some guy.

I'm not sure why it wont let me type in the white of this, but yeah the U.S. is not doing so hot, it's just gonna get worse and we are aware of that.
 
i thought about it mainly in terms of class. the cost of living has made it really hard for working class people since the pandemic. something has got to give. harris was all about helping the middle class (bastions of the status quo they are when it comes to the economy). poor people and many low wage workers are not turning out for that in 2024. they seemed more interested in wooing centre-right folks, so they didn't come out strong on sure wins for turnout (like, from leftists) like abortion rights or gaza ceasefire.

meanwhile, trump's base all came out. whatever else motivated those voters, he promised radical change (tarrifs) that will bring back manufacturing jobs, so i'm sure many ppl held their nose and voted for him. at least it was something radical! and now americans get to experience that radical change, brought to you by the (new) Status Quo. sure to be less fair than the previous one.

i also think national elections (everywhere?) in this social media age are being, uh, globalized like everything else. everyone must be f'ing with everyone else's elections! so we're all just suckers to the game in new and exciting ways. stuff like this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/self/comments/1gouvit/youre_being_targeted_by_disinformation_networks/

(source: not american)
 
Once Musk gets the peer-reviewing bodies banned/scrapped/jailed, in the name of efficiency, expect the worst. Then worse than that.

https://pluralistic.net/2024/11/21/policy-based-evidence/#decisions-decisions

Cory is always a good read.
 


ketan said:

so we're all just suckers to the game in new and exciting ways. stuff like this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/self/comments/1gouvit/youre_being_targeted_by_disinformation_networks/

(source: not american)



That post is so spot on. I don't use Tiktok, FB, X or IG, but I consume a lot of travel and language related content on YouTube; nothing negative or controversial. Even then, I have noticed a sharp increase in the frequency, engagement and angry, ad-hominem discourse in these "X country vs. Y country", "Europeans HATE Americans" and vice-versa, "don't EVER visit this country because it SUCKS", etc. in the comments sections of videos and newsfeed articles that the algorithm recommends to me over the past several years. I know trolls, flame wars and mostly harmless cultural humor/observations have been part of the Internet landscape forever. Russia isn't behind everything, but they have a lot to benefit from this brand of aggressive "us vs. them" content targeted to Westerners.
 


cove said:



Grafwritah2 said:Personal opinion, Democrats went too far to the extreme on a number of their policies and alienated swaths of the populace

What extreme are you referring to and which policies?




Ultimately elections are a political popularity contest - are you are or are you not saying what the populace wants to hear, and is what you are saying agreeing with the majority who can elect you?I think the Democrats on both the national as well as state and local levels in some situations could have throttled things back a bit, still moved their agendas forward, and possibly had better results in the recent elections.Take immigration, for instance - it's clearly been a barely controlled cluster fuck over the last few years. If they regulated the flow a bit more and took a little more time to try to filter out those coming with nefarious intentions, they still could have robust immigration, support those that are coming to the US who truly are fleeing dangerous situations, and most likely shave off some of the very visible negative press that has come with the poorly controlled and filtered flow that the country has had.Similarly on a state/local level the hands off on low level crime has clearly backfired in many areas. They could have had some level of reform to be more reasonable - such as adjusted bail and sentencing policies for low level offenders - without giving criminals free reign to loot stores with little to no repercussions.Both of those scenarios could have been handled better to still advance their policies without the boatload of negative press. And those are the ones that had unanticipated and undesired results - ultimately to win over the majority of voters on a national level they would do better with a more moderate approach.I could say the same for Republicans but this year they were in the lucky position to benefit from the backlash against the above (and more) against Democrats.
 


ketan said:

i thought about it mainly in terms of class. the cost of living has made it really hard for working class people since the pandemic. something has got to give. harris was all about helping the middle class (bastions of the status quo they are when it comes to the economy). poor people and many low wage workers are not turning out for that in 2024. they seemed more interested in wooing centre-right folks, so they didn't come out strong on sure wins for turnout (like, from leftists) like abortion rights or gaza ceasefire.

meanwhile, trump's base all came out. whatever else motivated those voters, he promised radical change (tarrifs) that will bring back manufacturing jobs, so i'm sure many ppl held their nose and voted for him. at least it was something radical! and now americans get to experience that radical change, brought to you by the (new) Status Quo. sure to be less fair than the previous one.

i also think national elections (everywhere?) in this social media age are being, uh, globalized like everything else. everyone must be f'ing with everyone else's elections! so we're all just suckers to the game in new and exciting ways. stuff like this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/self/comments/1gouvit/youre_being_targeted_by_disinformation_networks/

(source: not american)



American national politics pivots on a relatively small amount of fringe voters. Democrats have been in control and had a lot of visible fuckups. I think the Republicans saying we'll try some drastic but opposite policies was sufficient to sway enough of those fringe voters to put the majority on their side.I know we can also say Trump had a lot of visible fuckups, but he ultimately has not been responsible for the direction of the country over the last 4 years. I do truly think if there was a more moderate third party candidate that had the resources to be viable they would give both the Democrats and Republicans a run for their money.
 


Electrode said:



ketan said:

so we're all just suckers to the game in new and exciting ways. stuff like this:
https://www.reddit.com/r/self/comments/1gouvit/youre_being_targeted_by_disinformation_networks/

(source: not american)



That post is so spot on. I don't use Tiktok, FB, X or IG, but I consume a lot of travel and language related content on YouTube; nothing negative or controversial. Even then, I have noticed a sharp increase in the frequency, engagement and angry, ad-hominem discourse in these "X country vs. Y country", "Europeans HATE Americans" and vice-versa, "don't EVER visit this country because it SUCKS", etc. in the comments sections of videos and newsfeed articles that the algorithm recommends to me over the past several years. I know trolls, flame wars and mostly harmless cultural humor/observations have been part of the Internet landscape forever. Russia isn't behind everything, but they have a lot to benefit from this brand of aggressive "us vs. them" content targeted to Westerners.



I honestly think a lot of that was just Clickbait to drive traffic. What sounds more interesting to read/watch, "Europeans HATE Americans because..." or "European guy loved his trip to St. Louis".It's very annoying and most of them are garbage, but I do think that drives clicks.
 


Grafwritah2 said:

I honestly think a lot of that was just Clickbait to drive traffic. What sounds more interesting to read/watch, "Europeans HATE Americans because..." or "European guy loved his trip to St. Louis".It's very annoying and most of them are garbage, but I do think that drives clicks.



Definitely. The point I was trying to make was that, as stated in the Reddit post ketan linked to, those with nefarious geopolitical intent insert themselves into certain popular topics or social movements, act as outside agitators and get people arguing.Another example would be how years ago, hashtags like "save the children" and "bring back our girls" were hijacked to spread QAnon/Pizzagate nonsense. Nonprofits who work hard to eliminate real life human trafficking have nothing to do with nonexistant "Democrat politicians and celebrities kidnap children and drain their blood", but Russian troll farms made it so.
 


Electrode said:



Grafwritah2 said:

I honestly think a lot of that was just Clickbait to drive traffic. What sounds more interesting to read/watch, "Europeans HATE Americans because..." or "European guy loved his trip to St. Louis".It's very annoying and most of them are garbage, but I do think that drives clicks.



Definitely. The point I was trying to make was that, as stated in the Reddit post ketan linked to, those with nefarious geopolitical intent insert themselves into certain popular topics or social movements, act as outside agitators and get people arguing.Another example would be how years ago, hashtags like "save the children" and "bring back our girls" were hijacked to spread QAnon/Pizzagate nonsense. Non-profits who work hard to eliminate real-life human trafficking have nothing to do with non-existant "Democrat politicians and celebrities kidnap children and drain their blood", but Russian troll farms made it so.



Point taken. Aside from the noise that generates that obfuscates the real problems (and solutions), does that really take away from the people who aren't morons? What I want to say is does anyone that wasn't born with fetal alcohol syndrome really believe Hillary Clinton was facilitating trafficking of children from the non-existent basement of a pizza shop? Or maybe it doesn't matter - if they stir up enough morons they'll get the result they want, which is confusion and idiots showing up to pizza shops with guns looking for non-existent children.