What were voters thinking electing Ocasio-Cortez
If voters (even in NY) send a woman like Ocasio Cortez to the House, what does that say about the electorate?
While we're very happy to have you in the Gulch and appreciate your wanting to fully engage, some things in the Gulch (e.g. voting, links in comments) are a privilege, not a right. To get you up to speed as quickly as possible, we've provided two options for earning these privileges.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 4.
What I am saying is that until a fountain of youth is discovered, I will be LONG LONG dead before that process even gets a foothold. So, why would I be interested in supporting a process that will most likely take generations? Short term fixes to make MY life better seem to be a better bet. I am changing my mind about the voting for the wildest socialist (and havent done that in the past)- in thinking about the time frames, it would take too long for that approach to work for me to benefit. It is enticing to find a shorter term solution, but perhaps there is none, and I will have to just live with a declining society here for the rest of my time. Maybe I can find a better place to live out my days, either in a remote USA location with less collectivist leanings, or somewhere outside the USA
The "point of voting" is to support an occasional good candidate and slow down the worst as long as it does make a difference. That in itself is no more a long term solution than deliberately causing a suicidal collapse. It buys time, while it is still possible at all, to spread better ideas.
Ayn Rand discussed this several times, such as in her analysis of the Nixon-McGovern election in which McGovern lost by a landslide despite the intellectuals supporting him, while she warned that there is inadequate explicit opposition that can sustain the American sense of life. Today the Democrats are even more extreme, open collectivists than McGovern was and are winning elections, with many more very close. Ordinary people are increasingly wondering if we should "try socialism", in health care and much more.
You cannot count on the American people continuing to "step in to straighten things out" indefinitely without explicit, philosophical defense of reason and individualism.
Given that current voting choices are variations of collectivism, whats the point of voting unless just to slow down the march to complete collectivism (which in the case of older people, I can understand actually as I did that by voting for Trump).
The whole thing is very upsetting as there are no good alternatives that do not have side effects. One thing that can be done is to cut personal spending so as to cut the need for income (which is taxed) and cut the amount of sales taxes paid. Less money to the government means less control they exert over us all.
Perhaps that would take more than a generation, which would subject the people currently living to a worse life than if the resistance slows down the process. I am willing to accept this caveat.
I am also curious if you look at Atlas Shrugged as more of a documentary than a novel, with the actions of Francisco in destroying his mine, Ragnar by sinking ships, and Galt by "stopping the motor of the world" as actions just allowing the collectivist ideology to run its natural course. Once the economy collapsed, the people were more ready to accept the more rational alternative ideas. Galt presented.
Voting for the "wildest socialist" to "get this madness over with" is nihilistic self destruction. Now you say that it is "emotionally satisfying".
You did not answer what you think would ever cause "a real objectivist" to have "a shot to win" and how that is helped by not voting at all.
There should be many laws against this
- Apple - Big Brother - 1984
You should not join the mob.
Even though it is a protracted process which will eventually lead to complete terror and totalitarianism, I always believed in the American people that when things get very much out of control they step in to straighten things out. The "people who stick to their guns and religion".
Where we differ is that while I am aware the leaders on the left have high IQs, the mass below the tip of the iceberg is like a herd of sheep, blindly following the directives.
That is the main and defining difference between the GOP and the left. The GOP indulged in the "differences" (see Freedom Caucus) to fracture their power of action. At the same time the left stuck together and overcame the GOP.
Had it not been for the president the House would have been lost by an even larger margin.
Add to that the tainted nobody put up by the GOP.
I suspect that Cortez is only a facade or curtain placed right up front for all to see. The real power is whomever is hiding behind the curtain we are to pay no attention to.
Voting for the socialists instead of the intellectually challenged pseudo individualists won’t change things at all really, even though it’s emotionally satisfying
Believe me, I try to influence people to be more rational in their thinking, and perhaps in 50 years collectivism will no longer be the preferred ideology in the USA. I would like this process to be faster, and it’s frustrating to see how things are going
Load more comments...