Entryism historically doesn’t work well. Even if a political party were to flip, winning electorally still doesn’t let you establish socialism within the confines of capitalism. You still need revolution.
Entryism historically has faired better than a “revolutionary” third party. No party aside from Dems and Republicans have controlled congress or the presidency since the 1850s. More recently we have seen political flips. FDR’s New Deal coalition failed to include LGBTQIA+, but the coalition survived 30ish years with prosperity for the working class* before ultimately being destroyed by Nixon and ultimately Reagan.
My point being, that the last 2 times revolutionary politics wete introduced (FDR and Reaganism/Trumpism) it led to YEARS of success for the party:
Healthy, well-regulated capitalism is complementary to socialism. In a world of abundance capitalism gives power to the workers to choose how they want to spend their time and to work on the projects they’re passionate and proud of, while socialism evens the playing field for kids to be able to grow up and participate on an equal footing, and it enables entrepreneurs to take greater risks to advance society’s collective prosperity. Healthy, well-regulated (but still flawed) capitalism existed for under 50 years. It did not address bigotry and other social injustices, as society was considered to be a monolith of white men. Socialism in this same time frame would have had the same issues: unaddressed bigotry and unequal footing.
It should also be noted that legislation has increasingly made it more difficult for a 3rd party to participate. So while there was limited success in 2000, States have made it more difficult for third parties to have success.
We need a revolution. I would rather a peaceful revolution, and I’m sure you would too. But regardless of the shape the revolution takes, following a path of least resistance is a less labor intensive way to grow a movement, and it’s a playbook that has worked well against the LGBTQIA+ community.
“Trans people shouldn’t play sports” offends fewer people than “trans people shouldn’t live” even though they mean the same thing. That’s why Republicans have hit sports so hard. It’s why they targeted local drag shows not Ru Paul’s Drag Race. Take a page from their book. Tea party the shit out of the Democrats.
If you want to build a movement quick, get quick wins. Boycott a local restaurant for hosting a Nazi candidate, as opposed to boycotting Walmart. Creating a 3rd party pushes an elected revolution back by a minimum of 4 years (since many states dont give ballot access unless you hit 5% in the previous election).
*Of course, the cis straight white folk faired the best
Finland is still an imperialist country, that’s why it has the system it does without revolution. They simply exported the major contradictions within society to the global south, aligning their proletariat and bourgeoisie against the global south. Capitalists still dominate Finland and workers don’t have power, they just have more generous welfare, which could be taken away at any time by the capitalists if conditions changed and imperialism weakened.
I’d much rather be a part of a revolutionary party that actually stands to move humanity forward.
I’d also add joining a revolutionary party.
Or hijack and revolutionize a party with the infrastructure to win.
Entryism historically doesn’t work well. Even if a political party were to flip, winning electorally still doesn’t let you establish socialism within the confines of capitalism. You still need revolution.
Entryism historically has faired better than a “revolutionary” third party. No party aside from Dems and Republicans have controlled congress or the presidency since the 1850s. More recently we have seen political flips. FDR’s New Deal coalition failed to include LGBTQIA+, but the coalition survived 30ish years with prosperity for the working class* before ultimately being destroyed by Nixon and ultimately Reagan.
My point being, that the last 2 times revolutionary politics wete introduced (FDR and Reaganism/Trumpism) it led to YEARS of success for the party:
Healthy, well-regulated capitalism is complementary to socialism. In a world of abundance capitalism gives power to the workers to choose how they want to spend their time and to work on the projects they’re passionate and proud of, while socialism evens the playing field for kids to be able to grow up and participate on an equal footing, and it enables entrepreneurs to take greater risks to advance society’s collective prosperity. Healthy, well-regulated (but still flawed) capitalism existed for under 50 years. It did not address bigotry and other social injustices, as society was considered to be a monolith of white men. Socialism in this same time frame would have had the same issues: unaddressed bigotry and unequal footing.
It should also be noted that legislation has increasingly made it more difficult for a 3rd party to participate. So while there was limited success in 2000, States have made it more difficult for third parties to have success.
We need a revolution. I would rather a peaceful revolution, and I’m sure you would too. But regardless of the shape the revolution takes, following a path of least resistance is a less labor intensive way to grow a movement, and it’s a playbook that has worked well against the LGBTQIA+ community.
“Trans people shouldn’t play sports” offends fewer people than “trans people shouldn’t live” even though they mean the same thing. That’s why Republicans have hit sports so hard. It’s why they targeted local drag shows not Ru Paul’s Drag Race. Take a page from their book. Tea party the shit out of the Democrats.
If you want to build a movement quick, get quick wins. Boycott a local restaurant for hosting a Nazi candidate, as opposed to boycotting Walmart. Creating a 3rd party pushes an elected revolution back by a minimum of 4 years (since many states dont give ballot access unless you hit 5% in the previous election).
*Of course, the cis straight white folk faired the best
If your starting point is the US you could still move towards something like Finland without a revolution.
Be part of the cultural change that would be required for that.
Finland is still an imperialist country, that’s why it has the system it does without revolution. They simply exported the major contradictions within society to the global south, aligning their proletariat and bourgeoisie against the global south. Capitalists still dominate Finland and workers don’t have power, they just have more generous welfare, which could be taken away at any time by the capitalists if conditions changed and imperialism weakened.
I’d much rather be a part of a revolutionary party that actually stands to move humanity forward.