In All Seriousness: PSL or Greens?
In All Seriousness: PSL or Greens?
There's been a lot of memes going around, but I genuinely have a question. If PSL were on the ballot, I would obviously vote for them. However, they're write-in only in my state. Would writing in PSL have the same effect, or could the vote more easily be invalid or ignored.
In other words, is it better to vote for Greens if PSL is write-in only?
EDIT: THANKS FOR INPUT! I've decided to write in Hilary Clinton, have a wonderful day!
But really probably writing in PSL. Elections don't matter too much though, so I'm ever in an area where PSL is active, I'll make sure to join (which has been the plan for a while). Thanks again!
You're viewing a single thread.
Okay, I'll not ask anyone in this thread in particular, but since there are so many PSL voters can someone please explain to me why anyone should vote PSL?
The argument made for the Greens about down ticket candidates makes sense. PSL has none of that, as far as I am aware and I sincerely apologize for my ignorance in advance if I'm mistaken, so it's really just for promotional purposes. If the PSL did have down ticket, local candidates running, then I would totally understand and think it's a good strategy but they don't (again, as far as I know). Why don't they run local candidates for any and every office that they could potentially win in areas where they're active? It seems to me like they're not ready to win offices, or don't want to, which makes me feel like it's pointless to vote for them or even organize with them if this is the way they're going. Even if what they want is to get their name out, the local route with real wins and neighborhood organizing is way more effective in addition to the national campaign rather than the impossible, routine, and probably costly Presidential campaign every 4 years and some marches. If they even won the election, by some logistical miracle, it would be rendered meaningless because they have no one else in positions of power below them and they haven't built up their support over the years.
For the record, as I've said many times, I want to like the PSL and generally think they have good politics and I voted for them many years ago but I don't agree with or understand this strategy so I don't see the point in doing it again. I'm also not voting for anyone anyway so I'm not saying this in favor of Greens or to argue against the PSL or anything. I just really don't see the point but I'm willing to concede I'm wrong.
It's recognizing that if it's just tallying how many people are anti-establishment, you might as well put it towards a party that takes principled stances on things and could plausibly do something if it accrued political power.
But for the time being, "Look how many of us are communists", and a barometer for the reach of the party.
(I'm an anarchist communist who's often critical of PSL, but I'm still open to working with them and will vote for them)
That's one of the least important reasons to vote PSL, in my opinion.
Communists and radicals will always be a small minority in most countries under capitalism, and probably have been even at the outset of most revolutions. It's only after taking power and changing people's material conditions that we'll see typical people identifying with Communism. Take into consideration the fact that we're talking about the electorate in the US and multiply that by a thousand. Numbers of Communists or people voting for Communists in the US is dismally low and will stay that way for a long time. We don't need PSL to run a national campaign for that poll. It's a terrible reason to focus on a Presidential campaigns over building local support through campaigns and wins, honestly.
But, again, hope I'm wrong and I hope PSL does well and grows.
Ok I agree that organizational work is way more important, but I'm not about to join PSL specifically, so what are the more important reasons to vote PSL that you were thinking of?
Well, if they were running for local positions I think that it would be important to vote for them for those positions so that they can build power locally, and if they had already built popular support through local campaigns throughout the country and then ran the Presidential campaign then it would be important to vote for them for that to escalate their position and put them into direct conflict with the highest levels of the DNC/GOP.
the strategy seems like a deep theoretical blunder to me, the cost of running a candidate every 4 years has gotta be a large amount, probably enough to employ one or two professional revolutionaries full time. Theyre supposed to be a revolutionary party but i dont think ive seen a single one of their theoretical works be recommended in communist spaces maybe ever?
The organizational muscles need to build a large party apparatus and connect with the community need to be built, the party isn't merely a spring that can be shot all at once but a rolling snowball that'll turn into an avalanche. There's lots of effective work that the party does nationwide, but these campaigns are a great way to get an ML party in people's faces and a way for the national level of the party to coordinate work between local branches and members and find systemic issues of organization in the party exposed by this effort
The fact that we're talking about and debating this is the point of running a candidate. The Party and it's members have to flex their organizational muscles and work towards building the scaffolding for a truly meaningful and truly revolutionary party in the future; and running a campaign to highlight for many how much of a scam the elections are has been extremely effective in the past and continues to now be extremely effective in putting the PSL at the forefront of conversation for anti-imperialist movements.
We won't win, we just have a great excuse to talk to people at a point when they're having their lack of meaningful governing power highlighted by the genocide and the election.
Thanks for your responses but, thinking about it further, I'm still not convinced this is a good strategy. Not that my opinion matters much and I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think starting with multiple, failed, impossible Presidential campaigns is the way to go about doing this. They should be focused on doing local campaigns, in my opinion. It would do a lot more to get people "talking about" PSL.
We're "talking about" PSL because this is a niche Communist website, I assure you almost no one outside radical circles is "talking about" PSL.
I understand where you're coming from, but I should highlight that branches of the PSL do participate in local struggles, I can even speak for local struggles here where we've made headway; and a huge part of the PSL's notoriety at this point is due to various branch's participation in and headlining of local pro-Palestinian struggle. However, I should share that being on the ground itself the presidential campaign has been a great way to connect with people outside of "radical circles", even ignoring the organizational and strategic benefits that it's brought.
By running a campaign which shows how bankrupt both candidates are, we're not only clearing the way for future growth (ala the periods of major upheavel between the two parties like the rise of the Populist Party) but also highlighting to regular working people how our system has fundamental contradictions with common sense humanity and how it needs to be corrected. People really aren't stupid, they're able to see when they're being played, and this campaign and what it ultimately highlights as the solution is effective for just those people who realize they're being played. This is outreach to the majority of people, with the benefit of spurring discussion among people who would be amenable to working with or within a well organized party structure.
If you're interested in more justifications for this policy by the party, an article is available here on Liberation School. I think ultimately even if we end up disagreeing on this, the results will show for themselves whether this contributed towards building a nationwide anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist party and movement in the United States.
Oh, okay, good to know about the local campaigns! That's really my only critique, I don't really see a big problem running a Presidential campaign if they're also doing local campaigns. I've asked about this before but no one responded so I figured it wasn't happening. So, they are running for local offices too?
Also, just out of curiosity if you happen to know, is PSL doing outreach for the Presidential campaign outside of areas with current chapters or only in areas where there is a current chapter?
Thanks again for your responses! It does help but sorry for the questions. (I did read the article but what you said was more convincing.)