You should pull every lever you have. Riot. Vote. Be loud as fuck. Throw a brick at a cop. Do it all. Fuck 'em.

One hundred percent.

And I'm tired of people telling me to shut up and to trust that democracy will fix things.

The game is rigged. We gotta flip the fucking table.

This is precisely the problem, every generation after 60s stopped rioting. The FBI program worked: they assassinated the rioters, their families, stole their land, and enshrined the peaceful ones as “legitimate change.” Folks aren't rioting anymore, because the indoctrination works.

I can provide a counterexample. Orbán's fascist kleptocracy in Hungary ended through voting from a coalition of leftwing progressive, centrist and conservatives. And maybe a little sprinkle of J.D. Vance. So perhaps other tools like rioting have worked before and have had better success rate, but voting is a tool in democracies too, that isn't mutually exclusive from the others.

I disagree that internal uprisings and riots were a factor in ending the Holocaust, but violence certainly was.

I’m not interested in being friendly or even civil to Russians, Americans, or Israelis who aren’t busy working to overthrow their government.

Once again *clears throat*:

"Nonviolence is fine, as long as it works." — Malcolm X

"In order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience." — Stokely Carmichael

"A riot is the language of the unheard." — Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

The holocaust is a crazy bad example for this argument.

As far as I understand, there weren't significant riots or uprisings within Germany that led to the Nazi's downfall.

...Ironically considering the voting claim, the Holocaust was stopped because of the choices of voters in faraway places. (okay, that and invading Russia rarely ends well for anyone, including the Russians.)

Its disturbing to me, bringing Holocaust as example here, but not Boston Tea, no French, Haitian, russian or Chinese revolutions, Mexico, Iran or Cuba also are great examples. Yet, not all of them went for good.

For why Holocaust is bad example., there's other comments, but even slavery is bad - slavery ended in many local places by riots, since very first slavery, thousands year ago, such riots happened. But it still lasted as law, new ownerships were made, next peoples were enslaved. Until some law on ups were changed, mostly by... votes.

Wanna change something, change the ups, govs.

It takes both kinds of movements. Hungary voted out their dictator recently as well.

Holocaust might have ended through war, but it could have been prevented through ballot box in 1933

The State maintains a near total monopoly on violence even when the social contract is broken.

Slavery never ended. It just got rebranded. You can access it via the "For Profit Prison System" option.

The people that decided they were too busy to vote last time could quite literally band together and elect anyone they want in any party.

I know, fuck me, right?

Voting and rioting aren't mutually exclusive. I would go far as to say they are the peanut butter and jelly of domestic politics. The hammer and anvil go together. Two wings of the same bird. Ect.

You know what is distracting us from doing all that?

Amazon Prime and doordash. Take those away, watch out!

I dislike this line of thinking because often what this sort of violence does is delegitimize these claims at the same time. For the few times it has worked, it hasn't worked a lot.

On top of that, slavery ended because the government made laws against it. Interment ended because the government changed. How many awful things never came about BECAUSE of voting? Imagine if Trump didn't win. Imagine if Roger Stone never got Bush elected? What if FDR wasn't elected? What if Lincoln didn't win?

It's just a poor way of thinking.

Electoralism aside, the camps stayed open. The Supreme Court of USA ruled at the end of 1944 that loyal citizens couldn't be detained and FDR rescinded the Executive Order. The camps wound down in 1945 and were all closed by 1946 after the wars conclusion.

I've come to say this but the mealy mouthed neoliberals think that the Democrats will magic away all the fascism and we'll all be safe.

Voting is the olive branch the owning class extended when the rioting got too close to them. You take that twig, let it ease your conscience however you see fit, then head back out into another riot with a clear mind. It is possible to vote, and also understand that voting is an ultimately meaningless gesture used to guage discontentment of the commoners.

Voting gives credence to the rioting. If you can't be bothered enough to vote, it pulls legitimacy from the riots.

VOTE MOTHERFUCKERS

Any sane person would do both.

Even if they think it would do nothing, they would still vote in the off chance that it would.