[googlywoogly]

The right wing very vocally and openly calls for votes every election. In countries like the US and Canada voting is very obviously a scam - you get to vote for a few preselected candidates, and what determines the winner is actually the media and special interests who decide how much and what kind of coverage a candidate gets. Then, after the election, whoever wins just serves the special interests and is free to go back on every promise they made (and they always do). If you look at Canada (probably US too), every federal government for the last ~50 years, regardless of party, has had multiple corruption scandals involving various types of fraud and embezzlement of public funds. The RCMP, who are meant to investigate this, are top-down directly controlled by the PMO, who are free to block or shut down any investigation - and they do so routinely. There have been essentially zero punishment or repercussions for anyone involved and the scam continues.

[brendoelfrendo]

Perhaps the GP comment was too US centric, but in the context of US politics, you can't really both-sides this argument or say that the right-wing are the champions of free and fair elections. The Republican party is by far the leader in voter suppression tactics, including closing polling places; restricting or banning mail-in or absentee voting; restricting who is allowed to vote; calling for partisan election observers; claiming fraud and abuse when they lose, in spite of a lack of evidence; and gerrymandering. On the last one, I don't dispute that the Democratic party also engages in gerrymandering, but it's hard to say that Democrats have been even close to as successful in that regard, and Republican gerrymandering is currently in the news as several states appear to be redrawing their voting districts specifically to benefit Republicans.

[googlywoogly]

> you can't really both-sides this argument or say that the right-wing are the champions of free and fair elections.

Those are like two opposite statements, and I think you missed the whole point of my comment. You think you're in some noble partisan fight where your side are the good guys. In reality both sides work closely together to maximally fuck you over, while your cheer one of them on for some reason.

[brendoelfrendo]

No, I'm far too cynical to believe that anyone has my interests at heart. But I will acknowledge one side as being openly anti-democratic while the other is merely spineless in the face of opposition.

My opening statement being contradictory was, admittedly, my fault. I couldn't tell if you were trying to champion the right wing or if you were trying to build a both-sides argument, so I tried to cover both bases. And that just made me look silly.

[googlywoogly]

Both parties are very openly very anti-democratic and very corrupt. They openly sabotage and attack their own candidates if they don't fall in line (Bernie Sanders is one of MANY examples). They are pretty openly corrupt (look at Biden and family, look at all of the insider trading, etc), and pretty openly serve special/corporate interests like the military industrial complex. They constantly lie and try to misinform voters - which so very anti-democratic.

If you think one side is not anti-democratic, all that means is that you drank too much side-favoured coolaid.

[brendoelfrendo]

I am going to put this as bluntly as I can: I don't like the Democrats, but they are not the party currently dismantling our government institutions and civil liberties with gleeful abandon. You can't "both parties" US politics right now and expect me to take you seriously.

[nerdponx]

The "both sides" argument, in the USA, does not at all stand up to even a little bit of scrutiny. Yes, both sides do various bad things, and individual politicians on both sides are varyingly corrupt. But only one side systematically obstructs social, economic, environmental, educational, and medical progress, and actively works to undo progress that has already been made. The other side generally, albeit slowly and stubbornly, moves things in a positive direction.

It's one thing if you genuinely think liberal, center left, and leftist policy is bad compared to authoritarian conservatism. That's wrong, but at least it's a strong and clear position, and the people who hold such beliefs usually do so for various personal reasons that are at least somewhat intellectually and morally understandable, even though they are usually incoherent and inconsistent.

It's another thing entirely to continue to hammer away at the "both sides equally bad" idea. It's flatly wrong, as a matter of simple fact. Pelosi insider trading simply does not compare in magnitude of damage to, say, the president more or less openly taking bribes to allow huge industry consolidation, or unraveling decades of American soft power abroad. You might also want to go look up the actual activity that took place under the Biden executive branch. I don't think anybody will argue against you that Biden was a problematic president. But you can't look at the policy enacted and carried out by his administration and claim that it's all a wash. It would be much more intellectually honest to say you prefer Trump's policy.