• BalderSion@real.lemmy.fan
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    I’d reply that anyone can justify any conclusion if they’re allowed to pick and choose the evidence under consideration. We should aim to produce a political theory that accounts for decades of history and change.

    • superniceperson@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Sure… But that political theory is still explicitly illegal in the US and can get you imprisoned if you manage to get elected. Barring the obvious, we can’t base our political theory on entirely different material conditions experienced by entirely different people. The number of voters that were alive 60 years ago is miniscule, and the number of voters that voted 60 years ago is going to be less than 1% in the next election.

      Even supposing those people were physically still alive their material conditions have changed so dramatically they aren’t the same voters.

      By ignoring the change of conditions and change of voters mentality, you set yourself up for ‘surprise’ failures, like clinton in 2016, which all leftists knew clinton would lose.

      If you just look at the last four years and the material conditions people face, you’re far less likely to overvalue old elections that have nothing whatsoever in common with modern elections.