Voting should not be the main strategy to fight for liberty and progressive change, since the cards in electoralism are way too stacked in favour of the already powerful minority. That’s what I meant with “voting is not important”.

When Trump lost the last election, MAGA-heads were ready to take up arms against what they considered an injustice. Why aren’t progressives ready to do so? How does the “vote blue no matter who” crowd prepare against another Jan 6th situation?

surpassing liberal democracy is a good thing. I disagree with the free society bit. What definition of “free society” are you referring to?

It’s actually not, since you treat it more like a non-falsifiable “common sense” situation, which actually excludes logical reasoning.

To me, denying the push/pull concept is dumb, I’ll absolutely conceede that the main push/pull factors may not be as prominant as previously suggested, but the play a part.

This feel to me like a “feels over reals” situation.

Did you read the article? O.o

Nice strawman, homie.

With electoralism, people get complacent with watered down reforms and become politically alienated.

The homepage I linked to earlier tries to ansewer your questions. Here’s the english translation if you don’t speak German.

As I said: the theory of push- and pull-factors is outdated and not really taken seriously in academics anymore. Are you claiming that you know reasons for migration better than academia?

Ok. I’ve chosen this one

You can’t prove a negative.

It’s an outdated model and not really taken seriopsly in academia.

If progressive policies were ever put into place by an elected body, it was always merely a by-product of already established social consensus formed by bottom-up politics.

The US supreme court isn’t even a democratically legitimized body. Why do you want to take the high road if reactionaries clearly don’t care for the rules?

Voting doesn’t really matter, though.

Edit, clarification: at least compared to bottom-up social movements.

Pull effects have never been empirically shown. You’re repeating the right’s talking points.

Pull effects aren’t real. Help eradicating the reasons why the people are fleeing in the first place if you want less refugees.

Not as if the EU would want that, though. There’s continents to exploit and money to be made, after all.

Why are you repeating that fascist “strong men create good times” bullshit?

Quick reminder that in a liberal democracy, social movements are more important for progressive change than electoralism.

Join a union. Be it trade union, housing union, or whatever (or even any affinity group). And get active.

Complaining about election results achieves nothing, but sow despair.

You have to be very aware that it’s hard to gague your intent when posting. That’s why emojis and tone tags were invented. The way you asked that rather specific question which I couldn’t immediately connect to anything that was said (although it was obviously a technical term), made me cautious of someone trying to dunk on me. So I chose not to engage until you’ve made your intentions clear. Hence: “What’s your point?”

I still think this is a legitimate reaction to a question whose connection to the conversation isn’t straightforward.

“No” as in: I wont answer your question which is trying to put me in some kind of “gotcha” situation, regardless of how fluent I am in AI concepts.

Edit (addendum): We both know that regardless of what my answer was: you already made up your mind and thought I was full of crap. Why ask that question at all if not to dunk on me in case I said yes or no?