Democrats aren't attacking Jill Stein because they think she is taking votes from Kamala Harris. No one I know who's voting Green would consider a vote for Harris at this point. They're attacking Jill Stein because they don't want voters to know that there can be a worker-centered party to the left of the Democrats that supports popular policies like Medicare for All, a $25 wage and federally guaranteed housing.
There are 80+ million eligible voters who don't vote at all because they don't see the point. Democrats are okay with this, in fact, they don't want any candidate to their left to appeal to those voters with popular policies.
The fact that the Green Party exists shows that the Democrats aren't pushing the most progressive policies. Jill Stein's candidacy shows that it's possible to support reproductive justice AND be against funding and arming a genocide. That we can end homelessness if we stopped funding endless wars around the globe.
Democrats don't want anyone to the left of them to exist because it's the only way they can convince Americans that Dem policies are "the best that we can do". To Dems, anything else is just "asking for a pony".
Don't fall for it. Despite Dem's desire to have you think otherwise, things don't have to be this way.
Another world is possible.
Oh, I can say it to my own face, I'm trans. But I've also told all my trans friends that I'm not voting for Kamala, and have no difficulty doing so. There isn't a single person in the world I wouldn't look dead in the eye and say it to.
Your analogy fails to the account for the fact that you're strengthening the very people who put you in that situation in the first place, so it is not a valid analogy (among many other reasons). You "accounted" for the cause in saying that the city council "failed to fix" the problem. In reality, they intentionally caused the problem, and doing your "triage" empowers them to cause it to happen more and more, neither of which you accounted for at all.
Today, Palestinians are the ones being "triaged." Tomorrow, it could very well be us. By your calculus, if the democrats decide to throw us under the bus because they see us as too much of an electoral liability, you will still happily accept them as the "lesser evil" and all the arguments you're using now to support killing Gazans, you will deploy then to support killing us. "The Democrats just want to sacrifice trans people, the Republicans want to go after trans people and gay people and..." Don't try to pretend you wouldn't, unless you're prepared to explain why your "triage" analogy wouldn't apply there too.
An injury to one is an injury to all. If we don't stand up for Palestinians, if we allow minorities to be picked off one by one, then we are doomed because there will be no one left to stand up for us.
Good luck, because you're going to need it if Trump wins. Being trans is difficult in deep blue areas now, and it's going to be a lot harder if Trump wins. The very few labor protections that you have now are likely to evaporate under a Republican gov't. And perhaps you're okay with this, but how many of your friends are willing to be your sacrifice? I saw exactly what happened to the black transwomen in my area under Trump, and it was... Bad.
Minorities will be picked off in this election, whether you stand up or not. You can save some--specifically the ones that are in this country--or you can save none. That's the reality we live in. This is the reality unless and until you can build a coalition that can win elections on it's own, because that's politics. This has always been the reality; disadvantaged people need to build political power by courting the people that have political power; women needed to convince men in order to get the right to vote, non-white people needed to convince white people to pass the various civil rights acts. If you take a no-compromises position, you will always lose.
That's the "crabs-in-a-bucket" approach. We will never get anywhere if we're willing to sell each other out and tear each other down to get ahead or protect ourselves. I'm never going to sacrifice solidarity with the oppressed in the hopes that our oppressors will be merciful. If I were that much of a coward, I wouldn't have transitioned in the first place.
You say I will always lose with this path, but you don't know that. What I do know is that I will always lose following your path. As far as I'm concerned, that's the only thing that's guaranteed to fail. Solidarity is the only viable strategy and the only one that makes any logical sense at all. As well as being the only moral position. You wanted to play that card of "look them in the face," well I could never look a Palestinian in the face and explain why I'm selling them out just to save my own skin. They will level all their slings and arrows against us, but it is still better to stand against them together than to fracture and join them and fight against each other for a momentary respite until they inevitably turn on us.
Claiming that every victory every marginalized group has ever won was just handed down from above by appeasing the rich and powerful is absurd, ahistorical, and offensive.
My dude. That's the absolute truth. All the marches and riots in the world don't win minority groups power unless they can get members of the majority group--members that have political power--to agree with them. You can talk about 'human rights' until you're blue in the face, but rights only exist so long as they can be enforced. A powerless minority group can't expect to enforce the rights that are supposed to be guaranteed to them, unless they have people with power that are willing to step up.
But again - by failing to be strategic, you will probably lose, and not just for yourself, but for everyone that's even slightly marginalized.
I'm not going to discuss how I feel about you doubling down on "minority rights have always been handed down from above" because I don't want to get banned, suffice to say I have no interest in discussing anything further with you.