Even where there is no prospect of achieving their election the workers must put up their own candidates to preserve their independence, to gauge their own strength and to bring their revolutionary position and party standpoint to public attention. They must not be led astray by the empty phrases of the democrats, who will maintain that the workers’ candidates will split the democratic party and offer the forces of reaction the chance of victory. All such talk means, in the final analysis, that the proletariat is to be swindled. The progress which the proletarian party will make by operating independently in this way is infinitely more important than the disadvantages resulting from the presence of a few reactionaries in the representative body. If the forces of democracy take decisive, terroristic action against the reaction from the very beginning, the reactionary influence in the election will already have been destroyed.
It says nothing of the sort. It says do not support the bourgeoisie parties. Support the candidates that you believe are going to fight the bourgeoisie.
That’s literally what the phrase means.
Don’t vote for the bourgeois parties just because they have a “perfect” chance of winning, vote for who best represents your interests, the candidates that actually want to fight back against the bourgeois, i.e. vote for “good”, even if their chances of winning aren’t perfect.
Stop trying to argue for the sake of arguing. You’re just coming off as needlessly confrontational.
Democrats are not the good choice. Democrats are not even the alternative. They serve the same people that Republicans do. They are the blue shade of fascism. You are trying to take this quote and shift around to suit your interests.
No shit Sherlock. Again for the hundredth time.
I’M FUCKING AGREEING WITH YOU!
God damnit can you not be a cunt for like 5 minutes and actually read the words I typed instead of arguing with your own imagination?
I never said anything about supporting the Democrats, fuck face.