• 0 Posts
  • 34 Comments
Joined 9 days ago
cake
Cake day: December 15th, 2024

help-circle
  • OK. I’ll assign more benefit of the doubt.

    To be moral and ethical in their voting choice, to serve systemic design intent, to serve the practicalities of implementation, an individual need not care about others’ votes.

    So, it’s incorrect to set as a prerequisite a belief in success of a 5% goal to vote for it. Presenting as you did exemplifies the propaganda-fed ego of the neoliberal. The meaning in voting is not to make you feel good about yourself for choosing the bandwagon that wins. All should vote for whom best represents them with reckless disregard for the short-term outcome.

    The eventual counterargument to what I’m saying is rooted in utilitarianism: Democracy produces at best mediocre outcomes. The systemic design answer was the electoral college.




  • Let’s be honest here: None of us are going rogue. We aren’t going to grab a gun and start killing the worst of the worst, the people who have destroyed our lives and or the lives of millions, the people who have benefitted from the creation of a soulless society, the people who ruined our lives. We are cowards. We can’t do it, I certainly know I can’t. It’s best not to kid ourselves here.

    You want confirmation that everyone else is as weak to make yourself feel better. It’s typical neoliberal nonsense.














  • Thank you for the opportunity to teach.

    If my grandmother had wheels she’d be a tea trolley.

    Minimization.

    Right now the reality is the Donald Trump is going to take office because a lot of people didn’t vote for the alternative.

    Red herring.

    All the ‘what if…?’ games in the world isn’t going to change that.

    Minimization.

    This is a bit better than typical nonsense because there’s two tactics in a sandwich. Next is usually ad hominem. But, this one may have another trick up their sleeve.


  • The false assumption that most make is that one cycle doesn’t effect the next.

    However, if a third party garners just 5% of the general election vote for POTUS then their platform and higher quality candidate will be on every ballot in the next cycle.

    If there’s a third choice on every ballot then the the third party platform places tremendous and immediate pressure upon the platforms of the two major parties. The third party doesn’t actually win unless the other refuse to compromise. Long term, the continued threat is of greater value than a subsequent victory.

    But, the electoral scheme doesn’t work unless leftists trust leftists to determine the collective risk of voting third party for the states they reside in. Even Jacobin failed to trust twice.

    Things are pretty fucked. Electoral means are slow. I tend to advocate for boycott, strike, and riot (encompassing a wide scope of wisely breaking laws).



  • OK, what else do you suggest?

    Not many ask.

    Because of idealism, they seem to ask for something that doesn’t exist and not accept anything else.

    This is my issue with almost everyone. They believe they already know what others think, that no one could possibly have an alternative that they’ve not already considered.

    My suggestions are as follows: Consider that your scope of evaluation is only one cycle. As a consequence there may be nuance in system function that you’d not considered. Then ask the same question but in good faith.