• TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Seems like more from the other Groups should have voted with C, or C shouldn’t have been given the option to find a better source for food.

    • TheOakTree@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I agree with you. If we could get the entirety of the democratic party to vote green/left, that would be super helpful. We both know that’s not happening in America because of the broken electoral and political system. If we could suppress option C, we wouldn’t be having this conversation at all, but there would surely be other complaints to be had regarding that matter.

      In the end, the Group C votes are equivalent to not voting, which translates to having 0 impact on the outcome of vote. This exemplifies complicity with either option A or B.

        • TheOakTree@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Sorry, you’re right. My story doesn’t quite match the election dynamic. In the hypothetical, Group C should be extremely aware that they cannot win the popular vote, since most tribe members are either unaware of or have no faith in option C.

          In which case, yes, continuing to vote for option C is complicity with outcome A or B.

          • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Definition of complicit denotes otherwise. If making the right choice is unpopular, that doesn’t make you complicit with another choice. You’re conflating the two choices. Why is it Group C’s fault the other groups can’t get their shit together. Stop bullying people to vote the way you want. It makes you look weak.