robinoberg@feddit.uk to Memes@lemmy.ml · 1 个月前Voting for the lesser evil is still evilfeddit.ukexternal-linkmessage-square299fedilinkarrow-up1658arrow-down1184cross-posted to: politicalmemes@lemmy.world
arrow-up1474arrow-down1external-linkVoting for the lesser evil is still evilfeddit.ukrobinoberg@feddit.uk to Memes@lemmy.ml · 1 个月前message-square299fedilinkcross-posted to: politicalmemes@lemmy.world
minus-squarePrunebutt@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·1 个月前I’m not arguing against voting. I’m claiming that it’s not a valid strategy. You can partake, if you really want to.
minus-squaredeaf_fish@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 个月前Ok, this could just be me getting lost in the comment chain. To be clear you don’t think voting for the lesser evil is harmful, but you also don’t think it is a valid strategy. If that is true, I see no inconstancies in your arguments.
minus-squarePrunebutt@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·1 个月前Pretty much. Since electoralism is inconsequential for progressive change: vote if you want. Advocating voting for a lesser evil could be considered harmful, though.
minus-squaredeaf_fish@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 个月前 Advocating voting for a lesser evil could be considered harmful, though. Why?
minus-squarePrunebutt@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·1 个月前Because it suggests that it’s sufficient for progressive change.
minus-squaredeaf_fish@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up2·edit-21 个月前I don’t think it does. Don’t get me wrong. I know people who want to believe voting is all that is necessary for progressive change, but they are wrong. Edit: How does voting for the lesser evil suggest that it’s sufficient for progressive change?
minus-squarePrunebutt@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down1·edit-21 个月前 How does voting for the lesser evil suggest that it’s sufficient for progressive change? I said advocatingy for voting…
minus-squaredeaf_fish@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 个月前Ok how does advocating for voting for the lesser evil suggest that voting for the lesser evil is sufficient for progressive change? Is that better?
minus-squarePrunebutt@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 个月前It suggests that people need to vote for progressive change and that congludes their options to enact power on the system.
I’m not arguing against voting. I’m claiming that it’s not a valid strategy. You can partake, if you really want to.
Ok, this could just be me getting lost in the comment chain. To be clear you don’t think voting for the lesser evil is harmful, but you also don’t think it is a valid strategy. If that is true, I see no inconstancies in your arguments.
Pretty much. Since electoralism is inconsequential for progressive change: vote if you want.
Advocating voting for a lesser evil could be considered harmful, though.
Why?
Because it suggests that it’s sufficient for progressive change.
I don’t think it does.
Don’t get me wrong. I know people who want to believe voting is all that is necessary for progressive change, but they are wrong.
Edit: How does voting for the lesser evil suggest that it’s sufficient for progressive change?
I said advocatingy for voting…
Ok how does advocating for voting for the lesser evil suggest that voting for the lesser evil is sufficient for progressive change? Is that better?
It suggests that people need to vote for progressive change and that congludes their options to enact power on the system.