@[email protected] to [email protected] • 3 months agoVoting for the lesser evil is still evilfeddit.ukimagemessage-square290fedilinkarrow-up1661arrow-down1184
arrow-up1477arrow-down1imageVoting for the lesser evil is still evilfeddit.uk@[email protected] to [email protected] • 3 months agomessage-square290fedilink
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink0•3 months agoI’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_fishlinkfedilink2•3 months agoOk, 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-square@[email protected]linkfedilink0•3 months agoPretty 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_fishlinkfedilink2•3 months ago Advocating voting for a lesser evil could be considered harmful, though. Why?
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink0•3 months agoBecause it suggests that it’s sufficient for progressive change.
minus-squaredeaf_fishlinkfedilink2•edit-23 months agoI 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-square@[email protected]linkfedilink0•edit-23 months ago How does voting for the lesser evil suggest that it’s sufficient for progressive change? I said advocatingy for voting…
minus-squaredeaf_fishlinkfedilink1•3 months agoOk 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-square@[email protected]linkfedilink1•3 months agoIt 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.