FAQ
Q: why not organize and stop treating the bus as a legitimate entity? why aren’t you working to stop the bus?
A: do both. cut the fuel line. break windows. put oatmeal in the gas tank. but maybe your efforts don’t succeed this election cycle. and if so don’t fucking throw away your vote if it can help your neighbors fucking survive. “harm reduction” is not a political strategy for action. it is a last minute, end of the line decision to save lives, after all other resources have been exhausted.
ITT: people calling for revolution who will never do a damn thing about it. It’s easy to pretend violence is the answer when you’ll never participate, let alone start something.
Way too many of these chucklefucks just want to LARP as pure and radical revolutionaries. My wife and I are disabled and live on a fixed income of her disability payments and the SNAP program. If this “revolution” they want so bad does come, then we’re among the most likely to just fucking starve in the disruption. I’m also one of the people the GOP declared they want to “Eradicate from Public Life” with Project 2025.
Now, I’m not much of a Genocide Enjoyer. I think it’s one of the worst things you can do in fact. But I also don’t take too kindly to being effectively told that I specifically should just die because these wannabe revolutionaries refuse to entertain a world where we both vote for Biden to keep Trump from destroying democracy more than the GOP already has (harm reduction), AND engage in direct action to push Biden away from blindly supporting Israel.
And then they think they’ll be part of the vanguard when the power vacuum opens up, and will give way to a glorious socialist utopia. Guess what, turbo, you’ll be up against that wall too, and it’s just going to be roving gangs of authoritarians.
Even if you assume those LARPers are willing to sacrifice themselves in bloody revolution for the good of the common folk…
Who do you think suffers most when civil war disrupts supply chains, essential services, and the legal system?
It’s the dang common folk they’re supposedly dying to protect!
As easy as it is to vote, its even easier to whine about why not doing it is better(?) Maybe?
Then they come at u like theyre so very superior for not voting. Like theyre going to start a revolution by yelling at the people supposedly closest to them in ideology. Bc, clearly, voting is only done by libs, so if u advocate for voting ur a superlib. Then theyll simp for china or russia, and act like even neoliberal countries dont have leftist parties attempting to participate in the government theyre so keen on making u forsake.
Almost like theres a vested interest in there… somewhere…
This analogy is so absurd. Like if you have a vote on driving off a cliff, the answer is not to treat the vote as legitimate. The answer is to attempt to stop the bus by any means necessary. Pry open the engine panel and chuck a wrench in the gears, cut the fuel line, break the shifter lever, anything, just get off the fucking bus. Neither driver should be trusted.
EDIT: I am sick of hearing “WHY WON’T YOU VOTE THO”
First of all, I already said this:
The only reason to vote for the less-immediate cliff driver is to give you more time to stop the bus.
That’s the other problem with this post: the non-voter is a strawman. Most people with real critiques of the bus vote too because they understand this. Voting barely matters for the most part but you may as well do it. Most people yelling about “don’t vote it’s pointless” are like 15 years old doing baby’s first radical politics.
I just don’t understand why every time we criticise the bus we have to deal with loads of people yelling about why we don’t take the voting more seriously, as if who we vote for is the bigger issue than the fact that we’re stuck on a careening death machine with a bunch of people calmly debating how fast we should all die.
I think the answer to this is: so, what are you doing to stop the bus from going over the cliff that’s better than voting? And can’t you do both of them?
Because usually people aren’t doing much else. Especially anything effective. They’re just not voting.
This comment is why you’re getting this spiel, because you need to understand something:
They’re just not voting.
The people who don’t vote are usually the most disenfranchised people, living paycheck to paycheck, stuck in survival mode, and they don’t care who’s in charge because they’ve noticed through hard lessons that they keep getting screwed no matter what. Also often they can’t vote because they can’t get off work. They’re not terminally online yelling at people not to vote, those are probably mostly kids doing baby’s first radical politics.
The sad reality is that electoral politics has a cold calculus to it where they’ve got the populace cut into rough thirds. About a third are susceptible to full on fascist propaganda and cannot currently be reached. Another third vote centre-left because they usually understand it’s their only reasonable vote. Very few of them are actively engaged because it is a deeply disempowering system. Another third are who I mentioned.
That’s not going to change just because you correctly debated with me about voting. I vote as far left as I meaningfully can, I just don’t think it really matters and I think both psychologically and practically the faster people learn that the better.
I think understanding reality is much more important, and I think the fact that this insane bus analogy gets accepted paints a grim picture of how fucked up the electoral system really is. I also think it’s wrong about the stakes - it’s not cliff or icecream. It’s cliff or slower cliff. Vote for the slower cliff, but don’t ever mistake the drivers for your friends. You are voting for your preferred enemy.
I don’t think the third are the ones who have power fantasies about them not voting but rather just people who don’t bother. So they’re not the ones I was talking about.
I’m talking about the ones who are so proud of their principled take of not voting and telling others how that doesn’t change the system and how the actual change happens through other means. And then the other means they are doing are maybe some complaints on social media, which is just lol.
I think you are over prescribing power to a small handful of loud and proud voices because it’s an easier scapegoat to say they are the reason for the issues with voting.
I didn’t really define how big of a group they were or anything. I just find them annoying.
But maaaan, if we all, like, protest vote, they’ll have to change the system because they, like, knew what it meant when we chose to not participate in their broken system, man.
bro. do both.
cut the fuel line. break windows. put oatmeal in the gas tank.
but maybe your efforts don’t succeed this election cycle. and if so don’t fucking throw away your vote if it can help your neighbors fucking survive.
“harm reduction” is not a political strategy for action. it is a last minute, end of the line decision to save lives, after all other resources have been exhausted.
in response to your edit:
“the non-voter is a strawman.”
objectively false. in the 2020 election more eligible US voters turned out than any election in recent history, and still those who did not vote outnumbered those who voted for the winner. you are saying falsehoods.
Bless you for this comment.
How many commenters here have even tried to figure out how ‘busses’ (the electoral process) work and find a way to get involved?
Spend 5 hours a week (yes, you can find the time, deduct it from your screen time!) and you could basically take over your local party committee. That alone won’t change the national trend, but you might just be able to influence a city council or school board race.
Local races hinge on a handful of votes very often. In our area, we managed to keep two anti-LGBTQ+ candidates off the school board last election. This impacts the lives of literally thousands of youth and their families and it hinged on about 80 votes. Vote, yes, but at least skim the Chilton manual for your bus in between elections. It really does matter
If it’s so easy have to actually tried giving time to a campaign and having it win and change your local policy?
Have you done what you preach?
I have tried. The super easy barely an effort easy win of showing up and supported by my picks… Didn’t work. Like at all. The DNC in fact even refused to acknowledge half my candidates even though they had more grassroots support, and then funded former Republicans. In a blue city, they still thought the conservative options were better candidates. And lost. We all lost. But sure we held back some morons from school board. But stopping a couple people from getting elected is way different than getting policy makers you want in.
I agree that people need to be doing things but thinking a few hours and shouting at people to vote blue will do anything against the bigger systemic issues and flaws of the operating class of the DNC being happy to be useless then you are far more comfortable in your life than people like me.
The people who don’t vote are usually the most disenfranchised people, living paycheck to paycheck, stuck in survival mode, and they don’t care who’s in charge because they’ve noticed through hard lessons that they keep getting screwed no matter what. Also often they can’t vote because they can’t get off work. They’re not terminally online yelling at people not to vote, those are probably mostly kids doing baby’s first radical politics.
The sad reality is that electoral politics has a cold calculus to it where they’ve got the populace cut into rough thirds. About a third are susceptible to full on fascist propaganda and cannot currently be reached. Another third vote centre-left because they usually understand it’s their only reasonable vote. Very few of them are actively engaged because it is a deeply disempowering system. Another third are who I mentioned.
That’s not going to change just because you correctly debated with me about voting. I vote as far left as I meaningfully can, I just don’t think it really matters and I think both psychologically and practically the faster people learn that the better.
I think understanding reality is much more important, and I think the fact that this insane bus analogy gets accepted paints a grim picture of how fucked up the electoral system really is. I also think it’s wrong about the stakes - it’s not cliff or icecream. It’s cliff or slower cliff. Vote for the slower cliff, but don’t ever mistake the drivers for your friends. You are voting for your preferred enemy.
Yeah. I don’t envy nor blame those who vote for the biggest crash because they think their suffering will be over without having considered the suffering that will just be new.
People often just want change and those that don’t are just comfortable where they are. The slow route might be nicer for them but and even for others in the long run, but it doesn’t matter what they want change will have to come, they can just be proactive about it or let it be out of their control and in the hands of those that just want it to stop.
I think also people get frustrated by voting because it pretends to give them political power but what they get is almost no influence over their actual lives. I think it drives people a little bit crazy, because they actually believe this is the best they can do.
That’s why I tell people that they can vote but they need to understand that real change comes from direct action, so they shouldn’t put so much emotional energy into the vote. They should put their energy where it matters.
My logic is what about vote and pry the bus apart? If you have the option to might as well go for it as part of the ‘any means necessary’, a tool is a tool.
I don’t know why everytime I try to say that we should stop this bus half the passengers jump up and yell “BUT WHY WOULDN’T YOU VOTE”.
I never said that. I said the vote is illegitimate and we need to stop the bus. I still vote.
stop the bus != don’t vote
Alright, so what do you do to overthrow the system then? Nothing, that’s right. Screw you.
Oh okay, sorry, I had a whole political activist strategy that takes local action and builds on that to make people’s lives better and eventually put serious pressure on the overarching system, but since you said “nothing”, I guess the answer is “nothing”.
I mean you’re wrong, but you don’t sound like you want to hear the real answer.
Wouldn’t cutting the brake lines of a moving bus be really dangerous? Why not vote for ice cream, then sabotage the bus while it’s parked? At least the ice cream place has food, shelter, and a bathroom.
*brake
Also:
cut the fuel line
You might want to brush up on your mechanics knowledge. Cutting a fuel line will kill an engine fast.
And I never said not to vote. This idea that anyone trying to criticise the system is saying not to vote is a strawman. I literally said:
The only reason to vote for the less-immediate cliff driver is to give you more time to stop the bus.
In Australia we only have two options in the lower house. One of them is pretty close to driving off a cliff.
Things could always be better (I personally find with their recent car emissions legislation a bit weak) but our current government is doing OK.
The thing is, doing that is a great way to lose credibility. You’re basically sinking to the same level as the fascists.
Anti fascist sabotage is bad because violence, hmm 🧐
As long as you don’t physically harm people, sabotage all the fascists you want. Just remember to vote.
I was very careful to avoid actual violence in my language. You were the one that equated it to fascism, which I assume you mean is the cliff driver.
Of course stopping the bus isn’t violent, and is not at all equivalent to the cliff driver.
So you’re saying that you would condemn the killing of Donald Trump if he gets into power and enacts his dictature?
I’m the smash the bus person, and I actually would. The truth is he’s only marginally worse than Joe in most of the ways that matter, and assassinations always lead to much worse reactions. Trump isn’t the problem, the apparatus that enables him is.
The solution is to build alternatives that remove people’s dependence on the state and capital, so the president matters less. That’s what I mean by smashing the bus. I never said to kill the driver, because his mates will kill you and stay in control.
Oh because of the violence? Driving off a cliff is also violent behaviour, and with the bus as it is the cliff is inevitable, because the cliff drivers will always get back in. Also, the other guy isn’t the icecream guy. He’s the guy who promised to stop for icecream but doesn’t want to tell you if or how fast he plans to drive off the cliff. He’s open to debate on the issue, but he has a lot cliff driving friends and they often cast the deciding vote in cliff driving matters.
They’re both getting us off the cliff, just one is being more coy and circumspect than the other.
The only reason to vote for the less-immediate cliff driver is to give you more time to stop the bus.
Let me know when you start the violence. It’s easy as fuck to sit behind your iphone calling others to die.
Coooool comeback.
Even easier to sit behind your iPhone telling people to vote even though it will never solve our problems.
And my theory of change is not actually violent - you’ll notice I didn’t advocate hurting anyone, just dismantling the machinery of violence. The other person called it equal to fascism, which I assume they equate to the cliff driver, so I took their assumption of violence as given, which I shouldn’t have. Stopping the bus is infinitely preferrable to driving it off the cliff.
Except, it’s not an attempt to end democracy, as fascism is.
disagree
Extremism is how you start a civil war…
This is a long established problem with FPTP voting (FPTP = First Past The Post: One voter = one vote). You don’t really get to vote for your choice candidate, rather you vote against the worst of the two popular candidates by voting for the other guy.
Now there are plenty of election reform solutions, but in the US, both parties are weakened by the people having more choice, so neither party is willing to back amendments to the Constitution of the United States that would install a more public serving voting system.
This also means, according to CIA analysts who have studied nations on the brink and how they can avoid civil war, the US is very likely to see a civil war in its near future (next decade). But then we’re also likely to see elections neutered anyway, so that the Republican party controls all elected positions (and appointed ones after that). And then local genocides can get underway.
So yes, if you’re voting to make a point (other than you want the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 to play out or want to delay it for a while) the point won’t be heard. In fact, the Republicans and their foreign national propaganda machine supporters are probably very glad you’re willing to withhold blue votes to make a point. It won’t make that point, but they’re glad for you for trying.
i don’t disagree but this is also a long established problem with people not showing up to vote, so jot that down.
Taking a wild guess here, I suspect people not voting comes from a number of addressable causes. Here in the States, we are far more enamored with capitalism than Democracy, and the way we regard our civic duties (e.g. trying to get out of jury duty, mostly due to the hardship it would cause by skipping work without pay). We work our labor class so hard they are too exhausted to parent, cook or engage in health activities, much less engage in civics. It doesn’t help that this is exactly how our plutocratic masters want it.
After we address allowing people the time to think about what they want from government, and voting accordingly, then we can start looking into giving the people actual agency in their destinies, toward which election reform is only one front.
But all this is to say the United States doesn’t really try very hard to get the people to engage in civics. Rather, it would really prefer that we lie down and let ourselves be ruled by the wealthy according to their ideals and business interests. That, of course, brings us back to the same problems feudalism has: one Joffrey or Caligula or John of England / Richard II can bring to ruin all that a dozen prior generations have built up. Even Charles III is living up to the traditional standards of monarchy, and the UK has a parliament and a constitution with which to keep his shenanigans in check. (Parliament is up to its own shenanigans to turn the UK hardline fascist, but that’s another discussion.)
In elementary school government and western civilization class, we learn that we vote so that the government does what we want it to. But we quickly learn (sometimes as soon as intermediate or high-school) that our agency in selecting our government is very, very limited, and historian careers have been built on the corruption of government into an oligarchy with trivial democratic features.
Except right now, those trivial democratic features are the last line of defense between the two party state and a one-party autocracy. It’s a state of affairs that shows not only did we take a wrong turn, but we’re on a fast train to somewhere we never should have gone. Curiously, the never-Trump conservatives have been pouring billions into the proverbial railroad that lead us to Trump and the next line of Musolinni-wannabe strongman dictators. They didn’t just buy the ticket, but laid the rails.
What do you say to the DNC for dropping the ball this hard?
Voting metaphors that don’t have people dying in either option are disingenuous imo. Like I understand the concept of harm reduction to a point, but let’s not pretend one of the options is something as innocent as “getting ice cream”.
absolutely agree. the situation is closer to driving into the grand canyon versus into the sun.
nevertheless i do think the intended rhetorical effect of the post has value, esp for those who don’t intend to vote at all.
I hear you. I think many people who aren’t intending to vote do understand the situation but just have a different moral take. Like, sure, driving the bus into a brick wall may save some lives compared to driving it off a cliff. But for the people that’d die in the wall option, they’re still dead either way. Shouldn’t we at least try to stop the bus from crashing at all, as unrealistic as that may be?
i highly recommend doing both, organize and vote
I say organize, vote uncommitted in the primary if you can, and do what you have to in November. But yes, agreed.
We didn’t have that option in the Ohio primary so I just left that space blank and voted down-ticket.
Spoken like a proper leftist. Its funny how the lemmy trolls pretend ither countries dont gave anarchist or communist parties trying to participate in the neoliberal politics as is. Bc its beneficial to leftist causes if the people youre trying to sway, cooperate with, create a new way with, you know, actually can afford to do all those things.
Does anyone here realize how we’re arguing whether the easiest action u can take is praxis? No one says dont do the other stuff.
yeah it’s more like driving into a bush versus driving into an active volcano. The bush gives you at least a 30% chance to survive.
except the options are: 1- going off a cliff and 2- going off a cliff
What kills me are the people whose preferred form of government is not currently the most popular form of government somehow think that after a revolution that their preferred form of government will win out. They’re delusional. In most cases the government gets worse, much worse, before it gets better.
Thats only if you use experience or look at historial precedent, Im sure this time it will work out.
The four people vote and you still drive off a cliff due to gerrymandering
Some kind of proportional representation would fix that. For a whole pile of reasons, I like Sequential Proportional Approval Voting.
Just because you seem interested. Gerrymandering is a larger part of the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem
Liberalism is driving off a cliff and killing everyone because a third of people voted to do it.
There are 9 people on the bus. Five people vote to get shit burgers even though no one wants that, just because they think it will save them from the 3 people who vote to drive off the cliff. One person obstains. Two of the three people hijack the bus and drive off the cliff. Four of the five people blame the person who obstained as they drive off the cliff.
Fascists don’t care if they win or lose. Voting can’t save you once you’ve reached this point. You don’t have slightly high blood pressure that you can treat by eating right. You have cancer. You fight the cancer with everything you have or you die.
Fascists do care about winning, that is why they pump so much money into being elected, as elections are one of the most frictionless paths to power. That’s why they change the rules to make themselves more likely to be elected. That’s why they try to disenfranchise people who would vote against them. A coup is a risky thing, which is why they take all paths to power which are available.
You fight the cancer with everything you have or you die.
The problem is, you don’t have much. There isn’t a robust labor movement in the US which could provide a front against fascism. Any small scale or individual struggle might help you personally and save lives, but it’s not gonna stop the bus. At most it’s gonna pull some of the people from it before it drives of the cliff.
If you want to fight the guys who’re about to hijack the bus, you need time. As much time as possible to amass the response. Voting for shit burgers is just what gives you that sliver of it. This is the thing you keep doing to be able to keep going, not the saving grace.
Fascists want to win because it means there will be less resistence from liberals, not because they will abide by the law. That’s a pretty important distinction that I don’t think liberals can integrate right now.
A successful coup is indistinguishable from a legal election, which is why they create as much chaos as possible and sew distrust before elections.
I’m not saying voting is completely useless but I am saying that you are deluded if you think voting will save you. It might not even buy you more time. Organize now. Figure out how you’re going to eat while you’re fighting. Download army manuals and start reading them. Start talking to other people about what to do when Trump takes power (acknowledging that he will claim power reguarless if he wins or loses the election).
A coup is less likely to be successful if you promise to revolt no matter how a fascist takes power. They rely on tricking enough people in to cooperating. If enough people will riot, some of the ghouls who back the fascist will back off and you lower their chances of success.
You don’t have time. Sure, vote anyway because it’s a low effort thing that might buy you time. It’s basically a free lottery ticket. You probably aren’t going to win, but it will be really great if you do and it’s super low effort. But you wouldn’t take out a loan assuming that ticket will pay off. Act like voting won’t actually buy you time, because it probably won’t.
At most it’s gonna pull some of the people from it before it drives of the cliff.
Vote for shit burgers or don’t. The time to build a movement was 4 years ago before liberals decided to go back to brunch. The thing is that fascism requires the complicity of liberals. A very small group of people could beat the driver to death, take the keys, and park the bus. Liberals will work with fascists to resist those people because they think they’ll get the keys back later and get ice cream. Liberals can’t accept that there is no ice cream and there never was.
Whole lot of priveleged accelerationists ITT. Good thing most of them were probably never going to bother voting anyhow.
This is written from an “I’m right, you’re wrong” perspective. In real life, no one is running a drive off a cliff campaign, and the guy promising ice cream may not be able to deliver.
Also, fundamentally both left and right can make the argument the other side wants to run off a cliff.
Yeah, it’s a baby’s understanding of politics.
Like do these people actually think we get to vote on what the bus does? No, we’re voting on the bus driver. We’ve got a screaming maniac and a doddering fool who keeps letting the maniac yank the wheel anyway, and they’re both proven liars.
Pointing out that this situation is bad is not irresponsible. The irresponsible thing is to just vote and cheer on the fool because you’re so afraid of the maniac.
Also, fundamentally both left and right can make the argument the other side wants to run off a cliff.
Which is a great achievement by republicans. They’re excellent at controlling the narrative and making it seam like the Biden admin is actually equally bad.
Disclaimer, I’m Dutch, so my view is an outside view;
I don’t know if it’s their achievement. It seems to me that in the USA you can choose for the conservatives who want to keep everything as it always was, including Russia as the bad guys and Israel as the ever lasting allie. Or you can chose for the conservatives who want to install a state religion and re-install segregation. The first group wants to be a global power with reach all over the world, the last group doesn’t care for the rest of the world. With both groups the rich get richer.
if this is happening there’s a moral imperative to hijack the bus yourself
Or, more realistically:
- 3 vote to drive off the cliff
- 2 vote for ice-cream
- 4 vote to drive off the cliff at a slightly reduced speed, having been assured that they might get to look at a picture of some ice-cream, but only after democracy has been saved
I will not be voting for anyone who supports a genocide. That will not change. Now there are two ways to change the outcome.
- If you are a genocide supporter who wants to be elected, you could stop supporting genocide, and be vocal about it.
- If you are someone who wants me to vote for your candidate, you could demand that they stop supporting genocide. Or demand that whatever party you like stops nominating people who support genocide.
I will not budge. Will you?
Two candidates that support genocide, but one is a christofascist. No matter who you vote for, genocide support wins. But you think it’s better to give the christofascist better odds than to inconvenience yourself with a vote you don’t 100% agree with, and possibly abstain from your chance to ever vote again. Not voting won’t fix the issue, since there’s no threshold on voter turnout for the election to count. The struggle against genocide must be fought in other ways. So unfortunately, this fall you’re getting genocide, so please make sure you don’t get fascism too.
I’d rather just not vote for genocide.
Aside from the obvious, that will just be continuing to tell the two parties that nominating genocide supporters is good. You can continue telling your favorite party that you are okay with genocide, but I will not, thank you very much. This is why you are stuck between two genocide supporters. When your chosen party leaves you with a genocide supporter as your only choice, you tell them that’s good.
And you are not going to fight the genocide in any other way, so don’t pretend. Your chosen party is one of the two that ratified bills to make any attempts at boycotts or sanctions illegal.
Also, both candidates are fascists. Look at what’s happening on our Southern border, look at just our recent history in the Middle East, and look at the fascist government committing genocide that we are supporting.
You don’t fight fascism in the ballot box. Every single example in history teaches you that.
The parties don’t really care if you don’t vote, so not voting doesn’t apply pressure to them to change.
Direct action and or forcing the hands of politicians so more people have an incentive to voteTrying to get people to support genocide and half assed half measures (that keep the door open for making things worse than they were before, which is very in line with the ruling class’ interests), and when they don’t, imply they support fascism 😌
What do you mean, “support”?
First instance of the word: “supporting genocide” as in voting for someone who will facilitate said genocide via funding.
Second instance of the word: “supporting fascism” by refraining to vote for someone who will facilitate genocide but will stop the fascism creep ongoing in the USA using (in my not so humble opinion) crappy legislation which can be easily reverted.
To defend myself more directly, one wouldn’t ask a Palestinian American to vote for Biden, that is, unless you lack basic decency, ehich means the tactic that the person above me uses wouldn’t be effective for anyone seeing themselves as a victim or even victim-adjacent to the ongoing genocide.
And I’m saying that working outside of the system or trying to apply political pressure is a tactic that is abandoned by liberals by default, which makes their tactic ineffective against the creep of fascism.
Excuse my long ass comment, wanted to drop the sarcasm for a sec and say what i really mean.
I just think your humble opinion of the legislation being easily reversible is doing a lot of work here.
Are you really that sure that there will be no long term consequences if the guy comes into office who has explicitly stated his intention to become a “dictator for ‘a day’”, is really intent on stacking courts, fucking with elections, calling immigrants “vermin”, and so on?
Because if you’re wrong, there might be a civil war. And MAGA nut jobs statistically have more guns than us leftists.
You are assuming that the only options that exist are voting for either guy or not voting. Which is the main thing I’m trying to bring attention to as you are not the first person to comment in such a manner.
Also, Biden isn’t really doing much to reverse what Trump did, including stuff that affect immigrants.
If your main means to get more voters is shaming them instead of shaming your politicians then this lesser-of-two-evils game will only get worse, it had gone worse several times already.
I’m aware that more than two parties technically exist in your country. I’m also not under the illusion that voting for one of them in the general election has an effect that’s distinguishable from not voting.
I mean, except for the individual third party voter, who has to leave the house and stand in a queue when voting third party.
It’s great to have a political system that allows for diverse political parties. Sadly the US in not a country where such a system exists.
Under normal circumstances, you won’t be able to ever reach critical mass with a third party, and they won’t give up power.
It’s not implying they support fascism, it’s implying they’re letting fascism happen faster, because they are.
See other comment
Agree we should work outside the system, disagree that we should not use our vote strategically.
Using it strategically does not equate to voting unconditionally
See you at the bottom of the cliff then.
i admire your dedication and resolve. for the sake of everyone involved i hope your narrative plays out. :)
for me personally i find such a scenario unlikely and so choose to operate within the bounds of a model i find to be closer to reality to reduce the harm brought to my neighbors.
Between genocider and genocider-but-worse, I’m not gonna stand by and let genocider-but-worse win power.
Haha losers. Imagine not having some form of preferential voting. Catch up idiots
go away troll no one gets any benefit from this shit
The benefit is:
a) you know what needs to change
b) you know what country to move to if it doesn’t change
c) it’s entertaining
literal genocide is happening
trolling in the comments because “it’s entertaining”
disgusting and disturbing lmao. fuck off with that nonsense
I never said genocide is entertaining. It’s really not. How did you get from a joke about preferential voting not being in America to genocide? From what I understand of American politics both are potentially genocidal, so I don’t even know how much preferential voting would help.
Where I live also doesn’t have preferential voting if it makes you feel better.
sorry, don’t mean to claim that i’ll edit my comment
It’s not like you can’t do anything about it
Approval Voting and the proportional variety, Sequential Proportional Approval Voting, are better choices than any ranked system, but pretty much dang near anything is better than the “choose one” standard.
American with two Party system and no real choice trying ro rationalize HM?
go away if you aren’t going to do anything except troll please
Is 196 now a serious comment only community? Didn’t notice can you show me where the new rule is stated?
Also since when are satire and trolling the same thing?
Its not like i m trying to derail an argument by saying democrats and reps are equally bad or something like that, I’m pointing out the false dilemma you make with a (in all all honesty kinda edgy) joke. That has nothing to do with trolling.
One could argue your butthurt response tells I have hit a nerve there.
yeah serious comment only, no more jokes sorry 😢
we get it america bad. now say sth constructive please
Fight for a real democratic system now? Unionize? Abolish capitalism?
Lots of constructive things to say out there, doesn’t mean you can’t make a joke about your opressors
P.S: Also raising awareness about a problem (2-party system) is constructive even in a satirical way imho
I love all the any means necessary people, like just vote for 5 seconds and get the damned ice cream. You don’t need to sabotage the bus, just act civilly inside the bus