But in the actual election, vote strategically against the most abhorrent and least humane candidate, or you’re liable to get them.
I understand the appeal of this idea. It makes sense. But bear with me for a minute. Imagine a world where the democratic party really was as bad as the republican party, except they would give one grain of rice more to one prisoner in the concentration camp. Would you vote for that party? Do you have a line at all beyond which you wouldn’t vote for someone?
Sure, every grain of rice helps. If polling indicates that they are the only two parties with a chance of winning, voting for anyone else serves no purpose.
Obviously this would highlight the need to take actions outside voting, but what’s the point of wasting a vote doing nothing, even if all you get is a single grain of rice?
Alright, fair enough I guess. I used to think this way too, but I changed my mind about it. I don’t think that voting is actually value neutral, but rather affirmative consent for what the people you vote for then go on to do. There are practical aspects to it - I think it sucks the energy out of taking other actions outside of voting, and gives the winner of the election legitimacy in the eyes of normal people who are kind of checked out - but beyond that I think it morally ties you to the program of the party you voted for. I don’t think someone has to be perfect to be able to vote for them, but there is a line beyond which it is too far. After that, the only thing left to do is to take actions outside voting and not get distracted by the circus.
I understand the appeal of this idea. It makes sense. But bear with me for a minute. Imagine a world where the democratic party really was as bad as the republican party, except they would give one grain of rice more to one prisoner in the concentration camp. Would you vote for that party? Do you have a line at all beyond which you wouldn’t vote for someone?
Sure, every grain of rice helps. If polling indicates that they are the only two parties with a chance of winning, voting for anyone else serves no purpose.
Obviously this would highlight the need to take actions outside voting, but what’s the point of wasting a vote doing nothing, even if all you get is a single grain of rice?
Alright, fair enough I guess. I used to think this way too, but I changed my mind about it. I don’t think that voting is actually value neutral, but rather affirmative consent for what the people you vote for then go on to do. There are practical aspects to it - I think it sucks the energy out of taking other actions outside of voting, and gives the winner of the election legitimacy in the eyes of normal people who are kind of checked out - but beyond that I think it morally ties you to the program of the party you voted for. I don’t think someone has to be perfect to be able to vote for them, but there is a line beyond which it is too far. After that, the only thing left to do is to take actions outside voting and not get distracted by the circus.