Here’s the thing though, you could argue that voting in favour of brexit, would have emboldened the centrists and the establishment in the UK, to keep making the lives of the working class worse. Brexit gave them a much necessary bloody nose.
I dont worry about how other people will interpret my actions. its not a useful benchmark for decision making.
The propaganda will tell people Macron’s successor is a neo-liberal thief and part of why France is in deep trouble…
Is macron’s successor literally enabling a genocide like harris did? These are not either or questions. you need to look at what candidates are doing. I tossed my vote for biden in 2020 even though i didnt like him. He decided to start a genocide. he lost my support. harris continued to support the genocide. she also lost my support. Now you have the dems in absolute turmoil and progressives are sweeping up this primary. It’ll unfortunately take a few more cycles for this to complete.
You worry too much about what the candidate will do vs what they are doing and you’re trying to prevent candidate A from acting by supporting candidate B even though you also dont like candidate B.
As a result you explicitly are condoning candidate B’s actions. By not taking away your vote/support you are directly responsible for their actions. You also enable them to claim ‘that only they, the center, can win’ because you are unwilling to withhold your support. You’re literally a hostage.
On top of that by supporting candidate B regardless of their actions because of your fear of candidate A you make it more difficult to remove candidate B and replace them with a better option.
Sound familiar? its the rachette effect. Stop supporting candidate B and suddenly you have room to replace them. Withholding your vote is one of the most effective tools for electoral change outside of general strikes.
Im not going to join you or condone your support of ‘lesser evil’ because it makes the tail of this situation longer and worse. And I’m going to call it out for what it is: An Ineffective reaction to fear. It in fact is a direct source of the situation we’re in now in the states because its been going on for so long that all the guard rails have fallen and all you have left are… the very people enabling the situation.
Now, I respect your individual choice, its just a bad one if you actually want change. One option you have is to split your ticket: vote against le pen but dont vote in any of macron’s party otherwise.
I’m going to leave you with a quote:
Rosa Luxemburg: ‘Those who dont move, do not notice their chains’
Is macron’s successor literally enabling a genocide like harris did
France/Macron has continuously sold Israel weapons, yes. But they’re also being more critical of Israel, want to ban goods from settlements, etc.
Le Pen is a fascist and friend to Israel, so much so that a Likud minister has said she would be an excellent president, they’ve been in secret talks with Israel, and she has been critical of Macron for not supporting Israel enough, etc. The Israelis are almost certainly pushing propaganda to get people to not bother turning out to vote against Le Pen.
By not taking away your vote/support you are directly responsible for their actions.
You can vote for Macron’s guy, who’ll likely continue selling weapons to Israel, and that arguably makes you complicit in genocide. Correct.
Or you can not vote, and risk a Le Pen victory, and even closer ties to Israel. You’re doing what the Israelis want you to (not) do. You not voting, is an implied ok, you’re not going to do anything to stop them.
Rosa Luxemburg: ‘Those who dont move, do not notice their chains’
Do you think Rosa Luxemburg would have abstained from voting against the Nazis, because the other German political parties were corrupt and inept?
I’m not saying you’re necessarily wrong to not vote.
I’m saying it’s not a morally pure choice. Your hands aren’t clean either way.
To quote Sapkowski: “Evil is Evil. Lesser, greater, middling… Makes no difference. The degree is arbitrary. The definition’s blurred. If I’m to choose between one evil and another… I’d rather not choose at all.”
Or you can not vote, and risk a Le Pen victory, and even closer ties to Israel. You’re doing what the Israelis want you to (not) do. You not voting, is an implied ok, you’re not going to do anything to stop them.
Everything about this sentence is incorrect. Not voting is not an implied ‘fine with the outcome regardless’. As I’ve literally been pointing out since my first comment in this thread. people like you keep trying to assert it is. but it simply isnt and no amount of blathering on your end will make it so.
Do you think Rosa Luxemburg would have abstained from voting against the Nazis, because the other German political parties were corrupt and inept?
liberals literally like worshipping idols. the quote was to make you think. because clearly you are not. in your world there is only one method to deal with the problem in mine there are many.
I’m saying it’s not a morally pure choice. Your hands aren’t clean either way.
An Individual who is not involved is not responsible for the actions of others. Not voting for a terrible candidate is in no way supporting them, see above about your blathering. the only peoples whose hands are dirty are the individuals who voted for the candidate who won. The only dirt on my hands was tossing biden a vote in 2020 thinking they’d be reasonable re: wouldnt enable/support a fucking genocide (technically that admin lost it soon as they broke the rail strike). turned out they were not. my support was immediately rescinded.
But I don’t think we get to not choose.
You always have a choice. The world is wider than elections. You have plenty of options on the table for resisting trump/le pen, withhold your labor, use your labor to fund others withholding theirs. support general strikes. you dont need to vote in the election in order to resist if the candidates are terrible.
Now since you’re repeating talking points I’ve already addressed repeatedly with you and others, being utterly uninteresting, and breaking rule 7. disengage.
I notice you didn’t answer my question about if Rosa Luxemburg would have voted against the Nazis had she been alive to do so. I find that telling.
In any case, I didn’t shame you for not voting, I simply pointed out that not voting(not choosing) is also a choice and not necessarily a morally pure choice, especially when faced with fascists. Even if there are good reasons not to vote, it does not absolve you of the risks you take in not doing so. And the same goes for those who do vote, and perpetuate the current malaise and risk lending it legitimacy.
I tried to illustrate this with non-American examples, so you’d be less emotional about it, but given you’ve resorted to name calling and insults clearly I’ve failed.
I notice you didn’t answer my question about if Rosa Luxemburg would have voted against the Nazis had she been alive to do so. I find that telling.
You find it telling because you’re repeating the same mistake you have this entire conversation with me. Thinking you’re capable of convincing me to vote for your shit candidates out of fear, and that you have nothing to learn here about how your voting pattern has lead to the very situation you’re now desperately trying to correct by… doing the exact same thing that got everyone into this mess.
I didnt respond regarding rosa luxemburg because the answer is immaterial and the answer on what I’d do is very evident in my responses to people so what ‘rosa luxemburg would do’ has zero relevance to the conversation since QED: she isnt me. You’re trying to use hero worship and an appeal to an authority to make your case, which is not how I view rosa luxemburg and if you understood anything about anarchists you wouldnt make this mistake.
I didn’t shame you for not voting, I simply pointed out that not voting(not choosing) is also a choice and not necessarily a morally pure choice, especially when faced with fascists.
You’ve absolutely been attempting to shame people. That’s your whole drive with the ‘morally pure’ concept to begin with. a concept I’ve never subscribed to in the first place. you’re simply trying to assert positions onto me that I dont hold. I’ll repeat the point clearly again for you: ‘An individual is not responsible for the actions of candidate A through not voting for candidate B’. I dont get sullied because trump is an utter cunt. I am sullied for the vote I gave biden who was also an utter cunt.
I never said I was morally absolved purely by not voting, I said I’m not morally responsible of the actions of the person whom I didnt vote for, and if I was declaring abstaining from voting altogether, which i never have, then maybe you’d have a case. but since its not, and I do vote when the candidate is actually useful it doesnt apply. If you want people to blame for fascism look to the people voting for the fascists (cough you, lesser evil every day individual, via voting for the fascist wing of the democratic party and whom have been enabling the republican party since 1996 and longer cough)
When someone beats their partner 3 towns over are you responsible through the fact you were watching tv that night despite you knowing that the person was violent? No, of course not.
I dont get sullied because trump is an utter cunt. I am sullied for the vote I gave biden who was also an utter cunt.
You are sullied if you vote for the establishment candidate, perpetuating the current status quo. You are sullied if you don’t vote against the fascist. Choisir entre la peste et le choléra, as I said above.
(cough you, lesser evil every day individual, via voting for the fascist wing of the democratic party and whom have been enabling the republican party since 1996 and longer cough)
You didn’t read my comments properly. If you had, you would have gathered I voted for neither Biden or Trump, as I am not American. In any case, I haven’t voted in anything other than a local election in two decades, which once again, wouldn’t surprise you, if you had read my comments.
When someone beats their partner 3 towns over are you responsible through the fact you were watching tv that night despite you knowing that the person was violent? No, of course not.
It’s a poor analogy, but maybe I can rescue it.
If you can save someone from being beaten and perhaps murdered, you should arguably do that. But if always stepping in, results in the abused never leaving their abuser and being murdered when you’re not able to save them, you have arguably enabled poor behaviour and done more harm than good.
There is no good or moral choice. As I said a few comments above, there are no easy answers.
You are sullied if you vote for the establishment candidate, perpetuating the current status quo.
correct.
You are sullied if you don’t vote against the fascist. Choisir entre la peste et le choléra, as I said above.
Correct, both le pen and macron’s parties are fascist. you’re finally making progress!
You didn’t read my comment properly. If you had read my comment, you would have gathered I voted for neither Biden or Trump, as I am not American.
I did. I know you’re not american. trump is a an example. are you mentally capable of abstraction? have you passed algebra? If not we should stop here since you dont have the capability to continue.
It’s a poor analogy, but maybe I can rescue it.
No, you can’t because it was intentionally a poor analogy, but you’ve agreed with the premise that you’re not morally responsible for the actions of another individual, in the most basic of situations.
The next step is to move to a situation where two people directly call you simultaneously asking for you to come get them before their partner beats them (Partner A: Le Pen v Partner B: Macron). Unfortunately you’re at another friends house and cannot drive to either fast enough to get to either of them in time. are you morally responsible for the resulting beatings these individuals receive from their partners?
I made no progress in my position. As mentioned above, I haven’t voted in a national election in twenty years.
I am simply reiterating my comments from above, in the hopes you will finally understand them. I’m at least glad you’ve finally caught on I’m not telling you to vote for the lesser evil, the rest not so much, but oh well.
Let’s leave it there. This conversation wasn’t productive, that won’t change.
oh, suddenly when the answer to the premise doesnt match the nonsense position you’re suddenly incapable of responding. No, now I want you to continue. you need to learn what the fuck you’re doing when you espouse voting for the ‘least terrible candidate’. do you think we are joking when we say ‘scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds’?
I could break this down mathematically how ‘vote for the least terrible candidate’ results in worse outcomes across the board over time but I doubt you have the masters/PHD in mathemetics to follow it. Voting ‘least terrible’ is a position promoted by capital to slow down societal change and 99% of you dont even know it.
But the fact is you weren’t here to understand, you were here to try and correct the poor misguided anarchists who have been fighting against fascism for generations.
I dont worry about how other people will interpret my actions. its not a useful benchmark for decision making.
Is macron’s successor literally enabling a genocide like harris did? These are not either or questions. you need to look at what candidates are doing. I tossed my vote for biden in 2020 even though i didnt like him. He decided to start a genocide. he lost my support. harris continued to support the genocide. she also lost my support. Now you have the dems in absolute turmoil and progressives are sweeping up this primary. It’ll unfortunately take a few more cycles for this to complete.
You worry too much about what the candidate will do vs what they are doing and you’re trying to prevent candidate A from acting by supporting candidate B even though you also dont like candidate B.
As a result you explicitly are condoning candidate B’s actions. By not taking away your vote/support you are directly responsible for their actions. You also enable them to claim ‘that only they, the center, can win’ because you are unwilling to withhold your support. You’re literally a hostage.
On top of that by supporting candidate B regardless of their actions because of your fear of candidate A you make it more difficult to remove candidate B and replace them with a better option.
Sound familiar? its the rachette effect. Stop supporting candidate B and suddenly you have room to replace them. Withholding your vote is one of the most effective tools for electoral change outside of general strikes.
Im not going to join you or condone your support of ‘lesser evil’ because it makes the tail of this situation longer and worse. And I’m going to call it out for what it is: An Ineffective reaction to fear. It in fact is a direct source of the situation we’re in now in the states because its been going on for so long that all the guard rails have fallen and all you have left are… the very people enabling the situation.
Now, I respect your individual choice, its just a bad one if you actually want change. One option you have is to split your ticket: vote against le pen but dont vote in any of macron’s party otherwise.
I’m going to leave you with a quote:
Rosa Luxemburg: ‘Those who dont move, do not notice their chains’
Now please move. ;)
France/Macron has continuously sold Israel weapons, yes. But they’re also being more critical of Israel, want to ban goods from settlements, etc.
Le Pen is a fascist and friend to Israel, so much so that a Likud minister has said she would be an excellent president, they’ve been in secret talks with Israel, and she has been critical of Macron for not supporting Israel enough, etc. The Israelis are almost certainly pushing propaganda to get people to not bother turning out to vote against Le Pen.
You can vote for Macron’s guy, who’ll likely continue selling weapons to Israel, and that arguably makes you complicit in genocide. Correct.
Or you can not vote, and risk a Le Pen victory, and even closer ties to Israel. You’re doing what the Israelis want you to (not) do. You not voting, is an implied ok, you’re not going to do anything to stop them.
Do you think Rosa Luxemburg would have abstained from voting against the Nazis, because the other German political parties were corrupt and inept?
I’m not saying you’re necessarily wrong to not vote.
I’m saying it’s not a morally pure choice. Your hands aren’t clean either way.
To quote Sapkowski: “Evil is Evil. Lesser, greater, middling… Makes no difference. The degree is arbitrary. The definition’s blurred. If I’m to choose between one evil and another… I’d rather not choose at all.”
But I don’t think we get to not choose.
Everything about this sentence is incorrect. Not voting is not an implied ‘fine with the outcome regardless’. As I’ve literally been pointing out since my first comment in this thread. people like you keep trying to assert it is. but it simply isnt and no amount of blathering on your end will make it so.
liberals literally like worshipping idols. the quote was to make you think. because clearly you are not. in your world there is only one method to deal with the problem in mine there are many.
An Individual who is not involved is not responsible for the actions of others. Not voting for a terrible candidate is in no way supporting them, see above about your blathering. the only peoples whose hands are dirty are the individuals who voted for the candidate who won. The only dirt on my hands was tossing biden a vote in 2020 thinking they’d be reasonable re: wouldnt enable/support a fucking genocide (technically that admin lost it soon as they broke the rail strike). turned out they were not. my support was immediately rescinded.
You always have a choice. The world is wider than elections. You have plenty of options on the table for resisting trump/le pen, withhold your labor, use your labor to fund others withholding theirs. support general strikes. you dont need to vote in the election in order to resist if the candidates are terrible.
Now since you’re repeating talking points I’ve already addressed repeatedly with you and others, being utterly uninteresting, and breaking rule 7. disengage.
I notice you didn’t answer my question about if Rosa Luxemburg would have voted against the Nazis had she been alive to do so. I find that telling.
In any case, I didn’t shame you for not voting, I simply pointed out that not voting(not choosing) is also a choice and not necessarily a morally pure choice, especially when faced with fascists. Even if there are good reasons not to vote, it does not absolve you of the risks you take in not doing so. And the same goes for those who do vote, and perpetuate the current malaise and risk lending it legitimacy.
I tried to illustrate this with non-American examples, so you’d be less emotional about it, but given you’ve resorted to name calling and insults clearly I’ve failed.
Good luck to you.
You find it telling because you’re repeating the same mistake you have this entire conversation with me. Thinking you’re capable of convincing me to vote for your shit candidates out of fear, and that you have nothing to learn here about how your voting pattern has lead to the very situation you’re now desperately trying to correct by… doing the exact same thing that got everyone into this mess.
I didnt respond regarding rosa luxemburg because the answer is immaterial and the answer on what I’d do is very evident in my responses to people so what ‘rosa luxemburg would do’ has zero relevance to the conversation since QED: she isnt me. You’re trying to use hero worship and an appeal to an authority to make your case, which is not how I view rosa luxemburg and if you understood anything about anarchists you wouldnt make this mistake.
You’ve absolutely been attempting to shame people. That’s your whole drive with the ‘morally pure’ concept to begin with. a concept I’ve never subscribed to in the first place. you’re simply trying to assert positions onto me that I dont hold. I’ll repeat the point clearly again for you: ‘An individual is not responsible for the actions of candidate A through not voting for candidate B’. I dont get sullied because trump is an utter cunt. I am sullied for the vote I gave biden who was also an utter cunt.
I never said I was morally absolved purely by not voting, I said I’m not morally responsible of the actions of the person whom I didnt vote for, and if I was declaring abstaining from voting altogether, which i never have, then maybe you’d have a case. but since its not, and I do vote when the candidate is actually useful it doesnt apply. If you want people to blame for fascism look to the people voting for the fascists (cough you, lesser evil every day individual, via voting for the fascist wing of the democratic party and whom have been enabling the republican party since 1996 and longer cough)
When someone beats their partner 3 towns over are you responsible through the fact you were watching tv that night despite you knowing that the person was violent? No, of course not.
You are sullied if you vote for the establishment candidate, perpetuating the current status quo. You are sullied if you don’t vote against the fascist. Choisir entre la peste et le choléra, as I said above.
You didn’t read my comments properly. If you had, you would have gathered I voted for neither Biden or Trump, as I am not American. In any case, I haven’t voted in anything other than a local election in two decades, which once again, wouldn’t surprise you, if you had read my comments.
It’s a poor analogy, but maybe I can rescue it.
If you can save someone from being beaten and perhaps murdered, you should arguably do that. But if always stepping in, results in the abused never leaving their abuser and being murdered when you’re not able to save them, you have arguably enabled poor behaviour and done more harm than good.
There is no good or moral choice. As I said a few comments above, there are no easy answers.
correct.
Correct, both le pen and macron’s parties are fascist. you’re finally making progress!
I did. I know you’re not american. trump is a an example. are you mentally capable of abstraction? have you passed algebra? If not we should stop here since you dont have the capability to continue.
No, you can’t because it was intentionally a poor analogy, but you’ve agreed with the premise that you’re not morally responsible for the actions of another individual, in the most basic of situations.
The next step is to move to a situation where two people directly call you simultaneously asking for you to come get them before their partner beats them (Partner A: Le Pen v Partner B: Macron). Unfortunately you’re at another friends house and cannot drive to either fast enough to get to either of them in time. are you morally responsible for the resulting beatings these individuals receive from their partners?
I made no progress in my position. As mentioned above, I haven’t voted in a national election in twenty years.
I am simply reiterating my comments from above, in the hopes you will finally understand them. I’m at least glad you’ve finally caught on I’m not telling you to vote for the lesser evil, the rest not so much, but oh well.
Let’s leave it there. This conversation wasn’t productive, that won’t change.
oh, suddenly when the answer to the premise doesnt match the nonsense position you’re suddenly incapable of responding. No, now I want you to continue. you need to learn what the fuck you’re doing when you espouse voting for the ‘least terrible candidate’. do you think we are joking when we say ‘scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds’?
I could break this down mathematically how ‘vote for the least terrible candidate’ results in worse outcomes across the board over time but I doubt you have the masters/PHD in mathemetics to follow it. Voting ‘least terrible’ is a position promoted by capital to slow down societal change and 99% of you dont even know it.
But the fact is you weren’t here to understand, you were here to try and correct the poor misguided anarchists who have been fighting against fascism for generations.