No. Voter apathy means you are apathetic about the current system of voting, not the general concept of voting. It means that the current system does not appeal to you. Therefore both not voting and voting third party signals your apathy with the way things are.
This is objectively stupid, I’m sorry. It is possible to be apathetic of the current voting system, but you aren’t. You care about the outcome, you have an interest and motivation to vote (or not) a certain way. “Apathy with the way things are” would mean you don’t care about the way things are, not that you dislike it and would like to change it as you have demonstrated many times. This argument doesn’t even matter but it’s pissing me off that you’re using the word wrong.
Right, because when the political establishment talks about people who don’t vote, they definitely dont talk about things like “voter outreach” or “appealing to non-voters” 🙄
Voter outreach is designed to appeal to people who don’t care enough to vote, not people who are actively choosing not to vote. They believe nonvoters are apathetic, not protesting.
That says a lot more about you than anything else. That you cant think of any political organising and you think “there is so much more to do” is somehow vague. Theres a wealth of resources of political organising available to you. Join PSL or something.
I am organized, I participate heavily in local political groups that do protests and (ironically) voter outreach. I’ve spent plenty of time volunteering and doing all that. Did you assume I didn’t? What I am asking is whether you have a plan for how a revolution could actually be accomplished. One does not understand what one cannot explain, so go ahead.
This is objectively stupid, I’m sorry. It is possible to be apathetic of the current voting system, but you aren’t.
You’re not sorry, just stick to your insult instead of this affectation of snideness.
I’m not sorry, but it is a completely accurate use of the word and it is a fine descriptor for you, me, third party voters and non-voters.
I did not bother responding to the rest of your text trying to argue semantics.
I am organized, I participate heavily in local political groups that do protests and (ironically) voter outreach. I’ve spent plenty of time volunteering and doing all that. Did you assume I didn’t? What I am asking is whether you have a plan for how a revolution could actually be accomplished.
Pretty obvious I assumed you didnt, and it was a pretty reasonable assumption given what you had written.
No, I dont have a plan for a revolution lol, why would I? What a disingenuous dumbass question.
Do you have the entire cabinet for the US government with your third party planned out? Do you have people in mind for every key position that needs to be staffed? Probably not either, because that’s also not something you need to consider right this moment. The situation for either is so far off that any plan would be completely useless when it would be relevant, because conditions would have to change drastically for it to be relevant. Right now the point is to change conditions.
This is objectively stupid, I’m sorry. It is possible to be apathetic of the current voting system, but you aren’t. You care about the outcome, you have an interest and motivation to vote (or not) a certain way. “Apathy with the way things are” would mean you don’t care about the way things are, not that you dislike it and would like to change it as you have demonstrated many times. This argument doesn’t even matter but it’s pissing me off that you’re using the word wrong.
Voter outreach is designed to appeal to people who don’t care enough to vote, not people who are actively choosing not to vote. They believe nonvoters are apathetic, not protesting.
I am organized, I participate heavily in local political groups that do protests and (ironically) voter outreach. I’ve spent plenty of time volunteering and doing all that. Did you assume I didn’t? What I am asking is whether you have a plan for how a revolution could actually be accomplished. One does not understand what one cannot explain, so go ahead.
You’re not sorry, just stick to your insult instead of this affectation of snideness.
I’m not sorry, but it is a completely accurate use of the word and it is a fine descriptor for you, me, third party voters and non-voters.
I personally vote third party. I understand however that it will never bring change in itself, since any such party will be subsumed if it were ever to become a threat to capitalism. I am thus apathetic about voting. From the perspective of a democrat, they will also perceive non-voters and third party voters the same: People that are so apathetic about the current two-party system that they are willing to throw away their vote, one way or another.
I did not bother responding to the rest of your text trying to argue semantics.
Pretty obvious I assumed you didnt, and it was a pretty reasonable assumption given what you had written.
No, I dont have a plan for a revolution lol, why would I? What a disingenuous dumbass question.
Do you have the entire cabinet for the US government with your third party planned out? Do you have people in mind for every key position that needs to be staffed? Probably not either, because that’s also not something you need to consider right this moment. The situation for either is so far off that any plan would be completely useless when it would be relevant, because conditions would have to change drastically for it to be relevant. Right now the point is to change conditions.