i’m thankfully not participating in this election, but one would argue voting for any candidate that supports genocide is a vote in support for genocide.
In a first past the post system, like the US, not voting is the same as voting for whoever you hate more. If you hate them equally, then it’s the same as voting for both.
The next US president will support genocide. We get to pick between the one who supports it a lot vs a little. We get to pick which one we’d rather protest under.
The only way to be not complicit is to leave the country and renounce citizenship.
I wouldn’t protest your use, and since that phrase is mine now I can say that!
Jokes aside, this is exactly it. One option, you can protest it. The other, and you’re getting “a very rough hour, real rough”.
So… Yeah. Not voting is supporting more murders by the state, and I hope so many people realize they are being duped with their “non-voting protest” and actually go to the polls. Especially because the presidential election is not the only election that matters.
i don’t buy this “a lot vs a little” thing. its either genocide or its not. and if your voting system doesnt allow for an alternative, then its not a democracy anyway. sounds like a show to me.
Not really. It’s a pretty easy choice when the options are to maintain genocide vs crank it up to 11.
…but yeah there’s a 3rd option I wish we had. The absence of ‘no genocide’ doesn’t imply the voter supports genocide, it just means the options are shit.
I guess the difference is that those of us that would argue with you would believe that you are reasonable individuals whereas, shocker, the genociders are not reasonable.
Oh so you’re equally happy with whatever winner? No preference whatsoever? Interesting to see that on an election with such wildly different candidates.
i dont want any politician to pay me lip service, or announce, or call for shit. no use if all candidates end up pushing the same neoliberal, genocidal agenda.
You may want to clarify of you’re not participating because you can’t or because you won’t. Because if you can’t for some reason that’s fine, and if you won’t I have a few choice words for you.
i’m thankfully not participating in this election, but one would argue voting for any candidate that supports genocide is a vote in support for genocide.
In a first past the post system, like the US, not voting is the same as voting for whoever you hate more. If you hate them equally, then it’s the same as voting for both.
The next US president will support genocide. We get to pick between the one who supports it a lot vs a little. We get to pick which one we’d rather protest under.
The only way to be not complicit is to leave the country and renounce citizenship.
Nailed it. I’m stealing that, and there’s nothing you can do about it.
I wouldn’t protest your use, and since that phrase is mine now I can say that!
Jokes aside, this is exactly it. One option, you can protest it. The other, and you’re getting “a very rough hour, real rough”.
So… Yeah. Not voting is supporting more murders by the state, and I hope so many people realize they are being duped with their “non-voting protest” and actually go to the polls. Especially because the presidential election is not the only election that matters.
I can protest about it. For now at least…
i don’t buy this “a lot vs a little” thing. its either genocide or its not. and if your voting system doesnt allow for an alternative, then its not a democracy anyway. sounds like a show to me.
It’s reality whether you buy it or not. What a silly way of thinking.
Our voting system is barely a democracy and it’s totally a show.
But so what? Not participating doesn’t fix that. Participating let’s us choose the lesser of two evils.
the people calling the shots arent elected. thats true even in my country.
The moral absolutist, black and white view of the world: as bad as any religious nut.
Not really. It’s a pretty easy choice when the options are to maintain genocide vs crank it up to 11.
…but yeah there’s a 3rd option I wish we had. The absence of ‘no genocide’ doesn’t imply the voter supports genocide, it just means the options are shit.
It’s already at 11
deleted by creator
The Democrats could just as easily offer not genocide and win all of these voters back.
I guess the difference is that those of us that would argue with you would believe that you are reasonable individuals whereas, shocker, the genociders are not reasonable.
Oh so you’re equally happy with whatever winner? No preference whatsoever? Interesting to see that on an election with such wildly different candidates.
They’re a tankie, so they probably prefer trump.
i dont want any politician to pay me lip service, or announce, or call for shit. no use if all candidates end up pushing the same neoliberal, genocidal agenda.
A non-vote is a vote for Trump, a third-party vote under the current US voting system is a vote for Trump.
I hope you enjoy your Trump vote!
I love when people have such good faith. Good talk.
You may want to clarify of you’re not participating because you can’t or because you won’t. Because if you can’t for some reason that’s fine, and if you won’t I have a few choice words for you.
Pretty sure most people on the planet are not participating in the next usaian election, and we’re all in trouble for it. I’d vote PSL if I could.