That’s not an option. So that just means you are delusional.
If you didn’t vote for Harris, you helped Trump get elected. That’s basically the same as voting for Trump.
All the morons that for instance criticized how Democrats handled Israel/Gaza, and recommended not to vote Democrat, are partly responsible for what’s going on there now, with no help coming through, and widespread starvation and disease!
All the morons that complained about inflation, despite it was getting back to normal after COVID, are responsible for the economic chaos we have now.
By not supporting the lesser evil, you are actually helping the greater evil.
There are lots of way more constructive things to do, that can help push things in the right direction, than just being in denial.
One could argue that by voting you’re supporting the status quo, the bipartisan democracy heavily invested in said status quo. You are the one obstructing change.
Or to say it with a quote:
If democracy demands compulsory voting for candidates people can’t believe in, it’s not democracy, it’s extortion.
EDIT: One further thought on that reasoning: it might actually make one morally obliged to vote for a third party.
One can argue anything, but that doesn’t mean it makes sense.
If you want to change American democracy, which I agree is sorely needed, then you need to engage actively in politics. UNTIL such change has arrived, you are still a moron for not preventing a greater evil, when you are given that option.
You are saying you won’t use the democratic option you have because it’s not democratic enough. Well I got news for you, democracy can never be perfect, because democracy is about compromise.
Here we have 12 parties in parliament we can vote on, so we have options for mostly everyone. But it’s still a game of compromise.
If you can’t find the best compromise among 2 parties, you sure as hell can’t among several either. You just want to whine, so you would probably still whine even if you lived in the best democracy in the world.
That’s what Chomsky said too, I don’t buy it. In my country there are 10+ parties, 6 of which in government, and people are still playing the lesser evil game in the deluded hope they can shift the window.
It does, actually. Ice cream can put you at grave risk of brain freeze.
Good point! Then again, I don’t think some flavors result in less brain freeze than others.
Even breathing has downsides.
True as well, every breath destroys lung cells.
If you want to be philosophical about it, consider this: If there weren’t pros and cons, you wouldn’t be making a choice at all.
This, however, I’m having a hard time to agree with. Come to think of it, I’m not even sure choice is something natural, but that will require some deeper investigation to ascertain. In a fictional natural state, when looking for a place to sleep, would a “family” really (have to) make a conscious choice between this cave and that one?
Thanks! To your last point, I see any meaningful choice as fundamentally deliberative. If courses of action have no discriminating features (over which to deliberate), e.g., by being equally bad or good, then your decision would be arbitrary, right? Acting at random isn’t a deliberative action (evaluative, judgment-oriented, rule-bounded, normative, moral, or praiseworthy), etc.
Am I? I just hate the lesser evil bullshit.
Lol what is it that people like you don’t understand? Do you want to be kicked in the nuts twice or once? Easy fucking choice every single time.
I’d reckon it’s more natural to try and avoid any nut-kicking, but hey, that’s me.
Huh, why didn’t I think of that?
That’s not an option. So that just means you are delusional.
If you didn’t vote for Harris, you helped Trump get elected. That’s basically the same as voting for Trump.
All the morons that for instance criticized how Democrats handled Israel/Gaza, and recommended not to vote Democrat, are partly responsible for what’s going on there now, with no help coming through, and widespread starvation and disease!
All the morons that complained about inflation, despite it was getting back to normal after COVID, are responsible for the economic chaos we have now.
By not supporting the lesser evil, you are actually helping the greater evil.
There are lots of way more constructive things to do, that can help push things in the right direction, than just being in denial.
One could argue that by voting you’re supporting the status quo, the bipartisan democracy heavily invested in said status quo. You are the one obstructing change.
Or to say it with a quote:
EDIT: One further thought on that reasoning: it might actually make one morally obliged to vote for a third party.
One can argue anything, but that doesn’t mean it makes sense.
If you want to change American democracy, which I agree is sorely needed, then you need to engage actively in politics. UNTIL such change has arrived, you are still a moron for not preventing a greater evil, when you are given that option.
You are saying you won’t use the democratic option you have because it’s not democratic enough. Well I got news for you, democracy can never be perfect, because democracy is about compromise.
Here we have 12 parties in parliament we can vote on, so we have options for mostly everyone. But it’s still a game of compromise.
If you can’t find the best compromise among 2 parties, you sure as hell can’t among several either. You just want to whine, so you would probably still whine even if you lived in the best democracy in the world.
deleted by creator
Yeah, you prefer the greater evil, we get it
Hate it all you want, but until you can establish a viable third party (who isn’t also awful), “lesser of two evils” is the only choice you have.
Isn’t that literally life?
It’s every single choice these people have ever made and they still don’t get it.
That’s what Chomsky said too, I don’t buy it. In my country there are 10+ parties, 6 of which in government, and people are still playing the lesser evil game in the deluded hope they can shift the window.
That’s… life. You’ve never not made a lesser-of-two-evils choice. It’s metaphysically impossible.
Very interesting viewpoint but it doesn’t quite seem to apply when choosing flavors at an ice cream parlor.
It does, actually. Ice cream can put you at grave risk of brain freeze.
If you want to be philosophical about it, consider this: If there weren’t pros and cons, you wouldn’t be making a choice at all.
And even breathing has downsides. For instance, it means I must continue sharing the planet with you. This is terrible news. (Also my nose is cold.)
Good point! Then again, I don’t think some flavors result in less brain freeze than others.
True as well, every breath destroys lung cells.
This, however, I’m having a hard time to agree with. Come to think of it, I’m not even sure choice is something natural, but that will require some deeper investigation to ascertain. In a fictional natural state, when looking for a place to sleep, would a “family” really (have to) make a conscious choice between this cave and that one?
Thanks! To your last point, I see any meaningful choice as fundamentally deliberative. If courses of action have no discriminating features (over which to deliberate), e.g., by being equally bad or good, then your decision would be arbitrary, right? Acting at random isn’t a deliberative action (evaluative, judgment-oriented, rule-bounded, normative, moral, or praiseworthy), etc.
You’re the one who brought him into the conversation.