this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2024
1417 points (97.6% liked)

196

16890 readers
661 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
1417
rule (lemmy.cafe)
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

FAQ

Q: why not organize and stop treating the bus as a legitimate entity? why aren’t you working to stop the bus?

A: do both. cut the fuel line. break windows. put oatmeal in the gas tank. but maybe your efforts don’t succeed this election cycle. and if so don’t fucking throw away your vote if it can help your neighbors fucking survive. “harm reduction” is not a political strategy for action. it is a last minute, end of the line decision to save lives, after all other resources have been exhausted.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OnePhoenix 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

This argument (to me at least) assumes that the other 4 non-voters would have all voted for ice cream which, by just using basic logic, is false. If 3 out of 5 have already voted to drive off a cliff, one has to assume that at least 2 of the remaining 4 would also vote to drive off a cliff. Now this argument is back to square one... How do we find a solution which doesn't give 'driving off a cliff' as an option in the first place?

[–] bonus_crab 2 points 10 months ago

get the crazies off the bus. either give them their own clown car or stick them in the trunk.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I think there's evidence out there that suggests that only ~1.8 people of the remaining four non-voters would advocate driving off of the cliff but your point still stands. --That is, if people continue to strictly subscribe to the binary Dem/Repub mindset.