• nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yet refusing to accept the reality of mathematics that showed that, in a FPTP system, not voting for a viable candidate opposing a fascist only helps the fascist is acceptable? Nah. The blood is on the hands of both dems and non-voters. Non-voters/protest voters don’t give a fuck about trans people, as shown by their actions.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      So it seems like you fully understand the flaws of First past the post voting. Have you done anything to fix it? Are the democrats doing anything to fix it? Nows the time. Not during the election

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Have you done anything to fix it? Yes. I’ve supported efforts for electrical reform both locally and nationality.

        Are the democrats doing anything to fix it? The leadership of a primarily neo-liberal party that likes the status quo and sees little opposition from the left in primaries? No, I don’t think they currently are.

        Nows the time. Not during the election.

        Here, we have some agreement and common ground. Now is indeed a much better time to try for change than a general election. However, with fascists in power, free elections are likely to no longer occur for the foreseeable future. So, demanding resistance from elected officials and building community is vital to weathering this storm that was avoidable.

        Now. I see that you have not responded to my request for what you have done, after my response to your accusatory question. Care to do so? Or are you just JAQing it?

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Knowingly putting others lives at risk by refusing to do what is literally the least one can do, that is, voting in a strategic manner to prevent literal fascists who have repeatedly taken action against LGBTQ+ and made statements in support of committing genocide against them, POC, and people who are neurodivergent and/or impacted by mental illness is not what an ally does. It is an action that demonstrates that the non-voter/protest voter does not find vulnerable peoples’ lives important enough to warrant the effort needed to climb down off of their pedestal of egotistical moral superiority to do meaningfully lend support to their fellow human beings’ right to exist.

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Suppose there are 10 people eligible to vote.

        3 of them are known to support a fascist and will vote, no matter what. They have religious figures reminding them and pressuring them to vote for the fascist and watch propaganda daily that maintains their outrage and support.

        1 of them is a big supporter of the neolibs and will vote for them no matter what.

        1 of them is a pragmatic leftist who grudgingly will vote for the neolibs because there is no other viable choice.

        1 of them is undecided either because they don’t think fascism is that bad, or think it won’t impact them, or don’t consider how it could impact people who are not as privileged as them, etc.

        The other 4 are:

        • 2 who are too filled with apathy to care about voting

        • 1 who the fascists keep setting up artificial barriers for in order to prevent political engagement

        • 1 who is thoroughly indoctrinated in the cult of anti-electoralism

        That’s 6/10 eligible voting (in line with the proportion of eligible voters that voted in 2024).

        Further, historical data shows that when fewer people vote, the fascists win because of their dedication to their cause and authority figures coaxing them to do so. This data is readily available in terms that are easy to comprehend, even for those without technical or scientific education.

        So, the breakdown is:

        Fascism: 3

        Neolibs: 2 or 3

        Coin toss on whether the fascists win, because, of those deigning to engage in the electoral system, one of them is not convinced that opposing fascism is really that big of a deal.

        What about third parties? They don’t matter in this but because it is first-past-the-post and only a majority of participating voters is required.

        But, the majority of polled people support left-of-center policies! Why are we forced to vote for neolibs?! Doesn’t matter. 4 out of 10 eligible voters are going to vote in support of right-of-center ideologies. If more eligible voters voted, that wouldn’t be an issue and the voice of the majority would be heard. But, between apathy, voter suppression, and the anti-electoralist/accelerationist cult, 40% are not voting. And that’s still “good” compared to the last half-century.

        So, there you go. Barely even scratching statistics and simple to digest as to why voters who refused to do their duty to oppose fascism share the responsibility with the neolibs.

                • NSRXN@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  19 hours ago

                  when will you accept that there are an infinite number of possible outcomes, including no one taking power at all?

                  • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    It is vitally important, not just in elections but also in life overall, to recognize that not all possibilities are equally likely and to use available data to evaluate them.

                    For example, it is possible that a white rhinoceros might come down the hall and join me for a spot of tea and biscuits. I can, however, safely say that that is almost definitely not going to happen, based upon these data points:

                    • I do not keep any white rhinoceros in my home.
                    • White rhinoceros are not native to this continent and are classified as near-threatened (a major improvement from their previous near-extinction).
                    • White rhinoceros average between 1700kg and 2300kg. My home was not designed and built to support that kind of moving mass. Any white rhinoceros walking down my hall would likely fall through the floor.
                    • White rhinoceros, while generally docile and gregarious, are not known for enjoying tea and biscuits.

                    Yes, this is a exaggerated caricature. However, data with even more clarity is available surrounding election outcomes. Betting on a possible outcome without any evidence to suggest that it is likely is foolish and betting on an outcome that one knows is unlikely, while increasing the likelihood of an outcome known to be harmful to vulnerable people is detestable.