I will agree that defeatism is always appealing, because if nothing can be done then then you’re no longer obligated to do anything. Expecting the worst is easier than fearing it, because without the chance of success you remove the dreadful element of the unknown.

But with that said, I’d be hesitant to apply any of that to people who resist the idea of voting as a means for change. Many of them are actively seeking change, they just feel that it’s wrong to even include voting in the conversation. And they’re absolutely correct when they say that voting alone will never ever be the answer. That’s an accurate and valid assessment. What I’m disagreeing with is solely the notion, which tends to spin out of that position, that we shouldn’t even talk about voting. Voting matters, but it’s only one tool in a toolkit. If all you have is voting then you’re trying to solve everything with a hammer. But by the same token, you’d be an idiot to throw away your hammer just because you own fifteen other tools.