I’ve always found it strange how people gatekeep internet culture. Especially when it’s meaningless in the face of a genocide. I don’t care about this perfect utopia you expected the fediverse to be. I will be firmly against genocide and will say it wherever I see fit.
It’s more that you talk like nobody else is against genocide. Nobody here wants genocide. Your “solution” is just a nothing burger. The reality is every government is pretty fucked up, some more than others. There’s no way to change the whole world order, so you try make it as less shit for as many people as possible, not just throw your hands up and say “I’m done with voting”.
Whilst it’s a topic that can get very personal (which is why invariably political discussions ultimately get heated very quickly, as this thread has shown), I think the point here essentially boils down to pointing out what not voting means.
In a system where you have one side doing their best to amplify the weight votes for them have (whether that be through gerrymandering, the electoral college, etc), not voting just increases that amplification. So whilst on paper not voting demonstrates your lack of confidence in either side (and let’s be honest, without some real changes it’s a two horse race), in reality that decision is primarily (not exclusively, but primarily) benefiting one side of politics.
If you’re making the decision to not vote with full knowledge of what that means, realistically I think that’s all someone can ask without getting into a discussion about trying to change your mind about that decision.
I’ve always found it strange how people gatekeep internet culture. Especially when it’s meaningless in the face of a genocide. I don’t care about this perfect utopia you expected the fediverse to be. I will be firmly against genocide and will say it wherever I see fit.
It’s more that you talk like nobody else is against genocide. Nobody here wants genocide. Your “solution” is just a nothing burger. The reality is every government is pretty fucked up, some more than others. There’s no way to change the whole world order, so you try make it as less shit for as many people as possible, not just throw your hands up and say “I’m done with voting”.
I’m done with lesser evil voting. Pout all you want, but if I don’t believe in the person I’m not voting for them. End of story. Have a nice day.
Whilst it’s a topic that can get very personal (which is why invariably political discussions ultimately get heated very quickly, as this thread has shown), I think the point here essentially boils down to pointing out what not voting means.
In a system where you have one side doing their best to amplify the weight votes for them have (whether that be through gerrymandering, the electoral college, etc), not voting just increases that amplification. So whilst on paper not voting demonstrates your lack of confidence in either side (and let’s be honest, without some real changes it’s a two horse race), in reality that decision is primarily (not exclusively, but primarily) benefiting one side of politics.
If you’re making the decision to not vote with full knowledge of what that means, realistically I think that’s all someone can ask without getting into a discussion about trying to change your mind about that decision.