Praxis
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 22 points 1 day ago (12 children)

Does voting cause Americans some obscure form of pain or anguish?

I can see no other reason why not to vote.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    There was a law a few years back that prevented giving water to people standing in line to vote. Lines in places where your vote matters can take hours. You also do not get time off work so you have to use a personal day or just get paid less that week.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 19 hours ago

    The water law was specifically in Texas, not a federal law.

    It's stupid how difficult some places make it to vote. Also, in a surprise turn off events, the military was specifically ordered to make sure everyone gets a "down day" to vote.

    Probably because of the amount of stupid people in the military that will vote red. I hope it flips this year though.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Americans aren't really allowed to take off work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 17 hours ago*

    A problem is that, actually, some are. It's the carrot on a stick problem allowing the problem to get much, much worse, at a rapid rate.

    Like, the big stone door at the end of the tunnel is open, but closing, and there are only 10 people-spaces available. So, 1000 people fight each other to survive, rather than rushing through the door and ripping the spine out of the person closing the door.

    "Oh, you have an issue with the door closing person? Maybe if you ran faster and beat more other people you wouldn't have an issue with it."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago* (3 children)

    I'm not USian, but here are some assorted reasons why one might choose not to vote. I do not necessarily agree (or disagree) with any of them, and this is my attempt at a reasonably balanced analysis as a person who is not an expert in politics, but has read a lot of arguments in the comments.

    1. Voting makes you complicit.
      (Let's say for the sake of argument that it is a given that Democrats will continue aiding Israel's genocide and ethnic cleansing just as much as the Republicans, but will improve things for marginalised communities domestically.)
      The argument here is that voting for a politician that will perpetuate a genocide makes you complicit in a genocide in a way that inaction does not. The counter-argument is that refusing to exercise what influence you have in the choice between make a choice between Palestinian genocide or Palestinian genocide and trans genocide makes you complicit in trans genocide. This is literally the kind of thing that the trolley problem thought experiment was made to explore.

    2. Voting for the lesser evil increases harm in the long run.
      The argument here is that demonstrating a willingness to vote for the lesser evil - with no red lines whatsoever - incentivises Democrats to only ever be slightly less bad than the Republicans, whereas having red lines and allowing Democrats who cross them to lose will incentivise the Democratic party to change their policies. The counter-argument is that Dems haven't exactly demonstrated that they willing to adopt certain policies even when it would be demonstrably beneficial to their election prospects, and so the pragmatic thing to do is to delay harm for as long as possible to give a better chance that non-electoral politics will shift in the interim. The counter-counter-argument is that such a shift will not occur while that harm is being delayed, which leads us on to...

    3. Accelerationism.
      (Yes, I'm aware that what I'm about to write isn't the original meaning of accelerationism. Don't @ me.)
      The argument here is electoral politics either can never progress toward socialism/anarchism/your-flavour-of-leftism (if you're a leftist), or even that it is no longer even capable of halting a descent into fascism (if you're a pessimistic liberal), and so we should simply allow shit to get fucked so that a critical mass of people have it bad enough to do some revolution and/or non-voting-based direct action about it. The counter-arguments here include, but are not limited to: a) well, that's just like, you're opinion, man; b) that's an awfully big gamble to take when there's no guarantee that what will come after will be better; and c) you should prioritise the lives of people that currently exist, now, rather than those of hypothetical future people, and immediate harm reduction is of more benefit to those people specifically.

    In case any one cares, I'm English. My position on voting is that I may vote in an election where the Greens or possibly the Lib Dems stand a chance of winning, but otherwise I spoil my ballot. Yes, I'm aware that the Lib Dems are shitlibs. Still better than Labour. I will never vote Labour for as long as it remains transphobic or as long as the likes of Luke Akehurst remain in the party.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 hours ago (1 child)

    This is literally the kind of thing that the trolley problem thought experiment was made to explore

    no, it's not. the trolley problem is a series of questions that help you to explore your own morality and understand your tendency (consequentialism or deontology or divine command theory, etc) and how far you're willing to stick to your beliefs.

    there are no correct answers to the trolley problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 16 minutes ago*

    A runaway trolley is on course to kill five people, but if you pull a lever it will be diverted to a track where it will kill only one person. Should you pull the lever? Does that make you a murderer?

    You: There is no correct answer to this.

    A politician who will commit multiple genocides is fighting an election against a politician who will commit one genocide. Should you vote for latter politician? Does that make you complicit in genocide?

    You: This is obviously completely different from a trolley problem, and consequentialist and deontological ethics are not relevant in this situation.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago

    Several reasons - People are lazy AF, maybe a bit "soft disenfranchised" in terms of not preceiving that they have credible information, and also there are active demoralization campaigns going on.

    All those are reasons but none are valid excuses. Get off your ass and vote. Many places allow you to vote early. Federal law requires your employer to give you time off to vote.

    No excuses... inform yourself and vote.

  • source
  • parent