• Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    I understand why people do it but what I don’t understand is why they are content to continue supporting any child crushing and discourage people from discussing it.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      Discussing it is fine, I think people only get touchy about it right before an election because they don’t want other people to lose sight of the utility of voting lesser evil. I think the ones who actually think about it don’t support any child crushing, they just recognize that the election has a binary outcome, and they’d rather fight the lesser evil than the greater one.

      At the end of the day, voting in bourgeoisie elections is just choosing the enemy you’ll be fighting, and choosing the lesser child crushing gives you a fight you’re more likely to win.

      • Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        When else can people put pressure on the lesser evil to “tone down” the evil? Or take the opportunity to ensure folks know about the evil? Isn’t it when things look their worst they say “well actually we need to be slightly more evil to get those swing voters”?

        Maybe I don’t understand the US system but I believe platforms are individual to candidates and that there are no overall party platforms that the candidates are expected to adhere to. How is there no shift to less evil under these conditions? So many individual elections for individual people and a whole lot of wack people getting elected.

        and they’d rather fight the lesser evil than the greater one.

        I think this is my point: when do they fight the lesser evil?

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          Maybe I don’t understand the US system but I believe platforms are individual to candidates and that there are no overall party platforms that the candidates are expected to adhere to.

          Sincerely don’t mean to be rude, but the first 7 words provide the answer. Even when there are no official overall party platforms, the eyebrows waggle in a certain direction. Especially where campaign funding is concerned.

          I think this is my point: when do they fight the lesser evil?

          I do my part. Many others do too. The fighters are in the minority, which is why it’s so important that the bystanders at least make our work easier.