Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
Yeah.... But also, Carlin was right saying this shit is all a stage. We've got groups of bullies picking on us, and I'd rather throw bricks than help them decide who to pick on next.
If "harm" and "less harm" are the only two options, then the only question is how quickly you die. There's the argument that we have to do "harm reduction" in order to buy time to organize for something better, but we've been procrastinating for decades apparently. Since all of history informs us that humans act only when inaction is no longer tenable (and sometimes not even then), really the only material difference between "harm reduction" and accelerationism is, again, the timeline.
The harm or less harm are thanks to Ordinal voting.
First Past the Post is the absolute worst offender, but every single Ordinal voting system will eventually devolve into a forced choice between this or that.
Thankfully there are Cardinal voting systems. Those always boil down to the word and. For example, I can say that I support getting ice cream, and sandwiches, and a slushy, and even just finishing the route, but not going over that cliff.
My support for any given item is counted independently of my support for any other option.
To see what option wins, you just look at total support.
Different Cardinal systems have their own little quirks, but the key in all of them is that ability to give multiple items identical levels of support.
Well yeah but the one of the people who voted for ice cream downvoted a post about gaza one time so CLEARLY the entire bus sacrificing themselves just in case it might save gaza is the better option. Also there's an atomic bomb factory in a heavily populated area at the bottom of the cliff so basically the same amount of people as the entire population of gaza are going to die if this happens but protecting Gaza is more important than protecting loved ones apparently.
You're on a bus with 9 people. 1 guy takes up 2/3rds of the bus by himself. 3 people take up 90% of what remains, and the last 5 are stacked on top of each other on the last remaining seat.
The one guy with 2/3 of the bus says he wants to throw two of the other passengers off a cliff at random so he can have their seats. 2 of the 3 in the next segment think this is a terrible idea and say we should keep things as they are, with one voting for it because he thinks somehow everyone will benefit from the top guy having more space. The bottom segment votes 3-2 in favor of the idea, because they hate the people in the second group for taking up space they could use, and like the idea of possibly throwing them off a cliff.
Remember, no matter how beautiful, morally righteous, or gratifying your strategy is, you should really look at the results
Is voting for controlled opposition harm reduction?
Like I agree that Kamala was the correct choice, but her inevitably milquetoast liberal policies would keep us stagnant until people voted in the next Republican out of boredom
The ice cream no longer exists. It hasn’t existed for a long time, and no amount of wishing will bring it back.
I want ice cream, too. But before we can have ice cream again, we need to not die.
Some of the people refuse to believe that the accelerator and steering wheel do anything, even though the pro-cliff people are clearly steering and accelerating.
Some people think we've already gone over the cliff, and thus trying to drive the bus is meaningless.
They're wrong, but they believe it, and people's beliefs are sometimes too precious to let go.
And some people aren't on the bus, just on video chat, but for some reason are still arguing to drive off the cliff.
Everyone's upset about the vegan ice cream voters not voting for regular ice cream.
No one is upset at the regular ice cream people for being unwilling to vote for a vegan ice cream place because their choice is default in their mind.
Both sides are holding each other hostage. One has a moral reason and the other just doesn't want to compromise.
And yet.
This is kind of a good analogy for ranked choice voting, to be honest.
Honestly, seriously. Would harm reduction have happened if Kamala was elected. Yes. Did I personally core for her? Yes.
Did this get them elected? No? Shut the fuck up and stop blaming voters because the Democrats don't know how to do politics on purpose so they don't lose their bribes.
Want a better analogy? There's a bus driving for a cliff and one group votes to minimize the impact of driving off the cliff while another group says please please drive faster off the cliff and do a backflip. A third group says guys, can we perhaps maybe not drive off the cliffd? And the rest call them insane and drive off the cliff
More like two options: one runs the bus off the cliff while the other sets it on fire. Sure, we'll live longer in the fire scenario. Maybe we can even put it out!
But I'm still looking for the fucking exit.