@lain Electoral abstention is a legitimate political strategy when trying to force the hand of an entrenched establishment. If done mindfully, it's still a type of participation because it is expected or hoped to have a practical effect, even if not in the short term.
But to pretend you can fly off to Oz and ignore the consequences is delusion.
It's the difference between consciously accepting the steep price of a desperate action (or inaction) and the self delusion that choices don't matter.
@lain I haven't voted for years as exactly this type of abstentionist strategy. It's a small act of protest.
I can't worry about when exactly it will have an impact, but it definitely will have an impact, even if it is acceleration towards a totalitarian crisis.
@lain I think this is become a more general trend--Bai Lan, The Great Resignation. There are measurable effects--Sinema has effectively been forced out of the Democratic Party. Small measurable effects that may eventually be reversed, but success is never guaranteed in any ambitious project.
@twitterreject@zleap there's only one scenario where your vote could matter, and that is when it's exactly 50/50 and your vote makes the difference. I don't think that's very likely, so i think it's fine to skip voting, even if you're not opposed to it on a more fundamental level.
@lain@zleap sometimes the only thing that motivates me to vote is the fact that people who are against everything I believe in are trying extremely hard to prevent me from voting. If they didn’t cheat and fight so dirty, I probably would’ve just stayed home,
1. i agree with you, local elections can be rational to vote in. The more direct the influence, the better it is.
2. The argument works, but it doesn't proof that it is sensible to vote, it just proofs that it is sensible to tell others to vote if you expect them to vote for your party on average.
@lain@zleap there actually are more localized elections where the winner is decided by 1-10 votes. And the problem with assuming your vote doesn’t matter is that if only 1 person skips. it probably doesn’t matter much. But there’s quite a few people who share that belief and now it can actually effect outcomes. Local elections have issues that directly affect you daily and with less voters, your vote actually has more power than fed elections. I want a say in my future though.
@lain@zleap you can do whatever you want though. I understand your mentality and have been in similar places. I just know what motivates me. I want a say in what politics affect my future. I don’t want old people deciding my future. And if voting didn’t matter, my political opponents wouldn’t fight so hard to prevent me from doing it. There’s also a little guilt for not using it when others have had that right taken away and would do anything to get it back.
@lain@zleap 2 things. 1. If you would vote left but stay home, make someone else who was going to vote for the right also stay home. Same as if you both voted. 2. It’s probably not sensible for a single voter. But the problem is it’s not just a single voter with that belief. It’s many individuals and the group makes it sensible if they share support. Like when employees at a company unionized. Individual workers had almost no power for influence. But now they can join others and create power
@twitterreject@zleap i agree with you 100%, but you are not arguing that is is rational for a person to vote, you are arguing if it is rational for a person to argue about if it is rational to vote. The first one isn't the second one is.
@twitterreject@zleap voting-in-aggregate does matter in a democracy. but your vote doesn't. if you're an agitator and get 5% of people to vote for your cause, then that's great, i hope you can have that much influence. But if you yourself vote or not doesn't make a difference. (so i prefer not to do it, for practical and ethical reasons)