Because some very bad people who do real damage in the real world make a massive priority out of making it difficult to vote, because it’s still a pretty powerful tool that can be used against them.
Voting is a better use of part of your morning (or whatever) than almost anything else you could be doing on that one day, positive-change-wise. And abstaining from voting in an election with about as crystal-clear difference between the candidates as you could ask for, and thinking somehow that’s a positive thing if you care about change in the world, is one of the weirdest fuckin things I’ve ever heard.
Like if I were in the US I most likely would be voting if I lived in a state where it matters. But I dont
Voting is a better use of part of your morning (or whatever) than almost anything else you could be doing on that one day, positive-change-wise.
I would like to add, that if voting stops someone from doing the things they need to do to survive like working or childcare, then they should prioritize those things. Providing those who cant vote without losing something with the ressources they need to vote is something I so rarely see in these discussions. Instead people assuming voting is an easy task for everyone :(
Even in the most draconian states, there are options for early and/or mail voting. If you wait till the day of and complain about the lines, that’s on you for not taking advantage of the alternatives.
If you felt like being a bit more charitable then you might assume a stance such as mine doesn’t derive from losing 10 minutes—kind of a weird assumption given the content of the image?
What about the fact that this particular state project can draw a continuous line to one of the most brutal forms of slavery in recorded history which still largely determines the distribution of wealth and power (through inheritance and lobbyist groups), it may have singlehandedly destroyed the environment for all of humanity in less than 300 years, it wiped out an entire continent of cultures and continues to fund genocides and other conquests (with your money/labour) today. At what point would you put your foot down? I must have a lower threshold than that.
Please stop with your conspiracy theories. Voting or not voting is a fiercly debates topic in anarchist circles and not even close to being settled. There is no need for outside interference to start argumemts about voting, anarchists are perfectly capable of this by themselves. Literally just check every anarchist forum, plattform or online community and you will find arguments around everytime there is a mayor election happening.
I mean maybe it’s a tactical error for me to bring my “conspiracy theory” into it, sure.
Voting or not voting is a fiercly debates topic in anarchist circles and not even close to being settled.
I just did a little reading on it, since I don’t really know. I feel like I must be missing something. Doing what you can to build a great society aside from voting seems great. Just claiming you’re doing your part because you’re voting and nothing else is clearly wrong. But… can you break down for me the side of the debate that says abstaining from voting (in cases you see a difference between the candidates) is a good thing? Or a reference, if you don’t want to take the time to lay it out?
I have an interesting argument to not vote if the election results are “clear” - you don’t give any information this way. If the side you are closer to wins without your vote, it’s more likely that your bigger enemy will spend resources to try to beat them, and then only if you vote you can make them lose resources on electoralism without any gain for them, because they thought that they had a chance when they didn’t. You want your opponents to play games that they cannot win - even capitalists do that with suggesting workers that they too can become capitalists if they work hard enough - then workers start playing the game they are structurally meant to lose, from this the capitalist class keeps it’s advantage.
If you can’t ass up 10 minutes every two years to at least indicate the direction you’d like things to take then that’s on you.
Please check again, its not 10 minutes for everyone.
Because some very bad people who do real damage in the real world make a massive priority out of making it difficult to vote, because it’s still a pretty powerful tool that can be used against them.
Voting is a better use of part of your morning (or whatever) than almost anything else you could be doing on that one day, positive-change-wise. And abstaining from voting in an election with about as crystal-clear difference between the candidates as you could ask for, and thinking somehow that’s a positive thing if you care about change in the world, is one of the weirdest fuckin things I’ve ever heard.
Like if I were in the US I most likely would be voting if I lived in a state where it matters. But I dont
I would like to add, that if voting stops someone from doing the things they need to do to survive like working or childcare, then they should prioritize those things. Providing those who cant vote without losing something with the ressources they need to vote is something I so rarely see in these discussions. Instead people assuming voting is an easy task for everyone :(
Even in the most draconian states, there are options for early and/or mail voting. If you wait till the day of and complain about the lines, that’s on you for not taking advantage of the alternatives.
Check out this insightful wikipedia article about postal voting. You will not believe which countries dont allow it!
If you felt like being a bit more charitable then you might assume a stance such as mine doesn’t derive from losing 10 minutes—kind of a weird assumption given the content of the image?
What about the fact that this particular state project can draw a continuous line to one of the most brutal forms of slavery in recorded history which still largely determines the distribution of wealth and power (through inheritance and lobbyist groups), it may have singlehandedly destroyed the environment for all of humanity in less than 300 years, it wiped out an entire continent of cultures and continues to fund genocides and other conquests (with your money/labour) today. At what point would you put your foot down? I must have a lower threshold than that.
Sssssshhh
Bad-faith actors are tryin to say all the cool left-leaning kids aren’t voting this year
All of a sudden for no particular reason
You’re messin up the narrative with your simple good sense
Please stop with your conspiracy theories. Voting or not voting is a fiercly debates topic in anarchist circles and not even close to being settled. There is no need for outside interference to start argumemts about voting, anarchists are perfectly capable of this by themselves. Literally just check every anarchist forum, plattform or online community and you will find arguments around everytime there is a mayor election happening.
I mean maybe it’s a tactical error for me to bring my “conspiracy theory” into it, sure.
I just did a little reading on it, since I don’t really know. I feel like I must be missing something. Doing what you can to build a great society aside from voting seems great. Just claiming you’re doing your part because you’re voting and nothing else is clearly wrong. But… can you break down for me the side of the debate that says abstaining from voting (in cases you see a difference between the candidates) is a good thing? Or a reference, if you don’t want to take the time to lay it out?
Anarchism isn’t a cohesive project (though most agree on some basic tenets) so it’s actually cool google gave that rather accurate response.
One reason I hear quite a bit is that most democratic political systems (theoretically at least) are designed so that voting gives a mandate to rulers. A sort of signal of consent and support of its actions. Here’s a paper on it if you’re bored and interested:
https://moscow.sci-hub.se/2959/c850720e581c4054f784bfdf2fdfadd6/bendix1976.pdf?download=true
I have an interesting argument to not vote if the election results are “clear” - you don’t give any information this way. If the side you are closer to wins without your vote, it’s more likely that your bigger enemy will spend resources to try to beat them, and then only if you vote you can make them lose resources on electoralism without any gain for them, because they thought that they had a chance when they didn’t. You want your opponents to play games that they cannot win - even capitalists do that with suggesting workers that they too can become capitalists if they work hard enough - then workers start playing the game they are structurally meant to lose, from this the capitalist class keeps it’s advantage.