• db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Continue with that analogy. What would happen if that woman had no other option. Should she choose the nice guy, the chad or object to the choice being fostered upon her and choose nobody? And if she’s paired anyway with that person, should she then act as if it was her choice, or take actions to disengage from that person and destroy the system that caused these turn of events?

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      You can tactically vote for Biden to avoid Trump and still take actions to dismantle the system.

      • Kashif Shah@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Or you could maybe take actions to fix the system. Because whatever you lot come up with after dismantling is going be worse for everybody else.

        • Pennomi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          You can still do both. The only viable path to election reform comes from downballot state elections anyway.

          • Kashif Shah@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            You can still do both

            Not sure that I follow what you mean. You can’t fix a system that is being dismantled, so I’m guessing that you mean something else.

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        So the woman in our scenario should decide to choose the “Nice Guy” tactically?

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            I don’t think it does. A choice fostered upon me at the threat of violence is not a choice at all. I refuse to participate and therefore legitimize such a farce.

            • Pennomi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              You’re free to do nothing, but smart people choose to minimize harm when there are only bad choices in front of them.

              • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Who said I’m “doing nothing”? Voting isn’t doing anything. Only actions outside the ballot matter.

            • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              Non-participation is not the same as doing nothing. If she chooses to date neither, neither is in her life. If you do nothing, you still get trump or Biden. The analogy doesn’t hold.

    • null@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      And if she’s paired anyway with that person

      This line right here is where it should be obvious how far this “analogy” has to be twisted to even start to become analogous.

    • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      object to the choice being fostered upon her and choose nobody?

      do you genuinely think not voting will make neither candidate win