Nobody likes voting for the “lesser of two evils.” Casting a vote in favor of someone who is diametrically opposed to your viewpoint(s) absolutely sucks. The shitty reality is that we aren’t going to change the electoral process in the next two months.

If you don’t see either major candidate as a champion that you can support, it seems more beneficial to see it as selecting your enemy for the next four years. I would rather fight against someone that I have a chance of changing. At minimum I would rather protest against someone that I think has a lower chance of authorizing lethal force against a march that I attend.

Voting for a 3rd presidential candidate (or not voting at all), is letting someone else make that decision for you.

That said, we have got to get out of this constant cycle of only having two options. There’s too much money at a national level to start there. We’ve got to start local and get third party candidates into offices at a city level, then state, then national. It’s going to take a long time and it should have happened so very long ago. We can’t change the past, we can only change the future. The only time to start changing the future is in the present.

  • jaaake@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    24 hours ago

    This argument doesn’t really work in your favor, Leftist organizing was much stronger under Trump, because liberals had a common enemy with Leftists.

    So your stance is that in order to see real change, we must increase the amount of suffering and only then will people be motivated enough to do something about it? Sounds pretty risky to me.

    • TheAlbatross
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      24 hours ago

      It feels more like they’re explaining why your argument doesn’t work in your favor because it’s accelerationism, not that they’re advocating for accelerationism.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      23 hours ago

      No, your argument that we should vote for whoever would be the best to protest under is acceletationism. By your logic, Leftists should vote for Trump. That’s your line of logic.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      Police killings have gone up every single year under Biden, yet the streets are empty.

      We don’t need to increase suffering, we need liberals to stop pretending everything is fine.

      • jaaake@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Police killings have gone up every single year under Biden, yet the streets are empty.

        That’s a great stat that should be shared more widely.

        We don’t need to increase suffering, we need liberals to stop pretending everything is fine.

        Agreed!

        If you think those numbers won’t continue to rise under a Trump regime, you and I have irreconcilable differences of opinion

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          23 hours ago

          These stats show that the amount of suffering will continue to increase regardless of who the president is, so accelerationism is pointless. Trump oversaw the largest protest movement in US history and that category of suffering has only increased since he left office, but the protests are small and easily controlled. That tells me that increasing suffering isn’t actually relevant.

          The real problem is that liberals are staying home. They tune out and go back to brunch when a Democrat is in office.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      23 hours ago

      No, your argument that we should vote for whoever would be the best to protest under is acceletationism. By your logic, Leftists should vote for Trump. That’s your line of logic.