I voted for Biden in 2020. This was despite the fact that he is one of the main architects of modern American slavery through his crime bill which made the US the nation with the highest proportion of its own citizens imprisoned by far, who are quite literally slaves according to our constitution. This was despite him participating in the lies which caused us to murder hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis in our pursuit of blowing up Halliburton’s stock value and taking control of large parts of the oil trade. This was despite his support of the neoliberal consensus which has lead to the deterioration of the economic, social, and physical health of the average American while the wealthiest’s share of the economy continues to grow meaninglessly. In fact, it was relatively easy for me to vote for Biden because the person he was running against was Trump who demonstrated worse tendencies on all of the above (while actually softening some prison laws, still fostered the increased social acceptability of acting according to blatant racism so I can’t even give him credit here) and more. According to my utilitarian principles, the evil choice I made was morally superior to the evil choice I did not make. Recent events have me re-considering this motivation.
To be clear, my opinion of Trump has not changed. Under Trump, I am sure I will be more likely to lose my loved ones or even my own life, although I am personally less at risk than his main targets. I am also sure that his influence would at least maintain if not increase the atrocities committed by the Likud-lead Isreali government with whom he has a strong relationship. Christian Nationalism is extraordinarily dangerous and if some of their desires are pushed through there’s really no telling the extent of future horrors we may have to deal with. If Project 2025 has a certain degree of success we may consider any pretense of democracy to be nullified. If I were only considering the immediate consequences of my decision, I would still support Genocide Joe.
I phrased that last sentence like that intentionally and it is the inspiration for this essay. The lesser of two evils in this case is now facilitating a genocide and I think that’s significant. In 2020 I didn’t think I had a red line which would cause me to allow a greater evil, and within the last few months I’m coming to find that I do have a red line I have to consider in and of itself and that line is genocide.
This is what I find particularly frustrating when I try to engage this topic in good faith, even among Biden supporters who are lucid about recognizing what is clearly happening before their eyes with their implicit support. Yes, they tell me, there is a lot they don’t like about Biden but he is the better choice. There is some equivalence implied here. Biden is guilty of a lot of things like union busting, failure to support a public option despite promises, the continuation of many unfair border policies, and oh yeah genocide too. I really want to emphasize that we are talking about the categorization and systematic elimination of a group of people from their homes which could not be happening as it is now happening without the economic and political support of the Biden administration. This is now among the issues we are telling Democrats we are ok with or not ok with via the use of the only political currency left to us being our votes.
“Vote Blue No Matter Who” is a phrase that made me sick the first time I heard it and I have only grown to detest it more, especially since I acted according to it it through my actions in 2020. Recently I realized that this is less of a call to action and more of a threat. More explicitly, this phrase can be understood as “Vote for our candidate or the Republicans will fuck you up.” We better pay up or they can’t be responsible for what happens to us. Like other organizations who make threats like this, by paying up we are supporting them in what they do even if it’s under duress. As long as their heavy, the Republican party, is out there fucking people up the Democrats have license do anything as long as it’s not as bad. The DNC made a hard right-wing shift with Clinton and have been moving right since then, just not as far as the Republicans have. This is where damage control has gotten us. Democrats have pushed through so many boundaries and now we’re at genocide. Now the promise is, “You better support our genocide, or the Republicans will make it worse and fuck you up too.”
What is going to happen if we tell the Democrats that even though they are facilitating a genocide, we’re still going to pay up? What is the message the DNC will read from that? What precedent is going to be set? Are we going to be safer now that genocide will be seen as something we can compromise on? Do we really believe that Trump is the worst threat they can make, or that the lesser of two evils couldn’t eventually be worse than Trump? Do we really think by making this compromise here, on top of all the compromises we’ve made over the last few decades, that after this time everything will suddenly change and we can start talking about making average peoples’ lives better for once?
I can’t responsibly ask these questions without recognizing that the threat is very real. I am not an accelerationist and I do not desire the further deterioration of our society in hopes of a positive outcome through violent revolution. I do not want to have to risk imprisonment and death to resist government persecution. I recognize that a breakdown of democracy and subsequent shift to political violence would only advantage those most equipped for and skilled in the use of violence, whose society of nails would be governed by hammers.
It seems to me that failing to support the Democrats this cycle puts us at greater immediate risk of the above, and that is shocking enough to bring most reasonable people under control. The thing is though, I think that by leaving genocide on the table for anyone across the Overton window of elected officials to consider as a socially acceptable tool is a far greater risk in the long term.
I think that by making genocide just another issue of managing how much we can tolerate among the two sides, making it something that is tolerable under some circumstances, or especially encouraging the thinking that the charge of genocide is conditional on the political expediency of it victims, we are ultimately normalizing the general idea that genocide is an acceptable tool for elected officials across our “political spectrum” of right wing and big tent(right wing, centrist, some left wing) to support or even employ in the worst case as long as they call it something else regardless of international law. If this is ok, what is the next boundary the Democrats will push? I want to stop digging the hole we’re in now, suffer the consequences, and deal with Democrats who at least understand they will not get elected if they facilitate genocide. Honestly I’d like one day to not have to make the least evil choice and have the opportunity to support something after the DNC primary, and it doesn’t seem like damage control is leading us in that direction at all but away from it.
In practical immediate terms, Trump is hated outside of his base and has demonstrated that his endorsement is poison to politicians who are not himself more often than not. He is dangerous, but inspires so much more opposition to himself and his ideas than any other candidate I can think of. I even think that Trump’s genocide is going to be received very differently than Biden’s genocide since Trump will be far less tactful and far more honest about his motivations. The worst case scenario is possible under Trump and I don’t think it’s ok to dismiss that, but it is by no means a guarantee that Trump is the one to lead average Americans into fascism. It is a fucking frightening risk allowing a greater evil through inaction, but I think it’s the actual least bad option this time.
I’m open to being challenged on or discuss anything I’ve said here in good faith. I’m also open to rage-induced teardowns of the ideas I’ve proposed here as long as those teardowns are against my ideas and not against me as a person or others who are sympathetic to these ideas. I understand that this is an extremely charged topic and would like to encourage honest conversation as long as it doesn’t bleed into abuse which won’t help anyone.
Edit: Whew, that was some important discussion. I hope it was clear that my intention was to clarify my thinking and explore different perspectives on my argument rather than me judging others for coming to different conclusions or trying to convince everyone I am sure I am absolutely correct. Importantly, I realized this entire argument is secondary. What is important now is direct action. Depending on the degree of success we have with disrupting this sick order, this whole conversation could become moot and that is my strongest desire. See y’all on the street.
in my mind voting in our current system is just pretty straightforward utilitarian calculus (and can’t be anything else): you should vote for the option which will do the least harm and has the highest probability of winning. even if you, say, accept that Biden and Trump are equal on I/P, that just means you should look to other issues on which they are distinct–and they are distinct on basically every other issue in a way that clearly suggests Biden to be the best choice you can make here.
take just the Autocracy Tracker, which makes it unambiguous that Trump, if he wins, is planning a sweeping authoritarian wave of deportations, purges, restrictions of civil rights, and repression of minority groups and ideological groups he disagrees with. much of this is, in a sense, already happening here and already a form of genocide against some groups (trans people most prominently–it is now de facto illegal to be trans and legal to bring harm to trans people in large portions of the US). a Trump win will probably ensure there is no safe place for such groups in this country anymore.
on a moral level: i am just not sympathetic to the idea that voting for Biden constitutes blood on your hands in a meaningful way. i think if you accept this line of argumentation, you would ultimately have to bite the bullet that this could also be said of paying taxes[1]–and i certainly don’t begrudge people for paying their taxes even as this lines the pocket of the war machine, so then why should judge them for voting? in general: by virtue of existing within a state, you will always be complicit to some degree in the crimes of that state, regardless of what you do to extricate yourself from supporting them. so i just don’t think that abstention from voting or voting for a more morally defensible alternative actually cleans your hands of the blood being perceived here.
separately, and more pragmatically: there is no compelling third party with anywhere near a possibility of winning or even scoring a “symbolic victory.” a vote for a leftist third party right now is, in a real sense, a vote wasted–because these parties are incompetent, fractured, and full of people who are not serious candidates. even with the Green Party (by far the most electorally advanced of them) nobody has ever trembled at their influence and in practice they mostly seem to exist to waste a lot of the money given to them on quixotic presidential candidates. imo: any actual movement challenging the power–your DSAs, for example–is going to be built from the ground up and not imposed through the presidency, and is only going to use electoralism as one of its several political arms.
arguably, it’s even more true of paying taxes than of voting: votes may make no difference in whether something happens or not, but taxes actively make them possible ↩︎
: i am just not sympathetic to the idea that voting for Biden constitutes blood on your hands in a meaningful way. i think if you accept this line of argumentation, you would ultimately have to bite the bullet that this could also be said of paying taxes[1]–and i certainly don’t begrudge people for paying their taxes even as this lines the pocket of the war machine, so then why should judge them for voting?
This is such an important perspective that often seems ignored in these discussions. There is such a wide nuance to being an American and our participation, be it taxes or voting. It’s always seemed clear to me that at bare minimum voting for the lesser evil is the first step down the path of doing the right thing as a citizen. However I also would say that I do somewhat feel this to Trump voters, but I would say that’s more about the intent. I would hazard the assumption that if you’re voting for Trump again it’s likely because you have been pushed to have hate in your heart, not because his foreign policy is just so stellar. Whereas if you’re voting for Biden the intent is likely to not have the other guy.
OP’s post is a very good conversation of exactly this. “I won’t support a genocide, so I won’t vote!” That’s awesome, but by not participating you are inherently accepting to the default winner - your bare minimum participation of voting could have had an affect which you abstained from. In a hypothetical landslide of 1 vote for Trump, suddenly voting has a lot of power. By the way, some of our votes in the last 8 years have been down to barely triple digit breaks - legitimately 1 small town voting could have swayed the results in that towns favor. Voting matters quite a bit.
Given our current circumstances, in regards to deciding a vote for the lesser evil, I personally see a former president who placed as many restrictions as possible on specific citizens while relieving as many restrictions as possible on (mostly specific) corporations, and who had been all too happy to engage with the wrong sorts of International Relations, belligerently ignoring allies and goading more dangerous countries. I also see a current President who is historically known for not making the best decisions for the people, while also having a lot of policy that specifically is (or at least tries to… or at bare minimum says he’ll try to even if he won’t which should go without saying for sooo many Presidents).
Which by the way, yes, I would rather have a President who says he is for ____ rights but maybe doesn’t always have policies that fully align with that. As opposed to a president who says he is actively against those same rights, and actively promotes harm to certain demographics… Damn right. Send yourself back in time 10-15 years, try to remember the general public perception from 2008 to 2014. We were calmer citizens because we had a rational leader who wasn’t spewing hate speech at every turn. Of course other factors had an effect, media exacerbation and whatever else, but that wouldn’t have been the case had we had literally any other President.
And that’s the whole thing of it - if you don’t vote, the voter has no power (giving it to the rest of the voters). If you do vote, the voter has very little power. At. Bare. Minimum. If you are a voter who canvases in your area, you have made a much larger difference - you have gone above and beyond the bare minimum. And who knows, maybe you just happened to live in the town that changed your swing states results. The thing is, the bare minimum should be much more than just voting. Just voting is how we got here in the first place. Just voting isn’t ever going to change anything, because just voting alone doesn’t rally people together under a united ideal.
All this to say - I personally do not think that it is wrong to take what power you have to vote for “fascism in 50 years” as some have recently started to say about Democrats. It’s not wrong to vote this way when the alternative is fascism in 4 years. Futhermore, I think it’s also admitting that doing the absolute bare minimum just isn’t entirely effective.
As U.S. citizens, voting is what we have to do at the bare minimum. We should all be out actively campaigning in our local elections specifically to encourage, inform, and expand our collective understanding of politics. This works two-fold, because as we become more engaged @Kwakigra@beehaw.org we become much more observant. As you say, if Dems are on a path to evil, isn’t the solution for all of us to get as possibly involved as we can? At a certain point, we would be the Dems playing the game.
I say this as someone who has written to my California representatives about many things and having gotten response letters basically calling me an idiot for me expressing my wishes for him to reconsider his position, and why the evil things he’s supporting are actually a good thing. It’s obviously not easy, we’re fighting against 2 generations of propaganda and a media mogul. Some say that we are too far gone, though I don’t believe in that sort of defeatism.
We have many steps that we need to take in order to be set on the right path again. It should start with revitalizing the nations public education system, with a stronger focus on a healthy life-work balance. The fact that basic things about the U.S. system aren’t taught anymore has been a huge setback. I’m young, I didn’t have any sort of homeroom or home ec, it took until my senior year in High School to even learn about how we do our taxes (and it did nothing). These classes were supplemented with “extra critical thinking”, which has clearly failed, something that can be seen by reading just about any comment about a piece of media online. Home Economics, Time Management, and Critical Thinking all meld to make life at home manageable and enjoyable. From working with schools it’s been clear to see what I went through growing up has gotten even worse, especially with Covid putting all of the students on screens and a significant portion of them hardly even learning during that time at all.
Catch up our nations students and we’ll be well on our way back to civility. Fighting against the anti-education crowd and having homeschooling be far, far, far more rigorous than it currently is - state dependent I’m certain but the 3 I’ve lived in, CA, OR, and WI, holy shit they are awful. Homeschoolings seems to have almost become co-opted by the anti- crowds, I’ve regrettably only had 1 good encounter over the last 10 years and it was because the school remained open during Covid, to which the parents said screw that we’re homeschooling. As opposed to homeschooling because they’d have to get a vaccine otherwise, or because the schools “agenda”…
Anyway, I’ve said far too much and gotten pretty off topic. It’s been a while since I’ve gotten to say anything about this and it’s clearly been pent up, otherwise I’d have wrapped this up many paragraphs ago.
I am also primarily a utilitarian thinker. What has me considering the deontological position on this specifically is that, for utilitarian purposes, I have voted to allow our entire federal government to continue to drift right. When choosing the lesser of the two evils every time I did, I think I failed to consider that my permissiveness would embolden the lesser of the two evils to become increasingly evil as they were aware I wasn’t voting for them but against their opponent. I gave them license though my voting behavior to move to the right as much as they wanted and be financially rewarded for doing so because they knew they would always have my vote as long as they weren’t as bad as their opponents. This genocide is a red flag to me that since I have been voting to avoid immediate consequences, the ultimate consequence is that some of those consequences I was afraid of are now guaranteed from both options to varying degrees. The more I have rewarded the Democrats with my vote which they need to be elected, the only thing they need from me, they have no incentive whatsoever to do anything but what benefits themselves just as long as what they do isn’t as bad as what the Republicans would do. Average people aren’t funding their campaigns, we are only handing our votes over to them because their opponents are worse, despite both of them becoming worse all the time.
When I talk about whether to grant or withhold my vote to my only actual option, it’s a matter of currency and power rather than morality. I have found that if I always grant my vote regardless of the behavior of who receives my vote, they know they have license to do the things they were doing when I voted for them and no reason whatsoever to change course according to what I would like to see and not see, such as a genocide.
You are absolutely right that there isn’t an option for president outside blue and red. Our system isn’t built for it. Blue knows I’m not suicidal and can’t vote for Red, so the question becomes whether or not I will tolerate them becoming worse every cycle as long as during each cycle their candidate isn’t as bad as their opponent who is also getting worse every cycle. The option is whether to support Blue regardless of what we do and watch the system deteriorate, or demonstrate to blue that there are limits to how far right they can move regardless of who they’re up against with the hope that at least one side will stop getting worse because there are still consequences.
The reason I want to stop this cycle is survival. I think we are guaranteed to drift into explicit oligarchy as long as both sides are allowed to continue moving rightward. Every election since 2010 has been worse than the one before it, and I don’t think there’s a reason that would change after this cycle. The Republicans are going to try to capture the appeal of Trump even though they haven’t yet, and the right wing runs on delusion so they aren’t accountable to anything. All they have to worry about is telling lies that people strongly want to believe. The Democrats have to contend with reality and in my view are party far more likely to react to something that happened here in real life so they have better chances at being elected in the future.
I will easily concede that this is awful timing. Trump is a massive threat as you described. If I thought he would be highly successful in everything you mentioned, I would not consider doing what I’ve been advocating for. Even though I know him to be incompetent and without much support outside his base for anything he wants to do, any amount of success he has will be a problem. The primary reason I see fit to act as I described is because I predict the 2028 election will be between someone who is to the right of Biden vs someone who is to the right of Trump, and every future election it will be more and more difficult to change course from where we’re headed. All future elections could be about how appealing Republican lies are vs how many people don’t want them elected and are willing to vote for anything else.
What has me considering the deontological position on this specifically is that, for utilitarian purposes, I have voted to allow our entire federal government to continue to drift right. When choosing the lesser of the two evils every time I did, I think I failed to consider that my permissiveness would embolden the lesser of the two evils to become increasingly evil as they were aware I wasn’t voting for them but against their opponent.
i guess my problem is, if you acknowledge this possibility: does it not logically follow that, likewise, allowing someone running as an open fascist to win might have the same or worse impact as you’re trying to avoid? because i would personally consider the argument “if Trump wins, fascism will be given a greenlight” more likely than the argument “if Biden wins, genocide will be given a greenlight” for a variety of reasons, and i would consider it more harmful if it occurred too. that’s for a few reasons: the overall shift in the party has been to the left and i think that’s far more likely to continue than a shift to the right; there’s a flourishing left-critical tendency within the Democratic Party; the overall American left the strongest it’s been in a long time, etc.
but i think most immediately it’s because i would contest the logical validity of the second argument at all. the contemporary US is a post settler-colonial society and most of its land area was acquired through genocidal processes given sanctity by the legal system. to me Biden is neither establishing a new norm nor deviating from an old one—he’s just a part of a long-normalized string of presidents like this.[1] in my mind trying to break the cycle by punishing him might be cathartic but will be politically fruitless and unlikely to produce the introspection you’re seeking. by contrast: i would argue we have not really had a fascist president—authoritarian, racist, white supremacist, truly evil? probably yes, but not fascist[2]—and so Trump winning would be a catastrophic normalization of that political tendency which we’ve to this point avoided. it would have extreme ramifications both domestically and globally, especially for the left.
and i will reiterate that i believe it entirely likely that you’re going to get a larger, more sweeping genocide from Trump and his followers than is happening in Palestine if he is given the power to do that. (it’s also obvious he’s going to continue that one based on his positioning since October 7.) we’re already seeing efforts in places like Arizona to make it de facto legal to murder undesirables like undocumented immigrants–the dehumanization needed for widespread killing to begin is clearly high in some parts of the Republican Party. in all of this space, i just don’t see very many compelling arguments for why the utilitarian perspective of harm reduction should be discarded here.
indeed i think you could charge nearly every president since the US’s inception as being complicit in or directly responsible for at least one genocide. ↩︎
i also have a hard time fitting most contemporary presidents into these categories in terms of governance even though i think these descriptors are accurate for most of them. i think Reagan is probably the most explicit offender in this regard, but even so i think it’s obvious there is a lot of distance in outcome between how he governed and how Trump has/wants to. ↩︎
I think part of your premise here is flawed; the median Democratic lawmaker has drifted left in the past few decades quite significantly, as blue dog democrats and moderates have been slowly replaced. The Biden administration is also, in terms of supported and enacted policies, slightly to the left of the Obama administration and considerably to the left of Clinton.
I struggle to think of any issue where the Democratic Party of today is further to the right than they were 20 or 30 years ago.
That shift has happened for a large number of reasons, but one of them has been support from progressive voters replacing, in many areas, the electoral need to pander to center-right voters.
The overall country’s drift to the right has been largely driven by GOP electoral victories and the ramifications of those (like the three Supreme Court justices Trump appointed).
in general: by virtue of existing within a state, you will always be complicit to some degree in the crimes of that state, regardless of what you do to extricate yourself from supporting them.
I half agree with you. Yes, even if I do not vote for Biden I am certainly complicit in part for his actions, at least so long as I am not in open rebellion against the government. I am, by simple merit of enjoying the privileges afforded me as an American, complicit in it. It’s a passive complicity.
But when you move into taking actions that actively support the evil, you are no longer passively complicit, you are actively so, and I think there is a real material difference, rhetorically, morally, and practically (though even passive complicity is wrong).
If we know, as we do, that Biden will continue to support Israel’s genocide, and still vote for him, how can we un-hypocritically fault anyone else who supports a genocidal leader so long as they can claim some other worse person waiting in the wings?
If we place our own innocent lives above the lives of equally-innocent people in other countries (since none here would be advocating voting for Biden if it was some sub-group of Americans he supported the genocide of, as Trump does), how can we think ourselves better than Republicans? “The only moral genocide is my genocide”, as it were. The genocide of Americans is non-negotiable, rightfully, but apparently the genocide of Palestinians must be ‘contextualized’ properly (and in this case, lose out to our own internal political interests).
On a practical level, we are absolutely hemorrhaging any remaining shreds of international credibility, for a leader who was supposed to be the “return of US world leadership”. We are finding ourselves more and more isolated by the day, which is exactly what Trump and the rest of the isolationist GOPers want as well. Whatever quiet political leverage we on the Left gained from Trump being a worldwide laughing stock (and if you know any Trumpers, you know that no matter how much they pretend otherwise, they do feel anger about that ridicule), has now been matched by Biden being a worldwide figure of shame and frustration. Our closest allies are rebuking us over our inability to even just step aside and allow the rest of the world to pressure Israel into a ceasefire. Biden may have actually succeeded in undermining US hegemony in a way that Trump could only have dreamed of.
I am not claiming to have an answer that fixes this. I don’t think there is any way to extricate ourselves cleanly from the very circumstances of our country’s origins and its continuing imperialism and settler-colonialism. We’re stuck with this collective guilt, until the day this government ceases to exist. If you choose to treat that guilt as the simple “cost of doing business” of living as an American, and vote for Biden, that’s fine. But for me, I cannot accept active complicity in Biden’s reelection without eschewing my own personal moral redlines. Everyone has to draw their own lines. Maybe some would torture one man to save the lives of many, and that’s certainly Utilitarian, but don’t condemn the persons who wouldn’t, lest we lose sight of the heinousness of the act itself.
To my mind, this rhetoric pushing Biden over abstention as the only moral action
risksis taking us down a pathway of moral relativism in which even genocide can be excused under the right circumstances, and that’s not a path I will walk.If we know, as we do, that Biden will continue to support Israel’s genocide, and still vote for him, how can we un-hypocritically fault anyone else who supports a genocidal leader so long as they can claim some other worse person waiting in the wings?
i think this is already addressed in my comment: even if you don’t vote for Biden, you are complicit by virtue of paying taxes. the Palestinian children we’re murdering probably don’t care very much if you do or don’t vote, given that your vote is largely meaningless in what we do–your taxes are another matter, and directly finance our shipments of aid and weapons to Israel. accordingly i consider taxes to be a far more active contribution than any vote can be in this space, and i think if everybody was truly principled on this matter they would also abstain from paying them. since they don’t, i think they’ve already made such a moral compromise that it would be very silly to impugn voting for Biden.
Yes, I acknowledged the guilt we all collectively share for living in America and not actively and violently dismantling it, but that also doesn’t mean we should actively go along with it when we have the very simple ability not to. If I attempt to destroy the government , I will be killed. If I don’t pay taxes, I will go to prison. If I don’t vote for a president who will perpetuate a genocide, I won’t.
It is, in many ways literally, the least I can do.
the Palestinian children we’re murdering probably don’t care very much if you do or don’t vote, given that your vote is largely meaningless in what we do
They are unaware of me as an individual, sure, but I guarantee you they wish we’d all stop voting for presidents who kill them and their families.
If I attempt to destroy the government , I will be killed. If I don’t pay taxes, I will go to prison. If I don’t vote for Biden, I won’t.
i guess i’m sort of obliged to ask: why are these undesirable outcomes if your moral system is just? i find this a weird objection to make unless you fall into one of the following three camps:
- you don’t believe your moral system is just enough to actually live by for some reason (in which case i’m unsure why you’d confidently assert moral positions);
- you don’t actually and fully believe what you’re saying (self explanatory), or;
- you would sooner prioritize your personal comfort over the inconvenient outcomes that actually living your moral system invites (which i would consider immoral, especially in this case)
If I believed that either my failure to pay taxes, or my individual revolutionary actions, could have any chance of ending the genocide in Palestine, I would absolutely agree with you.
If the probability of success of those actions was not 0%, there may be an argument that the impact outweighs the unlikelihood of success. But you and I both know otherwise.
My belief that opposing the genocide in Palestine is necessary, does not assert that I must simply take whatever random actions someone throws out there, especially when the only real and logical outcome is self-harm, without helping Palestinians.
If the probability of success of those actions was not 0%, there may be an argument that the impact outweighs the unlikelihood of success. But you and I both know otherwise.
i mean i just don’t find this argument particularly convincing. i think biting this bullet would improperly impugn the vast majority of protests and forms of protest—because most of them are unsuccessful and will never be successful. likewise, i think “chance of influencing an outcome for the better” is just one variable you should consider in a moral act, because trying to weigh whether you should do something or not on that basis just invites a whole host of other problems.
If your express and only goal in a marching in a protest is to directly bring about some immediate policy change based on empathy or sympathy from politicians, then yes, stop protesting right now, you’re wasting your time. But generally the goal of most protests is to make an implicit threat that if ignored, other actions will follow (whether it be voting a certain way, boycotting, or other direct actions). The more people who participate in making that threat, the more effective it is.
People who organize protests attempt to plan for actions and times and places that maximize their impact, because 5,000 people standing in a field at midnight is not as effective as 5,000 people standing on a bridge in rush hour. They would tell you that the field at midnight is likely to have 0% chance of achieving any impact, which is why you don’t see that happen, as where you do see bridge obstructions during rush hour.
i think “chance of influencing an outcome for the better” is just one variable you should consider in a moral act
Of course it is not the only metric, but it can and must be heavily considered. All risk calculation looks at impact and likelihood as the 2 key factors. If Impact is High, but Likelihood is None, there is no chance of that outcome, and the outcome can be safely ignored.
My friend had my favorite take I’ve heard on this: organizing to signal to the Democratic Party that Biden is in political danger because of his support of genocide (as Michigan did this week) is arguably more important than not voting for him in November, in terms of tangible impact on American policy. My personal goal is to put as much pressure on him as possible right now, and then I’ll decide if I’m voting for him later this year based on how he responds.
It was never a secret what an awful man Joe Biden is, for many of the reasons OP listed in their post. Many people in 2020 said something similar: “Elect him and then pressure him to the left.” It’s a useless sentiment.
Since 2020, despite partisans’ supposed pressure, we’ve not only seen another genocide, but homelessness has spiked, wages have not improved in a meaningful way, education and health care are still cost-prohibitive, prices for everyday goods are 2-3x what they were Pre-Biden, Roe has been repealed and SCOTUS has made it very clear they’re going to target queer people next, and they’ve added hundreds of billions more in debt to help Ukraine while neglecting Americans. He even withheld $600 of promised COVID aid. He’s been such an atrocity of a president that it’s likely to get Trump reelected.
And this is coming from someone who voted Biden in the hopes that a cultural win against rising fascist interests might turn back the clock, but I was wrong. Biden, either in his greed or fecklessness (depending on who you ask, I suppose) has created the conditions for a probable fascist takeover. Personally, I think it’s greed.
I’m not sure there’s a reasonable argument to be made that there isn’t a fascist candidate in the next presidential election. One candidate will stab you in the front. The other will stab you in the back.
Also, just a personal pet peeve, but people need to stop using the word ‘democracy’. We don’t have one, and it was designed that way.
If Biden changes course in a major way I won’t have to risk a Trump presidency just to prove I am serious about not rewarding genocide with my vote they need for elected positions. If they actually believe us rather than making us prove it and take every measure to end this genocide economically and in international court, it would at least quintuple my faith that our democracy isn’t doomed. My cynical side thinks that they are confident it’s all a bluff and will make no changes, but I would highly prefer the good path.
Given your edit I feel compelled to point out that two things are true simultaneously:
- Direct action is effective and necessary
but also
- Direct action is not mutually exclusive with voting in any way.
Voting takes a couple of hours per year (at most) and is a tremendously effective way of keeping fascists out of power and reducing overall harm while we concurrently pursue direct action and systemic change.
I believe it is our moral obligation each day to do what we (reasonably) can, within the circumstances and powers we’re given, to ease suffering in our community and our world. On most days that’s direct action. On election days it’s spending an hour voting for harm reduction. Participating in our shitty electoral system is not an endorsement of it any more than paying taxes is an endorsement of military funding or having a credit score is an endorsement of Equifax. It’s simply the reality of having to live within a system we did not create and have limited control over. Refusing to engage with the realities we live under doesn’t make them go away - it just means more people get hurt.
I’ve ruminated and ruminated and ruminated on all of this and I can’t find any compelling philosophical or moral argument for allowing the greater evil to take hold, unless there is an imminent, likely possibility of a more just outcome following soon behind. If there was a groundswell of support in the US for a left revolution then perhaps a fascist victory could be the spark to push us towards structural change. But as it stands a plurality of Americans want (or are fine with) fascism, and they’re armed to the teeth. The most likely outcome of fascists winning the election is that fascists take over and keep power, and that will cause unfathomable harm far beyond the disgusting shortfalls of our current administration.
It’s a trolley problem, essentially. The trolley is coming down the tracks and all we can do is pull the lever to have less people die. I find that a lot of modern discourse around this in left-leaning spaces essentially comes down to “well I don’t like either option” or “there shouldn’t be a trolley!” or things like that. You know what? I agree. I don’t like either option, and there shouldn’t be a trolley. I hope we can take more direct action so there are less trolleys and less people tied to the tracks in the future. But here we are, right now, and the trolley is heading down the tracks, and we cannot stop it. It doesn’t matter that there shouldn’t be a trolley. It’s here. Not pulling the lever doesn’t make it go away, it just means that more people get hurt.
So please, by all means, prioritize direct action. Get those trolleys off those tracks. But once we’re barrelling down the hill it is our moral obligation to spend an hour pulling the lever in whatever direction necessary to minimize harm.
the only political currency left to us being our votes
I agree with a lot of what you’re saying, and I understand your concern for what it means that our lesser of 2 evils now supports a genocide. That being said, thinking that voting is our only means of affecting change made this rightward shift inevitable in our 2-party system influenced primarily by wealth.
I know this may be hard to hear, but our democracy - in isolation - was doomed to fail from the start. The only positive changes to our government were made not as a result of voting, but of direct action, which always has been and remains to be our most valuable political currency.
If you focus on the vote as being the only way to make change, then voting is indeed pointless, and that realization can only lead to doomerism and despair. However, understanding how insignificant the vote is is the first step to understanding how much more significant your other choices can be. When you know that organizing mutual aid, protesting, unionizing, and otherwise engaging in direct action is the most effective way to change things, the hard choice of how to cast your vote becomes much easier.
Personally, I will be voting uncommitted in the primary, and for Biden in the general, so that the Dems get some kind of message while I also buy time before the decline. Yes, it bothers me to vote for a man who is complicit in genocide, but knowing how little my vote matters allows me to give it a very small amount of thought and dedicate the rest of my energy to more important matters.
I agree with pretty much everything you’ve said here, and I agree that more extreme protests have historically been highly influential regarding governmental policy. This is probably the more important part of trying to redirect Biden’s behavior. There have to be some consequences or there is no incentive to change course, and a major public uprising could possibly be more significant than an election loss when considering policy. I suppose to avoid having to do what I’ve been discussing, leaning harder into public disruption could cause some changes without having to risk Trump. It’s definitely Plan A.
There is room for a lot of good faith debate here, but FWIW I reckon It is a mistake for the left to prematurely roll over and telegraph an inevitable Biden vote (whether on this or any other issue) just because Trump would be worse. The time for that utilitarian calculus is much closer to November. Right now, if you want policy change — you have to raise hell.
As much as you love to hate ‘em, this is what the Tea Party and their ideological successors got right about wielding power within their own party. When the time comes, by all means circle the wagons and vote pragmatically, but during primary season you have to come across as a credible threat to the party power structure.
I’ll personally be willing to (attempt!) to shame my progressive friends into voting blue, say, around October. In the meantime, I am proud of folks for speaking their mind and standing up for human rights.
I largely agree - which is why voting uncommitted in Michigan (or other states where it’s available) is a clever and effective idea.
The fine line, though, is this: it’s logical and just to spend time between now and the fall applying pressure to the campaign and administration to change course via uncommitted votes, campaigns, protests, etc. It’s not logical and just, however, to spend time telling others they should not vote in November, which has become sadly common in every left-leaning space I spend time in.
The former could result in policy changes. The latter is pretty much just pushing to allow fascists into power.
It’s really a game of chicken. I’m not about to say I’ll give Biden my vote as long as there’s a genocide and this primary is the safest way to send that message. However, they know that we don’t really have a choice to avoid what could be a catastrophe so they could very well assume we’re bluffing as they usually do. This is why I can’t afford to indicate if I’m willing to vote for a genocide to prevent a worse genocide because they will take any evidence that we’re not serious to not take our demands seriously. Why would they change anything if they know we’ll vote for them regardless? Importantly, I’ve engaged this conversation in February during the primary. The most I’m willing to say is that I’m not arrogant enough to be absolutely certain about anything. Actually driving off the cliff with Biden’s campaign would be a disaster. I’m really hoping we can swerve before the chips are down and we find out how many people are serious.
Trump emboldened and supported Netanyahu and made It entirely clear that he would support Israel being a fascist strongman state.
You think he wouldn’t compound the genocide? He’d support Russia in Ukrainian genocide. He’d put American jets in Gaza. Hell he’d put boots on the ground if he thought it’d make him more money or solidify his control.
Stop falling for this bullshit.
Biden is reprehensible but there is nothing, nothing positive in Trump’s entire track record. The worst possible decision? He’s made it at every turn. Cartoonishly exaggerated in his love for despots and dictators: he thinks the fascists belong in power.
Vote Biden. Not because you like him but because the alternative really is that much worse. Always has been.
That’s being a utilitarian.
It’s like you didn’t even read the original post. Your first three paragraphs are redundant because the OP already mentioned that they agree with you, barring calling it bullshit.
Your utilitarianism the the whole problems they’re pointing out, if you read the actual post, you’ll notice that all it does is draw us further and further to the right, with no end in sight.
If left unchecked, maybe, sure.
Sounds like we all just need to get more involved and hold our politicians accountable. Rather than not voting, I would argue that we should vote to be in a safe place so that we can vote to be in a safer place. By not voting, we don’t have any say. By voting Democratic this time around, we can vote Leftist next time around.
Otherwise I feel like we’re just repeating 2016, which was repeating 2004, which was repeating 1980, which was repeating 1969… That is to say, The U.S. tends to be in a good spot after a Democratic President and it seems to quickly get drawn down to the gutters with Republican ones, and the way in which Americans interact with the world around us seems heavily related to our current President.
And the social aspect is almost more important, as now we’re seeing the direct results of shameless narcissists. That’s exactly why their comment is relevant - just look at how people had been interacting after they chose a side, Ukraine or Russia (and politically, who tended side with which) only barely 2 years later to have almost the exact same situation in Isreal. We can’t say for certain, but I feel very confident that had Trump won 2020, we’d be in the exact same situation except he would be actively inciting harm towards Palestinians in the U.S.
This is a different argument than the one I was making but I will address it.
The next 4 years would be far better under Biden than Trump. I don’t think it’s good to consider allowing Trump to win and I am terrified of what could happen if Trump were re-elected. The reason I am considering allowing this immediate consequence is that it could be a better option than continuing the unabated rightward shift of both parties. Every election in my lifetime prior to this one, on issues such as war there was an option for and an option against. Now that genocide is on the table, the option is between for and for but worse. How did this happen? We assume there are no consequences for permitting the Democrats to do whatever they want as long as they’re not as bad as the Republicans and here we are. Both parties continue to move right and voting for every candidate who is more right-wing than the candidate who came before them just because they aren’t as radical as their series of opponents who will always be more right-wing than them just means we are demonstrating that we will tolerate anything they do as long as it’s not as bad as their opponent who will always be worse. There is nothing to stop the parties from continuing to move right. What is the next horrible choice we will have to make? Do we really think this election is the end of the process of moving away from voters and toward corporate interests which went into high gear with Citizen’s United by both parties? When the investors are all universally profiting from genocide, how can we redirect Democrats from going with that and profiting majorly from it other than causing them to associate supporting such things with election loss?
First of all, that’s very well put. Secondly, voting is anonymous for a reason. What happens at the ballot box is between you and your conscience. Nobody has the right to tell you how to vote. Third of all, fuck, man, I’m so tired of living in this reality. Jesus Christ we really are at the point where we have to choose between endorsing genocide or something even worse. Wish I knew the way to fix this situation, but I’m dumb as shit. Just do the best you can.
Unfortunately, the DNC is wise to this and are counting on it. They understand that whatever we say or whatever criticism we give no matter how severe, many or even most of us will still vote for them anyway because of the duress. There is nothing they need to do to earn votes because that’s not the decision we’ve been making for the last few cycles. They know the choice is between voting for your own destruction, not voting and allowing the possibility of destruction, or voting blue no matter who. They can keep moving right as long as the Republicans are moving further right. I completely understand voting like this since I did it myself last time. This is only my thinking this time, and whatever I say my vote is expected so unfortunately I can’t expect any change unless possibly if they face consequences for not having the votes of those who share my thinking. Emphasis on being possible, because they definitely didn’t change anything after Hillary lost other than to get rid of superdelgates and resort to other underhanded tactics in the subsequent primary.
I’m just as uncertain as you are. I posted this here because I wanted more perspectives. No one knows how to fix this, but it’s at least encouraging that more people are recognizing that it needs to be fixed especially among younger generations.
I’ve been mulling over my previous comment in one of the threads here, and think I’ve found the best way to condense it into a single line (not including this one, obviously), which can also serve as my response to the original post:
You don’t put out a kitchen fire by letting the house burn down.
Are we a house, or a baby-crushing machine with a cushy bench affixed on top for the oligarchs and war profiteers to enjoy the view from?
I was thinking more along the lines of being the people living in the house 👍
I guess as horrific as it is, I don’t see how genocide uniquely changes the political calculus here. Trump’s administration will almost certainly apply less pressure to reign in Israeli killing as compared to Biden’s, will be less susceptible to pressure campaigns by the American left, and is of course much worse on a whole host of other issues, most importantly on the issue of democracy. If we lose our ability to voice our concerns in society or to vote out leaders who abuse their authority, this leaves us in a worse bargaining position no matter the issue, and this includes the current and future violence our government enacts in other parts of the world.
I think a lot of this comes down to the emotional repugnance of feeling that you are endorsing a candidate by voting for them. But is this really true? I think it is widely known at this point that most American voters are more motivated by defeating a worse ideology than by supporting a good one. I suppose there is a small harm in that Biden or whoever can claim a mandate from their margin of victory, but I think this benefit is small and fleeting and can easily be undone by other actions like protests or public criticism.
You are right to point out that this lesser evil voting strategy is not going to dramatically improve the US government. But neither will sitting out the electoral process. Do you think Biden or Trump will be less likely to support genocide if you sit out? I don’t think so, and if Trump wins again, even ignoring all of the harm he will do directly, he will shift the political landscape further to the right. Politicians always seek to emulate strategies that win, so boycotting Biden and allowing Trump to win will only incentivize democrats to move right. Trump losing twice in a row sends a strong message that his tactics and ideology are not effective or popular, and should not be copied.
So I think we must continue to use the electoral system to make our voices heard. Primaries, congressional, and local races may be even more important than Trump vs. Biden but yes I think voting for Biden is still the best option in that race. However, we also need to be clear eyed that whether we do or not, the system will not be radically improved through this process. We need to take actions outside of voting. Build our own movements, protest, take nonviolent direct action even. I think we saw under Trump that these actions did have a real effect in limiting his agenda, and I think they will be even more effective against Biden because they will come from within his coalition. But I also think it will require waking up a lot of jaded people on the left who think that Biden is the best we can possibly hope for. This will not be an easy task but may be the most essential obstacle to overcome in improving the situation in the US and abroad.
Although I can’t deny that I don’t feel good about voting for certain Democrats, if voting for a Democrat now were likely to move the country left instead of right I would do it and consider it to be the right decision. Your argument is interesting to me because you are advocating the opposite action to get the same result I desire, which is to stop the Overton window from continuing to drift rightward. I would like to focus on this aspect in particular.
I think politicians, especially if they are skilled enough to be elected into federal congress or the presidency, think in purely practical terms. I do think Biden would be less likely to economically support this genocide if he were out of office because he would then lack the power to support it or to do anything else as president. Of course this would mean the situation would be in Trump’s hands which I agree would clearly be worse. The reason I am considering allowing this worse outcome to transpire is not because I refuse to vote since I don’t feel represented or strongly disagree with both candidates(I don’t think I’ll see a general election candidate I’m happy to support in my lifetime), but because I am deliberately withholding a vote they would have received if they had not continued to facilitate a genocide which could be established as a line they may no longer approach or move past if they want to win. If the Democrats lose an election because of an issue their voters are especially vocal about, I think that they would be less likely to support that issue in the future. If we tell the Democrats that they must stop facilitating this genocide but vote for them regardless, having our votes is significantly more important to them than our disapproval which they could simply disregard since they already have our vote. If they lose an election because they moved too far right on an issue, they will probably stop moving right on that issue. In 2016 Hillary Clinton lost the electoral college despite winning the popular vote, and the message voters were sending at the time was “We do not want Hillary Clinton.” As a consequence, they didn’t run Hillary Clinton again because they want to win. If in 2024 Biden loses and the message voters send is “We do not want to support genocide,” it is my belief that they would be less likely to support genocide in the future because they would consider it a risk to their electoral success.
As for the public reaction to Trump’s election and presidency affecting the overton window, I have observed the opposite effect of Trump’s presence in American politics. Trumpism, though popular, is just to the right of the Overton window. He has a solid base of support and disapproval outside of that. Trumpists are not being featured as legitimate political thinkers on any platforms other than their own. The radical right wing elements inspired by Trump have not become an accepted part of American culture. I have never heard from anyone who feels neutral about neo-nazis or the proud boys. January 6th was not seen as a simple evolution of our politics. Though it is true Trump has emboldened many of the the worst of us, there is a visceral contempt of Trumpism everywhere he isn’t worshiped, and Trumpists are the minority. As I mentioned above, the only Trumpist who has a chance at winning an election is Trump himself. All this being said, Trumpists are still a legitimate threat of course. I am only arguing that Trump inspires more revulsion than support even though he has enough support to be a threat himself.
Unfortunately, I don’t think Trump is going to be the worst Republican we will see if the Democrats believe we will support anything including genocide as long as it’s less severe than what their Republican opponent promises. Right-wing lunatics have been a massive boon to democrats since Trump was elected as there are more people like all of us who would rather see Trump’s ideology defeated than elected regardless of who they’re up against. The track record of Trump-endorsed candidates demonstrates this. Since the democrats don’t need to run on their own merits when they are up against a lunatic, they are empowered to do anything and everything short of what their opponent is threatening. Since winning an election is massively influenced by campaign funding and the majority of campaign funding now comes from the corporate world due to the Citizen’s United decision, the Democrats can govern in favor of Wall Street against workers all they want just as long as they don’t go as far as a Republican would. This means it is to their advantage that the Republicans move even further right or prop up more lunatics. They can then follow along and enjoy the benefits of increased funding. This is the pattern I’ve been observing since 2010 and is specifically what I want to be some limit on. I think genocide is a clear enough issue that it might possibly have an effect, and those invested in the infrastructure passing through Israel will seek to have have their economic interests rewarded through methods other than genocide. I think this pattern will continue until it is stopped in some way, and I hope it is not stopped due to the end of democracy in general which will happen if our two dominant parties keep going right without ever looking back. I don’t think it can be stopped if the Democrats never find a red line which could cost them votes even against the lunatics they’re up against.
I read this article earlier in the week about how Biden’s policy on the Israel-Gaza war may hand the election to Trump, and the last sentence has really stuck with me.
The president’s aides have reportedly been “keeping him in a bubble” regarding voters’ unhappiness with his Israel-Gaza policy. If this Michigan result isn’t what bursts it, then they need to step in and do it themselves.
While phrased in the context of this specific policy, it’s this political bubble in Washington DC that needs to pop. I’m astonished at how close this election is. We all know what Trump’s about. We’ve seen this before. Joe Biden cannot seem to get out of the way by either stepping down or pretending to be the communist antifa leader the right will paint him as anyway to securing a victory for anyone NOT Trump. Instead he’s content to let us slide into a second Trump Presidency.
I have believed since 2015/2016 that literally anyone else against Hillary or anyone else against Trump would have won in a landslide. No one really liked the candidates. Trump appealed to voters because he promised to go to Washington and stick a thumb in the eye of the establishment. It wasn’t Russian interference. The populist message has always done so well regardless of political party because we all see how broken the system is and candidates like Obama, Sanders, and even Trump capitalize on that message to win hearts and minds. Whether or not they actually follow through is secondary (sadly). At this point no one buys that Joe Biden is a “man of the people” regardless of how many Amtrak trains he rides.
But then we’re left with even comments here arguing “Trump would be worse” with the implication being “Biden is bad, Trump would be worse”. And I get it. This well and truly sucks that it looks like we’re going to have two of the oldest Presidential candidates fighting it out yet again from the major parties. I’m fortunate enough to live somewhere that won’t ever go for Trump, so I can vote my conscience instead of having to pick the least bad option. Others can’t make that call though.
All that to say it’s all frankly exhausting and terrible. I think everyone has to decide for themselves how existential of a threat Trump is and vote accordingly. I’m open to the argument that Democrats at least have some amount of shame and can bow to pressure. The conflict in Israel-Gaza is going to be a real test of how they pivot and actually meet the voters where they are.
The populist message has always done so well regardless of political party because we all see how broken the system is and candidates like Obama, Sanders, and even Trump capitalize on that message to win hearts and minds.
I don’t think it’s correct to describe the populist message as overwhelmingly successful. Sanders didn’t win. Trump won once and lost once (and in fact lost the popular vote both times). We can trace back a bunch of other populists who failed, too.
The nuts and bolts of elections and campaigns tend to reward coalition builders. Populists with no establishment allies tend not to do well (note that Obama courted the popularity of the masses at the same time that he was locking up endorsements from the Democratic Party’s old guard, including Biden, Byrd, Kennedy, and Dodd).
Humans tend to sort themselves into coalitions, led by organizations. Popularity is a feedback loop, and the fickle public can and does change their collective mind over whether someone is beloved or not.
You basically echoed perfectly my feelings on this all. I think your observation, that many people (especially Centrist Dems) are myopically focusing on Trump as the only force driving us towards fascism, is spot on.
I do not want Trump to be elected over Biden, and I will not under any circumstances vote for Trump, but I have decided that I’m not going to take part in a system that forces me to endorse a candidate, via my vote, who will further a genocide.
Democracy is supposed to be about political representation and the ability of the citizenry to direct the government, and that’s not what we have here in the US. My politics are not represented by Biden or Trump, and I won’t be coerced into actively aiding and abetting a genocide.
Others may have a different line in the sand. This is mine.
Congratulations, by not voting for Biden none of your politics are being represented and you’re helping Trump get elected.
As a bonus, by helping Trump get elected you’ll be actively aiding and abetting whatever Trump decides to do, which I’m sure will be great for the people in Gaza.
But you’re not crossing your line in the sand so I’m sure you’ll sleep well at night knowing you stuck to your guns.
By voting for Biden, none of my politics are being represented anyways.
And please, explain to me how my not voting for Biden helps Trump get elected. Be specific.
I’m not them and I’m not going to give details, but I’d like to posit why I personally am against the idea of not voting. First though, this has nothing to do with you or how I feel about your stance here, I’m not trying to attack you or change your mind, I’m simply expressing my thoughts about how I participate as a U.S. citizen. To me, voting is pretty much the bare minimum - our roles as citizens of the United States pretty much designates us to do this one thing.
So you don’t vote. You say something about it and why, gives someone else an idea to do the same. Word gets out and your entire town decides to have solidarity with you. The rippling effect of you being an active non-voter is potentially harmful. At it’s core, that’s all it really is.
I could go on, but it would be redundant. You are still participating, something seen by others who then may decide to also do it that way, which completely strips your power as a citizen. I do believe it serves it up on a silver platter to something you don’t agree with ideologically. As you said, you don’t agree with Biden’s ideology, which I agree with. I’m glad he’s attempted student loan relief and puts pledges towards national hunger, further encouraged policies that give more $$ towards earnings up to $55k (under Obama, initially $47k, lowered to $35k under Trump), and surprisingly getting involved in the situation happening in Rwanda and not completely butchering it. He’s done some solid actions, even if there are just as many things (maybe more) than I could be disappointed by.
But you are still participating, regardless of whether you want to or not. That does leave you 2 alternatives, which is to abstain, or to vote with someone with an even greater ideological difference. As a U.S. citizen, there is no way for us to not participate.
I think it’s fairly circumstantial from there. You not voting for any ideology is making a choice that you are complacent with either one, when in reality you are abstaining specifically because you are against them. Whether you not voting actually affects something outside of your single vote is relative. As in - in that hypothetical where you saying you won’t vote gets someone else to do the same, it goes both ways where they could have voted D/R/ or 3rd party. We are a social creature and there is some inherent value to sharing. Again, whether this is the reality or not is strongly related to where you are and who/how you interact.
So for me personally, few of my values are supported by voting for Biden, however none of my values are supported by abstaining, none are supported by voting R, and, this is most important, none of my values are supported by me being silent. You aren’t being represented by abstaining either. That is to say - I am in the exact same position as you, yet I choose to vote for a lesser evil because as I do it I am also campaigning for proper humanitarian values, campaigning for a future that will actually serve me and our people. By involving myself in it I am having a conversation with other people participating in our situation. They inform me, I inform them, and we may or may not come to similar conclusions based off these interactions.
Abstaining never gives this conversation the light of day. It’s the equivalent to sticking your head in the sand, because the unfortunately sick reality is that the war machine will keep the meat grinder going regardless of whether you choose to participate, which is exactly the reason why we must participate. By abstaining not only are we acknowledging all of the shortcomings but we are explicitly saying, “I’m okay with this and I am choosing not to do anything about it.” I think this gets said so often specifically because you do have an alternative, which is participating politically. It should always be read as get involved locally, because obviously you or I have little actual impact on these candidates - that’s never been the point. The point is to engage with other people living under the same responsibility.
Finally, when posed with an impossible choice, abstaining is an attempt to remove oneself from responsibility. We have to face these challenges head on, in broad daylight, surrounded by our peers. Else we sweep it under the rug for the next generation to deal with.
I’m the generation that had climate change swept under the rug, that had the U.S. destabilization of the Middle East and Africa, and some thousand or so corporate secrets from gas and oil spills teflon and xenophobia. I’m at the point in my life where I would like to do my best to ensure the rug is cleaned out. Our wars are more public than ever, our knowledge of climate change is more prevalent than ever, and our awareness of corporate profits in name of human health is higher than ever. I would like to continue this transparency by actively electing a candidate that will acknowledge the shortcomings of our country so that it can become a better place.
No, Biden will not be the one to do this, but his Presidency is far more likely to pave the way for this than Trump is. And that is why we have to vote - not only so that we don’t get Trump, but so that we can put the nation on a path to having a chance of doing the right thing.
Anyway, again I’m not trying to chide your position or claim that you are serving Trump his presidency on a silver platter. That is dumb and a poor rhetoric to take with someone. There is also the whole fact that we have many different rounds of voting, it’s insinuated that it’s the general Presidency election but it may not be, so I wonder if people get defensive for local elections. To which of course I say -
State representatives 1) do have to be elected, 2) do have briefings on constituent requests, and 3) could be you! Jk (unless…?) no for real, 3) that there are other people like you who may not feel fully represented by the state reps, to which I say change is possible. We just… we actually have to do something about it, and usually that means fully informed voting.
This is a lot to respond to, so I will first say that I am only not voting for President. I am and always do vote in races in my local area, as in my area there are choices who align with my beliefs.
You not voting for any ideology is making a choice that you are complacent with either one, when in reality you are abstaining specifically because you are against them.
This is simply a matter of perspective. If I hand you a gun and tell you to shoot the less-evil of 2 people, and you choose to drop the gun instead, are you actually “complacent” with both of them, or are you refusing to commit murder? Well, both candidates are pro-genocide, and I refuse to take part in that.
Finally, when posed with an impossible choice, abstaining is an attempt to remove oneself from responsibility.
In a situation where democracy is actually driving the country and participation can actually change the direction of the country, I would agree. In a case where the political and wealth classes operate as an oligarchy that offers you the appearance of agency in order to then use your vote as a mandate to justify whatever evil they do, all you’re doing is serving to legitimize their false choices. Obviously, if you don’t believe our federal-level politics have fallen that far, we’re probably not ever going to agree on how to move forwards.
[Biden’s] Presidency is far more likely to pave the way for this than Trump is.
This is another point where you and I probably fundamentally disagree. I don’t think Biden is paving the way for anything but more Center-Right presidents like Biden. He’s not pushing us Left. He’s not enabling that. He’s actually pushing us to the Right. Ronald Reagan was literally harder on Israel for committing crimes than Biden has been. Biden has pushed for mass-incarceration and police funding his entire political life. He’s pushing anti-immigrant policies at the border. He’s alienating Progressives, while getting people (like many here) to defend him as “paving the way” for the future Left.
You think he’s paving the way for a better country. I think he’s actively alienating Progressives and minorities from the Democratic Party in order to prevent it shifting to the Left, paving the way for DeSantis in 2028, and funding and supplying a genocide along the way.
none of my values are supported by abstaining
One of my values is not actively handing power to evil people, and I do believe Biden is evil. Abstaining is not preventing Biden or Trump from taking power, but the reality is that there is no (legal) way for me to do that. Using “actively preventing bad people from taking power” as the standard for action is also not met by voting, if both choices are bad.
I don’t think Biden is paving the way for anything but more Center-Right presidents like Biden. He’s not pushing us Left. He’s not enabling that. He’s actually pushing us to the Right.
Oh, you’re an uninformed bad faith actor. I’m glad I saw this before I took anything you said seriously.
given the exceptional civility of pretty much everyone else here versus the civility of your two comments, i’m going to have to ask you to take it down a notch. it’s fine if you don’t find these arguments convincing at all but the idea that they’re being made by an “uninformed bad faith actor” is not credible. t3rmit3 has been pretty straightforward and honest in their convictions here.
Cool story, bro. Just assume that anyone who disagrees with you is acting in bad-faith. Ignore his continued calls for more cops, more deportations, more bombs for genocidal regimes…
Oh shit, Biden is trying to give more bombs to China and Russia?
Yes, those are his only policies and that’s all that matters. Moa is clearly the centrist candidate you would support.
This is simply a matter of perspective. If I hand you a gun and tell you to shoot the less-evil of 2 people, and you choose to drop the gun instead, are you actually “complacent” with both of them, or are you refusing to commit murder? Well, both candidates are pro-genocide, and I refuse to take part in that.
This metaphor doesn’t work, because in this case one of the two people will get shot no matter what. It’s akin to the trolley problem, and the trolley is already barreling down the hill. Refusing to participate doesn’t make the trolley go away, it just means that more people die.
In a situation where democracy is actually driving the country and participation can actually change the direction of the country, I would agree. In a case where the political and wealth classes operate as an oligarchy that offers you the appearance of agency in order to then use your vote as a mandate to justify whatever evil they do, all you’re doing is serving to legitimize their false choices. Obviously, if you don’t believe our federal-level politics have fallen that far, we’re probably not ever going to agree on how to move forwards.
Our federal-level politics have fallen very, very far. They do change the direction of the country, however, even if the changes are insufficient and not always exactly what I prefer. A simple example is the Inflation Reduction Act, which single-handedly doubled investment in clean energy and decreased the “gap” we need to cut in greenhouse emissions by 2/3rds.. Is it what I wanted? Is it “enough?” No. But it changed the direction of the country in a meaningful way.
This is another point where you and I probably fundamentally disagree. I don’t think Biden is paving the way for anything but more Center-Right presidents like Biden. He’s not pushing us Left. He’s not enabling that. He’s actually pushing us to the Right. Ronald Reagan was literally harder on Israel for committing crimes than Biden has been. Biden has pushed for mass-incarceration and police funding his entire political life. He’s pushing anti-immigrant policies at the border. He’s alienating Progressives, while getting people (like many here) to defend him as “paving the way” for the future Left.
The Biden Administration, in terms of enacted policies, is further to the left than the Obama and Clinton administrations were. Him being absolutely awful on Israel does not change that overall balance.
Does that mean he’s “left” or pushing us there? Of course not. We’re a right-leaning country where a plurality of people want fascism, and Joe Biden sucks.
You think he’s paving the way for a better country. I think he’s actively alienating Progressives and minorities from the Democratic Party in order to prevent it shifting to the Left, paving the way for DeSantis in 2028, and funding and supplying a genocide along the way.
One of my values is not actively handing power to evil people, and I do believe Biden is evil. Abstaining is not preventing Biden or Trump from taking power, but the reality is that there is no (legal) way for me to do that. Using “actively preventing bad people from taking power” as the standard for action is also not met by voting, if both choices are bad.
The trolley is coming and will run over someone whether you participate or not. Pulling the lever for harm reduction is not mutually exclusive with any other form of direct action and is an effective means of short-term harm reduction while we work towards popular support for long-term systemic change. As it stands any sort of revolution in the US would be far, far more likely to lead to right-wing authoritarianism than it would be to push us left; not only is the country right-leaning, but the right-wingers are armed to the teeth.
Biden winning means we buy more time to change the tide that before fascists take power again. Trump winning means fascists take power now with an electoral mandate and popular support.
It is our moral obligation, every day, to do what we can within the circumstances we’re given to reduce harm. Participating within the circumstances we’re given isn’t an endorsement of them; using the internet doesn’t mean I endorse my ISP, and having a credit card doesn’t mean I endorse capitalism. It’s just the reality of having to navigate a complex world filled with systems and circumstances I did not set up and don’t control. The trolley is already on the tracks; 364 days of the year we can talk about how there shouldn’t be trolleys. I hope one day there won’t be any more trolleys. But for the hour or two it takes to vote on that 365th day pulling the lever is the most effective means of harm reduction.
I have not seen a single compelling case for how allowing fascists to take power will lead to less harm or a better future. If there is one I’m all ears.
I have not seen a single compelling case for how allowing fascists to take power will lead to less harm or a better future. If there is one I’m all ears.
I agree. This is why I won’t engage with a system whose only outcome is that eventual takeover.
Is Biden dismantling the duopoly? Is he ignoring or bypassing the fascist-appointed courts? Is he literally doing anything to prevent that takeover? And if not, why would he next term?
Biden winning means we buy more time to change the tide that before fascists take power again.
This assumes we can in fact change that tide. I have a lot of opinions on where we’re going, and what is or isn’t inevitable, but frankly they’re not something I’m comfortable discussing with people I don’t know, and certainly not online.
The trolley is coming and will run over someone whether you participate or not.
This is true whether I vote or not, and will not be impacted whether I vote or not. The trolley now called America has been running people over since 1619. Always has, always will. The question is whether you believe it can ever be reformed from within. I have come to the conclusion that it cannot be.
It is our moral obligation, every day, to do what we can within the circumstances we’re given to reduce harm.
Unless you draw a line with regards to reasonable actions, then essentially no one is doing that; after all, certain bad people we’re discussing are all still alive. And if you do accept that we can and must draw lines, well, I consider that line to end at endorsing a genocidal leader.
I agree. This is why I won’t engage with a system whose only outcome is that eventual takeover.
If our options are truly “fascism now” or “fascism later” why choose now? Letting fascists take over because they will eventually makes zero sense.
Is Biden dismantling the duopoly? Is he ignoring or bypassing the fascist-appointed courts? Is he literally doing anything to prevent that takeover? And if not, why would he next term?
I hope so! But I’m not Biden, and I don’t control him. I am presented with two options to choose from in November. That choice happens whether I engage with it or not. You’re again resorting to “well the trolley shouldn’t be coming down the tracks.” I agree! I hate both options, and the fact that I have to choose at all. But here we are, and it’s barreling down the hill. Pulling the lever is free, takes less than an hour, and isn’t mutually exclusive with any other form of activism or harm reduction.
This assumes we can in fact change that tide.
No it doesn’t. It buys time so we can try. Again, why would we choose “allow fascism now” over “chance of stopping fascism?”
This is true whether I vote or not, and will not be impacted whether I vote or not.
Whether it runs over more or less people (i.e. whether fascism comes to power) is going to be primarily determined by how everyone, including you, votes.
The trolley now called America has been running people over since 1619. Always has, always will. The question is whether you believe it can ever be reformed from within. I have come to the conclusion that it cannot be.
I don’t necessarily disagree. I still do not see why that is a reason to let more people be run over.
Unless you draw a line with regards to reasonable actions, then essentially no one is doing that; after all, certain bad people we’re discussing are all still alive. And if you do accept that we can and must draw lines, well, I consider that line to end at endorsing a genocidal leader.
Personally, I draw the line at reasonable actions, reasonable being “proportional to one’s current power and well-being” - otherwise the whole framework quickly becomes unworkable. I don’t hold Joe Schmo on 3rd street responsible for plastic pollution generally, but I do hold him responsible for the avoidable plastic waste or litter that he creates. I don’t hold individual Roman citizens responsible for the atrocities of Commodus; I do hold them responsible for helping the people they had the power to help. We’re responsible for pulling whatever levers of power our hands fall onto in the direction of less harm. If you’re an American citizen then there’s a lever available to you of whether to have more fascists or less fascists in power. The choice will happen even if you try to ignore it.
The whole lesson of the trolley problem is that not engaging with the problem doesn’t make it go away, and that ignoring it is a form of action. Pulling the lever isn’t an endorsement of the trolley. It’s dealing head on with the reality of a complex situation that you did not create but are presented with.
As I said elsewhere: “I’ve ruminated and ruminated and ruminated on all of this and I can’t find any compelling philosophical or moral argument for allowing the greater evil to take hold, unless there is an imminent, likely possibility of a more just outcome following soon behind. If there was a groundswell of support in the US for a left revolution then perhaps a fascist victory could be the spark to push us towards structural change. But as it stands a plurality of Americans want (or are fine with) fascism, and they’re armed to the teeth. The most likely outcome of fascists winning the election is that fascists take over and keep power, and that will cause unfathomable harm far beyond the disgusting shortfalls of our current administration.”
So again - I haven’t seen any compelling case for how allowing fascists to take power will lead to a better future. Even if our choice is “fascism now” and “fascism later,” as you posit, why on earth should we choose now?
Are you not confusing “some politics I don’t agree with are being represented” with “none of the politics I agree with are being represented”? Granted, I don’t know what your politics are, but you’re clearly not a trump fan. I’m having a difficult time imagining a political leaning that has zero overlap with Bidens politics.
I’m having a hard time with this whole thread. Yes, it’s a shitty choice, but that doesn’t make it any less the only choice. It’s not like a trump victory “nudges the country further towards a fascist state”. He, and his followers, have made it quite clear that the immediate goal is full-on fascism.
If wouldn’t be terribly surprised if this was a spoiler campaign, honestly, but even in the more likely event that it isn’t, the results are nearly indistinguishable. It does a great job of
sewingsowing doubt and spreading fatalism/doomerism. Does anyone seriously think we’re comparing apples to apples here?-
Biden is not fantastic. Agreed.
-
The glaring psychopathy of the right makes it easier for the Democrats to also shift right. Looks like it.
-
Biden is bad, so the alternative can be ignored. Uhm, what?
-
Withholding my vote for Biden will teach the Democrats a lesson, and it’s not like I’m voting for trump or anything. You’re going to get us all killed.
I think the implication above is that the person with the most votes wins; by not adding your vote to pile A, there are fewer votes for pile B to beat.
Again, it’s not a great set of options, but how can anyone who is even remotely sane consider furthering the risk of trump winning to prove a point? If he wins, will there even be any more elections? Who are you proving the point to?
It’s been 4 years since trump left office. 4 measly years. How such large swathes of the country seem to have collectively forgotten how utterly insane, deadly, and brazenly corrupt that whole shit-show was is completely beyond me.
None of the American presidents are great. Not one of them. Every single one of them has blood on their hands. None of this is new. At least people are waking up now, even if it’s too late. There’s a great shift towards unions. Attempts at making healthcare less horrible. An actual debate about student loans. About minimum wage. About housing. Will it all be fixed under the Democrats? Unlikely. Will it all be actively and aggressively fought by trump and the fascist right he represents? Guaranteed.
Want to make a difference? Fight it all with every fiber if your being. Join movements, unionize, support better candidates. Helping trump does not help anyone, and all but guarantees that the already rickety societal framework that lets you even have a dissenting opinion will be torn down in the blink of an eye.
Foil the fascist autocrat first. Then spend the next 4 years making your point clear to the democrats. Find better ways to try to steer the country away from its race to the right. There are many good suggestions on this thread as to how. None of them are “don’t vote for Biden”.
Are you not confusing “some politics I don’t agree with are being represented” with “none of the politics I agree with are being represented”?
I think you are confusing individual beliefs on particular subjects with “politics”. No, Biden does not support my political beliefs. The most fundamental positions he holds (pro-government, pro-capitalism, pro-imperialism, pro-American-exceptionalism, pro-settler-colonialism) are anathema to my fundamental beliefs. Literally any person out there (Trump included) will hold some stance you agree with. If you have accepted the idea that our responsibility as voters is just to line up a list of individual pros and cons of specific stances to determine our votes, and that the actual political beliefs of the candidates are not up for consideration, then you’ve already accepted that you don’t have any real influence over politics. You’re picking the person, not the politics.
It’s not like a trump victory “nudges the country further towards a fascist state”. He, and his followers, have made it quite clear that the immediate goal is full-on fascism.
And yet no one in the Democratic Party- or certainly in the White House- is acting like this is true. If Trump is actually planning a coup or an authoritarian takeover, Biden should be removing him through other means, as protecting the US from threats (foreign and domestic) is part of his job. You can’t vote your way out of a coup. Instead, we as individual voters are being set up as the patsies for the fascist takeover, when we can’t turn the functional duopoly we have into a functional single-party state (by only ever voting for one party), and Republicans inevitably get into power again at some point.
Then spend the next 4 years making your point clear to the democrats.
How do you think we just spent the last 4? Or the 4 before that, after the DNC put Trump in office? Why is it that the next 4 are going to be the ones that matter?
Why are you assuming that next election will not also see the imperative levied at us to “foil the fascist autocrat”? DeSantis or Ramaswamy could both easily have that levied against them as well.
Find better ways to try to steer the country away from its race to the right.
You and several others seem to be operating under the mistaken assumption that my not voting for a president means that I don’t engage in other political activities.
None of them are “don’t vote for Biden”.
My argument was never that not voting for Biden steers us away from the Right. My argument is that voting for him also does not. In fact, voting for him is steering us further Rightward. That’s the whole goddamn problem.
Voting for him means voting for someone who advocates for more police, more racist border control policies, more bombs for genociders.
“But he forgave a nominal amount of student loans tho!”
-
Thanks for the support, although I wish it was a happier topic. @Schmoo@slrpnk.net made the excellent point that direct action has historically been majorly significant to affect US policy and is in my view the best path for right now. It’s time to escalate.
I live in a very red state and until recently didn’t have the option to just jump to another more progressive state. But I also recognize that the ability to just jump ship is a privilege that the majority do not have. Even now I am on the fence because this is still my home where I have grown roots. The issue is those who decided to abstain or vote 3rd party in 2016 allowed for the rise of Trump. From there SCOTUS became a right-wing powerhouse and Roe was overturned. If Hillary had won in 2016, SCOTUS would have been provided justices who would not have taken that action. As much as I disliked Hillary, I knew she was the safer choice when it came to my reproductive rights and the rights of other minorities.
I cannot for the life of me find a gynecologist that isn’t some crazy pro-lifer obsessed with bAbieZ and the overturning of Roe only has made this worse. I’ve called gynos in my conservative state asking if they’re trauma trained and every damn time they act like they’ve never heard of sexual assault. It’s all talk of how can we get you to have bAbieZ because how dare you want to be a child free woman in such a godly state! How many other women are in my position in similar red states and delaying vital checks for cancer when the only providers want to shame you? All the decent gynos that I would have seeked care from have no desire to practice in a state that is so restrictive on abortion so instead it caters to the extreme.
As much as Biden’s backing of Isreal bothers me, I will still vote for him because the situation above will only get worse for I and other women. There’s also the whole war against Trans and Gay individuals by those on the right, and voting for Biden is another dam preventing their way of life being persecuted federally. The right is itching to hurt or even kill those they do not agree with and abstaining to vote just ushers this possibility to be greater and allow Trump to return.
Hillary was never going to win. She was, to use the term that people like to levy against progressives, “un-electable”. Blaming the literal millions of voters who voted for Obama but not for her, instead of blaming her or the DNC for not recognizing that she was losing, is exactly why we’re back in this situation.
In 2020, Trump was so fresh in peoples’ minds that a literal dog would have beaten him. But instead of taking 4 years to prepare a candidate that could beat him when things were not on fire, the DNC instead actively pushed all other candidates to not run, ensuring that we’d find ourselves here, and (if my read is correct), ensuring that no matter who I vote for, Trump is going to win.
As much as I disliked Hillary, I knew she was the safer choice when it came to my reproductive rights and the rights of other minorities.
Compared to Trump? Of course she was. No one here (hopefully) voted for Trump. I voted for her in the General, too. But she, just like Biden, was massively unpopular, and literally had no path to victory.
The right is itching to hurt or even kill those they do not agree with
There are many other actions that are necessary to forestall this violence. This rhetoric is only escalating on the Right, and they’re not going to be held in check by legal strictures for long. They’ve already tried a coup once, and Dems are doing literally nothing to ensure it cannot happen again. People should be preparing accordingly.
This is not an easy choice, because it does eventually come down to a question of how you weigh out the outcomes you’re voting for. If Biden indicated, through his actions, that he was going to support the genocide of a group of Americans, not one person here would be advocating voting for him. But since he’s only doing precisely that for a group of people in another country, suddenly voting for the lesser of 2 evils is alright.
My coworker (and deskmate in our office prior to lockdown) is Palestinian. He has lost multiple family members to bombs since the “war” started, which as far as he knows his own taxes may have helped pay for. Potentially provided by the person you’re telling me to vote for. Should he be thankful to Biden, since Trump might have done worse? Biden, who is still today asking congress for additional weapons for Israel?
Biden’s backing of Israel does not “bother” me, it infuriates me to a level I cannot properly describe.
I am not going to be part of that (any more than I already am, having voted for him last time).
You’re absolutely right though. If trump wins another term it will mean that democracy has completely died and the country that was America is over for good. My family is already moving out of the country, just in case, because it’s too steep a price to pay and it’s too horrifying to think that there are many horrifically mentally ill people still out in public who support trump, people I consider more dangerous than any child predator.
Given the situation I’d still vote for Biden. I’d vote for Jeff Dahmer before I’d ever vote for a complete monster like trump.
