• JungleJim@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean kind of, but more like, “Let’s keep that crazy guy from making things absolutely dogshit and then from there we figure improvements out, but if the fascists take over it’s game over because they change the rules as soon as they get power in order to keep power.”

    It’s not voting for a lesser evil. It’s a vote to keep democracy turned on. Once the democracy is turned off it’s incredibly hard to turn back on again. One guy talks about invalidating elections due to imaginary fraud while selling state secrets. The other guy is just old but he likes it when people vote in elections for things. Is that the lesser of two evils? Kind of a silly phrase. Any two things, one will be more evil, and as nothing is perfect, the other will have less but still some evil. The lesser of two evils is an excuse to do nothing or in this case, scuttle any hope of doing better in the future.

    • ArcticCircleSystem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Why can’t we do more than one thing at the same time? Why not try to make things better than before and prevent the fascists (they’re not “crazy”, fasciam isn’t caused by mental illness) from taking over? I mean things being as terrible as they are for the working class right now is a pretty major factor in rhe recent rise in fascism, so really you have to do the former to do the latter, otherwise it won’t work. You have to meaningfully improve things to combat fascism. So what are we supposed to do to get things like UBI; single-payer M4A; a voting system better than first past the post, student debt cancellation and free college tuition; codification of the Convention of the Rights of the Child, queer civilrights, and Roe v. Wade, and other progressive policies to actually be implemented?.. ~Cherri