• Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Yeah it just sounds so simple. Almost misleadingly so!

    And I don’t believe you need the effective half vote thing explained to you.

    I plan to use my vote to actually reduce and/or prevent genocide and other bad things as much as I can. Like real effects in the real world. If I vote for a third party candidate that stands on firmer moral ground (and who will never have to actually make those decisions), and that choice helps in any small way to get Trump elected, then there are many more people who will suffer and die. It is for those people that I can step outside the realm of idealism and vote for the lesser evil. Because like I saw in another comment, choosing the lesser evil does mean less evil in the world.

    I don’t have to be happy about it or excited to do it. But when looking at the practical cause and effect of the voting choices, I only see one ethical option for myself.

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      You aren’t reducing or preventing genocide by voting for someone in the process of supporting a genocide.

      If your conscience tells you that it’s acceptable to support a side that’s committing genocide because it’s enemies do it too, then there’s not much I can say except that my original point stands: my Russian bosses should give me a raise or give up on this whole thing because convincing Americans to oppose genocide is an exercise in futility.

      Nothing changes through compliance. If people don’t oppose it, it won’t ever stop. You know that as well as I do.