I wonder how many times people have thought "well, this isn't a critical moment in history"  

In some seriousness though, history isn't a chain of moments, it's a tide.  I read your article.  It's clear in what you want to convey, but, to me at least, there wasn't anything in there that isn't blatantly obvious.

I think it's a misconception to believe that most people are open minded and just want everyone to be welcome and happy.  Most people are close minded and don't want anyone to be happy at the expense of their own wellbeing and well-feeling.  We're social animals, we form groups of similar people to 'survive'.  In today's world, it's very clear that there are many, many people who are different from you.  So we feel embattled by those who are different.  I don't know much about most American states, but I'd wager that all those states that are imposing restrictions on all kinds of stuff are states with low levels of multiculturalism.  They're just trying to protect 'their way' of living, trying to keep the scary truth, that they're not the norm on a global scale, at bay.

And even more generally speaking: we see this happening all around the world.  We are taking the benefits of a globalised, multicultural world for granted, only seeing the downsides.  We have forgotten what a non-globalised world looked like, WW2 is too far behind us for people to see what reverting within our own bubble can lead too.  So we think we're better off on our own once more.  This, and climate change, are the biggest dangers to the relative peace we live in today.

Excellent blog and an extremely important message that sadly is going to fall on deaf ears or worse make the opposition feel "attacked". I am from what I feel is the worst state in America right now with the most vile garbage governor who has been on an absolute tear of conservative legislation so extreme that it's clearly all a bid to out Trump Trump in 2024. I live in a state that is now the least affordable state to live in, we have an affordable housing crisis, we have a climate change crisis (Miami will be underwater in the coming decades). So does the FL Republican run senate address any of this, NOPE, instead they go on a culture war which includes a pretty detailed abortion ban, don't say gay bill, anti woke bill, they changed one of the largest black voting districts and gutted it so they lose their voting power, and they get into a fight with Disney because the Disney CEO dared to criticize Desantis. Desantis like a petulant child can't take criticism so he acted like any shit head dictator would and took away Disney's right to govern themselves, which is a huge help to the state and the county, now that county will have a bill of a billion dollars and property taxes will skyrocket, but fuck people he got the headlines of going against "woke Disney". Now in the end nothing will happen to Disney as it's unconstitutional what they are doing but still Desantis cares about the culture, he wants to fight every anti woke, left battle there is to win brownie points to the right.

And that's the scariest part of all this, so many people love what he is doing. I have a bunch of my friends totally on board with all this, I fight with them all the time and well there is no point in discussing this, they are completely on board the right wing machine.  Like the Don’t say gay bill, I explained it's a bill addressing nothing, kids in elementary school where not being taught about sexual orientation, but these friends are terrified about their kids hearing about gay people or worse that there are multiple genders. The phobia is real, and the republicans and the right feeds on it. The fear of the other, they are going to brainwash your kids, they are trying to take away your right to speak out (meaning insult and discriminate with impunity), they are anti white and anti religion. And this message is working, it's effective, it's scary how easy it is for a society to basically agree to treat certain groups like second class citizens  that don't deserve the same rights as others. These people are willing to vote for a man who tried to overthrow a fair election... that's how dictatorships begin, with the people willing to forgo their voting rights to let authoritative figure take power.

The message to vote is so important because as bleak as it looks, those willing to support all groups do out number the ones trying to put them down. But the right is like an army, they VOTE. They will vote blindly, they don't care what kind of human scum is on the ballot, they vote red. Liberals, the younger vote, the minorities, have to mobilize like they did last election but I don't see it happening. We are much more worn down, Biden has not done a good job, a sense of disappointment in the leadership is palpable in the party, so I can see people not voting which in turn will let these republicans and more and more control and make America less tolerant than I have ever seen in my lifetime. It's horrifying.

Yodariquo said:

Foolz said:

Personally, the reason I don't vote (although I may make an exception this election) is indeed a political statement. I do not believe in representative democracy one bit.

Though I think your position is unusual, the sentiment of "I don't vote because *reasons*" is one that is common, and I can summarize my core point very succinctly here. I won't portend to know much about Australian politics, so I'll translate this to if you were American, which then means I'm not talking about you specifically.

Is your idyllic protest non-vote more important than abortion rights? Is it more important than trans people's right to medical care? Is it more important than the right to vote itself? I can't personally imagine the reasoning required to reach a conclusion that it is.

I think you'll find it's not a protest non-vote, as I use an apolitical excuse so I don't get fined. If I vote, it will, however, be a protest vote.

Are abortion rights, trans people's right to medical care, or the right to vote more important than, say, the right to medical care for all people, the right to higher education, the right to organise labour, the minimisation of the harm of the biggest prison state since the Soviet Union*, or the right for, say, Afghans to eat and not be assassinated by drones?  Your vote doesn't just protect the rights you mentioned, it also not only gives consent to but even supports the suppression of the rights I mentioned, becuase the party who supports those rights, also supports the supression of those other rights in practice, even if sometimes their rhetoric may push back against them.

So I don't think it's really that simple. Voting for important issues like you mentioned, doesn't mean that your vote doesn't impact others in similarly bad, or potentially even worse, ways.

But I find your position perfectly reasonable. There's no way to conduct politics without some people suffering at the expense of others, and that includes my idyllic non-voting practices.

*I recently read that per capita North Korea is worse than both, but the book was not a good source, so who knows.

Yodariquo said:

In the US, this is very simple. One party is better on all of these issues as well, by a very large margin, than the other. I also question that you'd be able to find outside of a hypothetical a major political party that is willing to throw women and LGBTQ+ people under the bus, but is better for everyone on-the-whole than a party that doesn't.


Better does not mean perfect, and in a better system, there may be room for nuance and discussion. In the US, there's a choice between a normal political party, meaning flaws and all, or a fascist dictatorship. There is no inbetween, and sitting out means you're equally fine with either.

Pretty much this at this point.

Look at the news of the night, leaked report shows the Supreme Court will over turn roe vs Wade. Unbelievable.

Yodariquo said:

Not voting is not some moral good that absolves you if the government does something shitty. People not voting in 2016 are very much part of what has led to setting women's rights back 50 years in America.




I could go into further detail on policy, but I'm just so, so sick of this "both parties are the same it doesn't matter" garbage attitude from so many people. It has never been more stark a contrast, and if the impulse is to retreat into "Biden voted for tough on crime 30 years ago!" in response to everything I detailed already, I don't know what to tell you.

Of course it isn't. Just as voting for women's rights doesn't absolve you of voting to starve Afghanis. Your position is not consistent, and, if anything, it seems to me like you're the one trying to take a position of moral absolution.

Politics does not work on the scale of election issues. That the democrats have created the problem is absolutely relevent, especially when they have zero intention of fixing it.

And I never said both parties are the same or that it doesn't matter, actually, so I don't see how that grandstanding is relevant.

No, it isn't consistent if you only apply moral responsibility for some things, yet not others.

Additionally, If you vote for harm reduction, you are not responsible solely for the reduction in harm, you are also responsible for the perpetuation of harm itself.

Setting aside the above reasons for not voting here is a pracitcal one.

In Australia, we have preferential voting.

So you can choose to rank the top five party's you prefer, in order.

My problem is, let's say I fully support both the leading left-wing and leading right-wing parties as the 1 and 2 choice. I am then FORCED to vote for three additional parties in the boxes 3 through 5. In Australia, there is probably 1 other party I could support (kind of -- the greens) and from there I'd be forced to vote for pseudo facist/ or greenie ratbag parties that exist only to maintain good inflation of their egos and bank accounts.  I have no choice.  So I won't and don't.

The other alternative, if you don't want if to vote for parties is to vote in a similar manner for 12 people, none of whom I have any idea who they are (unlike in California we don't get voter guides).  So I'm supposed to figure out, out of 50 people, the 12 least power-hungry/ dillusional high school debate team candidates and vote for them. And I've never heard of any of them even though every one of them is apparently a member of my local electorate.