OK, what else do you suggest? Not voting? That just speeds the process up. Voting for the small but much better option? In a FPTP voting system (like the American one that I assume you're talking about), the spoiler effect means that's as good as not voting.

This is my issue with the leftist community in general, and especially the ml group. Because of idealism, they seem to ask for something that doesn't exist and not accept anything else.

[–] ReadMoreBooks@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

OK, what else do you suggest?

Not many ask.

Because of idealism, they seem to ask for something that doesn't exist and not accept anything else.

This is my issue with almost everyone. They believe they already know what others think, that no one could possibly have an alternative that they've not already considered.

My suggestions are as follows: Consider that your scope of evaluation is only one cycle. As a consequence there may be nuance in system function that you'd not considered. Then ask the same question but in good faith.

[–] Mr_Fish@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

not many ask

Yes, they do ask a lot, at least a far as I've seen. I still haven't seen a good alternative to voting for the lesser evil in a FPTP system.

They believe they already know what others think

My opinion on that was based on the whole "don't vote for Harris, she'll support genocide" thing I saw earlier this year. If I'm wrong about that, or anything else, I'm more than happy to be corrected.

no one could possibly have an alternative that they've not already considered

Most people don't think that no one could have a good alternative, they just don't know of anyone who does.

your scope of evaluation is only one cycle

You're assuming that's my only scope. Both the short term and the long term are important, but from what I've seen the short term tends to get ignored in this sort of community.

[–] TheFinn@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 3 hours ago

Do you simply have no answer, or are you withholding them so you can feel smug?

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This video goes into why some radical leftists think that voting doesn't really matter, or could even be considered harmful.

[–] Mr_Fish@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As good as that video is, he ignores the strength elections have as damage control. Yes, large positive change needs the sort of efforts he's describing, but ignoring voting means a bad government will have far more opportunity to undo progress.

Really, the biggest takeaway from that video is that there are more tools than simply voting and protesting, which I don't think anyone is disagreeing with.

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think you got the main point of the video. Not only "large" change needs these efforts. Any progressive change does. As soon as there is no pressure by mass movements, politicians will drift to strengthen their power, which means moving to the right.

[–] deaf_fish@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

So the only way to keep and maintain a progressive government is to teleport from where we are now to the desired outcome? Is that the argument of the video?

If so, that seems not currently feasible.