kaffyr (kaffyr) wrote,
kaffyr
kaffyr

Dept. of Will You Listen to Yourself?

Thoughts Upon Seeing a Friend's Twitter Rant

Someone I'm very fond of has just posted thoughts about how they are not going to vote for Hillary Clinton. This person was a dedicated Bernie fan, and apparently is, much to my sad realization, one of those fans who will not vote for Hillary, despite Bernie's official endorsement.  

I chose not to engage on Twitter, not least because I'm already pushing the envelope of my semi-business Twitter account with the types of retweets and favorites I make public. A conversation about this would cross the line even further than I've already pushed it. 

So I'm bringing my thoughts here, via copying, pasting, and slightly amending a piece of commentary I posted before the last American presidential election.
I don't think the person in question pays much attention to LJ/DW these days, but I need to say what I have to say somewhere. 

**** **** ****

Voting matters. It always matters. 

Make a choice, even if it is the lesser of two evils. Often "the lesser of two evils" turns out to be one of two things - "better than one expected," or "helping keep the greater of two evils out." In either case, your vote is important.

Voting matters. It always matters.

A political meme that still inexplicably enjoys some coin puts forth the idea that a) one's vote doesn't count and b) one's vote is important enough to be withheld from the ballot box as a form of protest.

The illogic inherent between the front and back end of that message is staggering.

If you want to sound like some first year Business Communications major/French Lit minor trying to impress a potential roll in the hay with your world-weary political sophistication, go ahead and believe it. (If you are a Business Comm/French Lit student and understand the stupidity of that little conceit, my apologies.) If, on the other hand, you're an adult ....

You think that by withholding your vote, you'll make "them" listen? 

You fool. 

The only person who pays attention to an "unvote" is the campaign strategist for the winning candidate; she's the one who's glad her opponent's candidate was the beneficiary of every single unvote not in the ballot box.

And this year, who is the person happiest for the unvotes for Hillary? It's not Bernie. It's the fascist who would wreck this country.

You call yourself a progressive, but you turn on the progressive you backed when he makes the pragmatic decision that was, surely, far harder for him to make than for you to contemplate? Then you weren't really that much of a supporter, were you? 

Also, no, withholding your vote from the Democratic candidate won't make the Democratic apparatchiks take you or your views seriously. They may laugh as loudly as the clown-car fascist. 

If I hear one more iteration of "Voting for the lesser of two evils is voting for evil," I swear I will scream. Voting for the lesser of two evils is voting for the lesser of two evils - because the greater evil is greater, and will scour your soul far more badly than the lesser will.

If you look hard enough at any candidate, no matter how good, you're apt to find something at which you can point and say "EVIL!" So your argument is, frankly, an invalid and slightly sophomoric one. Pragmatism; it's a thing, and it is not, merely by definition, evil. Nor is idealism, merely by definition, good.

 Voting matters. It always matters.

This entry was originally posted at http://kaffyr.dreamwidth.org/416104.html?mode=reply, where there are currently comment count unavailable comments. You can comment there or here; I watch both.
Tags: democrazy, politics
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 21 comments