Nice Guy - Divisions by zero

source [https://hachyderm.io/@mekkaokereke/112438873513266466]

The analogy kind of falls apart since she is not limited to this guy and Chad. She’s free to choose nothing at all. With Trump vs Biden, there’s no viable third option, and having no president is not one of the options. So the “Trump is worse” argument becomes viable simply because you do have to choose one of them.
Continue with that analogy. What would happen if that woman had no other option. Should she choose the nice guy, the chad or object to the choice being fostered upon her and choose nobody? And if she’s paired anyway with that person, should she then act as if it was her choice, or take actions to disengage from that person and destroy the system that caused these turn of events?
You can tactically vote for Biden to avoid Trump and still take actions to dismantle the system.
So the woman in our scenario should decide to choose the “Nice Guy” tactically?
No, I’m saying that your analogy breaks down.
I don’t think it does. A choice fostered upon me at the threat of violence is not a choice at all. I refuse to participate and therefore legitimize such a farce.
You’re free to do nothing, but smart people choose to minimize harm when there are only bad choices in front of them.
Who said I’m “doing nothing”? Voting isn’t doing anything. Only actions outside the ballot matter.
Voting isn’t doing anything? Did you not see what happened when Trump got to pick three Supreme Court justices? Roe is gone dude. This stuff matters.
It really doesn’t. This is the momentum of your country either way. Or did you forget that your democrats had chances to put Supreme Court justices and they just…didn’t?
What are you talking about? The senate has to approve them. The GOP controlled the senate.
Hrc won the popular vote. How did voting harm reduction then do anyone any good?
I don’t understand the question. We don’t elect based on popular vote.
I'm saying hrc votes were worthless; throw away votes. Hence a non vote was the same, and a third party vote was at least as valuable, and when enough people support a third party candidate, it will be worth more, because it shows the two major parties they have something to worry about.
This is also a good point. I think we’d have a better shot at electing a third-party candidate than we would of pushing an establishment democrat left.
Dems have made it abundantly clear they are willing to move further right than a centimeter to the left. Also my American compatriots see socially left and assume economically left when that's just not the case. Socially left is great, until everyone is homeless, hungry and sick, equally.
Not to mention that even the “socially left” is highly questionable. When I see a leader who’s willing to throw other marginalized groups such as Palestinians, refugees, and BIPOC under the bus, I have no doubt he’d have us LGBTQIA+ people lined up and executed if he thought it would help him win elections. Establishment Democrats are not allies, no matter how many rainbows they project on the White House.
This is a great point. I've said you're either human rights or rights for me and mine, not thee and thine." If you're pro black but not pro women, pro women but not pro lgbtqia, etc.
Yep, this is how I see it too. Solidarity. If we don’t stand up for each other, then we all fall.
Nope. The folks that Voted remained in consideration as there was another Election. Those that didn't Vote were ignored. One of the primary reasons Biden got the Nod to be the Candidate in 2020 was that those that did not Vote could not be counted on to show up and thus the potential Candidates they would support were ignored from the considerations as they couldn't be counted on.
You act like Bernie wasn't ignored anyway. Please.
He wasn't, and isn't ignored. In fact his opinion is posted in papers all over the World for the single reason that People Voted for him. Who has more sway in getting the message out? The guy that Voted for Bernie to be paid attention to, OR the self important sat it out and thus has no one interested in what they wanted as they don't vote Purist?
I was talking about the dnc ignoring him. I wrote him in.
They didn't. Lots of folks that claimed to be supporters didn't show up to Vote in the Primary and thus Bernie lost the Primary.
Folks that stayed home to prove a point made sure the SC would get the three. Failure to Vote resulted in the harm. Had those folks Voted, harm would have been reduced. You the failure of your own position.
Right, because the dnc totally didn't ignore Bernie Sanders, or Dennis Kucinich. Again, please.
Both matter. We need to do both.
Non-participation is not the same as doing nothing. If she chooses to date neither, neither is in her life. If you do nothing, you still get trump or Biden. The analogy doesn’t hold.
And so I refer you back to my first comment in this thread
I have read it don’t be an ass. Say a point or don’t.
My point to this kind of comment is made in that post. We’re just looping at this point.
If the comment was sufficient we wouldn’t be here. It’s a shit analogy.

Non-participation is not the same as doing nothing. If she chooses to date neither, neither is in her life. If you do nothing, you still get trump or Biden. The analogy doesn’t hold.

Continue with that analogy. What would happen if that woman had no other option. Should she choose the nice guy, the chad or object to the choice being fostered upon her and choose nobody? And if she’s paired anyway with that person, should she then act as if it was her choice, or take actions to disengage from that person and destroy the system that caused these turn of events?

It fits. You say the analogy doesn’t fit because “we don’t have a choice”. I tell you to adjust the analogy so that the woman doesn’t have a choice either.

If you and I choose not to vote for Trump or Biden, who do we wind up with?
If the woman doesn’t choose any, who does she end up with? What should she do about it? You clearly see the absurdity when presented as an analogy, but you cannot see the similarity because the violence of the politicians is many levels removed from you.

I live in the gulf coast. The violence is not removed from me. It’s worse here than anywhere else. You know nothing about me or my family.

Interesting you dropped off that SCOTUS discussion. You seemed pretty smug and sure there too.

The fact that you’re continuously dodging the questions is not lost on me

I didn’t dodge questions. Some of us critiqued your shit analogy and you got butthurt. That’s what happened here.

Have a good one mate. Last word is all yours - I’m sure it’s very important to you.

Cognitive dissonance is uncomfortable. I'm still struggling through plenty of it, with no clear answers. I acknowledge it, and also acknowledge at this late age, my imaginative abilities have atrophied, significantly. :-/
And the point is she doesn’t have to have anybody. We do. We have. 2 people and 1 of them will be here whether we like it or not. We can’t opt out.
Again, assume she has the same lack of choice. What should she do? Why does that differ from what we should do?

If she has the same lack of choice, she should absolutely choose the lesser evil for now and do what she can to rectify the situation after. She can bide her time with the “nice guy” while devising a plan of escape. If she gets stuck with the the abuser, she very well may not survive long enough to make the attempt.

You’re right, it doesn’t differ from what we should do: mitigate damage now to buy time to develop more meaningful solutions.

I’m just saving all these golden takes.
Good on you, it’s never too late to learn.

You could adjust it to talk about arranged marriages instead.

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

Legal Code - Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International - Creative Commons

That’s a good point actually. Arranged marriages existed for thousands of years. Women and girls were usually not given a choice, but even if when they were and chose the “lesser evil” it did nothing to end the tradition and evils of arranged marriage.
Arranged marriages are still a thing. My Indian friend was quite happily a bachelor at 23 until his parents presented him with a choice of three brides or be disinherited and kicked out if the family business and family home compound. He traveled to India to meet his choices and returned married. I'm not sure either of them are happy, but they are parents. That's got to be good for their child, right?
That would make way more sense tbh
You can refuse to vote but you're still going to end up with one of those two as your president. Are you OK with not having a say about which one it ends up being just to make a point to nobody in particular?

Are you OK with not having a say about which one it ends up being just to make a point to nobody in particular?

Abstention makes a point to everyone in general through the tracking of voter participation levels.

Nope. Just results in your being removed from the calculation as irrelevant.

Yeah nah mate. You have the right to not vote. But if you choose to exercise this right you don’t get to whinge about the person elected by those who did vote.

Society is not composed of you and you alone. It is composed of many. You took yourself outta this decision but it’s still being made freely by everyone else and no, it doesn’t impinge on you to accept the democratic consensus of the many

I understand that I’m living in an oppressive system enforced by violence and that my life is shaped at the threat of state violence. you don’t need to reiterate that to me. It’s why I’m not legitimizing it by participating in this farce of “democracy” and instead dedicate my life to changing it.

Whichever puppet is on top doesn’t change all that whatsoever. Nor will your platitudes about be “accepting the democratic consensus of the many” when I don’t have the alternative due to said violence.

You've got some good points. Keep up the good fight

Well said. As someone who is going to vote for Biden to keep Trump out of office, I harbor no ill will towards leftists who choose to reject the whole charade. One way or another, we need to bring down the system, and I don’t see any evidence that voting for centrist democrats is likely to incrementally move us towards a better system.

On the contrary, it seems more likely to me that Trump would potentially accelerate the evolution of society by fucking everything up so badly that we would have no alternative but to make radical changes.

However, given that I am unable to be certain of the future outcome of each timeline, I believe that voting for Biden minimizes the risk of a worst case scenario. But again, I don’t approve of shaming leftists for abstaining, because the reality is that both parties are colluding to maintain the status quo, and ultimately if Trump wins the election its not the voters who will be to blame, but the Democratic party for failing to produce a credible challenger.

For the little it will be worth to you, i am a radical moderate and we can find common ground in fixing the broke in radical ways.
Thank you for sharing that; I also consider myself a radical moderate. In the context of a decadent and degenerate society, the term makes a great deal of sense.
You are so very welcome, friend. I totally agree.