I voted for the “harm reduction” vote in the 2016 Presidential election. Mar Roxas wasn’t great, but he was better than Duterte. Surprise, surprise, Duterte won. Hundreds of thousands died.

For the 2022 Presidential election, I voted for a principled vote for Leody de Guzman. Surprise, surprise, the Marcos dynasty returns to power.

Then people are treating Biden/Trump round 2 as top priority. Newsflash, if democracy was at stake in the election, then you don’t have democracy. I’ve been watching the Biden administration from afar. Biden, Trump, they’re the same. Same killer police. Same concentration camps at the border. Same prison industrial complex. Same trans genocide. Same abortion bans. No meaningful climate action. And now, a genocide in Gaza. Biden doesn’t care. Voting isn’t harm reduction.

  • keepthepace
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Am tired of it. Will do it again. I have colleagues in Ukraine. I know what is at stake and that both sides may be bad, but they are certainly not the same.

    See it that way: if you were in an armed rebellion against a fascist state, hiding from trench to forest dwelling, would you pass on an occasion to spend one hour of your time to reduce a bit the political power of the enemy?

    Voting is not enough, but it has an effect. Voting should not be your only political action, but I don’t think it should be dismissed.

    • MambabasaOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      What effect? Literally none of my actions have prevented fascists from coming into power. I did face-to-face conversations in why Duterte was bad. I campaigned against Marcos. Literally zero effect. The bad people win because the game is stacked in their favor.

      • keepthepace
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        You lowered their score. Not enough people did what you did. One person is unlikely to sway an election by themselves, it is a collaborative effort.

        Saying that voting is useless because your candidate did not win is missing the whole point of elections.

        • MambabasaOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          No, voting is not useless because my candidate lost. Voting is useless because it separates people from mass politics and makes it appear as if the ballot is the power. Instead of people acting for themselves, they delegate their power to a ballot and to a candidate. That is not power, that is an image of power.

          • keepthepace
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I am unconvinced that without voting people would feel more included in “mass politics”

            • MambabasaOPM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              That’s because the mass politics you envision is precisely one predetermined by the liberal-“democratic” voting form, where people are precisely separated from their power. Voting can be part of a truly liberatory and emancipatory politics, but its current form is authoritarian. Even the concept of voting as harm reduction and voting for lesser evils already shows people have no power.

              • keepthepace
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                Yes, it is authoritarian and allows one to choose between two authoritarian alternatives that are not the same. Voting matters but can’t be the only political action you have.