None indeed. Confronted with two choices that are not materially different because the system is rigged in such a way you'll never be offered a meaningful choice means you don't have actual agency. Voting for Trump, Biden or abstaining are all equally amoral because it's no longer a moral choice - the choice had already been made for you.

They don't see the full implications of another Trump term, or don't see Biden as any different. — Xtrix

It's not about Trump or Biden though, it's Republican and Democratic. I guess it takes a view from outside the USA to realise how marginal those differences are.

Eh, let's not make it a cartoon version. — Xtrix

Never mind. frank hasn't been following the conversation.



To a degree, I agree. If Trump really were about to, let's say, start a nuclear war then there would be an argument that just about anyone with a pulse would be a better option and in order to avert that disaster, they should vote for them. But I just don't see that level of difference. I see a regular GOP vs Dem election with the GOP candidate being a horrible boor with zero morals peddling shitty policies, but not one likely to start a war and not one capable of single-handedly destroying the planet (or America). There are other progressives who would go further and say Trump is actually better than Biden in some ways, just like they thought he was better than Hillary. I'm not making that argument and I wouldn't even criticize progressives for holding their noses and voting for Biden, seeing as there are likely practical benefits to doing so. I've only been arguing against the idea that progressives are obligated to give the Democrats their vote simply because Trump is a bad candidate. I see that as a form of blackmail. Nobody owes their vote to anyone. It has to be earned.

And we who are opposed to Trump, recognizing that he is a sociopath and, more importantly, runs an administration that is destroying the prospects of future human life, have what kind of responsibility? None? "Indirect"? — Xtrix

None indeed. — Benkei

I don't really think you believe this.

Confronted with two choices that are not materially different — Benkei

But they are very much different. This is the point I'd like to hone in on, because if I saw no difference than yes there would be no point in voting at all.

because the system is rigged in such a way you'll never be offered a meaningful choice means you don't have actual agency. — Benkei

Elections are largely PR affairs, we're given two "choices" of buttons to push, and we're told that this is democracy. I agree that it isn't. But that doesn't negate our agency -- it just means we should see it for what it is, vote for the least damaging candidate, and continue with the real work of changing society.

It doesn't mean we throw up our hands and see it all as the same. There are differences between the two parties, and they matter. So we vote for the party or candidate that is more likely to come around to progressive ideas. As I said, that should take about 5 minutes to decide and then we continue our day-to-day activist work.

I think you think essentially only the election matters, it's meaningless, and the way to change it is to do -- nothing? I disagree with all of this, needless to say.

It's not about Trump or Biden though, it's Republican and Democratic. I guess it takes a view from outside the USA to realise how marginal those differences are. — Benkei

Not really. They are fairly marginal. But given that we're the most powerful country on earth, those "marginal" differences still matter a great deal. Just compare Obama and Trump -- not just personalities, but their policies. It's just pure intellectual laziness to declare they're both the same because they both largely serve corporate interests. That's far too simplistic. Compare them on healthcare. Compare them on climate change. Etc.

I think the problem with the people on this thread is that they don't accept X. But that's exactly what I want to discuss, because I think there's overwhelming evidence supporting it which comes from science. — Xtrix

But let's say Biden succeeds in banning fracking throughout the US. Couldn't three presidents down the line start it back up?

My Trump/Biden concern has to do with which one is likely to create the most tension in the world, leading to needless bloodshed.


It's like you're Dr Jeckyl and Mr Hyde. Mr Hyde is the real one?

To a degree, I agree. If Trump really were about to, let's say, start a nuclear war then there would be an argument that just about anyone with a pulse would be a better option and in order to avert that disaster, they should vote for them. But I just don't see that level of difference. — Baden

I know -- so let's discuss it. Then it at least becomes a matter of facts and evidence rather than character and speculations (or allegations -- which I happen to believe).

I see a regular GOP vs Dem election with the GOP candidate being a horrible boor with zero morals peddling shitty policies, but not one likely to start a war and not one capable of single-handedly destroying the planet (or America) in any other way. — Baden

Ruling out nuclear war -- which I would argue he is indeed accelerating, with climate policy it's almost a truism. But leave even that aside and take the judiciary. That's crucial, and surely not short-term, as you know. McConnell has been vigilant about appointing judges because he knows this is the only way the GOP can maintain power given the shifting demographics, so that 1/4 of circuit judges are now Trump appointees. What will it look like in 2024? Trump has already gotten 2 SCOTUS picks and will almost certainly get two more in the next four years (unless RBG finds the fountain of youth). That's a 7-2 reactionary court, which will take decades to undo. This doesn't concern you?

Again, let Biden be investigated. We don't have to like him. Let him be thrown out of office for all I care. It's not about him as a character, even without the allegations. There are just greater factors at stake here.

I don't really think you believe this. — Xtrix

I do. I'm not into these utilitarian calculi where the lesser evil vote results in me thinking I did the morally upright thing. Utilitarianism isn't my cup of tea. If you don't have agency and your fellow voters don't either, then you don't have a position to morally judge them. It's those that pursue the status quo that ought to be judged, those that pull the levers in the DNC, that have the connections to steer the media narrative, the Sanders campaign team for having learned fuck all from 2016. Blame them.

Compare them on healthcare. Compare them on climate change. Etc. — Xtrix

I have. Matters of degrees. Obama did fuck all for the environment, Trump is worse but the endgame is the same. Biden wants to have a committee, which is just another word for "doing nothing". What major overhaul has Trump affected for healthcare? Trump wants to build a wall? Who expulsed the most immigrants? Obama.

EDIT: I get utilitarianism works for a lot of people in many instances and it's fine as a moral compass in most situations - it's just that, as this thread shows, some people have different moral intuitions.

The nasty one probably. I forget which one that is.

I've only been arguing against the idea that progressives are obligated to give the Democrats their vote simply because Trump is a bad candidate. I see that as a form of blackmail. Nobody owes their vote to anyone. It has to be earned. — Baden

Ok, in that case I agree. I consider myself "progressive," and I don't feel I'm obligated or that I "owe" Biden anything. What I owe the country and the future of the planet is to remove the cancer from office. The next step -- and this is important -- is to push the Biden administration to the extreme. If he doesn't listen at all, then perhaps the next election vote in a (sensible) Republican out of spite. But the Republicans are now so dangerous that I can't see myself voting for them unless there's a major overhaul, particularly about science.

Compare them on healthcare. Compare them on climate change. Etc.
— Xtrix

I have. Matters of degrees. — Benkei

Yes, Biden believes climate change is real, Trump says it's a hoax. I'd say that's a few degrees of difference. And it's reflected in policies.

Obama did fuck all for the environment, Trump is worse but the endgame is the same. — Benkei

The endgame is the same? I'm not sure what this means.

Biden wants to have a committee, which is just another word for "doing nothing". What major overhaul has Trump affected for healthcare? Trump wants to build a wall? Who expulsed the most immigrants? Obama. — Benkei

Biden, even if he can't be pressured to do more (which is the crucial point), will likely only take baby steps forward. Compare that to Trump's policies, which take us twenty steps backwards. I don't see how that's the same.

As for Trump and healthcare -- again, Obamacare isn't great, but it's something. What has Trump done? Weakened it, offered nothing in its place, tried to repeal it, etc.

I'm not an apologist for Obama -- I'm saying we should acknowledge that there are indeed differences, and they matter. Obama did stop the Dakato Access pipeline construction, for example -- which Trump immediately permitted. That matter to the Native Americans protesting. May not seem like much, but it's relevant. The details matter.

What I owe the country and the future of the planet is to remove the cancer from office. The next step -- and this is important -- is to push the Biden administration to the extreme. — Xtrix

THAT!

If he doesn't listen at all, then perhaps the next election vote in a (sensible) Republican out of spite. But the Republicans are now so dangerous that I can't see myself voting for them unless there's a major overhaul, particularly about science. — Xtrix

And also THAT.

I don't trust Biden as far as I can throw him. I know he really serves the money. Great that you want Trump gone. There may be a whole lot of people just like you. There are people like me, too, who none of you respect and evidently just don't need.

I'm not voting, and I don't feel I matter enough to help determine who wins. Your idea of appealing to people like me is looking down on us and trying to shame us into voting. And for what? Biden? I can't relate to that clown.

A vote is a personal expression. It's about what you want to be personally responsible for. It's not what you say it is; it's what I say it is. And I don't like this society, of which Trump and Biden are both symptoms of the same problem.

You've got no problem with it. Fine. I do. I'm not into what this society is. Biden or Trump, you get the same society. Biden is just a placeholder for the next utter fascist who sparks the interest of the status quo.

In fact, we might be safer with Trump, because at least he's dumb and we all know it. What happens when a charismstic, yet evil, politician comes along? Electing Biden does nothing to change that fate. In fact, he engenders it.

The malfunction is society as a whole.

The nasty one probably. I forget which one that is. — Benkei

Ah. Coronavirus survivor from Wuhan said he learned that people are precious, be nice to everyone.

I guess it hasn't gotten close enough to us yet.

I don't trust Biden as far as I can throw him. I know he really serves the money. Great that you want Trump gone. There may be a whole lot of people just like you. There are people like me, too, who none of you respect and evidently just don't need. — neonspectraltoast

It's not a matter of respect. It's not about shaming, or bullying, or blind obligation. It's also not about character, since the candidates themselves are empty suits.

It's about rationality and logic. Given a set of premises, or in this case a set of goals, it can easily be shown what the correct decision is.

I'm not voting, and I don't feel I matter enough to help determine who wins. Your idea of appealing to people like me is looking down on us and trying to shame us into voting. And for what? Biden? I can't relate to that clown. — neonspectraltoast

Nor can I. I can't stand him. I wanted Bernie and campaigned for Bernie. I was arguing on this very forum for months about Bernie.

So this itself should tell you you've misunderstood me. It's not about Biden.

Biden or Trump, you get the same society. — neonspectraltoast

That's just not true. It's a standard line used -- but it's false equivalence. The difference between a Biden administration and a Trump administration is very clear indeed. If you read further above, I've gone through multiple examples.

Joe Biden as far as I can see is "missing in action" "without a message". I think Trump is bad for the country and bad for the world but Biden is sadly mistaken if he thinks being "not Trump" is sufficient.

It's funny, this attempt to foist responsibility upon people who literally have no obligation or responsibility is indistinguishable from the kind of gaslight logic of abusive partners - 'if you dont do this [forced choice] you're going to be responsible for [violent outcome]'. And when push comes to shove they'll say: "OK, it's not like you're making me beat you, but it's your fault really'. Just logic and reason really.

These people who think a lowest common denominator democracy - vote for this peice of shit because he's not this other, slightly bigger piece of shit - is a democracy worth having are not 'progressive'. They're the willing sonderkommandos of an irredeemable system.

It's funny, this attempt to foist responsibility upon people who literally have no obligation or responsibility is indistinguishable from the kind of gaslight logic of abusive partners - 'if you dont do this [forced choice] you're going to be responsible for [violent outcome]'. And when push comes to shove they'll say: "OK, it's not like you're making me beat you, but it's your fault really'. Just logic and reason really.

These people who think a lowest common denominator democracy - vote for this peice of shit because he's not this other, slightly bigger piece of shit - is a democracy worth having are not 'progressive'. They're the sonderkommandos of an irredeemable system. — StreetlightX

good god, guy - domestic abusers and nazis? Easy, easy. At this rate of moral condemnation inflation, what are we going to call actual domestic abusers and Nazis? I'm tempermentally more inclined to take your position, minus the woozy rhetoric, but there are good arguments to be made - SCOTUS nominations etc.

I'm not sure if your counting me as "one of these people". I merely think Biden has a responsiblity to put forward a coherent message of his vision for the nation and I do not see that he is being successful at that. I am optimistic that a message of hope would prevail over a message of fear and division but I am hearing a message from Trump and from Biden there is barely any message at all getting through. Surely a candidate for president does have an obligation and responsiblity to articulate his vision for the future.

Sonderkommandos weren't Nazis.

Nah Proth, not you.

My mistake, if I hadn't leapt to conclusions, I would have realized you were simply talking about forced labor in the holocaust and I would have seen that it was, in fact, a reasonable and unoffensive comparison.

Excellent.

I was considering going for political katechons but I figured two obscure references would be a bit top heavy.

That would have gone over my head too, but I'm thankful for the introduction to the term.

Bracketing both the rhetoric (and my general misgivings, real, about inflation of moral condemnation) I think your position (and it's mine too) makes most sense for people who don't have something particular at stake. You're not a US citizen, and I'm on the fringes, disconnected. For a lot of americans, especially minorities (glance quickly at the most recent ten or so supreme court cases and what they're about) it makes a big difference who gets installed as a powerful judge. So that's a tough spot to be in. I'm not saying that means anyone should feel they have to vote for Biden, but ---- it's a tough spot to be in, and it takes a little delicacy to give a good solution to this conundrum. There's probably some stormy rhetorical point that sets delicacy against [better, less limp, more virile virtue] to make and if you want to make that rhetorical point, that's fine, but I think there's an actual, interesting (even important!) discussion to be had here

I see the argument about judges come up alot - I mean, we're talking about a man who fought, in the most shameful and misogynistic way - joyfully, maliciously getting Anita Hill to recount her rape trauma on national TV - to get Clarence Thomas - the most conservative high court justice - appointed. Biden was directly, personally responsible for that. And if the democrats are so fucking concerned with distinguishing themselves from their opponents, perhaps they might actually, I dunno, fucking distinguish themselves rather than voting to pass every other piece of Trump legislation that's put on the table, or better, trying to out-Trump Trump. We're talking again about a piece of shit who released an ad - in the last month - criticizing Trump for not being anti-Chinese enough. Someone asked above if Biden can seriously be taken for a racist. The answer is an unequivocal yes - he's a racist fuck, and fuck him forever*.

I'm serious when I said earlier that the hope that Biden would change is no different from the hope that abused women have when their partners promise that everything will change after the baby, or the marriage ceremony, or whatever. If the sonderkommando call-out is a bit much, the domestic abuse tropes aren't. Everyone knows this script, everyone knows what will - or rather won't - happen. Call it bluster if you want. Biden is not the lesser evil. He's the same evil who just happens not to say the quiet part out loud. Look at his past actions. Look at his current actions. This is a man whose spent his whole life making the world a worse place to live in. He's not going to stop any time soon.

I'm not saying this ought to be an 'easy' choice for anyone. It's all the more soul destroying because every other option is the worst option. That the options are indeed clear-cut (Biden or bust) is the most bullshit thing about this whole 'debate'. 'The logical option' my ass.

*Do I get skin-in-the-game points if I mention that I've got a Chinese background? What should it even fucking matter? A racist cunt-bag is a racist cunt-bag is a Biden.

Out for a bit, but want to come back to this later tonight

Worth repeating:

Let's say both men are equally terrible as people, man A and man B. One will destroy the planet (terrible man A), one will not (terrible man B) -- and we acknowledge this fact, say fact "X."

Given X, who do you want to see in charge? (Fully acknowledging it's still a bad choice indeed.)

If it's the latter (B), then the next question is: what if I sit out, or vote for someone besides the two terrible men?

If the answer turns out to be: it helps man A, what then? Do we change our mind and vote directly for man B? If not, and given we accept X, how can we live with this choice? Is it not saying that doing the "right thing" is a greater priority than human existence?

I think the problem with the people on this thread is that they don't accept X. But that's exactly what I want to discuss, because I think there's overwhelming evidence supporting it, which comes directly from science.
_______

That's logic. If the premises aren't accepted, my conclusion is wrong. So far as I know, however, there hasn't been a very cogent argument against the premises.

So if we care about what we profess to care about -- whether it's rape, or the DNC, or climate change, or any progressive policy, the logic is quite clear.

For those who don't care about these things, or believe the opposite, the logical thing is to vote for Trump.

Imagine thinking Trump will literally destroy the planet. Here I was thinking we weren't discussing cartoon supervillains.I mean, how hilariously terrible is your 'logical point' when you have to make a caricature out of the already living, breathing caricature vivant that Trump already is in order to get it off the ground?

I think we all can agree Joe Biden is morally compromised, to put it lightly. His character is in tatters, the flag is drooping. Yes, yes, I agree. As I said, we're on the same page and my vote will likely align with what you're saying.

I'm not talking about voting for a pure man versus an impure man. I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of someone with a real issue that will be voted on. That affects them. How do they vote? Street, I don't care about winning points, listen - how do they vote, and why? I mean something central : Again, look at the last ten SCOTUS cases. You talk like someone who's never had to make a hard choice. I can agree with you all day not to vote for Biden. We have that luxury.

Do I get skin-in-the-game points if I mention that I've got a Chinese background? What should it even fucking matter? A racist cunt-bag is a racist cunt-bag is a Biden

What does being an australian with a chinese background have to do with US elections - do we mean the same thing by 'skin-in-the-game'? The world isn't a moral parchesi game, guy. If you're mad, and find yourself spontanteously rilling out 'cunts,' justifying it because youre part chinese (?) then own that and do that, don't tie it into other countries politics, Be mad and who you are.

What does being an australian with a chinese background have to do with US elections

Idk you're the one who brought up personal stakes, like it mattered or something.

I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of someone with a real issue that will be voted on. — csalisbury

If that hypothetical issue is so overwhelmingly important to you (or whoever), over and above everything else, then vote for the candidate you think will get it passed, if that item even exists among any of the existing policy platforms. If that's Biden then so be it. I don't know what specific policies bear on you. I don't know how how you weigh the importance of said policy or policies against everything else. But here's what I do know: that electoral politics in the US are largely a sham (again, not bluster - quite literally and empirically, if you're just an average US citizen, the chances of your policy preferences having any influence on legislation are (1) practically nil [PDF]; (2) actually fucking nothing [PDF]) and that the illusion of you making a difference by means of voting is the most powerful bulwark to you actually being able to make a difference.

In the meantime, voting only functions to legitimate a broken system that will fuck you in every other way, if not that one or two ways that are offered like stale pieces of meat to offset the rest of the rottenness.

I brought up personal stakes in the sense that it's helpful to think of concrete effects on people when appraising how they vote. People aren't lining up for the chance to vote for racist cunts, as you put it. sometimes there's a logic to how they vote that isn't based on deep racist evil. It could be salutary for them to dose themselves with australian idealism, but theyre too dumb not to, alas. Presidents nominate judges, I don't know how else to say it.