this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
304 points (92.9% liked)

politics

18828 readers
4594 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

If you wanna mock them for being dumb and self destructive go ahead and do that, but you didn’t do that.

Man, I'm not responsible for your lack of reading comprehension.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

so long as you don’t examine your own inaction too closely.

Re-read you own comment, not for any argument or point I'm making, but just for your own benefit, you could learn from yourself once you realize you're not above your own advice. If you wanna mock someone else's effort, best be sure you're actually doing something meaningful, because voting is not much harder than abstaining in protest. Both are interactions with the electoral system and both only impact the electoral system.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I am literally advocating for civic participation in the system as a means of change, and I engage in civic participation in the system.

They are literally advocating for civil war as a means of change, but refuse to engage in any behavior that would contribute to that goal.

That you can't see that one is hypocritical and one isn't says more about you than me.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

They are literally advocating for civil war as a means of change, but refuse to engage in any behavior that would contribute to that goal.

Well again that's only if you're only thinking about your own perspective. If that person had your perspective, we wouldn't be here. Do you consider it bizarre for someone to believe that were already on the path to civil war, much the same way you believe you believe engaging with the electoral system will yield progress? It's not as if there are no signs of widening divisions in the country, authoritarian leaders trying to seize power, violent political rhetoric, militarized police forces, and dysfunctional governance.

Their comments are deleted now, so I can't even reference them but lets look at the democrats own messaging. When the dems say things like "vote like your democracy depends on it" it's not unreasonable for them to infer that staying home would then mean hastening of a civil war. So either them protesting the vote does indeed contribute to the goal of civil war, or this elections not as important as the messaging they're probably getting blasted with is making it seem.