this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
113 points (89.0% liked)
Memes
52910 readers
634 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'd love to have a discussion about this. I am a socialist through and through. I believe that the system needs to be dismantled to achieve any meaningful change, and that no progress can realistically be made within the system.
I'd argue that there are 4 actions within the system. Vote red, vote blue, vote third party, and don't vote. I'd argue that all 4 options will never lead to meaningful change. However, given this, every American who is eligible to vote is forced into playing the game, there is no way to abstain. Even not voting leads to a meaningful outcome within the system, and thus is still playing the game.
If no actions within the system can change things, I pose that the only way to disrupt this system is by dismantling it from the outside via revolution.
This however, cannot be done overnight, even if you are consistently acting on it. These types of things take a general sense of civil unrest to get kicked off. I believe that under capitalism, this unrest is inevitable, and once it hits a tipping point, the revolution will start. In the meantime, I feel we have two actions we can take.
First, we should be ushering in the revolution. Organize, make people aware of the alternative, disrupt the system in any means you reasonably can, try to get people to be sympathetic to the cause, etc. Don't slack on your responsibility to prepare and eventually initiate the revolution.
Second, since we have no choice but to play the game we've been dropped in to, you should vote for short term damage mitigation. If you are forced to take an action within the system, I feel people have a moral obligation to try to reduce the harm to others as much as possible. This involves making a vote, since not voting results in almost the same outcome as a vote for the candidate furthest away from the one you considered least harmful.
I have yet to see an argument that shows how not voting is going against or dismantling the system. However, considering so many people believe that not voting is the right choice, I'm really interested in hearing someone explain it to me, as there must be some reasoning behind it that I'm not seeing.
Let's draw the logical conclusion here.
Short term damage mitigation is the goal. There are three options that incur short term damage. Option 4, however, lets one continue working or resting, therefore incurring no damage at all.
As all 4 options don't lead to any meaningful change, option 4 is the best option.
Damage mitigation isn't the only thing. By voting for the party you support you're showing solidarity with that movement and also demonstrating to everyone else how the system doesn't work.