• PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      5 months ago

      I’m not obligated to encourage anyone to vote for the lesser evil so long as the lesser evil still has an opportunity to be less evil.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          5 months ago

          A lack of endorsement for a thing =! endorsement for the opposite thing

          Oh, when there are only two possible choices, it very much is, whether or not you want to confront that. If there is an infant drowning in an ankle-deep pool in front of you, doing anything other than saving the infant is endorsing its death.

          Before you is a very simple and very easy choice - fascism, or non-fascism. Yet your kind reject non-fascism, every single time. Curious.

          • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.socialOPEnglish
            0·
            5 months ago

            Oh, when there are only two possible choices

            Actually in this context there’s at least 4:

            • vote for a candidate AND endorse voting for the candidate
            • don’t vote for a candidate AND don’t endorse voting for the candidate
            • vote for a candidate AND don’t endorse voting for the candidate
            • don’t vote for a candidate AND endorse voting for the candidate

            Nobody has actually ‘voted’ for a candidate yet, all anyone has done thus far is endorse or not endorse voting for a candidate. Just as a reminder:

            I’ll vote for harm reduction if it comes down to it

            • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
              0·
              5 months ago

              Actually in this context there’s at least 4:

              All of which boil down to “Try to rescue the infant” or “Varying levels of letting the infant drown or hoping someone else will spontaneously see the infant and rescue them in your stead”