Negative votes for saying the exact same thing as the second top comment lmao

Idk man, theres not too much debate on who to vote for. There's a clear lesser evil and theres an avowed fascist. The quoted paragraph just reaffirms what his one sentence says, that voting isn't sufficient.

I like the pamphet. I think it hits most everything important. If you only vote and the entirety of your efforts are spent on electoralism and not direct action, its a lot if wasted time. But if you cant even take 20 mins to vote every 2 years, or worse you're advocating people who aren't fascist sit it out, you need to rethink what you're doing.

Not substantial enough changes unless you're capable of overthrowing the state. Direct action works best when the state is mostly uninterested in what you're doing, it's significantly harder if the state is actively opposed to what you're doing.

Voting isn't about solving everything, it's about making it slightly easier to do direct action. Participation in bourgeois elections is important precisely because it's never going to get rid of capitalism. It's the one method of slightly influencing the systems used to opress and undermine working class struggles. You aren't going to fundamentally change anything by voting, but elections influence how openly and strongly the state opposes direct action.

You don't throw away a tool just because it doesn't have much impact, you just use it where it can be slightly helpful.

You are playing into this issue of voting taking up more time than it deserves just as much as anyone you're criticizing. Time wasted on debates about if you should vote or not partially happens because you're making a big deal out of not voting instead of engaging in direct action.