478
Harm Reduction Rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

There are no ethical choices under first-past-the-post voting. We must instead make a decision that reduces the most harm.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] NateNate60@lemmy.world 147 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

A referendum will be held alongside the general election in Oregon, USA to switch to ranked-choice voting.

To any fellow Oregonians reading this, vote yes and tell all your friends to vote yes as well!

Register to vote:

[-] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 48 points 6 months ago

There are important ballot measures in a ton of states this year as well. If you're in a blue area, there might even be a decent candidate or 2. Always check to see what's happening in your community, if only to prevent harmful stuff from slipping through unopposed.

Your landlord and bosses vote, so you should as well. Don't make things easy for them. Make them require voter suppression to stand a chance. Power will never be given, so it must be seized.

[-] kakes@sh.itjust.works 42 points 6 months ago

I'm jealous. Here in Canada, our current PM's entire election campaign was based on the promise of scrapping FPTP. Then he reversed course pretty much day 1 after getting elected.

[-] darkevilmac@lemmy.zip 22 points 6 months ago

It's frustrating for sure, I was even more annoyed when we had a referendum in BC and people opted to keep things the same.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sp6@lemmy.world 38 points 6 months ago

For anyone wondering why the first-past-the-post voting system (used by most countries) is bad, what the alternatives are, and why those alternatives are better, Nicky Case has an excellent write-up that covers all of that: https://ncase.me/ballot/

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Jennykichu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 6 months ago

The way to tell MAGA propagandists from real lefitst activists is that propaganda will ignore primaries and local elections. General elections in America are for forming coalitions, not rejecting them.

Anyone making memes telling you not to form a coalition against MAGA is working to further the goals of MAGA.

[-] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 6 months ago

To be clear, I’m using this meme to address ethical concerns I see people have with voting. Namely that we should ignore those concerns. I think we should vote for Biden in 2024.

I saw your comment further down and I wanted to address any potential confusion where it can be seen. I think we fundamentally agree that people should vote.

But the sonic meme says voting is unethical

No, just that there are no ethical choices under first-past-the-post voting. For example, abstaining from voting is a choice even if it's not voting. Voting for the candidates, not just the president, that will result in the least amount of harm to people is what is optimal. People use ethical concerns as a reason to not vote, but no matter what a person chooses, even the least bad choice is still unethical. Therefore these ethical concerns should not weigh into our decision making process.

This is comparable to no ethical consumption under capitalism. Steve Shives made a good example in his video on Don't Look Up, so I'm going to steal it here. We shouldn't dismiss Hollywood out of hand for making movies like Don't Look Up even though everyone who works in the film industry benefits from capitalism in unethical ways. Even though it is true that they benefit in unethical ways, this line of reasoning would silence everyone. We all benefit in unethical ways from capitalism. It's the nature of living in a capitalist system that we cannot escape as long as we live under capitalism. Even the least bad consumption is still unethical. So these ethical concerns shouldn't weigh into our criticism of a movie like Don't Look Up.

There is no ethical consumption under capitalism. There are no ethical choices under FPTP voting. So, these ethical concerns should not weigh into our criticism of capitalism or our decisions about who to vote for. We should vote even if the choice of who we vote for isn't ethical. The goal should be to reduce the most harm to people.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] StoneGender@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 6 months ago

This isn't harm reduction. Stop co-opting real leftist terms for this crap. The USA has always been fascist and will always be so until it is destroyed. You people won't learn till you get all of us killed for the little bit of privilege afforded to you thru this colonist imperial hellhole

[-] Wilzax@lemmy.world 55 points 6 months ago

It is harm reduction to vote for the less fascist of the two fascist candidates with a chance of winning.

[-] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 12 points 6 months ago

So, do you start licking the boot from the toe or the heel?

Or are you the kind of person who just deep-throats the whole boot?

[-] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 39 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

This isn’t harm reduction.

It is harm reduction. Fewer people will be harmed if we elect the candidate that will do the least harm.

Stop co-opting real leftist terms for this crap.

I am a social democrat which is a leftist political position. This is a real leftist term. Gatekeeping won't get rid of this idea. Internalize it.

edit: To be clear, I'm referring to: There are no ethical choices under FPTP voting. I hope that clears up any confusion.

The USA has always been fascist and will always be so until it is destroyed.

There has been a fascist movement in the United States since the 30's. Hitler and the Nazis copied off of the US's Jim Crow era laws. But the US as a nation state has never been fascist. If Republicans win this November then the US will become a christo-fascist authoritarian dictatorship for the first time and probably for a long time.

You people won’t learn till you get all of us killed for the little bit of privilege afforded to you thru this colonist imperial hellhole

The people who are going to get us all killed are the privileged accelerationists who think they stand to benefit from sacrificing us all to fascism. They think they going to accelerate social change, but there won't be anyone left to benefit from it.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] Dippy@beehaw.org 31 points 6 months ago

We have a system, and we do not have the political will to get rid of that system. Go ahead and build a coalition towards a better system, but until that coalition is tangible, harm reduction is not complicity.

[-] Daxtron2@startrek.website 22 points 6 months ago

Obvious troll or clinically idiotic patsy

[-] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 6 months ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harm_reduction

I finally figured out what some people were concerned about. Apparently there is already a phrase called harm reduction or harm minimization that I wasn't aware of. This phrase specifically refers to reducing harm around drug and sex related activities. This is a naming collision on my part for the title of the meme.

However I stand by my usage of the words for the title. I was using the words harm and reduction together because that is what makes sense to me for the topic based on the definitions of those individual words. I wasn't referring to harm reduction the phrase and I think that was clear to most people. Also, it's just for the title of an internet meme. No one is co-opting the phrase harm reduction or using that phrase incorrectly. I hope that clears up that confusion.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 May 2024
478 points (100.0% liked)

196

16494 readers
2853 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS