1. Mod of !anarchism@slrpnk.net posts a great Greta Thunberg quote, but then tries to use it to justify not voting in the upcoming US election
  2. Multiple people point out that’s very clearly not what she meant
  3. Removed by mod Removed by mod Removed by mod Removed by mod

Using your mod powers to decide who is allowed and not allowed to speak is not very anarchist of you, @mambabasa@slrpnk.net

  • poVoq@slrpnk.net
    22·
    2 months ago

    You are again missing the point. No one claimed that you are not allowed to vote for the lesser evil if that is something you want to do.

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
      3·
      2 months ago

      But you should not be voting for the way-lesser evil are asking others to do so (perhaps while continuing to emphasize that the system will still be broken)? If that’s what you’re arguing, could we take this to where I’ve replied below so the overall argument is more public and easier to follow? thx

      • poVoq@slrpnk.net
        22·
        2 months ago

        Sorry, can you please rephrase or fix the grammar in your post above? I don’t get what you are trying to say.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.net
            41·
            2 months ago

            No that is not what I am arguing then. Voting for the lesser evil is often the right choice. If I was a citizen of the USA I would certainly vote for Harris tomorrow as the lesser evil, but that is a personal choice and I trust that most US based anarchists are sensible enough to do the same.

            The main problem with electorialism is not the voting itself, its the spectacle around it and the waste of effort and money to promote the candidates and all the (self) gaslighting that people do. Coming to an anarchist space and doing that will at best get you ridiculed, but in this case the mod decided to show these people the door.

            • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
              2·
              2 months ago

              That’s an interesting argument I haven’t seen before.

              While I obviously wouldn’t support anyone dumb enough to make a new post to explicitly promote a candidate, I think the mod basically egged these comments on in this case by going to great lengths to promote not voting for this specific candidate, thus feeding into the spectacle. I would understand if all such comparison of candidates was treated the same; however, that doesn’t seem to be the case here.

              • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOP
                2·
                2 months ago

                Someone commented under the post, advocating for the Green Party, and the mod left it up but deleted and banned people who replied to that person and brought up the whole “impossible to overestimate the consequences” thing.

                I didn’t do anything similar to what poVoq is claiming I did, as you’re pointing out. But the people who did do that, the mod left alone, banning people who objected.

                I’m done litigating this at this point, but I did get tempted into coming back to point that one thing out.

                Edit: Phrasing

                • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
                  2·
                  2 months ago

                  ehhhh while it’s close, i wouldn’t call “I would not condemn anyone who refuses to vote for genocide” outright support for the green party

                  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOP
                    4·
                    2 months ago

                    I was talking about:

                    Since it’s going to be shit either way, remember that getting Greens to the 5% threshold is attainable.