If they’re both equally evil internationally and mostly equally evil domestically, am I allowed to vote for who is less likely to remove more human rights from women and trans people?
I would never tell anyone that they should vote, I understand people’s reasons for not doing it. Selfishly, I’m going to give myself the best chance of having access to life saving health care until I’m no longer of child bearing age.
Of course! I’m just standing up to speak my mind. We all are allowed to vote exactly as we see fit. I live in MA where I have the opportunity to vote with my conscience, but in a place like AL, SC, or KY, my strategy wouldn’t be helpful to those groups of people.
The two party system makes democracy in the US an absolute sham.
In terms of federal representatives, that’s rather like a poor white German supporting the Strassers.
If Hitler had actually held an election and the only options were him or a Strasser party, I don’t think it would be immoral to vote for the Strassers. But I also don’t think it would be a moral obligation if you had no reason to believe they would stop the Holocaust.
A vote for Hindenburg was indeed a vote for Hitler, so I think the moral is that caping for a lesser evil instead of trying to build good (and those two things are normally opposed) is not a constructive behavior. I couldn’t give less of a shit who you personally vote for, that’s the consumer-lifestyle version of political engagement. I do care somewhat what you advocate for, because promoting the lesser evil is still promoting evil over good (using the overly moralistic phrasing of the adage).
Withholding support from Nazis (on any substantial level) is plainly the better option if you want to not need to keep choosing between two Nazis.
