FAQ
Q: why not organize and stop treating the bus as a legitimate entity? why aren’t you working to stop the bus?
A: do both. cut the fuel line. break windows. put oatmeal in the gas tank. but maybe your efforts don’t succeed this election cycle. and if so don’t fucking throw away your vote if it can help your neighbors fucking survive. “harm reduction” is not a political strategy for action. it is a last minute, end of the line decision to save lives, after all other resources have been exhausted.
It’s a false dilemma. --For the reasons people reduce it and argue that it is an exclusively binary decision would by the nature of those reasons implicitly argue against the concept of living under any form of a functional democracy itself.
This argument (to me at least) assumes that the other 4 non-voters would have all voted for ice cream which, by just using basic logic, is false. If 3 out of 5 have already voted to drive off a cliff, one has to assume that at least 2 of the remaining 4 would also vote to drive off a cliff. Now this argument is back to square one… How do we find a solution which doesn’t give ‘driving off a cliff’ as an option in the first place?
Harm reduction is fine, but faced with a view going that way, why not use ranked choice. First choice might be I’ve cream, but if you can’t do that, perhaps going somewhere else works.
I’m a fan of harm reduction. There might still be harm, but it’s more limited than it was previously.
It’s not the whole solution and always needs further actions at the end of the day, but it’s movement in the right direction.
Far better than just coasting along waiting for things to get worse.
Four people vote for driving off a cliff. Three vote for driving into a wall. Two vote for getting ice cream.
Everybody on the bus dies. You blame the people who voted for ice cream.
