2020 was… truly unique. It was so hard to stay away from doom scrolling, and I (and many others) were pretty disillusioned by the sad fact that so much of our country legitimately supported the Orange Man. I didn’t get a wink of sleep the night of the election because I genuinely considered it to be a make or break decision for America.

My point is that looking back on it, in the end the only real difference I made was at the ballet box. This year I’m going for the Head-in-the-Sand approach. I’m done with the political memes. Done with the Twitter screenshots. It just riles me up and this year I’m gonna do my best to fight that.

  • SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve taught game theory. Voting isn’t the Ultimatum game, because the most a third party is going to do is shave off a few percentage points, resulting in the main party losing, resulting in the main party generally becoming more conservative. Look who ran after Reagan - the entire Democratic Party shifted right with the third way. Look who we ran after Trump.

    In voting the way it’s currently configured, there are two elements from game theory that apply. The first is minimax strategy - minimize the maximum damage your enemy can do. Above all that means keeping republicans out of office if you care about minimizing harm to women, minorities and immigrants, the poor, and the LGBT community.

    The second concept that applies is the BATNA - the best alternative to a negotiated agreement. If the negotiated agreement fails (we get a left democrat on the ballot) our next best alternative is to get a Democrat elected.

    We came within a hair’s breadth of not having another election, and at the very least we will be looking at a roll back of LGBT rights, a nationwide abortion ban, and a massive crackdown that will make sure they don’t lose any more elections.

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sounds great, but then the genie grants it and you don’t get any more elections, sham or otherwise. I’ll take the illusion of democracy over blatant mask-off fascism, personally.

        • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you live in the “illusion of democracy” then the elections don’t matter in the first place, so we may as well forego the mask so taht even blind people like you can see it. And polite fascism is actually worse because then liberals like you will support it and chastise others for pointing out the emperor has no clothes.

          For example, do you know who started using drones to bomb civilians? Do you know who first started putting kids in cages? Because liberals like you think he was the greatest president to ever president, and you gleefully supported him since he was polite with his fascism.

            • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m just making assumptions based on your own words.

              I’ll take the illusion of democracy over blatant mask-off fascism, personally.

              This is what liberals believe.

              • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                It is what pragmatists believe. Some pragmatists are liberals, other pragmatists have other ideals. The coincidence of pragmatic results is not indicative of a coincidence of pre-pragmatic ideals. Your framework is too simplistic to be interesting or useful.

                • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Lol I’m sure pragmatcists(?) have a cohesive framework they all draw from, and I’m sure it is definitely different from the current Neo-liberal zeitgeist.

                  • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Some people believe that stringent adherence to idealism is paramount, despite the material suffering of others implementation of that ideal causes. Other people have empathy, and are willing to analyze the actual consequences of political action independent of idealism, prioritizing actions which do tangible good over performative platitudes. Pragmatists fall in to the second camp, you certainly appear to fall into the first. The first are boring and impotent everywhere but their own minds.