HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » If it's a "privilege" to ...

Fri Mar 25, 2016, 05:07 PM

If it's a "privilege" to vote for...

a candidate you respect, trust, and most agree with on the issues, if it's a sign you live in relative luxury to be able to vote in such a way, guess what, it's not you who is privileged, it's the system that is fucked up.

Imagine a parliamentary democracy with proportional representation and multiple parties. Sanders and Clinton could form a coalition in such a hypothetical. People could vote for more than two choices! Is this hedonism possible? Would the privilege levels be too high?

I'm going to vote for Clinton in the general even though I think she's a moderate conservative who has thrown various demographics under the bus when it suited her because I'm a pragmatist, not because I'm underprivileged. I'm not forgoing a privilege by voting this way, I'm reinforcing it by voting for someone that will maintain the status quo very well.

Having only two choices in a democracy is a lack of privilege, IMHO, and for the principled that just won't vote, I'm not going to blame them, I'm going to blame the fucked up system we're in, one I'm endorsing by voting for Clinton and the Democratic establishment, who, as far as I can tell, would never want to see a multi party system and who are thrilled at the idea of supporters of a moderately conservative, status quo, infinitely privileged candidate lecturing others on their "privilege" for not voting the lesser of two evils.

Seriously? It's bad enough I feel like this is my best choice in this system, by to lay down this "privilege" gauntlet just seems like the ultimate irony in how to defend privilege and the status quo.

0 replies, 907 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Reply to this thread