Memes

The point is I'm not going to lend you any legitimacy

You keep saying that, but what does that even mean? What is "legitimacy", in the way you're using it?

Material authority? You don't have to "lend" that, it's enforced by the system; not participating doesn't rob the system of its authority, it just means you don't participate.

Ideological endorsement? That's materially worthless, it's just virtue signaling so you get to feel ideologically pure in your social circles.

I'm going to make it impossible for the shit peddler to hide their willingness and ability to abuse their power.

How does not participating do that? They still control mass media. A smattering of True Leftists refusing to participate is a whisper at a rock show. That's not making anything impossible.

If I'm eating shit either way, why would I do it in a way that makes it apparent to outsiders that I'm choosing to eat shit?

"Hey outsiders, we're being force fed shit. Blue team is serving it up by the ounce, Red team is serving it up by the pound. The more shit we eat, the sicker we get. Choosing the smaller quantity will make it easier for us to gather the strength we need to escape this situation."

But in any case, voting is anonymous. Nothing is apparent unless you choose to make it so.

You are promoting the idea that everyone is choosing these options out of complete and true support of complete and unbiased information.

How did you come to that conclusion? I'm promoting the idea that the system is what it is, and in the current system some actions are more productive than others. I'm promoting the idea that we should base our behaviors on how effectively they support our goals, not how idealistic they are.

This is especially true when people like you misrepresent and refuse to understand the arguments of those who choose to abstain or vote third party.

I don't refuse to understand anything. I've heard the arguments and found them lacking. None of them provide any practical advantage.

You are saying, "if you participate in this system, you could change the way things are going; and if you don't, then you implicitly consent to it", which is simply not true.

How is it not true? Participation in the system can change the way things are going, and non-participation is a voluntary disposal of that small bit of material effectiveness. Refusing to use a tool to affect an outcome is implicit consent to either outcome.

you know how little power a person has when acting as an individual, which is why you minimize the reach of individuals when it comes to forms of political action other than voting

When did I do that? I wholeheartedly promote other forms of political action. But it's not an either-or choice. You can strategically vote for harm reduction while simultaneously using all the other tools in the political toolbox to actively push for positive change in ways besides voting.

but you never apply it to the situation of voting where the ruling class has vast numbers of ways to influence people's behaviors in whatever direction they want.

Which is why I promote voting for harm reduction, whichever half of the ruling class is serving up smaller portions of shit. The people have been influenced to accept the duopoly, so we need to meet the people where they are and promote electoral actions that minimize the work we have to do elsewhere.

The change can only come when we have built the ability to move cohesively as a class, or a voting bloc if you will, that can either take power for itself or force our leaders to come to our table if they want our compliance.

Exactly, which is why I want harm reduction while we build that ability. We do not magically gain that ability by splitting the left-of-fascism vote. We don't have that power yet. When we do, my recommended voting strategy will change accordingly.

We can only build this by overcoming the resentment we hold for other members of our class, and putting one foot in front of the other; turning one person at a time towards the inner workings of the machine that the ruling class works so hard to hide

Which is precisely why labeling those who don't conform to our exact ideals "liberals" is counterproductive. In this very comment, you've stoked resentment for "people like [me]" who "misrepresent and refuse to understand".

I'm all for radicalizing the working class, I just don't think we accomplish that by not-voting/voting-3rd-party.

Not by stoking resentment and wasting our energy trying to manipulate an illegitimate system while we wait around for the movement to build itself.

Still don't know what you mean by "illegitimate", but I'm neither trying to manipulate it nor waiting passively for the movement to build. The amount of energy that voting takes is miniscule, and it contributes to popular consensus. That tiny amount of energy does not prevent us from building a movement. On the contrary, it allows us to secure the most favorable conditions available in which to actively build the movement.