4 ms·

you can't really escape politics Nah, I'm really tired of seeing this cop-out. It can't be escapted because people like you take joy in reducing every convers

you can't really escape politics Nah, I'm really tired of seeing this cop-out. It can't be escapted because people like you take joy in reducing every conversation down to politics so you can then steer it to your liking. Just that it's important to be aware of who is likely benefiting from your actions and not pretend that by remaining "neural" or "independent" you're somehow above the fray. I'd wager most of those voters voted for Nader because they wanted him to win, not because they were spiting Bush/Gore (while all the same being ignorant of the fact that 3rd party candidates don't work in first-past-the-post systems).

amanaplanacanal 5y ago
I think he was just saying try to be less ignorant. Which sounds like good advice to me.
- SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
  The problem is the idea that you can't be above the fray. It's clearly false as a literal claim - I've never met anyone who struggles to avoid discussing communism with their coworkers from China or Modi with their coworkers from India. In practice, whenever I've seen people say that it's impossible to be above the fray, what they mean is that suchandsuch issues are very important so they think everyone ought to be dragged into the fray.
  - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    Yeah. There needs to be a middle ground. Terrible things are happening around the world, and nobody has the time or energy to attend to all of them. On the other hand, if somebody is calling a co-worker some racist term, looking aside is pretty cowardly. Everybody should probably think this through for themselves and figure out what they can live with.
AlexandrB 5y ago
> I'd wager most of those voters voted for Nader because they wanted him to win... Yes. I didn't say otherwise. But voting for Nader probably benefitted Bush as well. Something that's important to consider if you want to vote for Nader. To be clear, despite this, I think that the 2000 Nader campaign was a good thing. I think the worst thing about "first past the post" electoral systems is that sometimes you end up voting "strategically" because of the above calculus.

amanaplanacanal 5y ago

I think he was just saying try to be less ignorant. Which sounds like good advice to me.

SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
The problem is the idea that you can't be above the fray. It's clearly false as a literal claim - I've never met anyone who struggles to avoid discussing communism with their coworkers from China or Modi with their coworkers from India. In practice, whenever I've seen people say that it's impossible to be above the fray, what they mean is that suchandsuch issues are very important so they think everyone ought to be dragged into the fray.
- amanaplanacanal 5y ago
  Yeah. There needs to be a middle ground. Terrible things are happening around the world, and nobody has the time or energy to attend to all of them. On the other hand, if somebody is calling a co-worker some racist term, looking aside is pretty cowardly. Everybody should probably think this through for themselves and figure out what they can live with.

AlexandrB 5y ago

> I'd wager most of those voters voted for Nader because they wanted him to win... Yes. I didn't say otherwise. But voting for Nader probably benefitted Bush as well. Something that's important to consider if you want to vote for Nader. To be clear, despite this, I think that the 2000 Nader campaign was a good thing. I think the worst thing about "first past the post" electoral systems is that sometimes you end up voting "strategically" because of the above calculus.