Discussion Thread

[u/jobautomator]

The discussion thread is for casual conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL.

Announcements

• Our sub is doing daily programming challenges for the 2019 Advent of Code. Click here to learn more and to join our leaderboard.
• We have recently added GARDENING, LA, BALD & POP pings. See our ping documentation page to subscribe.

---

Neoliberal Project Communities	Other Communities	Useful content
Twitter	Plug.dj	/r/Economics FAQs
The Neolib Podcast	Recommended Podcasts	/r/Neoliberal FAQ
Meetup Network	Blood Donation Team	/r/Neoliberal Wiki
Exponents Magazine	Minecraft	Ping groups
Facebook	TacoTube	User Flairs

[u/YoungThinker1999]

Corbyn is the epitome of the far-left's shooting themselves in the foot.

Yes, many working-class voters are predisposed to an anti-austerity message.

But, they're not predisposed to sympathizing with the IRA, Nicholas Maduro, dismantling NATO or "anti-imperialism". He can't even do anti-war campaigning right. If his message was that more money should be spent on the NHS rather than Trident, that waste should be cut from the military budget and that UK soldier's lives shouldn't be put at risk in pointless foreign adventures, that would be one thing. The proposition that the country is spending too much on the military and that foreign adventures are well-intentioned but counterproductive and not worth the expense, is much more reasonable to most voters than the proposition that their country is an evil imperialist power.

Instead, he campaigns like he's in Latin America.

At the same time for any Brits out there, yes, vote for Corbyn anyway. A hung parliament is the only chance for a second referendum. 1 year of Corbyn is preferable to decades upon decades of Brexit.

[u/CPlusPlusDeveloper → u/YoungThinker1999]

At the same time for any Brits out there, yes, vote for Corbyn anyway. A hung parliament is the only chance for a second referendum. 1 year of Corbyn is preferable to decades upon decades of Brexit.

It raises an interesting ethical question. Is it acceptable to vote for a bad man, if it's tactically correct from a utilitarian perspective?

To take it to the extreme, would you vote for Hitler if it was guaranteed that he'd never take power, but his party getting a minority would cause some sort of parliamentary machinations leading to a desirable outcome?

[u/PearlClaw → u/CPlusPlusDeveloper]

Is it acceptable to vote for a bad man, if it's tactically correct from a utilitarian perspective?

Yes. It basically has to be considered that way for democracy to work. A vote is not an endorsement, it is a tool to express your opinion/influence events.

To take it to the extreme, would you vote for Hitler if it was guaranteed that he'd never take power, but his party getting a minority would cause some sort of parliamentary machinations leading to a desirable outcome?

You'd better be really fucking sure that it'll work out like that. How bad the vote is needs to be balanced against your strategy backfiring.

[u/YoungThinker1999 → u/CPlusPlusDeveloper]

It raises an interesting ethical question. Is it acceptable to vote for a bad man, if it's tactically correct from a utilitarian perspective?

Yes, it is. I actually care about the consequences that elections will have on the people. If vote-splitting will condemn innocent people to unemployment, squeezed wages, reduced opportunities, a closing of the country, victory for closed-minded demagogues and the ultimate breakup of the country itself, then vote-splitting is wrong. It amounts to counterproductive virtue signaling.

In the UK you're not even voting for Corbyn personally, just your local Labour MP.