And - to put it mildly many of the options before voters are far from wonderful.
asserted
many → put → voters
In all too many races, the candidates with a realistic chance of winning are all bad.
asserted
candidates → win → chance
This situation, like other recent elections, raises difficult questions about such issues as whether people have a duty to vote, whether it is permissible to vote for a badly flawed candidate if the alternative is even worse, and how to balance competing issues in making voting decisions.
asserted
alternative → raise → decisions
I've written about these kinds of issues in some detail, previously, and this post links and and summarizes some of those writings.
asserted
post → write → writings
This is not a post about which candidate you should vote for in any given race.
asserted
you → vote → race
I've already written a post about why - in most cases - the Democrats are the lesser evil in races for federal offices this year (state and local elections are often a different matter).
asserted
elections → write → offices
I've also written about why libertarians (like me) should seek political alliances with "abundance liberals" and why the previous "fusionist" alliance with conservatives probably cannot and should not be revived in the near future.
asserted
alliance → write → future
This post doesn't argue for any particular voting choice, but rather compiles pieces about how we should make such decisions in general - and whether we should make them at all.
asserted
we → argue → them
Much of the post is adapted from a similar one I put up in 2024.
asserted
I → adapt → 2024
Unless otherwise noted, these pieces were all published right here at the VC blog:
1.
asserted
pieces → note → blog
This post was inspired by the 2016 election, but almost all of it remains relevant today.
asserted
all → inspire → it
In it, I explain why it is both permissible and desirable to vote for the lesser evil in an election where all of the viable options are bad.
asserted
all → explain → options
I address a variety of counterarguments, including claims that voting for a lesser evil makes you morally complicit in that candidate's wrongdoing, arguments that it's better to cast a "protest vote" for a candidate that has no chance of winning, arguments based on the very low probability that your vote will be decisive, and more.
uncertain
vote → address → probability
Imagine an election where the only options are Queen Cersei from Game of Thrones, and Sauron, the Dark Lord from Tolkien's Lord of the Rings.
asserted
options → imagine → Rings
If Cersei wins, she will kill many innocent people, and oppress others.
asserted
she → win → others
But she will leave much of the population more or less alone (as long as they don't openly oppose her or threaten her family in any way).
asserted
they → leave → way
If Sauron wins, he will kill far more innocent people, and make the survivors his slaves.
You can instead cast a protest vote for a vastly better alternative, such as Gandalf…..
asserted
You → win → Gandalf
But, by assumption, these are purely symbolic options, because they have zero chance of prevailing.
asserted
they → have → chance
If the protest voter would otherwise have backed Cersei, the net effect of his decision to protest is to increase the likelihood of the worst possible outcome: the triumph of Sauron.
asserted
effect → back → Sauron
Under those circumstances, it seems clear that a person who ensures a Cersei victory has done a good deed.
asserted
who → seem → deed
He or she will have saved large numbers of people from slavery or death, even though the Cersei regime would be a deeply unjust one.
asserted
regime → save → slavery
The Cersei-Sauron hypothetical was obviously inspired by the contest between Trump and Hillary Clinton, and is an exaggerated version of that tradeoff.
asserted
hypothetical → inspire → tradeoff
But I think it works for many other elections, as well - including many of the choices voters face this year.
asserted
voters → think → choices
Notice how my logic is different from that of those who say you can only vote for a candidate if he or she meets some minimal threshold of character or good policy.
asserted
he → notice → character
On my approach, it is morally justifiable to vote for almost any candidate - even a cruel despot like Cersei - so long as the only feasible alternatives are even worse.
asserted
alternatives → vote → Cersei
Canadian columnist John Robson responded to my piece in the National Post, and I, in turn, posted a rejoinder.
asserted
I → respond → rejoinder
Many people, including some political theorists, believe we have a moral duty to vote.
asserted
we → include → duty
I disagree.
asserted
I → disagree → ?
Indeed, I think - in many cases - it's better if you don't vote, especially if ignorance and bias make it likely you will make a bad decision.
asserted
you → think → decision
Casting a ballot motivated by ignorance and bias is often worse than not voting at all.
asserted
Casting → cast → ignorance
Even if there is no general duty to vote, perhaps we are morally required to do so in situations where the stakes of an election are unusually high.
asserted
stakes → be → election
In this post, I explain why I disagree - at least with respect to most voters.
asserted
I → explain → voters
There is a kernel of truth to the claim that you have a duty to vote if the stakes are high enough.
uncertain
stakes → be → duty
But the resulting moral duty applies far less often than advocates of the argument tend to assume.
asserted
advocates → result → argument
And the same reasoning actually implies many people have a moral duty not to vote.
asserted
people → imply → duty
Let's start with the kernel of truth.
asserted
's → let → truth
Imagine there's an election for a powerful political office that pits Gandalf (the benevolent wizard in J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings) against Sauron, the despotic dark lord from the same story.
asserted
that → imagine → story
If Sauron prevails, millions of people will die or be enslaved, while Gandalf would rule justly if he manages to win.
asserted
he → prevail → people
And all you have to do to ensure Gandalf's victory is check his name on a ballot.
asserted
you → have → ballot
If you do so, Gandalf wins; if not, Sauron does.
asserted
Sauron → do → ?
…and 47 more, not listed.
The Aporia
