CMV: If I don't consent to one of the two parties, voting is immoral.
Representative democracy or republicanism is predicated on the idea of the "consent of the governed." The government only derives legitimacy and authority because the majority of people (or at least their electors) consent to their governance.
If I do not consent to either presidential candidate because neither represents my interests or is otherwise engaged in unacceptably immoral behavior (see "genocide"), then it is dishonest and immoral to vote for one or the other on consequentialist grounds.
Even if one could run the country in a way that is more personally beneficial to me, which is impossible to know for sure beforehand and speculative, if I don't consent to their governance overall then this is selfish opportunism.
Democracies are supposedly based on the consent of the governed. I do not provide my consent and would never voluntarily choose either of these candidates. I am non-consensually forced to choose between two horrible options. Making a consequentialist utilitarian choice is false consent.
CMV
Originally posted on Reddit. Browse posts from 2024.